Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

EVE Online F2P

13567

Comments

  • RydesonRydeson Canton, OHPosts: 3,858Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by dave6660
    Originally posted by Rydeson

    EVE is plenty easy to set up.. They already did it with trial accounts.. Each skill, each ship, each stargate can be controlled with "unlockables"..  Pay as you go..

    Holy shit.  You want to pay for each new gate you jump through?  If that was the case I would owe CCP a small fortune.

    The fortune it would cost me would be up there, too. :)

    One day in Sank and Jita, next day back in Alenia, then a couple days doing missions in Arraron, then back to Jita for selling and mischief... suddenly the $13.00 to take the GWB out of NY seems like pennies. :)

    Ok guys.. lets not be petty about stargate being singular.. LOL you could easily group sections or multiple stargates to be unlockable..  The more you explore, they more it cost you to unlock the galaxy..  Consider it a toll :)  lol

  • BanquettoBanquetto CityPosts: 1,037Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by Gdemami
    Originally posted by BanquettoSo I'm not sure what our argument is.

    The point is, you claimed that Gems are not purchased with real money.


    Originally posted by Banquetto

    Not from players spending cash.



    Gems are not ordinary item with infinite supply you can purchase for gold, something you were implying. It is quite more complex than that and much closer to PLEX system, just in GW2 case ANet stepped in as a regulator in the process.



    Oh, no, no, no, I think you misunderstood me partially. Of course gems are purchased with real money. I never meant to imply that they weren't. What I am asserting is that there are two ways gems enter the game: either you pay real money for them, or you buy them from ArenaNet, for gold, at an exchange rate set by ArenaNet.


    And that once gems enter your possession, you can either spend them at the cash shop, or sell them back to ArenaNet, for gold, at an exchange rate set by ArenaNet.


    I think you are incorrect when you say "Gems are not ordinary item with infinite supply you can purchase for gold". All the evidence suggests that they are.



    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by Banquetto Gdemami, I honestly have no idea what you're trying to say here. Is it your claim that gems for gold in GW2 involves players directly buying and selling from each other? That each and every gem bought for gold is matched up with one gem purchased for cash and sold for gold? Because I'm claiming that that is not the case.
    And you'd be wrong. All gems on the market were purchased and placed there by players. "The gems and gold players get from the Currency Exchange are supplied by other players, not ArenaNet." (source)

    Is it possible that there may be no available gems one day as a result of that? Possible, but not at all probable. 



    Interesting piece. The follow-up explanation actually doesn't make a whole lot of sense, though. It certainly reads like the writer got a little confused by the discussion:



    ArenaNet will set the initial exchange rate for gems to gold when the servers first open for headstart, but after that the rate will fluctuate based on supply and demand of the players using the Currency Exchange. The gems and gold players get from the Currency Exchange are supplied by other players, not ArenaNet. As supply of gems goes up, the price will go down and vice versa. While we do not expect prices to fluctuate wildly, smart traders will be able to get good deals by watching the exchange rate closely and waiting for it to favor gems or gold, whichever they are looking to purchase.


    You are correct that if it worked like this, there would be no available gems one day as a result. And actually that is extremely probable: soon after launch, for instance, the exchange rate (the initial rate set by ArenaNet, according to this piece) was so low that countless players were buying gems for gold like crazy (I grabbed $30 worth or so, for a handful of gold), and nobody was selling them for gold because it was so insanely expensive (in the order of $6 to buy one gold).


    How were there gems available to buy at this time, if the gems are supplied by other players, not ArenaNet?


    You can look at Diablo 3 to see what happens when a fixed exchange rate doesn't match supply and demand - initially, they put a floor of $2.50 per million on gold sales at the RMAH. Result - countless players with millions of gold listed for sale, none of it selling. If GW2 worked as claimed, there would be a frequent state of players wanting to buy gems, and none available.


    I think it is far more likely, in the absence of a clear and unambiguous statement directly from ArenaNet (and satisfactory answers to the many follow-up questions), that when you trade at the currency exchange, you are trading directly with ArenaNet, and the effect of this supply and demand is not any market interaction, but rather an algorithmic modification to their exchange rate.

  • GdemamiGdemami Beau VallonPosts: 7,865Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by Banquetto

    I think you are incorrect when you say "Gems are not ordinary item with infinite supply you can purchase for gold". All the evidence suggests that they are.


