Howdy, Stranger!

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

Let the pre-Alpha cash shop items flow...

1246717

Comments

  • DleatherusDleatherus Member UncommonPosts: 162
    Mendel said:

    I am aware of what has been said.   Yet, they've also suggested an inheritance system with rules and heirs and laws and contracts to protect some things, pretty much contrary to the idea of winner-take-all.  To me, they appear to be supporting both sides.  That's sending mixed messages.

    I'm also skeptical about the nobility and aristocracy making up only 2% of the population.  That's a lot of other players they will need to attract (and retain).  But that's fodder for another thread.

    the inheritance system is there to allow for the passing on of things that you still possess, onto your next generation, otherwise you would lose everything with each permadeath - inheritance does NOT guarantee that things aren't taken from you during any given lifetime



    as for the numbers you are skeptical about:

    projected/speculated number of players per duchy = 1,600

    duke + 24 counts = 25 players

    25 players in a population of 100 = 1.5625%

  • UngoodUngood Member EpicPosts: 2,757
    Kyleran said:
    Ungood said:
    Selling map sections, or even whole zones is nothing new, games have been doing that since 2003, or maybe sooner, so that also is a safe bet. Not like making a map area and a castle is going to be hard in the grand scheme of making an MMO.
    I'm curious, what game in 2003 sold individual players a map section or zone?
    Well the game I was thinking of, and using as reference was Second Life.


    Kyleran
  • AshyLarry24AshyLarry24 Member UncommonPosts: 208
    Tiller said:
    Honestly I might be into this game if it wasnt for the convoluted soul system thing. I would rather just pay for my time per month or whatever and not have to think about anything else.
    The soul system is one of my favorite parts of the game.  Without it the whole concept sort of falls apart.  Dying in the game isn't a big deal if you can just create a new character as long as you pay your monthly fee. 

    Might be cool for a single player game where you can reload your last game save to recover hours of work like Rimworld, but I imagine its gonna cause some keyboard rage in an mmo for a few folks because it will happen at the worst time most likely.

    They are asking you not to get attatched to the work you put into your character. That's a big stretch. I just can't play like that. Maybe it's just me but I like that sense of acomplishment I get from building the perfect avatar for my play style in an mmo and being able to show off years of work with titles and gear.

    Even in old games like EQ, swg you could kinda tell who the vets were. In a single player game it maters less if I lose progress and have to restart. If I want to start over in an mmo I can make an alt. This is why this game has been such a hard sell to investors, its a gamble for sure.

    I politely disagree.  Your character and your time with that character will be even more poignant because you know that it won't last forever. 

    And you still get that satisfaction but it doesn't happen with one character.  Being a legendary craftsman will take generations. ANd it's not like your progress goes poof in a cloud of smoke.  Your progress will be tied to your soul, and your progress will be continued by your family.

    I agree that it can feel awesome when you have a character on an MMO for 10 years.  Hell I'm pretty sure that's the main reason there is such a huge WoW player base.  But it'll feel even better when you're incredibly rich because of the dynasty you built from the ground up, and with the knowledge that what you've built can be snatched away or destroyed in an instant.   Just like it will feel terrible when everything you worked for is taken from you.  That's part of the reason a lot of us are so excited about this game. Not everyone gets to be the hero in this game.  No one is in power forever.  People who try CoE will be getting a way different experience then they get from other MMO's, and thats a good thing IMO.

    There's no question that this game is a risk, but it is actually an extremely well thought out game, and if they pull it off it could change the industry.
    UngoodKyleranmystichazeYashaX
  • UngoodUngood Member EpicPosts: 2,757
    Mendel said:
    Mendel said:


    I can't see this being a loot-everything-anytime situation.  The backers (those who are paying for these things) will be protected.  Or there will be whining and complaining of the highest magnitude imaginable.  I just can't envision a company allowing people to pay thousands of dollars for an in-game item and having that item be a free-for-all-grab-the-pixels.  I do not accept that people are buying these items for 'the general good of other people in the game', they're buying for themselves.  They own these items.

    I'm betting that players will take the ownership to heart.  So much so that a free-for-all loot scenario may even generate some real life lawsuits.  

    I still am unconvinced that it will be possible to take items purchased with real-world money from another player.  I will definitely have to see that in action.
    there basically isn't anything in this game that can't be taken 

    granted it will be easier to steal a sword from a solo player, than take a kingdom from an entire community, however it is to be expected:


    I am aware of what has been said.   Yet, they've also suggested an inheritance system with rules and heirs and laws and contracts to protect some things, pretty much contrary to the idea of winner-take-all.  To me, they appear to be supporting both sides.  That's sending mixed messages.

    I'm also skeptical about the nobility and aristocracy making up only 2% of the population.  That's a lot of other players they will need to attract (and retain).  But that's fodder for another thread.

    The Heir system is set up so you can pass your Inheritance down when your character dies of old age. This in no way protects you from having a stronger force come in and take over your kingdom, it just means, that you can lose your title in many different ways, just some more violent then others.
    AshyLarry24mystichazeYashaX
  • AshyLarry24AshyLarry24 Member UncommonPosts: 208
    edited March 2018
    Mendel said:
    Mendel said:


    I can't see this being a loot-everything-anytime situation.  The backers (those who are paying for these things) will be protected.  Or there will be whining and complaining of the highest magnitude imaginable.  I just can't envision a company allowing people to pay thousands of dollars for an in-game item and having that item be a free-for-all-grab-the-pixels.  I do not accept that people are buying these items for 'the general good of other people in the game', they're buying for themselves.  They own these items.

    I'm betting that players will take the ownership to heart.  So much so that a free-for-all loot scenario may even generate some real life lawsuits.  

