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!

[Interview] General: Revival: 'We'll Adapt Together'

13»

Comments

  • SerondarSerondar na, NEPosts: 8Member
    Originally posted by GeezerGamer
    Originally posted by Foomerang

     


    Originally posted by GeezerGamer
    OMG, More bullshit!

     

    Mt/RMT in a player driven economy?  Talk about P2W! There is no way to avoid that. The second this game releases, the wealthiest players will be the ones buying gold or whatever tradeables are for sale in the shop. Those 1st days will be crucial to the gold buyer, it will set them up in game with opportunities that will not be available to players later, even ones that spend more money. Plus there is the whole Cash Shop driven RNG mechanics to deal with. Sorry but a Cash Shop in the game means Publisher controlled economy. Sandbox games have a player driven economy. These two are diametrrically opposed. It's just not going to work. EQ:N and The Repopulation will most likely face the exact same issue.


    preaching to the choir my friend. Unfortunately, I feel we will see a new definition of player driven economy made to fit a cash shop and we will be drowned out.

     

    Yeah, there is that and the fact that the past few years of Theme Park MMOs sucking wasn't just because Theme Parks have been over done. These games have sucked because of piss poor game design. These same creative geniuses suddenly had an epiphany and "get it"? They are now gonna start making games that don't suck just because it's a sandbox? They could start by realizing that a true sandbox needs to launch as P2P. And for those who might be thinking It works for EVE. EVE had 5 years of established economy in purely P2P before introducing PLEX. Had EVE launched with PLEX, We'd see an entirely different economy base in EVE now.

    Yeah.........I'll hold my breath for this one.

     

    I am with ya there , he kinda of lost me at F2P not P2W and sandbox. Even with Eves version of RMT with PLEX someone was still paying the bill for the sub.

    Isn't part of the fun of sandbox games like UO and Eve the economy side of things.

  • LaserwolfLaserwolf Oklahoma City, OKPosts: 2,383Member

    "Players are tired of being lied to with fluffy gimmicks"

    Yeah, this interview was pretty full of fluffy gimmicks like Player Housing and NPC towns wasting away from the lack of an economy or being destroyed. There is almost zero chance this is making it into the game or, if it does, will be anything at all like described.

    It doesn't sound like a sandbox game and it doesn't sound like it's anything at all different from what is already out there.

    image

  • plutosamsplutosams Seattle, WAPosts: 49Member
    I was liking the vibe of the game until they said F2P...all interest left at that point.  To me a healthy and fun game is void of a cash-shop and this is made double in sandbox where the economy needs to be balanced by player actions not developer actions.  
  • DSWBeefDSWBeef phoenix, AZPosts: 791Member

    It sounds like they're trying to find the balance between FFA full loot pvp and "carebear" so ill keep an eye on it. I dont support any game where Full loot pvp is in. Dont have a problem with FFA pvp just let me keep my stuff.

    Playing: War Thunder, World of Warcraft, and Grim Dawn
    Waiting on:Everquest Next and The Black Desert

  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer ChairPosts: 5,599Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Serondar
    Originally posted by GeezerGamer
    Originally posted by Foomerang

     


    Originally posted by GeezerGamer
    OMG, More bullshit!

     

    Mt/RMT in a player driven economy?  Talk about P2W! There is no way to avoid that. The second this game releases, the wealthiest players will be the ones buying gold or whatever tradeables are for sale in the shop. Those 1st days will be crucial to the gold buyer, it will set them up in game with opportunities that will not be available to players later, even ones that spend more money. Plus there is the whole Cash Shop driven RNG mechanics to deal with. Sorry but a Cash Shop in the game means Publisher controlled economy. Sandbox games have a player driven economy. These two are diametrrically opposed. It's just not going to work. EQ:N and The Repopulation will most likely face the exact same issue.


    preaching to the choir my friend. Unfortunately, I feel we will see a new definition of player driven economy made to fit a cash shop and we will be drowned out.

     

    Yeah, there is that and the fact that the past few years of Theme Park MMOs sucking wasn't just because Theme Parks have been over done. These games have sucked because of piss poor game design. These same creative geniuses suddenly had an epiphany and "get it"? They are now gonna start making games that don't suck just because it's a sandbox? They could start by realizing that a true sandbox needs to launch as P2P. And for those who might be thinking It works for EVE. EVE had 5 years of established economy in purely P2P before introducing PLEX. Had EVE launched with PLEX, We'd see an entirely different economy base in EVE now.

    Yeah.........I'll hold my breath for this one.

     

    I am with ya there , he kinda of lost me at F2P not P2W and sandbox. Even with Eves version of RMT with PLEX someone was still paying the bill for the sub.

    Isn't part of the fun of sandbox games like UO and Eve the economy side of things.