    Gem conversion rate is being regulated, any ordinary item has fixed price.

    It does not matter how gems are entering the game, what matters is how their price is formed up. In EVE, the price regulator is supply/demand, in GW2 the regulator is ANet.

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,666Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Banquetto

    Originally posted by Loktofeit

    Originally posted by Banquetto Gdemami, I honestly have no idea what you're trying to say here. Is it your claim that gems for gold in GW2 involves players directly buying and selling from each other? That each and every gem bought for gold is matched up with one gem purchased for cash and sold for gold? Because I'm claiming that that is not the case.
    And you'd be wrong. All gems on the market were purchased and placed there by players. "The gems and gold players get from the Currency Exchange are supplied by other players, not ArenaNet." (source)

    Is it possible that there may be no available gems one day as a result of that? Possible, but not at all probable. 



    Interesting piece. The follow-up explanation actually doesn't make a whole lot of sense, though. It certainly reads like the writer got a little confused by the discussion:


    ArenaNet will set the initial exchange rate for gems to gold when the servers first open for headstart, but after that the rate will fluctuate based on supply and demand of the players using the Currency Exchange. The gems and gold players get from the Currency Exchange are supplied by other players, not ArenaNet. As supply of gems goes up, the price will go down and vice versa. While we do not expect prices to fluctuate wildly, smart traders will be able to get good deals by watching the exchange rate closely and waiting for it to favor gems or gold, whichever they are looking to purchase.


    You are correct that if it worked like this, there would be no available gems one day as a result. And actually that is extremely probable: soon after launch, for instance, the exchange rate (the initial rate set by ArenaNet, according to this piece) was so low that countless players were buying gems for gold like crazy (I grabbed $30 worth or so, for a handful of gold), and nobody was selling them for gold because it was so insanely expensive (in the order of $6 to buy one gold).


    How were there gems available to buy at this time, if the gems are supplied by other players, not ArenaNet?

    The gems people bought during beta. You'd be surprised at how many people buy game cash during betas, especially when that game cash will be refunded once the game goes live. There were also gem giveaways. I think the events during Beta Weekend 2 gave the player 3k gems.

     

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • itstheclimaxitstheclimax Hempstead, NYPosts: 22Member
    Originally posted by Gdemami

     


    Originally posted by banzai014

    Oh from what I read I thought PLEX was like gems in GW2 - I didn't know somebody actually had to have spent cash to get it to market.

     

    Don't GW2 gems come from real currency purchase only?

    no. you can buy gems with the in game currency on your character.

  • KiljaedenasKiljaedenas New Westminster, BCPosts: 468Member
    Originally posted by Rydeson
    Originally posted by Kiljaedenas
    Originally posted by Rydeson
    Originally posted by tom_gore
    Originally posted by Rydeson
    Originally posted by Boardwalker
    I hope EVE never goes F2P. Having a sub is a great way to keep the freeloaders out, while ensuring consistent updates and free expansions from CCP.

          How is F2P freeloading?   I'm curious how and why you see it that way..  Have you heard of the saying "something is better then nothing"?  There is alot of truth in that..  There are many players such as myself that only play casually on weekends.. Paying for a sub is just careless and crazy..  I'm an advid golfer when weather permits.. Sure I would LOVE a subscription based golf course that allows me to golf all I want, whenever I want.. But should everyone, even the guy that golfs once a month pay the same monthly golf sub.?  Oh hell no..

         When a game has ONLY a subscrption option, if forces people to go  "ALL IN" or fold.. Just like poker..  If a B2P cash shop is set up properly, then both subs and pay as you go customers can co-exist..  As I said in my post, I would have no problem buying unlockables as I play..  Getting $50 out of me per year is better then nothing, which is what they are getting now from me with a manditory sub..  

    Your post just plainly tells us you don't understand anything about EVE.

    in exchange of every paltry 50 USD per year from casuals like you, they would probably lose ten times the amount from customers disgusted by rampant spammers, spy alts, corp thieves et cetera. Really?  It's amazing that so many sub games already suffer from spammes and such, so subbing doesn't guarantee you anything.. And as I said, if the cash shop model is done correctly there would be no need for spamming because they wouldn't be in business..  Spy alts?  Already exist for those that own more then one account.. I believe you are reaching for "possibilities" to excuse your bias stance.. 