    I still am unconvinced that it will be possible to take items purchased with real-world money from another player.  I will definitely have to see that in action.
    there basically isn't anything in this game that can't be taken 

    granted it will be easier to steal a sword from a solo player, than take a kingdom from an entire community, however it is to be expected:


    I am aware of what has been said.   Yet, they've also suggested an inheritance system with rules and heirs and laws and contracts to protect some things, pretty much contrary to the idea of winner-take-all.  To me, they appear to be supporting both sides.  That's sending mixed messages.

    I'm also skeptical about the nobility and aristocracy making up only 2% of the population.  That's a lot of other players they will need to attract (and retain).  But that's fodder for another thread.



    How is it sending mixed messages lol?  You act like everything being available to be taken from you, and things being able to be inherited can't coexist lol. Your inheritance ain't going to mean shit, when the neighboring 3 counties decide they don't like how big you're getting and decide to snatch all your shit, and hand it over to their best generals.  Or when a group of people in your duchy decide to start a revolt and kill you and your family.

    This is all stuff that needs to be balanced and tested of course but I don't see your point that these are "mixed messages" lol.

    Oh and it's been made pretty clear that everything being sold by SBS can be found, bought, stolen, or made in game.  There is nothing that'll be exclusive to players besides small things like the founders chat, certain emotes, and other rewards that don't have a real in game effect.
    YashaX
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 33,962
    edited March 2018
    Tiller said:
    Honestly I might be into this game if it wasnt for the convoluted soul system thing. I would rather just pay for my time per month or whatever and not have to think about anything else.
    The soul system is one of my favorite parts of the game.  Without it the whole concept sort of falls apart.  Dying in the game isn't a big deal if you can just create a new character as long as you pay your monthly fee. 

    Might be cool for a single player game where you can reload your last game save to recover hours of work like Rimworld, but I imagine its gonna cause some keyboard rage in an mmo for a few folks because it will happen at the worst time most likely.

    They are asking you not to get attatched to the work you put into your character. That's a big stretch. I just can't play like that. Maybe it's just me but I like that sense of acomplishment I get from building the perfect avatar for my play style in an mmo and being able to show off years of work with titles and gear.

    Even in old games like EQ, swg you could kinda tell who the vets were. In a single player game it maters less if I lose progress and have to restart. If I want to start over in an mmo I can make an alt. This is why this game has been such a hard sell to investors, its a gamble for sure.

    I politely disagree.  Your character and your time with that character will be even more poignant because you know that it won't last forever. 

    And you still get that satisfaction but it doesn't happen with one character.  Being a legendary craftsman will take generations. ANd it's not like your progress goes poof in a cloud of smoke.  Your progress will be tied to your soul, and your progress will be continued by your family.

    I agree that it can feel awesome when you have a character on an MMO for 10 years.  Hell I'm pretty sure that's the main reason there is such a huge WoW player base.  But it'll feel even better when you're incredibly rich because of the dynasty you built from the ground up, and with the knowledge that what you've built can be snatched away or destroyed in an instant.   Just like it will feel terrible when everything you worked for is taken from you.  That's part of the reason a lot of us are so excited about this game. Not everyone gets to be the hero in this game.  No one is in power forever.  People who try CoE will be getting a way different experience then they get from other MMO's, and thats a good thing IMO.

    There's no question that this game is a risk, but it is actually an extremely well thought out game, and if they pull it off it could change the industry.
    You base your final statement on what evidence? 

    What MMORPG have players ever flocked to a game where they could lose "everything."

    Even EVE and Darkfall have means for players to shield most of their assets, or did you just mean things like loot carried,  castles and kingdoms can be taken?


    YashaX

    "See normal people, I'm not one of them" | G-Easy & Big Sean

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing POE at the moment.

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding, but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • VrikaVrika Member EpicPosts: 5,783
    edited March 2018
    Ungood said:
    Kyleran said:
    Ungood said:
    Selling map sections, or even whole zones is nothing new, games have been doing that since 2003, or maybe sooner, so that also is a safe bet. Not like making a map area and a castle is going to be hard in the grand scheme of making an MMO.
    I'm curious, what game in 2003 sold individual players a map section or zone?
    Well the game I was thinking of, and using as reference was Second Life.


    Entropia Universe has also been selling map sections for more than a decade.

     https://www.forbes.com/sites/oliverchiang/2010/11/13/meet-the-man-who-just-made-a-cool-half-million-from-the-sale-of-virtual-property
    KyleranUngood
     
  • AshyLarry24AshyLarry24 Member UncommonPosts: 208
    edited March 2018
    Kyleran said:
    Tiller said:
    Honestly I might be into this game if it wasnt for the convoluted soul system thing. I would rather just pay for my time per month or whatever and not have to think about anything else.
    The soul system is one of my favorite parts of the game.  Without it the whole concept sort of falls apart.  Dying in the game isn't a big deal if you can just create a new character as long as you pay your monthly fee. 

    Might be cool for a single player game where you can reload your last game save to recover hours of work like Rimworld, but I imagine its gonna cause some keyboard rage in an mmo for a few folks because it will happen at the worst time most likely.

    They are asking you not to get attatched to the work you put into your character. That's a big stretch. I just can't play like that. Maybe it's just me but I like that sense of acomplishment I get from building the perfect avatar for my play style in an mmo and being able to show off years of work with titles and gear.

    Even in old games like EQ, swg you could kinda tell who the vets were. In a single player game it maters less if I lose progress and have to restart. If I want to start over in an mmo I can make an alt. This is why this game has been such a hard sell to investors, its a gamble for sure.

    I politely disagree.  Your character and your time with that character will be even more poignant because you know that it won't last forever. 

    And you still get that satisfaction but it doesn't happen with one character.  Being a legendary craftsman will take generations. ANd it's not like your progress goes poof in a cloud of smoke.  Your progress will be tied to your soul, and your progress will be continued by your family.

