You can literally buy in game currency with real cash straight up. It is the very definition of traditional P2W. And if someone wants to disagree by typing a couple of paragraphs that talk about how no one should care because it doesn't affect them, that's fine. But most people know that when you are in a game where people can be killed by each other, there are real advantages to being able to generate incredible amounts of resources (credits) through real world money. You can call it what you like, but to me at least, it is the epitome of P2W.
I'm not saying that there is something inherently wrong with P2W, I'm just calling it what it is. I honestly think that P2W should lose some of the negative stigma so that we can start discussing these genres in an honest way.
If the studio doesn't do it, gold sellers will. Selling game currency for real cash is a deterrent against people who might deal with gold sellers as much as a way to gain revenue for the company.
Considering Star Citizen will offer private servers with modding tools and an offline mode when they complete all the stretch goals, if you don't like it play elsewhere than on the official servers...
You can literally buy in game currency with real cash straight up. It is the very definition of traditional P2W. And if someone wants to disagree by typing a couple of paragraphs that talk about how no one should care because it doesn't affect them, that's fine. But most people know that when you are in a game where people can be killed by each other, there are real advantages to being able to generate incredible amounts of resources (credits) through real world money. You can call it what you like, but to me at least, it is the epitome of P2W.
I'm not saying that there is something inherently wrong with P2W, I'm just calling it what it is. I honestly think that P2W should lose some of the negative stigma so that we can start discussing these genres in an honest way.
If the studio doesn't do it, gold sellers will. Selling game currency for real cash is a deterrent against people who might deal with gold sellers as much as a way to gain revenue for the company.
Considering Star Citizen will offer private servers with modding tools and an offline mode when they complete all the stretch goals, if you don't like it play elsewhere than on the official servers...
Studios selling currency is no panacea against RMT, just look at EVE where you can convert PLEX to ISK, the RMT market has been a huge thing for years.
Also, it might be better to say 'they intend to offer private servers and modding tools' rather than 'they will offer private servers and modding tools', between now and then anything could change and besides, the last word from Lando was quite ambiguous about it all and could easily be interpreted as 'not going to happen'.
You can literally buy in game currency with real cash straight up. It is the very definition of traditional P2W. And if someone wants to disagree by typing a couple of paragraphs that talk about how no one should care because it doesn't affect them, that's fine. But most people know that when you are in a game where people can be killed by each other, there are real advantages to being able to generate incredible amounts of resources (credits) through real world money. You can call it what you like, but to me at least, it is the epitome of P2W.
I'm not saying that there is something inherently wrong with P2W, I'm just calling it what it is. I honestly think that P2W should lose some of the negative stigma so that we can start discussing these genres in an honest way.
If the studio doesn't do it, gold sellers will. Selling game currency for real cash is a deterrent against people who might deal with gold sellers as much as a way to gain revenue for the company.
Considering Star Citizen will offer private servers with modding tools and an offline mode when they complete all the stretch goals, if you don't like it play elsewhere than on the official servers...
I agree that it "helps" deter gold sellers (it doesn't stop it). I just want people to call it what it is instead of trying beat around the bush about it. It is, in every sense, P2W. And that's fine for the game and the people that like that monetization model.
You are just forgetting one crucial detail about being able to buy ships and insert currency in Star Citizen:
UNLIKE EvE and other mmo's, you can steal those ships. Board the ship, kill the pilot and steal it for you is a thing on the game.
So players can actually take what you bought and that's it. You are putting resources on the game to buy a ship that you can lose to another player... While on games like EvE you can only destroy the ship and pray for the good loot drop and not get also destroyed - so, in my opinion, injecting resources in that case is way more dire since the resources go only for you and for your benefit (in case of ships).
You have clearly not played EVE to the fullest.
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
As someone who the names "Chris Roberts" and "Derek Smart" meant nothing to prior to 2012 and 2014 respectively, it's eye opening. It hits all the drama high notes, but provides a little extra backstory if you will. @Arglebargle 's comments about Origin suddenly make a lot more sense.
More importantly, it highlights a few things that I feel are going very wrong with this project. Things I've often noticed and pointed out prior to 2015 and found myself vehemently shouted down, even moderated, especially on massivelyop.com.
Here some people still try to claim the Escapist article was a farce because there was no follow-up, which is comparatively tame as far as white knighting goes (there is an obvious logical answer to this I'll not get into here).
At any rate, it's interesting and lends credence to some of the doubts I've had. I appreciate what CIG is trying to do, but some of their moves have been absolutely outrageous.
