Howdy, Stranger!

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

CoE selling Legendary items for straight cash also unretiring Duke and Count packages

13567

Comments

  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,062
    Yeah... the secret sauce is apparently selling Duke and Count accounts.  As predicted they are extending the sale of those... until they transform into “something better”  ext week. 

    https://chroniclesofelyria.com/forum/topic/29566/november-2018-promo-comes-to-an-end#post323918


    "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.

  • WBadgerWBadger Member UncommonPosts: 282
    That awkward feeling when the only people playing are nobility so they don't have serfs to work the land. 
    MadFrenchieSlapshot1188KylerananemoScot
  • CryomatrixCryomatrix Member EpicPosts: 2,636
    I actually don't mind at all that the game is funding itself this way. I made a post awhile back that had something similar. 

    The truth is that life isn't fair, it never was, it never will be, people get born into rich families and people get born into poor families. People are born healthy and people are not. This game will simulate that, I actually like the way it is going. 

    Not everyone is supposed to be a hero in a game, isn't that what people want? Everyone is different. This game looks to be innovative and interesting. I'll definitely keep my eye on it. 

    If someone wants to pay 5k to be amazing in this game then I'm all for it. P2W has never actually offended me, perhaps it is because I can afford it if i wanted to or perhaps I just think there are a million other games to play, who cares about P2W. I look at it like a feature, if i don't like it, i don't play it. 

    Also, don't make fun of the way people spend their money on what you think is stupid. I don't look at a person who buys a 60k rolex as being stupid  . . . I mean i'd never do it, even if i was a billionaire, but at the same time, if someone can afford a 60k Rolex, you got to give them credit . . . unless of course they didn't earn it. 

    Cryomatrix
    mystichazeStaalBurgherViper482Iselin
    Catch me streaming at twitch.tv/cryomatrix
    You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations. 
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,483
    I actually don't mind at all that the game is funding itself this way. I made a post awhile back that had something similar. 

    The truth is that life isn't fair, it never was, it never will be, people get born into rich families and people get born into poor families. People are born healthy and people are not. This game will simulate that, I actually like the way it is going. 

    Not everyone is supposed to be a hero in a game, isn't that what people want? Everyone is different. This game looks to be innovative and interesting. I'll definitely keep my eye on it. 

    If someone wants to pay 5k to be amazing in this game then I'm all for it. P2W has never actually offended me, perhaps it is because I can afford it if i wanted to or perhaps I just think there are a million other games to play, who cares about P2W. I look at it like a feature, if i don't like it, i don't play it. 

    Also, don't make fun of the way people spend their money on what you think is stupid. I don't look at a person who buys a 60k rolex as being stupid  . . . I mean i'd never do it, even if i was a billionaire, but at the same time, if someone can afford a 60k Rolex, you got to give them credit . . . unless of course they didn't earn it. 

    Cryomatrix
    Video games are experiences that take us outside the confines of reality.  Nobody (or almost nobody) wants to experience class stratification in a friggin' video game just cause they have to watch the rich ride their yachts in real life.
    TEKK3NKyleranGdemamidragonlee66

    image
  • TEKK3NTEKK3N Member RarePosts: 727

    Video games are experiences that take us outside the confines of reality.  Nobody (or almost nobody) wants to experience class stratification in a friggin' video game just cause they have to watch the rich ride their yachts in real life.
    SotA docet.
  • CryomatrixCryomatrix Member EpicPosts: 2,636
    @MadFrenchie

    I see your point. I guess class stratification doesn't bother me at all. The only currency that matters in real life is happiness any way. Just because you are rich it doesn't guarantee happiness. If you are happy in life, then you win. If the guy has a huge yacht and is not happy in life, then you are superior to that person. 

    Cryomatrix
    AnOldFart
    Catch me streaming at twitch.tv/cryomatrix
    You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations. 
  • YanocchiYanocchi Member UncommonPosts: 660


    Star Citizen once again collected more money during the last seven days than CoE over its lifetime, nearly $6.5 million.  >:)

    KylerananemoAnOldFart
    Baldur's Gate Online - Video Trailer
    * more info, screenshots and videos here

  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,483
    @MadFrenchie

    I see your point. I guess class stratification doesn't bother me at all. The only currency that matters in real life is happiness any way. Just because you are rich it doesn't guarantee happiness. If you are happy in life, then you win. If the guy has a huge yacht and is not happy in life, then you are superior to that person. 