    I agree that it can feel awesome when you have a character on an MMO for 10 years.  Hell I'm pretty sure that's the main reason there is such a huge WoW player base.  But it'll feel even better when you're incredibly rich because of the dynasty you built from the ground up, and with the knowledge that what you've built can be snatched away or destroyed in an instant.   Just like it will feel terrible when everything you worked for is taken from you.  That's part of the reason a lot of us are so excited about this game. Not everyone gets to be the hero in this game.  No one is in power forever.  People who try CoE will be getting a way different experience then they get from other MMO's, and thats a good thing IMO.

    There's no question that this game is a risk, but it is actually an extremely well thought out game, and if they pull it off it could change the industry.
    You base your final statement on what evidence? 

    What MMORPG have players ever flocked to a game where they could lose "everything."

    Even EVE and Darkfall have means for players to shield most of their assets, or did you just mean things like loot carried,  castles and kingdoms can be taken?


    What part of my final statement do you have a problem with?  The game is definitely taking a lot of risks.  And yeah, if they create the game that they plan on making I think it could revolutionize gaming.  Not really a lot of ways I can "prove" that.  It's just my opinion.

    Games that come out and revolutionize genre's are usually not the first of their kind.  WoW wasn't the first MMO.  LoL wasn't the first MOBA.  Doom wasn't the first FPS. But all these games revolutionized the genre by taking an already known genre and improving/modernizing it, and reaching a wider audience.

    And come on, Eve is a great game but the graphics were dated by 10 years when it released.  A lot of gamers take one look at the gameplay and decide it's not for them.  It has a very niche and passionate fanbase, but it doesn't take a genius to figure out why it didn't blow up bigger than it did.

    As for Darkfall, I don't know enough about the game so I can't really answer that.
    YashaX
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 33,962
    Kyleran said:
    Tiller said:
    Honestly I might be into this game if it wasnt for the convoluted soul system thing. I would rather just pay for my time per month or whatever and not have to think about anything else.
    The soul system is one of my favorite parts of the game.  Without it the whole concept sort of falls apart.  Dying in the game isn't a big deal if you can just create a new character as long as you pay your monthly fee. 

    Might be cool for a single player game where you can reload your last game save to recover hours of work like Rimworld, but I imagine its gonna cause some keyboard rage in an mmo for a few folks because it will happen at the worst time most likely.

    They are asking you not to get attatched to the work you put into your character. That's a big stretch. I just can't play like that. Maybe it's just me but I like that sense of acomplishment I get from building the perfect avatar for my play style in an mmo and being able to show off years of work with titles and gear.

    Even in old games like EQ, swg you could kinda tell who the vets were. In a single player game it maters less if I lose progress and have to restart. If I want to start over in an mmo I can make an alt. This is why this game has been such a hard sell to investors, its a gamble for sure.

    I politely disagree.  Your character and your time with that character will be even more poignant because you know that it won't last forever. 

    And you still get that satisfaction but it doesn't happen with one character.  Being a legendary craftsman will take generations. ANd it's not like your progress goes poof in a cloud of smoke.  Your progress will be tied to your soul, and your progress will be continued by your family.

    I agree that it can feel awesome when you have a character on an MMO for 10 years.  Hell I'm pretty sure that's the main reason there is such a huge WoW player base.  But it'll feel even better when you're incredibly rich because of the dynasty you built from the ground up, and with the knowledge that what you've built can be snatched away or destroyed in an instant.   Just like it will feel terrible when everything you worked for is taken from you.  That's part of the reason a lot of us are so excited about this game. Not everyone gets to be the hero in this game.  No one is in power forever.  People who try CoE will be getting a way different experience then they get from other MMO's, and thats a good thing IMO.

    There's no question that this game is a risk, but it is actually an extremely well thought out game, and if they pull it off it could change the industry.
    You base your final statement on what evidence? 

    What MMORPG have players ever flocked to a game where they could lose "everything."

    Even EVE and Darkfall have means for players to shield most of their assets, or did you just mean things like loot carried,  castles and kingdoms can be taken?


    What part of my final statement do you have a problem with?  The game is definitely taking a lot of risks.  And yeah, if they create the game that they plan on making I think it could revolutionize gaming.  Not really a lot of ways I can "prove" that.  It's just my opinion.

    Games that come out and revolutionize genre's are usually not the first of their kind.  WoW wasn't the first MMO.  LoL wasn't the first MOBA.  Doom wasn't the first FPS. But all these games revolutionized the genre by taking an already known genre and improving/modernizing it, and reaching a wider audience.

    And come on, Eve is a great game but the graphics were dated by 10 years when it released.  A lot of gamers take one look at the gameplay and decide it's not for them.  It has a very niche and passionate fanbase, but it doesn't take a genius to figure out why it didn't blow up bigger than it did.

    As for Darkfall, I don't know enough about the game so I can't really answer that.
    I guess my point is the majority of gamers have shown little tolerance for losing.

    Not experience, gold, status or territory so I'll be surprised if the idea gains much traction in this game either. 

    "See normal people, I'm not one of them" | G-Easy & Big Sean

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing POE at the moment.

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding, but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • MendelMendel Member EpicPosts: 3,286
    Mendel said:

    I am aware of what has been said.   Yet, they've also suggested an inheritance system with rules and heirs and laws and contracts to protect some things, pretty much contrary to the idea of winner-take-all.  To me, they appear to be supporting both sides.  That's sending mixed messages.

