Avatar

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Badges

Asm0deus

About

Username
Asm0deus
Joined
Visits
3,515
Last Active
Roles
Member
Points
1,013
Rank
Rare
Posts
2,179
Badges
36
  • Squad Battle (AC) Participation Decline

    I am a backer of both SC and was one for Elite but Arena Commander and CQC bores me to tears and is not at all what I backed this game for and I think that would hold true for many players.
    Babuinix
  • Pay-to-Build and Manage vs Pay-to-Win

    Ungood said:
    Asm0deus said:
    Ungood said:
    ...snip...
    Evony and "other such crap" (IE: Browser and Mobile games) are the originators of P2W and where the term stemmed from.

    Because in those games you could Pay to Win a fight. it was exactly what I am saying it was, it was rampant, and it was very common. Hence the outrage. 

    That toilet water you are passing off whisky was never the real deal, and didn't come till much after P2W had built it's stigma and traction in the game community.

    That is why is called "Pay to Win" and not "Cash Advantage"

    Also, very Few MMOs were using anything remotely like a F2P model when P2W was building it's massive reputation in the game world.
    Even back then there were arguments on what p2w was and that the point I am making.  Now it's somekind of BS to say mobile gaming is what started p2w.

    P2w comes from f2p games and mobile gaming, while mobile games took it to the next step and went hog wild with it you are not going to peddle to me that mobile game was a huge thing back then and sole creator of p2w... that just you trying to fit shit in your narrative like the rest of the spin doctors in this thread.

    F2p in mmo was late 1990 early 2000 same as mobile but mobile was not as popular as standard mmo f2p or not till later on.
    Do you even read what you are saying? 

    Yah, no duh browser and mobile games owned that shit like pimp in high heels and a stupid hat, hence why the term was born there, and not some wimpy little game that gave you an advantage if you spent money.

    P2W, said perfectly what it was, it was "paying to win" that is why the term stuck, gained traction,  and outrage, leading it to become a huge deal in the game world and move on to other games.

    Also, F2P MMO's didn't become a thing till late 2006.
    Do you read what you are writing?   The big damned issue with these threads is how you guys want to confuse the issue on what winning is?

    Lets not be daft some games like cards or games that are match based have winners and loser but many games are not in that kind of format, this was also true back then, and they also had p2w.

    Some people just like to be obtuse and try to wordsmith and never bloody mind the meaning or intent of the meaning of the word.

    This is the fundamental issues you guys have.

    Lets take it a step further. I will even go so far as to say I won't argue about the origin of the damned word and give you reason, but realize the meaning to the damned word has evolved yet its meaning it still the same.

    There term had no choice to evolve as the industry and games it is used in evolve.

    Some of you though would rather we have terms like pay to win, pay to advantage, pay 2 advance etc etc just so you can all claim hey it's not p2w blablabla when really these terms all fit under p2w as they are just different degrees of the same thing.

    To sum up, anyone with an ounce of common sense and honesty COE is p2w and there no debate about it.

    Anyone trying to claim otherwise is overly emotionally attached to the game and clinging to some old possible meaning of the term as they can't admit what's staring them in the face.

    When I came into this thread I thought you were just some objective observer that had no skin in the game...boy was I wrong ...lol

    While some of the bigger AAA games jumped on the bandwagon a little later in 2006 they were by no means the first.

    ABout f2p:


    The free-to-play business model in online games was created by Nexon in Korea.[9][10] The first game to use it was Nexon's QuizQuiz, released in October 1999, and made by Lee Seungchan, who would go on to create MapleStory.[11] The free-to-play model originated in the late 1990s and early 2000s, coming from a series of highly successful MMOs targeted towards children and casual gamers, including Furcadia, Neopets, RuneScape,[12][13] MapleStory, and text-based dungeons such as Achaea, Dreams of Divine Lands.[14] Known for producing innovative titles, small independent developers also continue to release free-to-play games.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free-to-play#History

    JamesGoblin
  • Pay-to-Build and Manage vs Pay-to-Win

    Ungood said:
    Asm0deus said:
    Ungood said:
    Asm0deus said:
    Ungood said:
    This seems to be a constant where the Naysayers repeatedly claim (In every thread) that CoE is a pay-to-win game. I know I am opening a can of worms by making this post and setting myself up as a target. But I want to try to clarify the difference to those that are still learning about CoE if I can. 

    I laugh at P2W cries, I play GW2, where people call mount skins.. not mounts.. not mount upgrades.. just a purely cosmetic skin.. and they call it P2W.

    So yah..  I don't give those cries an iota of respect anymore. I'll see it.. I'll play.. and I alone will make a decision if I think it is P2W.

    Indeed any kind of cosmetic skins that's in such games is not p2w IMO either but then this game isn't offering that is it but things far far different.




    The idea is still the same.. anything anyone does not want to spend money on, suddenly becomes P2W.

    I am playing BDO right now, and, I have heard it's very P2W.. on my 3rd day of the trial.. and I am still am not sure where the Item Store is.. so it can't be that P2W.

    In games like second life, Most of the Money in the game, was player bought, (and money in that game could go both ways), and no one cried P2W about it, mainly because real P2W games like Evony were going strong at the time.

    So with CoE .. we shall see. If it turns out to be unacceptable to me. I'll just stop playing, let my character die in AFK oblivion, and move on to another game, not like I have to invest into the game if I am not having fun.

    But P2W has been soo watered down these days, it's not even worth humoring it's usage anymore.
    Ah no. 

    Sure some people take the term too far but fundamentally p2w never meant "win" as some people in this thread are trying to spin it. This isn't a board game or card game with a clear start and end to a game or match.

    Like I said Occam Razor and KISS.   Anything else is just sophistry.