    Cryomatrix
    I don't disagree.  But it's easier to be happy when you buy your car in cash and don't have a car payment.  Same with homes.

    It doesn't define the quality of one's life, it just makes it easier to achieve a higher quality than those who are struggling to make end's meet, for instance, or those parents who have no clue how their child will get through college, because they don't have the money to pay for it.
    KyleranGdemamiCryomatrixdragonlee66

    image
  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,062
    I actually don't mind at all that the game is funding itself this way. I made a post awhile back that had something similar. 

    The truth is that life isn't fair, it never was, it never will be, people get born into rich families and people get born into poor families. People are born healthy and people are not. This game will simulate that, I actually like the way it is going. 

    Not everyone is supposed to be a hero in a game, isn't that what people want? Everyone is different. This game looks to be innovative and interesting. I'll definitely keep my eye on it. 

    If someone wants to pay 5k to be amazing in this game then I'm all for it. P2W has never actually offended me, perhaps it is because I can afford it if i wanted to or perhaps I just think there are a million other games to play, who cares about P2W. I look at it like a feature, if i don't like it, i don't play it. 

    Also, don't make fun of the way people spend their money on what you think is stupid. I don't look at a person who buys a 60k rolex as being stupid  . . . I mean i'd never do it, even if i was a billionaire, but at the same time, if someone can afford a 60k Rolex, you got to give them credit . . . unless of course they didn't earn it. 

    Cryomatrix
    What bothers me about it is that they try to obfuscate the purchased advantages instead of just owning it with denials and bullshit like Pay 2 Build. I’m not a P2W fan but for a long time I (and others ) have been saying that at this point they should just drop the facade and embrace what has been successful and what their customers apparently are willing to pay for.

    CryomatrixMadFrenchieKyleranGdemami

    "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.

  • StaalBurgherStaalBurgher Member UncommonPosts: 263
    edited December 2018
    Video games are experiences that take us outside the confines of reality.  Nobody (or almost nobody) wants to experience class stratification in a friggin' video game just cause they have to watch the rich ride their yachts in real life.

    There is always class stratification. Just because they are called "nobles" does make it any different. In any game there is a upper tier of players or guilds that have more status than others. And even in this game there will be players with social influence and status who will not be noble.

    I really don't get this obsession with nobility. Players farm, trade, fight in all sorts of games. There is no reason why suddenly in this game it will be a problem. It is about whether the game mechanics of farming is enjoyable. The titles, social class etc is the RPG aspect of the game.

    Nobles are simply group leaders with some built-in RPG for players to use. It is a major drawback of many sandbox games vs single player games that a dev supplied social design doesn't exist to give the world a lived-in feel. The whole purpose of nobility, kingdoms etc is to provide that.
    GdemamimystichazeCryomatrix
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 33,960
    Video games are experiences that take us outside the confines of reality.  Nobody (or almost nobody) wants to experience class stratification in a friggin' video game just cause they have to watch the rich ride their yachts in real life.

    There is always class stratification. Just because they are called "nobles" does make it any different. In any game there is a upper tier of players or guilds that have more status than others. And even in this game there will be players with social influence and status who will not be noble.

    I really don't get this obsession with nobility. Players farm, trade, fight in all sorts of games. There is no reason why suddenly in this game it will be a problem. It is about whether the game mechanics of farming is enjoyable. The titles, social class etc is the RPG aspect of the game.

    Nobles are simply group leaders with some built-in RPG for players to use. It is a major drawback of many sandbox games vs single player games that a dev supplied social design doesn't exist to give the world a lived-in feel. The whole purpose of nobility, kingdoms etc is to provide that.
    Sure, theres always upper tiers of players in every game, the difference here is players are buying their way to the top before the game ever begins.

    In most other games players either had to earn their way to fame and glory, or in recent years wait until the game launched before pulling out their wallets to do so.

    In all fairness, COE isn't the only game doing this.  Star Citizen may not call their mega backers nobles, but players with tens of thousand of dollars worth of ships, land, and in game currency will definitely start off with clear advantage.

    Both games claim it is only a matter of time before those who join at launch fight their way to the top,  which is all too true I'm sure.

    Some will relish the challenge, but many won't be interested in trying when so many have such a significant head start.

    CCP runs into this with late joiners to EVE who say there is no way to catch up, even though 15 years of in game history shows there clearly is a way to do so.