    I'm also skeptical about the nobility and aristocracy making up only 2% of the population.  That's a lot of other players they will need to attract (and retain).  But that's fodder for another thread.

    the inheritance system is there to allow for the passing on of things that you still possess, onto your next generation, otherwise you would lose everything with each permadeath - inheritance does NOT guarantee that things aren't taken from you during any given lifetime



    as for the numbers you are skeptical about:

    projected/speculated number of players per duchy = 1,600

    duke + 24 counts = 25 players

    25 players in a population of 100 = 1.5625%

    Ungood said:
    Mendel said:
    Mendel said:


    I can't see this being a loot-everything-anytime situation.  The backers (those who are paying for these things) will be protected.  Or there will be whining and complaining of the highest magnitude imaginable.  I just can't envision a company allowing people to pay thousands of dollars for an in-game item and having that item be a free-for-all-grab-the-pixels.  I do not accept that people are buying these items for 'the general good of other people in the game', they're buying for themselves.  They own these items.

    I'm betting that players will take the ownership to heart.  So much so that a free-for-all loot scenario may even generate some real life lawsuits.  

    I still am unconvinced that it will be possible to take items purchased with real-world money from another player.  I will definitely have to see that in action.
    there basically isn't anything in this game that can't be taken 

    granted it will be easier to steal a sword from a solo player, than take a kingdom from an entire community, however it is to be expected:


    I am aware of what has been said.   Yet, they've also suggested an inheritance system with rules and heirs and laws and contracts to protect some things, pretty much contrary to the idea of winner-take-all.  To me, they appear to be supporting both sides.  That's sending mixed messages.

    I'm also skeptical about the nobility and aristocracy making up only 2% of the population.  That's a lot of other players they will need to attract (and retain).  But that's fodder for another thread.

    The Heir system is set up so you can pass your Inheritance down when your character dies of old age. This in no way protects you from having a stronger force come in and take over your kingdom, it just means, that you can lose your title in many different ways, just some more violent then others.
    I will believe this only when I see this not following the money.  My opinion is that possessions bought in the store *will* be protected to some degree.  It's the difference between what they claim they will do and what they actually do.  I'm not willing to trust what most developers say, these especially so.

    And yes, 25 of 1600 (I'm pretty sure you meant that) is about 1.5%.  It's where they are expecting those 1600 players to come from in order to populate one of six kingdoms that I question.  I'm sure they can get 150 people per server to play the nobility, I just don't know about that 9600 people they seem to anticipate to be scruffy men eager to be lorded over.



    KyleranSpottyGekkoYashaX

    Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.

  • mystichazemystichaze Member UncommonPosts: 378
    edited March 2018
    To take small aspects of the game and debate them without painting a complete picture is, of course, going to create extra skepticism. Especially, when you are looking at the game, in a box, as though it was intended to be like all other MMOs out there. I know it did with me when first researching the game. But rather than forming an opinion about a detail like Permadeath, since I have never been very good at not dying in other MMOs, I first researched how it was to be implemented and discovered I was comfortable with the mechanics in the intended structure. 

    To look at and compare CoE to other games out there is really not a fair assessment since many aspects of the game have never been attempted with the current technology of today. Caspain has always said that the type of gameplay CoE was offering wasn't going to be attractive to everyone and that they are focused more on an individual demographic of game players rather than the entire gaming community. 

    So when some of you state that certain features of this game aren't attractive to you it doesn't surprise me. 

    • CoE doesn't promise that everyone will be a Hero. "Fair but inequitable" To gain achievements you will have to work for them, and they will mean something.
    • SBS has always been very upfront about the fact that no matter what you pay real money for, there is no guarantee you will be able to keep it.
    • CoE has also been very upfront about the fact that Pets, Mounts, Buildings, Equipment ext.. Will die or decay over time.  
    • Absolutely nothing in the game is bound to Account/Character. 
    • Your Character will die, but your skills will remain with your soul. Therefore you are not building an individual character but rather a dynasty. 
    There isn't anything wrong with these types of features not appealing to you. However, that doesn't mean the game won't be successful it what it is trying to do, with the players that are interested in this type of gameplay. 

    Just my two cents, since these same topics have been discussed repeatedly in nearly every thread here. Nothing is gained from beating a dead horse, over and over. 
    YashaX
  • UngoodUngood Member EpicPosts: 2,757
    Mendel said:
    Ungood said:
    Mendel said:
    Mendel said:


    I can't see this being a loot-everything-anytime situation.  The backers (those who are paying for these things) will be protected.  Or there will be whining and complaining of the highest magnitude imaginable.  I just can't envision a company allowing people to pay thousands of dollars for an in-game item and having that item be a free-for-all-grab-the-pixels.  I do not accept that people are buying these items for 'the general good of other people in the game', they're buying for themselves.  They own these items.

    I'm betting that players will take the ownership to heart.  So much so that a free-for-all loot scenario may even generate some real life lawsuits.  

    I still am unconvinced that it will be possible to take items purchased with real-world money from another player.  I will definitely have to see that in action.
    there basically isn't anything in this game that can't be taken 

    granted it will be easier to steal a sword from a solo player, than take a kingdom from an entire community, however it is to be expected:


    I am aware of what has been said.   Yet, they've also suggested an inheritance system with rules and heirs and laws and contracts to protect some things, pretty much contrary to the idea of winner-take-all.  To me, they appear to be supporting both sides.  That's sending mixed messages.

    I'm also skeptical about the nobility and aristocracy making up only 2% of the population.  That's a lot of other players they will need to attract (and retain).  But that's fodder for another thread.

    The Heir system is set up so you can pass your Inheritance down when your character dies of old age. This in no way protects you from having a stronger force come in and take over your kingdom, it just means, that you can lose your title in many different ways, just some more violent then others.
    I will believe this only when I see this not following the money.  My opinion is that possessions bought in the store *will* be protected to some degree.  It's the difference between what they claim they will do and what they actually do.  I'm not willing to trust what most developers say, these especially so.