    F2P just would not work for EVE. It would cause more problems than solve anything, resulting in the paying customers to leave quickly and the death of the game.  I'm all ears.. do inform us all how F2P would not work.. I don't want vague "could of, should and would of".. I want factual details please..

    Thank you.

     

     

    That particular discussion has been had before. Read this: http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/post/5415659#5415659

    Particularly my post on it. It explains in explicit detail why Eve going F2P is a catastrophically bad idea.

    Those are not facts but opinion why YOU feel F2P would fail.. and you use YOUR rules of F2P to justify..  TRY again..  Thank you

    ...Have you even played the game past the trial period? Haven't you ever had a spy alt steal from your corp (I have), or witnessed the Burn Jita event (I did) or have seen the permanent gank-gangs outside the main Jita station (and I do mean PERMANENT)? You keep asking for "facts" on how a F2P system would affect a game that has a level of logistical and tactical metagame complexity completely unheard of anywhere else, and there is nothing to compare to. My "facts" as it were are based off of plain logical thought, and I'm surprised you don't see them. So let's try again:

    1a) It is a FACT that suicide ganking happens in Eve

    1b) It is a FACT that suicide ganking is at least partially controlled because the players that do it get a significant security status hit each time, enough of them and they won't even be able to enter Hisec without the NPC police blowing them out of the sky on sight.

    1c) It is a FACT resulting from simple logic that if Eve went F2P the players that like to suicide gank would waste no time in creating legions of free suicide gank drone accounts to accelerate their work. Why wouldn't they? It would result in a significant increase in their profit rate as well as "moar carebear tears" as some of them like to say. I'd probably do it too. They could just cycle through account names, discarding ones that have too low of a sec status in place of a new one. If properly set up initially you could get a very effective Thrasher ganker up and running inside of two days in terms of skill training (and if you don't understand that as a fact, you REALLY haven't played the game).

    Next point:

    2a) It is a FACT that Eve's living, epic economy depends on a careful balance of supply vs demand, creation vs destruction

    2b) It is a FACT that excessive mining supply (i.e. bots) can negatively affect the market, hence recent anti-bot campaigns.

    2c) It is a FACT resulting from simple logic that if Eve went F2P the players who like to mine would waste no time in creating a legion of mining drones that they could run at the same time (hell, I probably would too) and completely glut the market with supply for hisec ores (which are used in pretty much EVERYTHING) and ruin the market.

    If you have any abilities in logic at all, you should also see the spying implications I mentioned in my previous post.

    The fact (!) of the matter is, if there is an easier way to make a profit in Eve people will do it. There isn't a single thing you can say that can disprove what I stated above, and if you even try that will prove that you really don't understand Eve Online or the people in it at all.

    Where's the any key?

  • RydesonRydeson Canton, OHPosts: 3,858Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Kiljaedenas
    Originally posted by Rydeson

    Those are not facts but opinion why YOU feel F2P would fail.. and you use YOUR rules of F2P to justify..  TRY again..  Thank you

    ...Have you even played the game past the trial period? Haven't you ever had a spy alt steal from your corp (I have), or witnessed the Burn Jita event (I did) or have seen the permanent gank-gangs outside the main Jita station (and I do mean PERMANENT)? You keep asking for "facts" on how a F2P system would affect a game that has a level of logistical and tactical metagame complexity completely unheard of anywhere else, and there is nothing to compare to. My "facts" as it were are based off of plain logical thought, and I'm surprised you don't see them. So let's try again:  keyword being "YOUR" facts on how F2P wouuld effect the game.. No one is saying that gankings and spy doesn't happen, they do and happen on PAID accounts.. So to imply that subscriptions immune you from poor judgement and actions doesn't hold up..

    1a) It is a FACT that suicide ganking happens in Eve No one said ganking doesn't happen.. You are off topic here arguing about something that wasn't said..   The fact that sky is blue is true, but had nothing to do with this topic..

