Claiming to give you a free path to progression along side a paid path and making the free path tortuous is another common predatory practice.
TBH I don't find that anymore predatory than what Everquest did. Purposefully prolonging ones time in game to just make money from you via a sub.
Yeah I've heard that perspective before but I don't subscribe to it (pun intended) because I leave games once they bore me and both "end game" and hanging around till they feed me more PVE content bore me.
If I play a game for a long time it's because there's something there that I find worth playing. And even then, I come and go, sub or not, depending on how much fun or not I'm having.
so if loot boxes had unintresting prizes then it would not be a moral outrage
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I consider any profit based business transaction predatory to some extent.
So if you go to a service station with a flat tire and the guy says $20 to fix it. That's predatory to some extent?
Yes. He's set up an entire enterprise to prey on people in a desperate situation and make money off of them. Our entire society and economics systems are predatory by nature and design. It all comes down to how can we leverage our position to profit off of others to make our lives better at the expense of others.
What an awful way to look at the world.
Actually the guy is providing a service and he's got to eat. Now if he was secretly throwing nails on the road giving you the reason to need his service.... now that would be predatory.
Claiming to give you a free path to progression along side a paid path and making the free path tortuous is another common predatory practice.
TBH I don't find that anymore predatory than what Everquest did. Purposefully prolonging ones time in game to just make money from you via a sub.
Yeah I've heard that perspective before but I don't subscribe to it (pun intended) because I leave games once they bore me and both "end game" and hanging around till they feed me more PVE content bore me.
If I play a game for a long time it's because there's something there that I find worth playing. And even then, I come and go, sub or not, depending on how much fun or not I'm having.
so if loot boxes had unintresting prizes then it would not be a moral outrage
If you read what he wrote and then read what I wrote you should realize that you're asking the wrong question.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Claiming to give you a free path to progression along side a paid path and making the free path tortuous is another common predatory practice.
TBH I don't find that anymore predatory than what Everquest did. Purposefully prolonging ones time in game to just make money from you via a sub.
Yeah I've heard that perspective before but I don't subscribe to it (pun intended) because I leave games once they bore me and both "end game" and hanging around till they feed me more PVE content bore me.
If I play a game for a long time it's because there's something there that I find worth playing. And even then, I come and go, sub or not, depending on how much fun or not I'm having.
so if loot boxes had unintresting prizes then it would not be a moral outrage
If you read what he wrote and then read what I wrote you should realize that you're asking the wrong question.
very well could be the case
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Claiming to give you a free path to progression along side a paid path and making the free path tortuous is another common predatory practice.
TBH I don't find that anymore predatory than what Everquest did. Purposefully prolonging ones time in game to just make money from you via a sub.
Yeah I've heard that perspective before but I don't subscribe to it (pun intended) because I leave games once they bore me and both "end game" and hanging around till they feed me more PVE content bore me.
If I play a game for a long time it's because there's something there that I find worth playing. And even then, I come and go, sub or not, depending on how much fun or not I'm having.
I agree. EQ was my first MMO and it did put me of the genre for a bit. After the second month I just came to the conclusion "They're taking the piss here" I was basically paying a sub for a glorified chat room.
So I stopped.
However there is no denying that Everquest was known at the time as Evercrack for it's addictive gameplay and people wanted to hit max level.
So say in your example where the free path to progression is tortuous compared to the sub, why not just stop playing if it's not fun? Why claim it's being predatory?
Claiming to give you a free path to progression along side a paid path and making the free path tortuous is another common predatory practice.
TBH I don't find that anymore predatory than what Everquest did. Purposefully prolonging ones time in game to just make money from you via a sub.
That's a very cynical view on it.
My thought is that they just though this was the way it should play out. Lineage 2 had a HUGE leveling curve and it was fine by me. That was the game.
Because, by your estimation, a game company shold just give out all progression within what? first week? Month?