    I have no doubt that they won't be protected, as they make it clear from the start, that they won't be protected.

    But I think they would be smart to require players to pay to claim. IE: If you try to take a Kingdom, you would still need to buy the Throne for 1000 dollars or something, or all you did was dethrone the old king, you have not set yourself up as the new one.

    Now that could be very profitable in a game like this.
    DleatherusKyleranAshyLarry24YashaX
  • WellspringWellspring Member EpicPosts: 1,200
    Ungood said:
    Mendel said:
    Ungood said:
    Mendel said:
    Mendel said:


    I can't see this being a loot-everything-anytime situation.  The backers (those who are paying for these things) will be protected.  Or there will be whining and complaining of the highest magnitude imaginable.  I just can't envision a company allowing people to pay thousands of dollars for an in-game item and having that item be a free-for-all-grab-the-pixels.  I do not accept that people are buying these items for 'the general good of other people in the game', they're buying for themselves.  They own these items.

    I'm betting that players will take the ownership to heart.  So much so that a free-for-all loot scenario may even generate some real life lawsuits.  

    I still am unconvinced that it will be possible to take items purchased with real-world money from another player.  I will definitely have to see that in action.
    there basically isn't anything in this game that can't be taken 

    granted it will be easier to steal a sword from a solo player, than take a kingdom from an entire community, however it is to be expected:


    I am aware of what has been said.   Yet, they've also suggested an inheritance system with rules and heirs and laws and contracts to protect some things, pretty much contrary to the idea of winner-take-all.  To me, they appear to be supporting both sides.  That's sending mixed messages.

    I'm also skeptical about the nobility and aristocracy making up only 2% of the population.  That's a lot of other players they will need to attract (and retain).  But that's fodder for another thread.

    The Heir system is set up so you can pass your Inheritance down when your character dies of old age. This in no way protects you from having a stronger force come in and take over your kingdom, it just means, that you can lose your title in many different ways, just some more violent then others.
    I will believe this only when I see this not following the money.  My opinion is that possessions bought in the store *will* be protected to some degree.  It's the difference between what they claim they will do and what they actually do.  I'm not willing to trust what most developers say, these especially so.

    I have no doubt that they won't be protected, as they make it clear from the start, that they won't be protected.


    Unless you count the 3 month exposition, where PvP is disabled and no one can lose their titles, as protection "from the start".

    But hey! At least you have no doubts...
    YashaX
    --------------------------------------------
  • AshyLarry24AshyLarry24 Member UncommonPosts: 208
    Kyleran said:
    Kyleran said:
    Tiller said:
    Honestly I might be into this game if it wasnt for the convoluted soul system thing. I would rather just pay for my time per month or whatever and not have to think about anything else.
    The soul system is one of my favorite parts of the game.  Without it the whole concept sort of falls apart.  Dying in the game isn't a big deal if you can just create a new character as long as you pay your monthly fee. 

    Might be cool for a single player game where you can reload your last game save to recover hours of work like Rimworld, but I imagine its gonna cause some keyboard rage in an mmo for a few folks because it will happen at the worst time most likely.

    They are asking you not to get attatched to the work you put into your character. That's a big stretch. I just can't play like that. Maybe it's just me but I like that sense of acomplishment I get from building the perfect avatar for my play style in an mmo and being able to show off years of work with titles and gear.

    Even in old games like EQ, swg you could kinda tell who the vets were. In a single player game it maters less if I lose progress and have to restart. If I want to start over in an mmo I can make an alt. This is why this game has been such a hard sell to investors, its a gamble for sure.

    I politely disagree.  Your character and your time with that character will be even more poignant because you know that it won't last forever. 

    And you still get that satisfaction but it doesn't happen with one character.  Being a legendary craftsman will take generations. ANd it's not like your progress goes poof in a cloud of smoke.  Your progress will be tied to your soul, and your progress will be continued by your family.

    I agree that it can feel awesome when you have a character on an MMO for 10 years.  Hell I'm pretty sure that's the main reason there is such a huge WoW player base.  But it'll feel even better when you're incredibly rich because of the dynasty you built from the ground up, and with the knowledge that what you've built can be snatched away or destroyed in an instant.   Just like it will feel terrible when everything you worked for is taken from you.  That's part of the reason a lot of us are so excited about this game. Not everyone gets to be the hero in this game.  No one is in power forever.  People who try CoE will be getting a way different experience then they get from other MMO's, and thats a good thing IMO.

    There's no question that this game is a risk, but it is actually an extremely well thought out game, and if they pull it off it could change the industry.
    You base your final statement on what evidence? 

    What MMORPG have players ever flocked to a game where they could lose "everything."

    Even EVE and Darkfall have means for players to shield most of their assets, or did you just mean things like loot carried,  castles and kingdoms can be taken?


    What part of my final statement do you have a problem with?  The game is definitely taking a lot of risks.  And yeah, if they create the game that they plan on making I think it could revolutionize gaming.  Not really a lot of ways I can "prove" that.  It's just my opinion.

    Games that come out and revolutionize genre's are usually not the first of their kind.  WoW wasn't the first MMO.  LoL wasn't the first MOBA.  Doom wasn't the first FPS. But all these games revolutionized the genre by taking an already known genre and improving/modernizing it, and reaching a wider audience.

    And come on, Eve is a great game but the graphics were dated by 10 years when it released.  A lot of gamers take one look at the gameplay and decide it's not for them.  It has a very niche and passionate fanbase, but it doesn't take a genius to figure out why it didn't blow up bigger than it did.

    As for Darkfall, I don't know enough about the game so I can't really answer that.
    I guess my point is the majority of gamers have shown little tolerance for losing.