    1b) It is a FACT that suicide ganking is at least partially controlled because the players that do it get a significant security status hit each time, enough of them and they won't even be able to enter Hisec without the NPC police blowing them out of the sky on sight. (read above)

    1c) It is a FACT resulting from simple logic that if Eve went F2P the players that like to suicide gank would waste no time in creating legions of free suicide gank drone accounts to accelerate their work. Why wouldn't they? It would result in a significant increase in their profit rate as well as "moar carebear tears" as some of them like to say. I'd probably do it too. They could just cycle through account names, discarding ones that have too low of a sec status in place of a new one. If properly set up initially you could get a very effective Thrasher ganker up and running inside of two days in terms of skill training (and if you don't understand that as a fact, you REALLY haven't played the game). You obviously didn't bother reading the entire post(s).. You are assuming that F2P means anyone can have 100% access to the game.. As I said, that is NOT my stance.. Pay as you go is my stance.. Could someone invest $$ to unlock enough of the game to become a spy and ganker as you worry about.. Sure.. But that is no different then someone investing the same $$ in a temporary sub to do the same thing you are trying to avoid..

    Next point:

    2a) It is a FACT that Eve's living, epic economy depends on a careful balance of supply vs demand, creation vs destruction HUH?  lol  Who is arguing that EVE doesn't have an ecomomy? As I said, fact is sky is blue, but it has nothing to do with this topic or what I'm saying..

    2b) It is a FACT that excessive mining supply (i.e. bots) can negatively affect the market, hence recent anti-bot campaigns. (read above)

    2c) It is a FACT resulting from simple logic that if Eve went F2P the players who like to mine would waste no time in creating a legion of mining drones that they could run at the same time (hell, I probably would too) and completely glut the market with supply for hisec ores (which are used in pretty much EVERYTHING) and ruin the market. Again you are using YOUR set of rules of F2P to base your argument from.. There are safety protocols to keep multiple accounts being generated by a single sourse.. MMORPG.com uses some to only allow ONE account per ISP...  and even if there are those diehards that can find backdoors into multple accounts, what good would it do for them if they are LOCKED out from all mining outside the starting locations..

    If you have any abilities in logic at all, you should also see the spying implications I mentioned in my previous post.

    The fact (!) of the matter is, if there is an easier way to make a profit in Eve people will do it. There isn't a single thing you can say that can disprove what I stated above, and if you even try that will prove that you really don't understand Eve Online or the people in it at all.

    total strawman argument you posted.. you are arguing your stance using your set of rules.. Sorry.. but try again..  Happy Holidays..

  • dave6660dave6660 New York, NYPosts: 2,543Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Rydeson
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by dave6660
    Originally posted by Rydeson

    EVE is plenty easy to set up.. They already did it with trial accounts.. Each skill, each ship, each stargate can be controlled with "unlockables"..  Pay as you go..

    Holy shit.  You want to pay for each new gate you jump through?  If that was the case I would owe CCP a small fortune.

    The fortune it would cost me would be up there, too. :)

    One day in Sank and Jita, next day back in Alenia, then a couple days doing missions in Arraron, then back to Jita for selling and mischief... suddenly the $13.00 to take the GWB out of NY seems like pennies. :)

    Ok guys.. lets not be petty about stargate being singular.. LOL you could easily group sections or multiple stargates to be unlockable..  The more you explore, they more it cost you to unlock the galaxy..  Consider it a toll :)  lol

    During the course of my three years in Eve my character lived in at least a half dozen different regions from Placid to Black Rise to Lonetrek to the Great Wildlands to Syndicate to Essence.  I still would've owed a fortune.  So I'll gladly pay $15 a month and not have to bother about paying to unlock different regional gates.

    “There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own.”
    -- Herman Melville

  • RydesonRydeson Canton, OHPosts: 3,858Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by dave6660
    Originally posted by Rydeson
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by dave6660
    Originally posted by Rydeson

    EVE is plenty easy to set up.. They already did it with trial accounts.. Each skill, each ship, each stargate can be controlled with "unlockables"..  Pay as you go..

    Holy shit.  You want to pay for each new gate you jump through?  If that was the case I would owe CCP a small fortune.

    The fortune it would cost me would be up there, too. :)

    One day in Sank and Jita, next day back in Alenia, then a couple days doing missions in Arraron, then back to Jita for selling and mischief... suddenly the $13.00 to take the GWB out of NY seems like pennies. :)

    Ok guys.. lets not be petty about stargate being singular.. LOL you could easily group sections or multiple stargates to be unlockable..  The more you explore, they more it cost you to unlock the galaxy..  Consider it a toll :)  lol

    During the course of my three years in Eve my character lived in at least a half dozen different regions from Placid to Black Rise to Lonetrek to the Great Wildlands to Syndicate to Essence.  I still would've owed a fortune.  So I'll gladly pay $15 a month and not have to bother about paying to unlock different regional gates.