I can say with a clean conscience it's nice to have just a little publicized validation for things I was made to feel like a lunatic for pointing out since 2013.
Inb4 Kotaku gets described as "hateful".
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
The follow up article might be described as "scathing". I'd expect nothing less from a Swede:
That is not a follow up article. Its a rehash of a Swedish article many months old, which was essentially a rehash of the Escapist piece from last year. Translated to English by the Goons shortly after it was published in Sweden. Touted by TheSmarty for a few weeks, then forgotten due to the lack of novelty. Now necroed again in Kotaku for its clickbait value. A shorter article, as almost no one wants to read the OTHER "in-depth" "article" due to its short novel length (32000 words) that TheSmarty's private dirt digger has written.
Don't even get me started. If I had a nickel for every time I heard someone in a meeting suggest outsourcing as the solution to resource problems, I'd have enough to buy a bullet for myself.
What people generally don't understand is that the level of communication required in outsourcing scales at a non-linear rate according to the complexity of the project. Almost to the point where unless Illfonic was in the same office, I wouldn't have even bothered. It was definitely not the best decision, but it's not an uncommon mistake either.
I agree with you.
Generally speaking you would only outsource jobs that are considered basic and non-complex, outside your main business practice. For example in most company they would outsource security or cleaning.
if you have to sub-contract your work for one reason or the other, make sure you sub contract the most menial work (which prone to lowest mistake, minimum supervison).
If you have experience real life work you realize that even in one office or in one team, miscommunication is not of rare occurances, much less punctuality and quality. Even an iron clad aggreement could not save a project from those common problems.
The funny thing is some people seems to think that due to current technology, mobility and off-site meeting would be next working trend. Though it certainly makes it easier, however it does not eliminate the underlying issue, the resource's quality. Technology can only help so much.
After reading the article I come to these conclusions.
1. CR has no clue how to oversee a project. 2. Too many cooks in the kitchen. 3. CryEngine. Spending to much rewriting the engine to try and make it fit their ideas.
I don't think Roberts gets enough credit for not choosing the hero engine. Nothing dooms a project quite like choosing the hero engine.
Number three is an odd choice considering the article seems to go to some length to indicate whatever engine they chose would need to be heavily rewriten.
I can say with a clean conscience it's nice to have just a little publicized validation for things I was made to feel like a lunatic for pointing out since 2013.
...
It's always nice to see that you are not the only crazy person in the world, isn't it ?
if you have to sub-contract your work for one reason or the other, make sure you sub contract the most menial work (which prone to lowest mistake, minimum supervison). ...
That must be why so many Fortune-500 companies have outsourced their entire IT divisions to offshore consultancies in India ?
if you have to sub-contract your work for one reason or the other, make sure you sub contract the most menial work (which prone to lowest mistake, minimum supervison). ...
That must be why so many Fortune-500 companies have outsourced their entire IT divisions to offshore consultancies in India ?
I'd say there are two instances where sub-contracting work.
One is sub-contracting something that's outside your area of expertise. Even cleaning is not so simple and menial work that a sub-contractor who's expert couldn't do it a bit more effectively. Let alone something like security, or IT.
The other instance is sub-contracting something that you can specify exactly. Materials, parts and assembly of physical product can be specified to so great detail that a miscommunication is unlikely.
But sub-contracting fails if you try to sub-contract something that's supposed to be your core expertise: A game developer should not subcontract developing a game, an investment bank should not sub-contract deciding what to invest on, and a farm should not sub-contract taking care of their fields. Each business has something they are good at, and sub-contracting that will only lead to worse results than they could have done by themselves.
if you have to sub-contract your work for one reason or the other, make sure you sub contract the most menial work (which prone to lowest mistake, minimum supervison). ...
That must be why so many Fortune-500 companies have outsourced their entire IT divisions to offshore consultancies in India ?
Sure, must be why all those companies does not have any local it support.
Employee: I can't send email. lets call it. (Calling IT...) IT Support: yes, may I help you? (in indian accent...) Employee: I can't send email. IT Support: Have you connect to your wifi? Employee: How? I never tried before an it works just fine.... ... (At the end if year) CFO: Why is our call expenditure so damn huge. Whats this long hours call to India for? ...
Probably they all outsource all their cleaning and security department to Mexico as well huh?
I don't think it's right to defend this obvious money-milking feature unless you want this in every video game.
Where have you been the last years ?
It already IS in most video games. Wether we like it or not.