It was what it was. Especially for one of the earlier mmo's. You're looking at things through eyes from the present as opposed to actually understanding how things actually were.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
So say in your example where the free path to progression is tortuous compared to the sub, why not just stop playing if it's not fun? Why claim it's being predatory?
Because unlike in EQ, there's instant relief for the addict's pain via the credit card... and because it's designed EXACTLY to do that.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Claiming to give you a free path to progression along side a paid path and making the free path tortuous is another common predatory practice.
TBH I don't find that anymore predatory than what Everquest did. Purposefully prolonging ones time in game to just make money from you via a sub.
That's a very cynical view on it.
My thought is that they just though this was the way it should play out. Lineage 2 had a HUGE leveling curve and it was fine by me. That was the game.
Because, by your estimation, a game company shold just give out all progression within what? first week? Month?
It was what it was. Especially for one of the earlier mmo's. You're looking at things through eyes from the present as opposed to actually understanding how things actually were.
At the time MMO's weren't my go to genre for online gaming. I got the internet in 1996, just after Quake released and spent most of my gaming time in Quake/Quake 2 and Command and Conquer servers. Whilst communicating with friends in mIRC and ICQ.
No subscription fees in those games. B2P.
So I'm comparing Everquest to other online gaming at the time. The quality of game EQ provided wasn't sub worthy compared to that. Not todays games.
I consider any profit based business transaction predatory to some extent.
So if you go to a service station with a flat tire and the guy says $20 to fix it. That's predatory to some extent?
Yes. He's set up an entire enterprise to prey on people in a desperate situation and make money off of them. Our entire society and economics systems are predatory by nature and design. It all comes down to how can we leverage our position to profit off of others to make our lives better at the expense of others.
What an awful way to look at the world.
Actually the guy is providing a service and he's got to eat. Now if he was secretly throwing nails on the road giving you the reason to need his service.... now that would be predatory.
Because if everything is predatory then nothing merits being singled out as predatory. There should be a logical fallacy named for that.. or maybe there is.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Claiming to give you a free path to progression along side a paid path and making the free path tortuous is another common predatory practice.
TBH I don't find that anymore predatory than what Everquest did. Purposefully prolonging ones time in game to just make money from you via a sub.
I don't buy that mainly because there are free MUDs with longer leveling curves/progression systems than EQ. The free MUDs do it solely for progression.
"You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Claiming to give you a free path to progression along side a paid path and making the free path tortuous is another common predatory practice.
TBH I don't find that anymore predatory than what Everquest did. Purposefully prolonging ones time in game to just make money from you via a sub.
I don't buy that mainly because there are free MUDs with longer leveling curves/progression systems than EQ. The free MUDs do it solely for progression.
I dont understand, why no visual aids as usual?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I consider any profit based business transaction predatory to some extent.
So if you go to a service station with a flat tire and the guy says $20 to fix it. That's predatory to some extent?
Yes. He's set up an entire enterprise to prey on people in a desperate situation and make money off of them. Our entire society and economics systems are predatory by nature and design. It all comes down to how can we leverage our position to profit off of others to make our lives better at the expense of others.
What an awful way to look at the world.
Actually the guy is providing a service and he's got to eat. Now if he was secretly throwing nails on the road giving you the reason to need his service.... now that would be predatory.
Reality can have awful and horrifying aspects to it.
Notice that you're justifying his predatory practice with an argument of survival. Your argument doesn't change the predatory nature of it, but rather appeals to our emotions and base desire to survive and thrive. Therefore that predatory practice is subjectively given a pass because it's "survival".
Animal predators kill to survive. It doesn't make them less predatory.
You vilify practices you don't like, or participate in, while rationalizing and justifying what suits you and promotes your advantage. It's not like your argument carries a real moral imperative. That is you're not looking out for the welfare of others. You're advocating for an environment advantageous to you personally and financially. That advocacy extends to your forum buddies here as you all band together for the strength in numbers "might makes right" approach to shoehorning your advantage onto others.