           THEN pay your 15 a month sub..  NO ONE has said that a monthly sub would be canceled..   Grrr why do so many assume that F2P means that monthly subs are canceled..  Choose your payment method based on what fits you best..  Right?  You like buffet playing, I like to ala carte my menu.. TY..    Happy Holidays :)

  • RocketeerRocketeer NachrodtPosts: 1,304Member

    F2P for EvE is flagging a dead horse. That shit only works for those more single than multiplayer MMOs like SWTOR, which you can play without a guild/corp.

    In EvE metagaming is big, and no sane corp would invite a F2P player and give him any kind of access for three reasons:

     

    1. If you have to pay 15$ to roll an alt you need to steal about 800 mil to meet the ISK value of it. Anything less and you might aswell have sold a GTC.

    2. With F2P you make money even with 10 mil stolen. Lots of players would make F2P alts, plant them in corps and steal all the crap they get their hands on, only to recycle the chars and repeat.

    3. CEOs will be aware of 1 and 2 and require a running sub as a entry requirement into the corp, to show people are dedicated to the game(and not just an alt there to steal our crap).

     

    And without access to player run corps EvE sucks big time. Besides F2P players are less dedicated to the game, and training/equipping people costs time and money. Why should i be arsed to spend all my evening teaching you the ropes of EvE and our corp, if you can't be arsed enough to actually pay for the game or play enough to afford a plex?

    And im saying that as someone who is very open in regards to F2P in other games like LotRO, STO and SWTOR. But in EvE, as a director, i just don't see the benefit vs risks in F2P players for our corp and we are pretty laidback and casual.

  • KiljaedenasKiljaedenas New Westminster, BCPosts: 468Member
    Originally posted by Rydeson
    Originally posted by Kiljaedenas
    Originally posted by Rydeson

    Those are not facts but opinion why YOU feel F2P would fail.. and you use YOUR rules of F2P to justify..  TRY again..  Thank you

    ...Have you even played the game past the trial period? Haven't you ever had a spy alt steal from your corp (I have), or witnessed the Burn Jita event (I did) or have seen the permanent gank-gangs outside the main Jita station (and I do mean PERMANENT)? You keep asking for "facts" on how a F2P system would affect a game that has a level of logistical and tactical metagame complexity completely unheard of anywhere else, and there is nothing to compare to. My "facts" as it were are based off of plain logical thought, and I'm surprised you don't see them. So let's try again:  keyword being "YOUR" facts on how F2P wouuld effect the game.. No one is saying that gankings and spy doesn't happen, they do and happen on PAID accounts.. So to imply that subscriptions immune you from poor judgement and actions doesn't hold up.. I never once said "immune". Of course it will happen. The key thing is, with F2P introduced it would MULTIPLY.

    1a) It is a FACT that suicide ganking happens in Eve No one said ganking doesn't happen.. You are off topic here arguing about something that wasn't said..   The fact that sky is blue is true, but had nothing to do with this topic.. You obviously don't recognize build-up to an argument. I'm presenting what is in the game now, and will later show how F2P will affect that. It's a logic sequence for an argument, so take your finger off the trigger

    1b) It is a FACT that suicide ganking is at least partially controlled because the players that do it get a significant security status hit each time, enough of them and they won't even be able to enter Hisec without the NPC police blowing them out of the sky on sight. (read above)(same to you)