Crates in Assassins Creed. Air drops in countless shooters. Platinum-in-game-credit-cards in GTA V. Jewels/Diamonds/Berries in hundreds of free to play games to accelerate progression. etc etc Have fun
Yeah, but SC is in a league of it's own with ships for $10K, there are a few others (in different genres) that are almost as bad but as MMOs go I don't think there is a single game a whale can spend more money in and the game is nowhere near launch.
I am all for crowdfunding but in this case pay2win is not a strong enough word. The game better be awesome at launch, anything less and the devs are in for a s#itstorm we never seen the like of before.
Still, as adults it is your own money and your own responsibility how you use it. I think that the game seems to have some potential but I wont play it anyways, I ain't much for games that are pay2win.
I was taking about DS not the person who posted that twitter picture.
On the other hand, the messenger should matter less than the message (assuming the message is true).
A messenger and a guy on a crusade are two different things. The reality is that he loves the attention and has an axe to grind. As a neutral party to SC it's rather obvious.
I don't think it's right to defend this obvious money-milking feature unless you want this in every video game.
Where have you been the last years ?
It already IS in most video games. Wether we like it or not.
Crates in Assassins Creed. Air drops in countless shooters. Platinum-in-game-credit-cards in GTA V. Jewels/Diamonds/Berries in hundreds of free to play games to accelerate progression. etc etc Have fun
Yeah, but SC is in a league of it's own with ships for $10K, there are a few others (in different genres) that are almost as bad but as MMOs go I don't think there is a single game a whale can spend more money in and the game is nowhere near launch.
I am all for crowdfunding but in this case pay2win is not a strong enough word. The game better be awesome at launch, anything less and the devs are in for a s#itstorm we never seen the like of before.
Still, as adults it is your own money and your own responsibility how you use it. I think that the game seems to have some potential but I wont play it anyways, I ain't much for games that are pay2win.
Several Korean games have whales that spend hundredsthousands of dollars for e-peen fame.
There are several studies about TYPICAL whales that spend 10-26 k$ on a game (the higher number is from - you guessed - Saudi Arabia ;-)
So - while SC allows you to spend tenthousands of dollars (i think 36 k$ was the highest published number I have seen) it is not alone in the pool of games and not the leader in expenditure done by whales.
As SC allows you to get everything in game with in game money - which is NOT the case in many of the P2W games, especially on the Korean market - no one is forced to spend more than the basic amount. Which currently is 54 $ and was as low as 20 $ in the past. I can get everything in game later. Personally I PREFER to get those things later in the game - that is why I have a single ship and will get the rest later in the game.
If people think SC is truely P2W, they just wait until it is releasted and several months have passed. Then they can see if those with big fleets pre-launch really dominate.
My prediction: those that are organized and those that have a lot of time will dominate after a short while. With a LOT of salty tears having been spend by those with solo-flown big multi-crew ships early in the game.
I was taking about DS not the person who posted that twitter picture.
On the other hand, the messenger should matter less than the message (assuming the message is true).
A messenger and a guy on a crusade are two different things. The reality is that he loves the attention and has an axe to grind. As a neutral party to SC it's rather obvious.
One has to keep in mind that the so-called "messenger" in reality is a competitor in the same industry producing the same type of games (or trying to and failing the last 20 years).
A "messenger" that is trying to ruin another companies product, based on a decades old crusade fueled by hurt pride and jealousy.
A "messenger" that is trying to AGAIN take over another persons company ( a la Alganon) through a campaign of FUD and propaganda aimed at the stakeholders (in this case - the backers).
A "messenger" that paints himself as the spokesperson of "the gamer" and "gamer's rights" - while being known to himself ignore the rights of the players of his own games, banning people left, right and center for decades.
So ... i hear the message from different sources and there is some truth to it (especially when it comes to the organisational structure of CIG in the early years) ... but a message coming from THIS "messenger" is not a message but a poisonous dart more akin to libel and spite.
Comments
Considering Star Citizen will offer private servers with modding tools and an offline mode when they complete all the stretch goals, if you don't like it play elsewhere than on the official servers...
Studios selling currency is no panacea against RMT, just look at EVE where you can convert PLEX to ISK, the RMT market has been a huge thing for years.
Also, it might be better to say 'they intend to offer private servers and modding tools' rather than 'they will offer private servers and modding tools', between now and then anything could change and besides, the last word from Lando was quite ambiguous about it all and could easily be interpreted as 'not going to happen'.
Have fun
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
http://www.kotaku.co.uk/2016/09/26/the-24-year-feud-that-has-dogged-star-citizen
As someone who the names "Chris Roberts" and "Derek Smart" meant nothing to prior to 2012 and 2014 respectively, it's eye opening. It hits all the drama high notes, but provides a little extra backstory if you will. @Arglebargle 's comments about Origin suddenly make a lot more sense.