    GdemamiViper482TEKK3N

    "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






  • StaalBurgherStaalBurgher Member UncommonPosts: 263
    edited December 2018
    Kyleran said:

    Sure, theres always upper tiers of players in every game, the difference here is players are buying their way to the top before the game ever begins.

    In most other games players either had to earn their way to fame and glory, or in recent years wait until the game launched before pulling out their wallets to do so.

    In all fairness, COE isn't the only game doing this.  Star Citizen may not call their mega backers nobles, but players with tens of thousand of dollars worth of ships, land, and in game currency will definitely start off with clear advantage.

    Both games claim it is only a matter of time before those who join at launch fight their way to the top,  which is all too true I'm sure.

    Some will relish the challenge, but many won't be interested in trying when so many have such a significant head start.

    CCP runs into this with late joiners to EVE who say there is no way to catch up, even though 15 years of in game history shows there clearly is a way to do so.

    I agree it is not ideal. SB have gone way beyond anything that can be defended re selling of in-game items. But what is the alternative?

    They have (1) aging and permanent death, (2) a built-in social structure and (3) persistent in-game characters. I identified those 3 things as the major issues for a sandbox to overcome if you want it to compete with single-player RPG in terms of story/world-feel years ago. And that world sterility is what has strangled competitive sandbox games because there is just nothing to hold the non-PvPers to the game. People can point to EVE as a counter-argument but in 15 years there has been one game to not fail in this respect? To me at least, this just proves that sandboxes need something more.

    Leaving aside of course the claims that some of this is just not technically feasible, I'm not a tech guy so I don't know. Regardless, I am desperate that someone attempts it. So much that I don't care how they get the money to do it. In this instance the ends justify the means, it's working for Facebook, Google and Twitter right? I want this game made, if they have to steal our free speech money to do it, then so be it.
    KyleranConstantineMerus
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,483
    Video games are experiences that take us outside the confines of reality.  Nobody (or almost nobody) wants to experience class stratification in a friggin' video game just cause they have to watch the rich ride their yachts in real life.

    There is always class stratification. Just because they are called "nobles" does make it any different. In any game there is a upper tier of players or guilds that have more status than others. And even in this game there will be players with social influence and status who will not be noble.

    I really don't get this obsession with nobility. Players farm, trade, fight in all sorts of games. There is no reason why suddenly in this game it will be a problem. It is about whether the game mechanics of farming is enjoyable. The titles, social class etc is the RPG aspect of the game.

    Nobles are simply group leaders with some built-in RPG for players to use. It is a major drawback of many sandbox games vs single player games that a dev supplied social design doesn't exist to give the world a lived-in feel. The whole purpose of nobility, kingdoms etc is to provide that.
    Cool story.  None of it changes that most folks aren't cool with people paying their way there instead of playing their way there.  Nice try, though.
    Viper482Mendeldragonlee66Linif

    image
  • danwest58danwest58 Member RarePosts: 2,011
    Did anyone think this wouldnt have happened?  It told you all that Paying for lives in an MMO would lead to P2W and a pile of shit for a game.  Yet everyone wants to say well its better than a subscription.   Yet P2W and loot boxes and the entire industry is trying to get every last penny out of your pocket.  Yet A Subscription is the cheapest way to pay for a game because if you dont pay you dont play.  Also What is the most you spent on a Subscription $15?   Yet all these gaming companies want Hundreds of dollars from you a month and will bleed you dry and will continue to find ways of getting you to pay more than that $15 a month sub is.

    Watch this video and you tell me that F2P  with micro-transactions is really is better for the player.  https://www.scientificrevenue.com/scientific-revenue-pricing-cloud/

    I can tell you the $15 a month sub is better for you.  Are all games worth $15 a month.  NOPE Some are worth $5 a month.  However if you push for subscriptions vs Micro-Transactions maybe you would see how much less you are truly spending with a subscription.  
    Viper482Gdemami
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 33,960
    Kyleran said:

    Sure, theres always upper tiers of players in every game, the difference here is players are buying their way to the top before the game ever begins.

    In most other games players either had to earn their way to fame and glory, or in recent years wait until the game launched before pulling out their wallets to do so.

    In all fairness, COE isn't the only game doing this.  Star Citizen may not call their mega backers nobles, but players with tens of thousand of dollars worth of ships, land, and in game currency will definitely start off with clear advantage.