    1c) It is a FACT resulting from simple logic that if Eve went F2P the players that like to suicide gank would waste no time in creating legions of free suicide gank drone accounts to accelerate their work. Why wouldn't they? It would result in a significant increase in their profit rate as well as "moar carebear tears" as some of them like to say. I'd probably do it too. They could just cycle through account names, discarding ones that have too low of a sec status in place of a new one. If properly set up initially you could get a very effective Thrasher ganker up and running inside of two days in terms of skill training (and if you don't understand that as a fact, you REALLY haven't played the game). You obviously didn't bother reading the entire post(s).. You are assuming that F2P means anyone can have 100% access to the game.. As I said, that is NOT my stance.. Pay as you go is my stance.. Could someone invest $$ to unlock enough of the game to become a spy and ganker as you worry about.. Sure.. But that is no different then someone investing the same $$ in a temporary sub to do the same thing you are trying to avoid.. Dude...they would have to cripple the access of a F2P account to the point of it being unplayable to avoid free gankers. If a player can get into a ship, change its fit, undock and go through hisec stargates, which is 1% of the game, they can gank. These are the absolute bare-bones tools that all new players need and are even trained on during the tutorials. And yes, I did read your entire post stream.  What you call "casual pay-as-you-go" also results in Pay to Win, which is the worst concept ever invented in the entire history of gaming. One player should not get an advantage over another just because he dumped more real life money into the game. The player who puts the most effort and thought into their actions should be the one to win. With a subscription model like what Eve has, everyone gets the same access, rich or poor. So they have to rely on their wits to survive. It's a better system, simple as that. Oh, and your comment about "It's amazing how so many sub games already suffer from spammies so subbing doesn't guarantee you anything"...yes it does. There is nothing on earth that can outright prevent spammers in games. They will find a way. What a sub does is prevent an absolute LEGION of spammers from invading everywhere; it helps control the number of them because spammers don't want to spend tons of money to spam.

    Next point:

    2a) It is a FACT that Eve's living, epic economy depends on a careful balance of supply vs demand, creation vs destruction HUH?  lol  Who is arguing that EVE doesn't have an ecomomy? As I said, fact is sky is blue, but it has nothing to do with this topic or what I'm saying.. See my previous comment about a logical buildup to an argument

    2b) It is a FACT that excessive mining supply (i.e. bots) can negatively affect the market, hence recent anti-bot campaigns. (read above)(same to you)

    2c) It is a FACT resulting from simple logic that if Eve went F2P the players who like to mine would waste no time in creating a legion of mining drones that they could run at the same time (hell, I probably would too) and completely glut the market with supply for hisec ores (which are used in pretty much EVERYTHING) and ruin the market. Again you are using YOUR set of rules of F2P to base your argument from.. There are safety protocols to keep multiple accounts being generated by a single sourse.. MMORPG.com uses some to only allow ONE account per ISP...  and even if there are those diehards that can find backdoors into multple accounts, what good would it do for them if they are LOCKED out from all mining outside the starting locations.. I don't have any rules for F2P, I never said I did nor do I ever intend to claim that I have F2P rules. I'm going based off of historical fact as to what has happened in previous F2P games. And those "safety protocols" you mention don't work well. I have myself been able to get around such protocols on various sites quite easily. And as for being locked out from all mining outside the starting locations, not only is that cripplingly unfair they could still pump out a very hefty amount of minerals in those starting locations and transfer them to sub accounts by jetcan mining. The economy would still be blasted.

    If you have any abilities in logic at all, you should also see the spying implications I mentioned in my previous post.

    The fact (!) of the matter is, if there is an easier way to make a profit in Eve people will do it. There isn't a single thing you can say that can disprove what I stated above, and if you even try that will prove that you really don't understand Eve Online or the people in it at all.

    total strawman argument you posted.. you are arguing your stance using your set of rules.. Sorry.. but try again..  Happy Holidays.. You have yet to provide good counters to my arguments bud. You should try again.

     

    Where's the any key?

  • ElsaboltsElsabolts Greencastle, INPosts: 2,594Member Uncommon

    Could we all just try and get along, Im sure all the old vets would now go along with a PVE server. CCp gave China there own server so its not like there gonna preserve just one server.

    image

  • BoardwalkerBoardwalker Austin, TXPosts: 384Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Elsabolts

    Could we all just try and get along, Im sure all the old vets would now go along with a PVE server. CCp gave China there own server so its not like there gonna preserve just one server.

    Creating another server, and a PVE one at that, would be more catastrophic than going F2P. It would destroy a big part of EVE's core identity and break it utterly. I'd rather deal with a bunch of freeloaders.

    They can adjust a game all day, but they can't help the issue between the keyboard and the chair.
    Played: UO, DAoC, AC, WoW, EVE, TR, WAR, Aion, Rift, SWTOR, GW2, TSW, ESO, Elite:D
    Play EVE for free for 21 days

  • tom_goretom_gore TamperePosts: 1,796Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Rydeson

    The reason why trial accounts don't work is because you are locked OUT of doing much after a certain point.. same can be done with F2P.... I don't know why so many assume that F2P means "everything" is free with no restrictions.. As I have said, if F2P was set up correctly, it would not cause any problems against full paying subs..  HELL.. I would even be interested in a limited sub plan.. Such as $5 a month and I get 10 hours of game time per month as an example..