    Not experience, gold, status or territory so I'll be surprised if the idea gains much traction in this game either. 
    I don't necessarily disagree with you.  Gamers are use to being catered to.  But so far they've stuck to their guns IMO and haven't made any drastic changes that effected the integrity of what they sought out to do.  But I also think that gamers are extremely tired of the same formula's in every single game.

    You got to understand I'm extremely optimistic on this subject compared to other people.  A lot of people think the this game is just another niche MMO.  But I tend to think CoE will provide such a different experience that people will get something out of CoE that they can't get out of anywhere else.  A full living, breathing world with modern day graphics.  Playing CoE is going to be a very different experience then any other MMO out there IMO.
    YashaX
  • AshyLarry24AshyLarry24 Member UncommonPosts: 208
    edited March 2018
    Ungood said:
    Mendel said:
    Ungood said:
    Mendel said:
    Mendel said:


    I can't see this being a loot-everything-anytime situation.  The backers (those who are paying for these things) will be protected.  Or there will be whining and complaining of the highest magnitude imaginable.  I just can't envision a company allowing people to pay thousands of dollars for an in-game item and having that item be a free-for-all-grab-the-pixels.  I do not accept that people are buying these items for 'the general good of other people in the game', they're buying for themselves.  They own these items.

    I'm betting that players will take the ownership to heart.  So much so that a free-for-all loot scenario may even generate some real life lawsuits.  

    I still am unconvinced that it will be possible to take items purchased with real-world money from another player.  I will definitely have to see that in action.
    there basically isn't anything in this game that can't be taken 

    granted it will be easier to steal a sword from a solo player, than take a kingdom from an entire community, however it is to be expected:


    I am aware of what has been said.   Yet, they've also suggested an inheritance system with rules and heirs and laws and contracts to protect some things, pretty much contrary to the idea of winner-take-all.  To me, they appear to be supporting both sides.  That's sending mixed messages.

    I'm also skeptical about the nobility and aristocracy making up only 2% of the population.  That's a lot of other players they will need to attract (and retain).  But that's fodder for another thread.

    The Heir system is set up so you can pass your Inheritance down when your character dies of old age. This in no way protects you from having a stronger force come in and take over your kingdom, it just means, that you can lose your title in many different ways, just some more violent then others.
    I will believe this only when I see this not following the money.  My opinion is that possessions bought in the store *will* be protected to some degree.  It's the difference between what they claim they will do and what they actually do.  I'm not willing to trust what most developers say, these especially so.

    I have no doubt that they won't be protected, as they make it clear from the start, that they won't be protected.


    Unless you count the 3 month exposition, where PvP is disabled and no one can lose their titles, as protection "from the start".

    But hey! At least you have no doubts...
    I mean yeah... Exposition is for ya know... Building the world lol.  It's kind of vital.  They don't want people to focus on things like PvP at that time, because that's not what exposition is for.  If you want to PvP then wait till the actual launch. Remember the devs aren't building much of a game here.  They're more building tools that we use to build the game ourselves.  So building the world is going to be an extremely important process.  And not only building the structures themselves.  But setting up your kingdoms, businesses, schools, guilds.  Without exposition there would be a giant shit show right at launch and the game would probably fail miserably.

    And you're acting like this was some change.  This was always the plan lol.  People can't lose their shit during vox elyria either, because that would be dumb as fuck hahaha.

    Edit: And just to be sure you don't like the fact that you can't lose your package before launch?  LOL!  Like what the fuck dude lolololol. Of course they're not going to let people that paid 1000's of dollars for their packages lose their positions before launch.  That seems blatantly obvious my dude.  How dare SBS protect a your package before the game comes out!

    Like these are things that drive me crazy about you guys.  You are so intent on being negative you don't think shit through before you say it lol.
    Post edited by AshyLarry24 on
    YashaX
  • TillerTiller Member EpicPosts: 7,989
    Ungood said:
    Kyleran said:
    Ungood said:
    Selling map sections, or even whole zones is nothing new, games have been doing that since 2003, or maybe sooner, so that also is a safe bet. Not like making a map area and a castle is going to be hard in the grand scheme of making an MMO.
    I'm curious, what game in 2003 sold individual players a map section or zone?
    Well the game I was thinking of, and using as reference was Second Life.


    SL partials and sims are actually very expensive to operate. A full sim or region takes tremendous resources to operate due in part to the old unoptimized engine.You are limited to what is called 'prims', 20,000 to be exact. Most objects can be anywhere from 2-1000 prims.

     You share an actual server blade with like 3 other people and it can cost you around $600 per private region and $350 per month to rent (maintain) that sim. And yes thousands upon thousands of people have been and are operating sims, sometimes for years, a few I know of have been around for 8 or more. It's entirely plausible that people will hand over wads of cash to own virtual property ect in this game if it turns out to be good. Question is since it caters to gamers who tend to be a fickle and mostly cheap bunch, unlike SL, will it be sustainable long term?
    KyleranYashaX


  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 33,962
    edited March 2018
    Ungood said:
    Mendel said:
    Ungood said:
    Mendel said:
    Mendel said:


    I can't see this being a loot-everything-anytime situation.  The backers (those who are paying for these things) will be protected.  Or there will be whining and complaining of the highest magnitude imaginable.  I just can't envision a company allowing people to pay thousands of dollars for an in-game item and having that item be a free-for-all-grab-the-pixels.  I do not accept that people are buying these items for 'the general good of other people in the game', they're buying for themselves.  They own these items.

    I'm betting that players will take the ownership to heart.  So much so that a free-for-all loot scenario may even generate some real life lawsuits.  