The whole backlash is because a greedy publisher wanted to squeeze it's playerbase for the most money it could. While on the other side of the coin gamers want more game for little to nothing and demand the industry meet these demands on their terms. It's greed and selfishness all the way around.
Consider the Activision patent to skew matchmaking for better revenue return. It's a greedy approach to a service that preys on the greed and envy of players. There is little to no moral high ground in any of this.
So yeah, predatory and selfish by nature.
Sounds like you vilify everything.
Predators *hunt*
The process described in Activision's patent is akin to the tire repair guy secretly throwing nails on the road.
The rest of your diatribe I'll ignore (your better than that)
Claiming to give you a free path to progression along side a paid path and making the free path tortuous is another common predatory practice.
TBH I don't find that anymore predatory than what Everquest did. Purposefully prolonging ones time in game to just make money from you via a sub.
That's a very cynical view on it.
My thought is that they just though this was the way it should play out. Lineage 2 had a HUGE leveling curve and it was fine by me. That was the game.
Because, by your estimation, a game company shold just give out all progression within what? first week? Month?
It was what it was. Especially for one of the earlier mmo's. You're looking at things through eyes from the present as opposed to actually understanding how things actually were.
At the time MMO's weren't my go to genre for online gaming. I got the internet in 1996, just after Quake released and spent most of my gaming time in Quake/Quake 2 and Command and Conquer servers. Whilst communicating with friends in mIRC and ICQ.
No subscription fees in those games. B2P.
So I'm comparing Everquest to other online gaming at the time. The quality of game EQ provided wasn't sub worthy compared to that. Not todays games.
I appreciate that opinion but don't agree with it. I'm guessing that those games; Quake/Quake 2 not have progression? I don't remember there being progression.
It's sort of apples to oranges. Especially because the early mmo's were sort of styled after pen and paper games which did have progression. I know that the early D&D games that I played had somewhat long progression. At least the games I played. And for me, since I want a "world" I think that's more than a good enough cause to say "take my money!".
As long as I'm getting what I think is value.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Claiming to give you a free path to progression along side a paid path and making the free path tortuous is another common predatory practice.
TBH I don't find that anymore predatory than what Everquest did. Purposefully prolonging ones time in game to just make money from you via a sub.
Yeah I've heard that perspective before but I don't subscribe to it (pun intended) because I leave games once they bore me and both "end game" and hanging around till they feed me more PVE content bore me.
If I play a game for a long time it's because there's something there that I find worth playing. And even then, I come and go, sub or not, depending on how much fun or not I'm having.
I will add here that games are, at their core, a pastime. The idea that developers provided longevity of content is compatible because that's the entire point: to pass time doing something enjoyable.
You can argue that grinding wasn't the best way to add lifespan to content, but to argue it's the same as adding paywalls to bypass spending time progressing through a game's content is completely irrational. It defeats the entire purpose of a hobby, which is to spend your free time participating in an activity one enjoys.
Claiming to give you a free path to progression along side a paid path and making the free path tortuous is another common predatory practice.
TBH I don't find that anymore predatory than what Everquest did. Purposefully prolonging ones time in game to just make money from you via a sub.
I don't buy that mainly because there are free MUDs with longer leveling curves/progression systems than EQ. The free MUDs do it solely for progression.
If you don't buy it explain to me why EQ and other MMOs at the time charged a mandatory subscription fee when other online games at the time, FPS/RTS games with no progression and MUDs like you mentioned with progression didn't?
Quality of product is to subjective to argue. I didn't think they were worth a sub. Most single player games from the time were more sub worthy than EQ from a quality of content perspective.
The leveling in EQ was inane it didn't need to be that long from a game play perspective. You didn't need the huge gaps of time during each level to study skills.
Providing a service? The server costs are high?
The pacing was built around keeping you subbed as long as possible.