    That is the other thing where Plex works. Plex is Plex. It's a set amount of ISK. With a Cash Shop, you have items that you can buy that have an inherent value to them. That value will float with inflation. So $30.00 USD has a  set  value for Plex. And in EVE's economy, the USD is incredibly weak compared to ISK that you'll never be able to use a reasonable amount of real money to make any lasting change in your overall status in the game. Maybe make things somewhat easier for yourself, but never enough to really affect too many others. But in a Cash Shop. You use $30.00 to buy the most valuable items you can to resell. The value fluctuates. There is a huge difference in that. I don't even like the idea of PLEX, It still opens the door for real money to be brought into a game's economy and for me, it's a deal breaker at any level. But at least I can see with EVE where the impact is minimal. Eve's version is not repeatable.

  • LydeckLydeck Charleston, WVPosts: 80Member
    Did this guy really just compare their game and players to cam whores and perverts? What? Is this real life?
  • BacchiraBacchira MalmöPosts: 50Member

    A few days ago I had never heard of this game and now I'm excited enough to make a post. The things said in this article are almost too good to be true, which usually means they are. But even if it is all true, the bright sky is still dreadfully clouded by F2P.

     

    God why oh why! I mean, I know why, you can make a truck load of money fast with f2p, but can't there be any developer anymore with enough trust in their product to charge for it on a monthly basis and then let the players handle the economy? I hate f2p with a passion. Never have I seen a developer saying "yes, we will have pay-to-win items!", it's always "only minor things, fluff items" but usually it turns out to be pay-to-get-ahead or pay-to-look-cool etc etc

     

    And even if i is just fluff items, like a new kitchen table for someones house, it still has no place in a sand-box game. I might want to build one of those tables to sell so I can buy a cart, so I can transport some ashwood to some remote village where I heard It fetches a good price cause someone is building a castle there. Even fluff items can't be dismissed in a sandbox environment.

     

    The person from IllFonic admitted he had not been following the f2p debate over the last few years. I strongly recommend that he catches up...

     

    After that little rant I want to give all my best wishes to IllFonic for a courageous vision.

     
  • EvolvedMonkyEvolvedMonky Tulsa, OKPosts: 549Member

    The art and graphics look good and there ideas sound good but the F2P is kind of a red flag, same with EQnext.

    I understand why a f2p is a good idea in that your not a big company with a new product design. Youll get alot of players in to try your game and alot will stay due to it being free.

     

    But todays model of f2p wont work in a sandbox.  The devs talk about players wanting to role play there character yet if I want to look unique I have to shell out money for digital clothes that ill have to stick with unless I want to shell out more moeny to bulid a wardrobe. If I want to decorate my house (kinda like what was done in SWG) I have to shell out money. Because in every single f2p ive seen all non-cash cosmetic items are a joke. If your game is about immersion than reminding your player base about Real World problems everytime they want something in your game, kinda negates anything you do to keep your player immersed.     From what ive experienced in cash shop games is that the free ingame cosmetics lack viable choices. For example "Secret World" ofcourse they wanted you to buy the game, pay a sub, plus buy items in the shop. Another bad one was Star Trek.

     

    Honestly sandbox mmos with a f2p model is a good idea but not with a "themepark" cash shop.

    No matter what, players should always have access to all items in the game with work and luck.  The whole idea that you use real money to buy something in a fake world or use real money to buy convenience while the stock of your players have bs revive times, xp limiters (if you design your game around players buying xp boosts), item storage limitage (which affects your ability to make money, not a big deal in a theme park), Dungeon timers (also affects income), convenient powerful loot equal to hardworking loot, respecing characters....etc.  By doing those things you create an environment of "haves" and "have nots" but not one based upon gaming skill, guild management, and dedication on playing the game; but based upon who spends the most rl money. 

     

    Make it kinda like Wizards 101(kid game I know but one of the best f2p models ive seen). Give players the options for a subscription, give them better live tech support and access to all new content you add to the game. For a decent monthly price. 

    Offer non subed fans with a shop to buy PvE story packs. To buy new land content (like a new island with its own theme or somethin) you add to the game. Buy the option to create a guild. Etc.... 

     

    Now to get keep revenue flowing from subed and get more revenue from non sub. Add in service charges.  Give the option to buy name changes, race changes, guild name changes, transfer servers and so on.

     

    But im a realist and this game and eqnext will nickle and dime us. And things like economy and such will never exist on the same level as a game like EvE, or have a merchant community like SWG, or an immersive world like UO. 

     

    image
  • happyfartshappyfarts bzPosts: 85Member Uncommon
    after a long series of disappointments when it comes to sandboxes, I'm sad to say, I got to see it to believe it
  • MoiraeMoirae New Orleans, LAPosts: 2,746Member Uncommon
    Ok, sounds interesting. Just so you know, quest hubs are in every single MMO so there is NOTHING about that that's unusual. As for the rest... PROVE IT!
  • BelegStrongbowBelegStrongbow Pasadena, MDPosts: 281Member
    Why hasnt this game been added to the game list?
13»
Sign In or Register to comment.