    How would the limited sub plan work? Would your skills also only train for those 10 hours per month?

    If not, again a lot of players would change their normal subs to limited ones because they only keep those subs to train their alts while they play their mains. End result - CCP would lose money.

    If on the other hand the skills would also only train 10 hours a month the limited sub would be worthless.

     

    Again I have to wonder. Have you ever even tried EVE?

     

  • RydesonRydeson Canton, OHPosts: 3,858Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Rocketeer

    F2P for EvE is flagging a dead horse. That shit only works for those more single than multiplayer MMOs like SWTOR, which you can play without a guild/corp.

    In EvE metagaming is big, and no sane corp would invite a F2P player and give him any kind of access for three reasons:

     

    1. If you have to pay 15$ to roll an alt you need to steal about 800 mil to meet the ISK value of it. Anything less and you might aswell have sold a GTC.

    2. With F2P you make money even with 10 mil stolen. Lots of players would make F2P alts, plant them in corps and steal all the crap they get their hands on, only to recycle the chars and repeat.

    3. CEOs will be aware of 1 and 2 and require a running sub as a entry requirement into the corp, to show people are dedicated to the game(and not just an alt there to steal our crap).

     

    And without access to player run corps EvE sucks big time. Besides F2P players are less dedicated to the game, and training/equipping people costs time and money. Why should i be arsed to spend all my evening teaching you the ropes of EvE and our corp, if you can't be arsed enough to actually pay for the game or play enough to afford a plex?

    And im saying that as someone who is very open in regards to F2P in other games like LotRO, STO and SWTOR. But in EvE, as a director, i just don't see the benefit vs risks in F2P players for our corp and we are pretty laidback and casual.  this caught my eye big time.. I keep hearing how F2P is going to allow spy's and thieves, etc etc.. It's kinda hard to spy and steal from corps if you don't INVITE them into your corp..  You can't blame the thief or spy if you don't take the time to get to know your players before inviting them into your family (guild/corp).. I was a guild master in multiple games and never once had a problem with guild members stealing or drama.. Maybe because I don't invite every stranger I bump into.. Get to know your players before giving them the keys to the city.. lol

          Well there you go.. You pretty much confirmed my position that F2P wouldn't have a game destroy effect as many believe..  As you said, NO real corp and group of dedicated hardcore players have time to babysit F2P newbies..  And as a F2P freeloader you really aren't in a position to do much in the game on your own.. Correct?  My position on "correctly" set up cash shop models is that a player pays as he goes..  Today's MMO's are all modeled that a customer is going to consume X amount of content at a rate to justify a monthly sub.. ($15)..  But what happens when said customer only casually plays 1/5th of the time of the average customer.. To him he's not getting his money's worth.. It's just like asking a old man to pay for a buffet when he knows he's only going to consume a half a plate of food..

         Any game can be designed to host both sub based customers and cash shop customers.. The problem today, is that almost all F2P models are really only trial accounts in disguise, that penalize the customer to entice them to go sub because without doing so, is no fun..  SWTOR is a prime example of that..  GW2 is a better example of a good cash shop system.. NOT perfect, but better then anything I've played so far.. 

  • RydesonRydeson Canton, OHPosts: 3,858Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Elsabolts

    Could we all just try and get along, Im sure all the old vets would now go along with a PVE server. CCp gave China there own server so its not like there gonna preserve just one server.

    image

         Good idea.. a PvE server would definately be interesting, and something I would look into more..  IF EVE doesn't offer it, maybe newer ideas like "Elite Dangerous"  would..  Not every person wants to live in a PvP world.. Probably why CCP hasn't grown in the last 2.5 years.. Offering a new server to PvE minded players would open up a new market of players and have NO EFFECT on the current servers..

  • KrematoryKrematory TVNPosts: 542Member Uncommon
    A pve server make no sense given the game design. Without pvp economy woul suck, and low/null sec would make no sense at all.

    "EVE is likely the best MMORPG that you've never really understood or played" - Kyleran

  • jpnzjpnz SydneyPosts: 3,529Member

    A PVE server in EVE-Online would be similar to having PVE server for PlanetSide2 or CounterStrike.