More importantly, it highlights a few things that I feel are going very wrong with this project. Things I've often noticed and pointed out prior to 2015 and found myself vehemently shouted down, even moderated, especially on massivelyop.com.
Here some people still try to claim the Escapist article was a farce because there was no follow-up, which is comparatively tame as far as white knighting goes (there is an obvious logical answer to this I'll not get into here).
At any rate, it's interesting and lends credence to some of the doubts I've had. I appreciate what CIG is trying to do, but some of their moves have been absolutely outrageous.
I can say with a clean conscience it's nice to have just a little publicized validation for things I was made to feel like a lunatic for pointing out since 2013.
Inb4 Kotaku gets described as "hateful".
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
Seaspite
Playing ESO on my X-Box
Have fun
Generally speaking you would only outsource jobs that are considered basic and non-complex, outside your main business practice. For example in most company they would outsource security or cleaning.
if you have to sub-contract your work for one reason or the other, make sure you sub contract the most menial work (which prone to lowest mistake, minimum supervison).
If you have experience real life work you realize that even in one office or in one team, miscommunication is not of rare occurances, much less punctuality and quality. Even an iron clad aggreement could not save a project from those common problems.
The funny thing is some people seems to think that due to current technology, mobility and off-site meeting would be next working trend. Though it certainly makes it easier, however it does not eliminate the underlying issue, the resource's quality. Technology can only help so much.
Number three is an odd choice considering the article seems to go to some length to indicate whatever engine they chose would need to be heavily rewriten.
One is sub-contracting something that's outside your area of expertise. Even cleaning is not so simple and menial work that a sub-contractor who's expert couldn't do it a bit more effectively. Let alone something like security, or IT.
The other instance is sub-contracting something that you can specify exactly. Materials, parts and assembly of physical product can be specified to so great detail that a miscommunication is unlikely.
But sub-contracting fails if you try to sub-contract something that's supposed to be your core expertise: A game developer should not subcontract developing a game, an investment bank should not sub-contract deciding what to invest on, and a farm should not sub-contract taking care of their fields. Each business has something they are good at, and sub-contracting that will only lead to worse results than they could have done by themselves.
Employee: I can't send email. lets call it.
(Calling IT...)
IT Support: yes, may I help you? (in indian accent...)
Employee: I can't send email.
IT Support: Have you connect to your wifi?
Employee: How? I never tried before an it works just fine....
...
(At the end if year)
CFO: Why is our call expenditure so damn huge. Whats this long hours call to India for?
...
Probably they all outsource all their cleaning and security department to Mexico as well huh?
I am all for crowdfunding but in this case pay2win is not a strong enough word. The game better be awesome at launch, anything less and the devs are in for a s#itstorm we never seen the like of before.
Still, as adults it is your own money and your own responsibility how you use it. I think that the game seems to have some potential but I wont play it anyways, I ain't much for games that are pay2win.
There are several studies about TYPICAL whales that spend 10-26 k$ on a game (the higher number is from - you guessed - Saudi Arabia ;-)
So - while SC allows you to spend tenthousands of dollars (i think 36 k$ was the highest published number I have seen) it is not alone in the pool of games and not the leader in expenditure done by whales.
As SC allows you to get everything in game with in game money - which is NOT the case in many of the P2W games, especially on the Korean market - no one is forced to spend more than the basic amount. Which currently is 54 $ and was as low as 20 $ in the past. I can get everything in game later. Personally I PREFER to get those things later in the game - that is why I have a single ship and will get the rest later in the game.
If people think SC is truely P2W, they just wait until it is releasted and several months have passed.
Then they can see if those with big fleets pre-launch really dominate.
My prediction: those that are organized and those that have a lot of time will dominate after a short while. With a LOT of salty tears having been spend by those with solo-flown big multi-crew ships early in the game.
Have fun
A "messenger" that is trying to ruin another companies product, based on a decades old crusade fueled by hurt pride and jealousy.
A "messenger" that is trying to AGAIN take over another persons company ( a la Alganon) through a campaign of FUD and propaganda aimed at the stakeholders (in this case - the backers).
A "messenger" that paints himself as the spokesperson of "the gamer" and "gamer's rights" - while being known to himself ignore the rights of the players of his own games, banning people left, right and center for decades.
So ... i hear the message from different sources and there is some truth to it (especially when it comes to the organisational structure of CIG in the early years) ... but a message coming from THIS "messenger" is not a message but a poisonous dart more akin to libel and spite.
Have fun
Have fun