    Both games claim it is only a matter of time before those who join at launch fight their way to the top,  which is all too true I'm sure.

    Some will relish the challenge, but many won't be interested in trying when so many have such a significant head start.

    CCP runs into this with late joiners to EVE who say there is no way to catch up, even though 15 years of in game history shows there clearly is a way to do so.

    I agree it is not ideal. SB have gone way beyond anything that can be defended re selling of in-game items. But what is the alternative?

    They have (1) aging and permanent death, (2) a built-in social structure and (3) persistent in-game characters. I identified those 3 things as the major issues for a sandbox to overcome if you want it to compete with single-player RPG in terms of story/world-feel years ago. And that world sterility is what has strangled competitive sandbox games because there is just nothing to hold the non-PvPers to the game. People can point to EVE as a counter-argument but in 15 years there has been one game to not fail in this respect? To me at least, this just proves that sandboxes need something more.

    Leaving aside of course the claims that some of this is just not technically feasible, I'm not a tech guy so I don't know. Regardless, I am desperate that someone attempts it. So much that I don't care how they get the money to do it. In this instance the ends justify the means, it's working for Facebook, Google and Twitter right? I want this game made, if they have to steal our free speech money to do it, then so be it.
    Great points, and I have to mention I am not against this system, game has to be funded somehow and investors haven't stepped up yet, likely waiting for concrete evidence of the project's viability.

    I've always thought the monetization model was muddled,  sell advantage before launch but not after?  

    Makes no sense, they should drop the pretext and continue to sell advantages both before and after, would like increase interest of investors if they had a concrete revenue plan which I don't feel the current one proves, at least not long term. 
    Gdemami

    "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






  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,483
    Kyleran said:

    Sure, theres always upper tiers of players in every game, the difference here is players are buying their way to the top before the game ever begins.

    In most other games players either had to earn their way to fame and glory, or in recent years wait until the game launched before pulling out their wallets to do so.

    In all fairness, COE isn't the only game doing this.  Star Citizen may not call their mega backers nobles, but players with tens of thousand of dollars worth of ships, land, and in game currency will definitely start off with clear advantage.

    Both games claim it is only a matter of time before those who join at launch fight their way to the top,  which is all too true I'm sure.

    Some will relish the challenge, but many won't be interested in trying when so many have such a significant head start.

    CCP runs into this with late joiners to EVE who say there is no way to catch up, even though 15 years of in game history shows there clearly is a way to do so.

    I agree it is not ideal. SB have gone way beyond anything that can be defended re selling of in-game items. But what is the alternative?

    They have (1) aging and permanent death, (2) a built-in social structure and (3) persistent in-game characters. I identified those 3 things as the major issues for a sandbox to overcome if you want it to compete with single-player RPG in terms of story/world-feel years ago. And that world sterility is what has strangled competitive sandbox games because there is just nothing to hold the non-PvPers to the game. People can point to EVE as a counter-argument but in 15 years there has been one game to not fail in this respect? To me at least, this just proves that sandboxes need something more.

    Leaving aside of course the claims that some of this is just not technically feasible, I'm not a tech guy so I don't know. Regardless, I am desperate that someone attempts it. So much that I don't care how they get the money to do it. In this instance the ends justify the means, it's working for Facebook, Google and Twitter right? I want this game made, if they have to steal our free speech money to do it, then so be it.
    The desperation does not serve you well.

    In fact, being a desperate customer is the absolute worst and most vulnerable position you can be in.  Literally saying you don't give a shit how they get the money anymore because you're so desperate is a pretty compelling example of what consumers are getting wrong about crowdfunding.  You shouldn't be backing these projects or supporting them out of desperation, because your judgement is no longer sound.
    MendelGdemamidragonlee66

    image
  • anemoanemo Member RarePosts: 1,749
    danwest58 said:
    Did anyone think this wouldnt have happened?  It told you all that Paying for lives in an MMO would lead to P2W and a pile of shit for a game.  Yet everyone wants to say well its better than a subscription.   Yet P2W and loot boxes and the entire industry is trying to get every last penny out of your pocket.  Yet A Subscription is the cheapest way to pay for a game because if you dont pay you dont play.  Also What is the most you spent on a Subscription $15?   Yet all these gaming companies want Hundreds of dollars from you a month and will bleed you dry and will continue to find ways of getting you to pay more than that $15 a month sub is.