    I still am unconvinced that it will be possible to take items purchased with real-world money from another player.  I will definitely have to see that in action.
    there basically isn't anything in this game that can't be taken 

    granted it will be easier to steal a sword from a solo player, than take a kingdom from an entire community, however it is to be expected:


    I am aware of what has been said.   Yet, they've also suggested an inheritance system with rules and heirs and laws and contracts to protect some things, pretty much contrary to the idea of winner-take-all.  To me, they appear to be supporting both sides.  That's sending mixed messages.

    I'm also skeptical about the nobility and aristocracy making up only 2% of the population.  That's a lot of other players they will need to attract (and retain).  But that's fodder for another thread.

    The Heir system is set up so you can pass your Inheritance down when your character dies of old age. This in no way protects you from having a stronger force come in and take over your kingdom, it just means, that you can lose your title in many different ways, just some more violent then others.
    I will believe this only when I see this not following the money.  My opinion is that possessions bought in the store *will* be protected to some degree.  It's the difference between what they claim they will do and what they actually do.  I'm not willing to trust what most developers say, these especially so.

    I have no doubt that they won't be protected, as they make it clear from the start, that they won't be protected.


    Unless you count the 3 month exposition, where PvP is disabled and no one can lose their titles, as protection "from the start".

    But hey! At least you have no doubts...
    I mean yeah... Exposition is for ya know... Building the world lol.  It's kind of vital.  They don't want people to focus on things like PvP at that time, because that's not what exposition is for.  If you want to PvP then wait till the actual launch. Remember the devs aren't building much of a game here.  They're more building tools that we use to build the game ourselves.  So building the world is going to be an extremely important process.  And not only building the structures themselves.  But setting up your kingdoms, businesses, schools, guilds.  Without exposition there would be a giant shit show right at launch and the game would probably fail miserably.

    And you're acting like this was some change.  This was always the plan lol.  People can't lose their shit during vox elyria either, because that would be dumb as fuck hahaha.

    Edit: And just to be sure you don't like the fact that you can't lose your package before launch?  LOL!  Like what the fuck dude lolololol. Of course they're not going to let people that paid 1000's of dollars for their packages lose their positions before launch.  That seems blatantly obvious my dude.  How dare SBS protect a your package before the game comes out!

    Like these are things that drive me crazy about you guys.  You are so intent on being negative you don't think shit through before you say it lol.
    All this discussion about player's "packages" is making me uncomfortable,  lets change the subject. 

    ;)
    AshyLarry24

    "See normal people, I'm not one of them" | G-Easy & Big Sean

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing POE at the moment.

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding, but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • DleatherusDleatherus Member UncommonPosts: 162
    mystichazeAshyLarry24
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 33,962
    Ungood said:
    Mendel said:
    Ungood said:
    Mendel said:
    Mendel said:


    I can't see this being a loot-everything-anytime situation.  The backers (those who are paying for these things) will be protected.  Or there will be whining and complaining of the highest magnitude imaginable.  I just can't envision a company allowing people to pay thousands of dollars for an in-game item and having that item be a free-for-all-grab-the-pixels.  I do not accept that people are buying these items for 'the general good of other people in the game', they're buying for themselves.  They own these items.

    I'm betting that players will take the ownership to heart.  So much so that a free-for-all loot scenario may even generate some real life lawsuits.  

    I still am unconvinced that it will be possible to take items purchased with real-world money from another player.  I will definitely have to see that in action.
    there basically isn't anything in this game that can't be taken 

    granted it will be easier to steal a sword from a solo player, than take a kingdom from an entire community, however it is to be expected:


    I am aware of what has been said.   Yet, they've also suggested an inheritance system with rules and heirs and laws and contracts to protect some things, pretty much contrary to the idea of winner-take-all.  To me, they appear to be supporting both sides.  That's sending mixed messages.

    I'm also skeptical about the nobility and aristocracy making up only 2% of the population.  That's a lot of other players they will need to attract (and retain).  But that's fodder for another thread.

    The Heir system is set up so you can pass your Inheritance down when your character dies of old age. This in no way protects you from having a stronger force come in and take over your kingdom, it just means, that you can lose your title in many different ways, just some more violent then others.
    I will believe this only when I see this not following the money.  My opinion is that possessions bought in the store *will* be protected to some degree.  It's the difference between what they claim they will do and what they actually do.  I'm not willing to trust what most developers say, these especially so.

    I have no doubt that they won't be protected, as they make it clear from the start, that they won't be protected.

    But I think they would be smart to require players to pay to claim. IE: If you try to take a Kingdom, you would still need to buy the Throne for 1000 dollars or something, or all you did was dethrone the old king, you have not set yourself up as the new one.

    Now that could be very profitable in a game like this.
    Awesome new monetization idea of the day, +1 sir.

    I'd go further and apply the concept to all levels of nobility.

    If you kill a Duke in order to take their place you have to pay a fee to the "church" for their blessing. 

    Lower fees than pre launch of course and as an extra money maker, if the conquerer isn't interested in paying for the title,  it then goes up for open auction to the highest bidder, in either in game script or real life currency.

    This idea just gets better and better.


    "See normal people, I'm not one of them" | G-Easy & Big Sean

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing POE at the moment.

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding, but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • DleatherusDleatherus Member UncommonPosts: 162
    wouldn't this just deter many folks from trying to take titles away in game from those who purchased them before launch?

    because of the low percentage of noble and aristocrat titles out there compared to the player base, i personally want to see everybody have an opportunity to take them away, rather than make the pool of potential players who can do so, smaller
    AshyLarry24YashaX
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 33,962
    edited March 2018
    wouldn't this just deter many folks from trying to take titles away in game from those who purchased them before launch?

    because of the low percentage of noble and aristocrat titles out there compared to the player base, i personally want to see everybody have an opportunity to take them away, rather than make the pool of potential players who can do so, smaller
    Well, one idea would be to label the new player as "the Ursurper" and give them lower privileges than a noble who paid a tithe.