    Doesn't fit at all.

    Gdemami -
    Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.

  • ElsaboltsElsabolts Greencastle, INPosts: 2,594Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by jpnz

    A PVE server in EVE-Online would be similar to having PVE server for PlanetSide2 or CounterStrike.

    Doesn't fit at all.

    If this is not true then why did CCP give china there own server ?

    image

  • tom_goretom_gore TamperePosts: 1,796Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Rydeson
    Originally posted by Elsabolts

    Could we all just try and get along, Im sure all the old vets would now go along with a PVE server. CCp gave China there own server so its not like there gonna preserve just one server.

    image

         Good idea.. a PvE server would definately be interesting, and something I would look into more..  IF EVE doesn't offer it, maybe newer ideas like "Elite Dangerous"  would..  Not every person wants to live in a PvP world.. Probably why CCP hasn't grown in the last 2.5 years.. Offering a new server to PvE minded players would open up a new market of players and have NO EFFECT on the current servers..

     

    Oh god. Please stop already.

    There is a PvE server in EVE already. It's called High Sec.

     

  • BizkitNLBizkitNL NetherlandsPosts: 2,280Member Common
    Originally posted by tom_gore
    Originally posted by Rydeson
    Originally posted by Elsabolts

    Could we all just try and get along, Im sure all the old vets would now go along with a PVE server. CCp gave China there own server so its not like there gonna preserve just one server.

    image

         Good idea.. a PvE server would definately be interesting, and something I would look into more..  IF EVE doesn't offer it, maybe newer ideas like "Elite Dangerous"  would..  Not every person wants to live in a PvP world.. Probably why CCP hasn't grown in the last 2.5 years.. Offering a new server to PvE minded players would open up a new market of players and have NO EFFECT on the current servers..

     

    Oh god. Please stop already.

    There is a PvE server in EVE already. It's called High Sec.

     

    Yeah.....asking for a PvE server means you're missing the point of EvE.

    10
  • KrematoryKrematory TVNPosts: 542Member Uncommon
    China server is not a pve server, and it only exists because the chinese government is full of shit, not because CCP thinks its a good idea.

    "EVE is likely the best MMORPG that you've never really understood or played" - Kyleran

  • ElsaboltsElsabolts Greencastle, INPosts: 2,594Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by tom_gore
    Originally posted by Rydeson
    Originally posted by Elsabolts

    Could we all just try and get along, Im sure all the old vets would now go along with a PVE server. CCp gave China there own server so its not like there gonna preserve just one server.

    image

         Good idea.. a PvE server would definately be interesting, and something I would look into more..  IF EVE doesn't offer it, maybe newer ideas like "Elite Dangerous"  would..  Not every person wants to live in a PvP world.. Probably why CCP hasn't grown in the last 2.5 years.. Offering a new server to PvE minded players would open up a new market of players and have NO EFFECT on the current servers..

     

    Oh god. Please stop already.

    There is a PvE server in EVE already. It's called High Sec.

     

    LOL, Humm I guess someone forgot to tell the Goonies ie: " Goonswarm " along with Suicide ganking. Concord can no longer protect anyone in High Sec.

    image

  • KrematoryKrematory TVNPosts: 542Member Uncommon
    Concord was never meant to protect anyone. They're there to punish crime, not to prevent it. And it works fine this way. So if you're not ok with that move on and find another game that fits your needs, but please stop talking nonsense about eve.

    "EVE is likely the best MMORPG that you've never really understood or played" - Kyleran

  • MukeMuke BredaPosts: 2,172Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Elsabolts

     

    LOL, Humm I guess someone forgot to tell the Goonies ie: " Goonswarm " along with Suicide ganking. Concord can no longer protect anyone in High Sec.

     

    SHOCKER:

     

     

    highsec has NEVER been 100% safe.

    The only 100% certainty you get in highsec killing carebears is that the attacker gets killed by Concord, evading them is a exploit and it'll get them banned. It has never been the case in EVE that Concord prevents the victom from getting blown up.

    I've been suiciding on freighters and miners (funganks) for many years now, before the tier3 battlecrousers were released and Goonswarm were qualified for anything else then t1 fitted rifters.

    PVE only server for EVE?  then CCP will be closing their doors in 6 months and all the PVE fanatics will be crying about how evil CCP is and how good EVE was.

     

    "going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"

Sign In or Register to comment.