    Watch this video and you tell me that F2P  with micro-transactions is really is better for the player.  https://www.scientificrevenue.com/scientific-revenue-pricing-cloud/

    I can tell you the $15 a month sub is better for you.  Are all games worth $15 a month.  NOPE Some are worth $5 a month.  However if you push for subscriptions vs Micro-Transactions maybe you would see how much less you are truly spending with a subscription.  
    I think it's silly because by having lives you have a moment every few months of "do I want to keep playing?" and remove the possibility of having "returning/free play weekend" promotions.

    ____ 

    As for there being no serfs...  they've hinted at scripting for offline players and similar.  Though I have lower hopes for this, than any sort of release of the game.

    Though if it's there those are some good serfs, and very profitable ones at that.

    Though it would be an annoying combination  of pay to win and RL skills to win, that i imagine any sort of RPGer would be annoyed .

    Practice doesn't make perfect, practice makes permanent.

    "At one point technology meant making tech that could get to the moon, now it means making tech that could get you a taxi."

  • Viper482Viper482 Member EpicPosts: 2,713
    edited December 2018
    I actually don't mind at all that the game is funding itself this way. I made a post awhile back that had something similar. 

    The truth is that life isn't fair, it never was, it never will be, people get born into rich families and people get born into poor families. People are born healthy and people are not. This game will simulate that, I actually like the way it is going. 

    Not everyone is supposed to be a hero in a game, isn't that what people want? Everyone is different. This game looks to be innovative and interesting. I'll definitely keep my eye on it. 

    If someone wants to pay 5k to be amazing in this game then I'm all for it. P2W has never actually offended me, perhaps it is because I can afford it if i wanted to or perhaps I just think there are a million other games to play, who cares about P2W. I look at it like a feature, if i don't like it, i don't play it. 

    Also, don't make fun of the way people spend their money on what you think is stupid. I don't look at a person who buys a 60k rolex as being stupid  . . . I mean i'd never do it, even if i was a billionaire, but at the same time, if someone can afford a 60k Rolex, you got to give them credit . . . unless of course they didn't earn it. 

    Cryomatrix
    If you were giving a lecture about real life this would be fine with me.....but this is a farking game dude. Saying that, your post is beyond absurd. Most people play games to escape reality. And in 99.9% of games you ARE the hero, so wtf is this "everyone is not supposed to be the hero in games" crap?? 

    The game world should not exist as a rich person's playground, that is what real life is for. In a game they should start at zero just like everyone else. And don't be the asshat that equivocates that statement with real life....I am talking about games.
    ScorchienTEKK3NTorvalGdemamidragonlee66
    Make MMORPG's Great Again!
  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 12,907
    I actually don't mind at all that the game is funding itself this way. I made a post awhile back that had something similar. 

    The truth is that life isn't fair, it never was, it never will be, people get born into rich families and people get born into poor families. People are born healthy and people are not. This game will simulate that, I actually like the way it is going. 

    Not everyone is supposed to be a hero in a game, isn't that what people want? Everyone is different. This game looks to be innovative and interesting. I'll definitely keep my eye on it. 

    If someone wants to pay 5k to be amazing in this game then I'm all for it. P2W has never actually offended me, perhaps it is because I can afford it if i wanted to or perhaps I just think there are a million other games to play, who cares about P2W. I look at it like a feature, if i don't like it, i don't play it. 

    Also, don't make fun of the way people spend their money on what you think is stupid. I don't look at a person who buys a 60k rolex as being stupid  . . . I mean i'd never do it, even if i was a billionaire, but at the same time, if someone can afford a 60k Rolex, you got to give them credit . . . unless of course they didn't earn it. 

    Cryomatrix
    So when you were a kid and played monopoly with the rich kid down the block you considered it innovative and interesting if he started the game with hotels on Boardwalk and Park Place?

    Real life social stratification has no place in any game I want to play. Where you see innovation and something interesting I see a boring ass shit show.


    MadFrenchieMendelTorval
    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED
  • TEKK3NTEKK3N Member RarePosts: 727
    Viper482 said:


    The game world should not exist as a rich person's playground, that is what real life is for. In a game they should start at zero just like everyone else. And don't be the asshat that equivocates that statement with real life....I am talking about games.
    Completely agree.
    That's why I am against Micro Transactions in general.
    But this one is the worst type.
    A game where you can buy status, properties and wealth is a no go area for me.