I think the fact that lengthy leveling died at the same time the mandatory subscription did is no coincidence.
If people aren't willing to pay a sub then there's no need for the lengthy leveling process.
Claiming to give you a free path to progression along side a paid path and making the free path tortuous is another common predatory practice.
TBH I don't find that anymore predatory than what Everquest did. Purposefully prolonging ones time in game to just make money from you via a sub.
That's a very cynical view on it.
My thought is that they just though this was the way it should play out. Lineage 2 had a HUGE leveling curve and it was fine by me. That was the game.
Because, by your estimation, a game company shold just give out all progression within what? first week? Month?
It was what it was. Especially for one of the earlier mmo's. You're looking at things through eyes from the present as opposed to actually understanding how things actually were.
At the time MMO's weren't my go to genre for online gaming. I got the internet in 1996, just after Quake released and spent most of my gaming time in Quake/Quake 2 and Command and Conquer servers. Whilst communicating with friends in mIRC and ICQ.
No subscription fees in those games. B2P.
So I'm comparing Everquest to other online gaming at the time. The quality of game EQ provided wasn't sub worthy compared to that. Not todays games.
I appreciate that opinion but don't agree with it. I'm guessing that those games; Quake/Quake 2 not have progression? I don't remember there being progression.
It's sort of apples to oranges. Especially because the early mmo's were sort of styled after pen and paper games which did have progression. I know that the early D&D games that I played had somewhat long progression. At least the games I played. And for me, since I want a "world" I think that's more than a good enough cause to say "take my money!".
As long as I'm getting what I think is value.
So a single player game in that regard could actually justify a sub model.
Comments
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Actually the guy is providing a service and he's got to eat. Now if he was secretly throwing nails on the road giving you the reason to need his service.... now that would be predatory.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
So I stopped.
However there is no denying that Everquest was known at the time as Evercrack for it's addictive gameplay and people wanted to hit max level.
So say in your example where the free path to progression is tortuous compared to the sub, why not just stop playing if it's not fun? Why claim it's being predatory?
My thought is that they just though this was the way it should play out. Lineage 2 had a HUGE leveling curve and it was fine by me. That was the game.
Because, by your estimation, a game company shold just give out all progression within what? first week? Month?
It was what it was. Especially for one of the earlier mmo's. You're looking at things through eyes from the present as opposed to actually understanding how things actually were.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
No subscription fees in those games. B2P.
So I'm comparing Everquest to other online gaming at the time. The quality of game EQ provided wasn't sub worthy compared to that. Not todays games.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
If everyone is outraged and not participating, then who is participating that makes it predatorial?
I hope I dont have to parse that too much.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/Predators *hunt*
The process described in Activision's patent is akin to the tire repair guy secretly throwing nails on the road.
The rest of your diatribe I'll ignore (your better than that)
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
It's sort of apples to oranges. Especially because the early mmo's were sort of styled after pen and paper games which did have progression. I know that the early D&D games that I played had somewhat long progression. At least the games I played. And for me, since I want a "world" I think that's more than a good enough cause to say "take my money!".
As long as I'm getting what I think is value.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
You can argue that grinding wasn't the best way to add lifespan to content, but to argue it's the same as adding paywalls to bypass spending time progressing through a game's content is completely irrational. It defeats the entire purpose of a hobby, which is to spend your free time participating in an activity one enjoys.
Quality of product is to subjective to argue. I didn't think they were worth a sub. Most single player games from the time were more sub worthy than EQ from a quality of content perspective.
The leveling in EQ was inane it didn't need to be that long from a game play perspective. You didn't need the huge gaps of time during each level to study skills.
Providing a service? The server costs are high?
The pacing was built around keeping you subbed as long as possible.
I think the fact that lengthy leveling died at the same time the mandatory subscription did is no coincidence.
If people aren't willing to pay a sub then there's no need for the lengthy leveling process.
As long as I'm getting what I think is value.