    Or perhaps they could only get a title one grade lower for free and upgrade to the full title for a fee.

    Another great idea, let the ursurper sell the title to others on a company sponsored web site,  with the "church" taking a 10% "tithe" on all sales.

    Or perhaps let the ursurper ransom it back to the noble it was taken from,  or maybe even their "family" or king.

    Hey, some of these folks paid thousands to get these titles and kingdoms the first time around, whose to say they wouldn't do so again.

    Of course all transactions would have to pay the church tithe to properly bless them.

    AshyLarry24YashaX

    "See normal people, I'm not one of them" | G-Easy & Big Sean

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing POE at the moment.

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding, but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • AshyLarry24AshyLarry24 Member UncommonPosts: 208
    edited March 2018
    The community would flip their shit if any of this was actually implemented, me included.  And I don't even have any interest in being a noble or royalty.  That would be completely going against the very core concepts that people invested in. 
    YashaX
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 33,962
    The community would flip their shit if any of this was actually implemented, me included.  And I don't even have any interest in being a noble or royalty.  That would be completely going against the very core concepts that people invested in. 
    True, they "invested" in a headstart for themselves, but aren't really interested in letting others buy in post launch.

    But it actually is totally in keeping with the games core principals and would provide much needed revenues outside of an occasional soul purchase.

    Besides were this game to be any degree of successful most of those early founders are getting punted to the curb as the major powers move in and dominate. 


    "See normal people, I'm not one of them" | G-Easy & Big Sean

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing POE at the moment.

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding, but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,062
    Kyleran said:
    Kyleran said:
    Tiller said:
    Honestly I might be into this game if it wasnt for the convoluted soul system thing. I would rather just pay for my time per month or whatever and not have to think about anything else.
    The soul system is one of my favorite parts of the game.  Without it the whole concept sort of falls apart.  Dying in the game isn't a big deal if you can just create a new character as long as you pay your monthly fee. 

    Might be cool for a single player game where you can reload your last game save to recover hours of work like Rimworld, but I imagine its gonna cause some keyboard rage in an mmo for a few folks because it will happen at the worst time most likely.

    They are asking you not to get attatched to the work you put into your character. That's a big stretch. I just can't play like that. Maybe it's just me but I like that sense of acomplishment I get from building the perfect avatar for my play style in an mmo and being able to show off years of work with titles and gear.

    Even in old games like EQ, swg you could kinda tell who the vets were. In a single player game it maters less if I lose progress and have to restart. If I want to start over in an mmo I can make an alt. This is why this game has been such a hard sell to investors, its a gamble for sure.

    I politely disagree.  Your character and your time with that character will be even more poignant because you know that it won't last forever. 

    And you still get that satisfaction but it doesn't happen with one character.  Being a legendary craftsman will take generations. ANd it's not like your progress goes poof in a cloud of smoke.  Your progress will be tied to your soul, and your progress will be continued by your family.

    I agree that it can feel awesome when you have a character on an MMO for 10 years.  Hell I'm pretty sure that's the main reason there is such a huge WoW player base.  But it'll feel even better when you're incredibly rich because of the dynasty you built from the ground up, and with the knowledge that what you've built can be snatched away or destroyed in an instant.   Just like it will feel terrible when everything you worked for is taken from you.  That's part of the reason a lot of us are so excited about this game. Not everyone gets to be the hero in this game.  No one is in power forever.  People who try CoE will be getting a way different experience then they get from other MMO's, and thats a good thing IMO.

    There's no question that this game is a risk, but it is actually an extremely well thought out game, and if they pull it off it could change the industry.
    You base your final statement on what evidence? 

    What MMORPG have players ever flocked to a game where they could lose "everything."

    Even EVE and Darkfall have means for players to shield most of their assets, or did you just mean things like loot carried,  castles and kingdoms can be taken?


    What part of my final statement do you have a problem with?  The game is definitely taking a lot of risks.  And yeah, if they create the game that they plan on making I think it could revolutionize gaming.  Not really a lot of ways I can "prove" that.  It's just my opinion.

    Games that come out and revolutionize genre's are usually not the first of their kind.  WoW wasn't the first MMO.  LoL wasn't the first MOBA.  Doom wasn't the first FPS. But all these games revolutionized the genre by taking an already known genre and improving/modernizing it, and reaching a wider audience.

    And come on, Eve is a great game but the graphics were dated by 10 years when it released.  A lot of gamers take one look at the gameplay and decide it's not for them.  It has a very niche and passionate fanbase, but it doesn't take a genius to figure out why it didn't blow up bigger than it did.

    As for Darkfall, I don't know enough about the game so I can't really answer that.
    I guess my point is the majority of gamers have shown little tolerance for losing.

    Not experience, gold, status or territory so I'll be surprised if the idea gains much traction in this game either. 
    I have seen a few conversations related to groups claiming to have been hired for thousands of dollars in real cash to protect or attack territory.

    Games not even in Alpha yet...  its going to get crazy.

    Kyleran

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

    My ignore list finally has one occupant after 12 years. I am the strongest supporter of free speech on here, but free speech does not mean forced listening. Have fun my friend. Hope you find a new stalking target.

  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,062

    The community would flip their shit if any of this was actually implemented, me included.  And I don't even have any interest in being a noble or royalty.  That would be completely going against the very core concepts that people invested in. 
    Keep in mind that the core population that put in all that investment is just 2% of what they think the launch population is... and they already got $4M from them.  They need to broaden their base.


    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

    My ignore list finally has one occupant after 12 years. I am the strongest supporter of free speech on here, but free speech does not mean forced listening. Have fun my friend. Hope you find a new stalking target.

Sign In or Register to comment.