    This game will end up like SotA, a game with few Lords and no peasants.
    Gdemami
  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 11,062
    @StaalBurgher In addition to what has been said above, what makes this different is the extent to which “nobles” can affect your gameplay.  They can literally make laws and determine punishments of other players.  You will be paying them taxes and pretty much exist at their pleasure. Then to top it off, even if you find a great noble to swear to,  you may still have your land and life taken because some other noble paid $60,000 (let’s call him GhettoMaster) decided to be a dick. At each opportunity (name selection, plague, map vote) these nobles (some) have proven to resort to trolling, griefing, and asshattery.  Closing the store at launch just solidifies the advantages they bought and makes it difficult for a non-noble to compete.
    MadFrenchieMendelKyleranGdemami

    "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.

  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 11,757
    @StaalBurgher In addition to what has been said above, what makes this different is the extent to which “nobles” can affect your gameplay.  They can literally make laws and determine punishments of other players.  You will be paying them taxes and pretty much exist at their pleasure. Then to top it off, even if you find a great noble to swear to,  you may still have your land and life taken because some other noble paid $60,000 (let’s call him GhettoMaster) decided to be a dick. At each opportunity (name selection, plague, map vote) these nobles (some) have proven to resort to trolling, griefing, and asshattery.  Closing the store at launch just solidifies the advantages they bought and makes it difficult for a non-noble to compete.
    Do you think he is talking about us newbs?


    MadFrenchieKyleranetlarConstantineMerus

     25 Agrees

    You received 25 Agrees. You're posting some good content. Great!

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    Now Doesn't That Make You Feel All Warm And Fuzzy Inside? :P

  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,483
    Scot said:
    @StaalBurgher In addition to what has been said above, what makes this different is the extent to which “nobles” can affect your gameplay.  They can literally make laws and determine punishments of other players.  You will be paying them taxes and pretty much exist at their pleasure. Then to top it off, even if you find a great noble to swear to,  you may still have your land and life taken because some other noble paid $60,000 (let’s call him GhettoMaster) decided to be a dick. At each opportunity (name selection, plague, map vote) these nobles (some) have proven to resort to trolling, griefing, and asshattery.  Closing the store at launch just solidifies the advantages they bought and makes it difficult for a non-noble to compete.
    Do you think he is talking about us newbs?


    I just wanna see the players reenact the repression scene from Monty Python, complete with appropriately titled players.
    Scot

    image
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 33,960
    @StaalBurgher In addition to what has been said above, what makes this different is the extent to which “nobles” can affect your gameplay.  They can literally make laws and determine punishments of other players.  You will be paying them taxes and pretty much exist at their pleasure. Then to top it off, even if you find a great noble to swear to,  you may still have your land and life taken because some other noble paid $60,000 (let’s call him GhettoMaster) decided to be a dick. At each opportunity (name selection, plague, map vote) these nobles (some) have proven to resort to trolling, griefing, and asshattery.  Closing the store at launch just solidifies the advantages they bought and makes it difficult for a non-noble to compete.
    I do wish they had thought to include a neutral NPC kingdom (like EVEs empire space) players could be part of if they didn't feel like being part of the "dynasty safety dance" or whatever called.


    AnOldFartConstantineMerus

    "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:
    @StaalBurgher In addition to what has been said above, what makes this different is the extent to which “nobles” can affect your gameplay.  They can literally make laws and determine punishments of other players.  You will be paying them taxes and pretty much exist at their pleasure. Then to top it off, even if you find a great noble to swear to,  you may still have your land and life taken because some other noble paid $60,000 (let’s call him GhettoMaster) decided to be a dick. At each opportunity (name selection, plague, map vote) these nobles (some) have proven to resort to trolling, griefing, and asshattery.  Closing the store at launch just solidifies the advantages they bought and makes it difficult for a non-noble to compete.
    I do wish they had thought to include a neutral NPC kingdom (like EVEs empire space) players could be part of if they didn't feel like being part of the "dynasty safety dance" or whatever called.


    To some extent that would be worse unless it was far more powerful than the average.  After all all things being equal the first target would be the NPC King.   Unless you mean a Kingdom that could not be attacked by other Kingdoms.  That would be interesting but probably end up with the majority of non-noble players.

    I have always thought that they should have one “clean” server at launch with no ore-purchased advantages.  Of course that’s a no go because most people would choose to start there instead of as a serf to a guy like GhettoMaster.
    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.

Sign In or Register to comment.