    I can understand your wanting to just try the game and see for yourself...some of us have enough experience in games to be able to see how it's going to go down by how the mechanics are suppose to work and what happening in the store or crowdfunding phase etc.


    All the luck to you though.


    What really annoys me though are games that are clearly p2w and depending on whales yet try to hide this or can't just own it.

    I mean if some dev or company wants to make a p2w game cause "reasons" then go for it, attract those whales and make mad cash.

     I mean you see it often enough in mobile and browser games and no one cares so why the big brouhaha when it comes to these more traditional rpgmmo?

    I say stop spinning it and own it instead.
    As someone that went through the rise of P2W games, and ended up on both sides of the credit card wars.. I assure you.. P2W.. meant exactly that, You Paid, You Won.

    Which is why P2W obtained such traction in the gaming world. Now, those old browser (now morphed into mobile) games were a very pure form of Node control type games, and disputes over who owned what nodes would fuel the P2W conflicts.

    Now, never has P2W meant "You won the whole game" Just like there really was no way to win at Evony, but that game was he embodiment of P2W. P2W was always based on often single conflict situations. IE: I will beat you if I spend more then you, there is nothing you can do to win, unless you in turn outspend me.


    Now, I don't see CoE doing that.

    I could be wrong.. and if I am.. well.. the door is open to leave.
    I was there when games started to go f2p and p2w etc started and I can assure you p2w was not like you're say barring some extreme cases.

    P2w gained traction in the game world because it was a way to pay to get an "unfair" advantage over some scrub that couldn't afford to pay.  I can assure you there were lots of wallet warriors that sucked and only managed to compete against top players because of said advantage.

    I think this will be the same thing in COE.

    Tbh I find it hilarious you compare COE to Evony and other such crap....lol

    Imo COE is set up more to akin how Revival was to be.


    JamesGoblin
  • Pay-to-Build and Manage vs Pay-to-Win

    Ungood said:
    Asm0deus said:
    Ungood said:
    This seems to be a constant where the Naysayers repeatedly claim (In every thread) that CoE is a pay-to-win game. I know I am opening a can of worms by making this post and setting myself up as a target. But I want to try to clarify the difference to those that are still learning about CoE if I can. 

    I laugh at P2W cries, I play GW2, where people call mount skins.. not mounts.. not mount upgrades.. just a purely cosmetic skin.. and they call it P2W.

    So yah..  I don't give those cries an iota of respect anymore. I'll see it.. I'll play.. and I alone will make a decision if I think it is P2W.

    Indeed any kind of cosmetic skins that's in such games is not p2w IMO either but then this game isn't offering that is it but things far far different.




    The idea is still the same.. anything anyone does not want to spend money on, suddenly becomes P2W.

    I am playing BDO right now, and, I have heard it's very P2W.. on my 3rd day of the trial.. and I am still am not sure where the Item Store is.. so it can't be that P2W.

    In games like second life, Most of the Money in the game, was player bought, (and money in that game could go both ways), and no one cried P2W about it, mainly because real P2W games like Evony were going strong at the time.

    So with CoE .. we shall see. If it turns out to be unacceptable to me. I'll just stop playing, let my character die in AFK oblivion, and move on to another game, not like I have to invest into the game if I am not having fun.

    But P2W has been soo watered down these days, it's not even worth humoring it's usage anymore.
    Ah no. 

    Sure some people take the term too far but fundamentally p2w never meant "win" as some people in this thread are trying to spin it. This isn't a board game or card game with a clear start and end to a game or match.

    Like I said Occam Razor and KISS.   Anything else is just sophistry.


    I can understand your wanting to just try the game and see for yourself...some of us have enough experience in games to be able to see how it's going to go down by how the mechanics are suppose to work and what happening in the store or crowdfunding phase etc.


    All the luck to you though.


    What really annoys me though are games that are clearly p2w and depending on whales yet try to hide this or can't just own it.

    I mean if some dev or company wants to make a p2w game cause "reasons" then go for it, attract those whales and make mad cash.

     I mean you see it often enough in mobile and browser games and no one cares so why the big brouhaha when it comes to these more traditional rpgmmo?

    I say stop spinning it and own it instead.
    YashaXJamesGoblinKyleran
  • Pay-to-Build and Manage vs Pay-to-Win

    just a question I think is quite important; What is winning in CoE? Is it being king? If it is, then clearly its p2w, but for me whos only interested in the wvw aspect of the game my objections, or what I would call winning, would be to be a part of the best wvw guild and be recognized as it as well. Im part of call it a major wvw guild in CU, and some of us have also bought CoE (the game only), and for us, thats winning. Whats your ideas of winning?
    I would like to elaborate on this post. If your win condition is Just to be King! Then yes I guess you have won by purchasing the package. You can say "I was -King-. But For how long? Well, that is very dependent on your ability to rule, lead, deal with drama, organize and have a vast amount of time to donate to the game. So if your win condition is to be a -successful- King, you will have to work for it being a success can't be purchased in the pledge package. See the difference?

    Elyria has no end game, therefore everyone's win conditions are going to be different. As Killimondros stated, the group he/she is part of has very different win conditions. So as asked in the above post, what are your Win Conditions?
    Occams Razor.....or in my kind of jargon KISS (keep it simple stupid) the winning condition in these types of argument is anything in which you pay real life monies that gives you an advantage over another player in game.

    All the spins you all are spitting out entertain far far too many assumptions that can never be proved one way or the other which are further confounded buy other peoples motives and honesty in such discussion.

    This is why ultimately most people that use common sense would agree cosmetics are not pay to win because they offer no kind of advantage over others whereas other stuff like we see in these packages do as they are not purely cosmetic.
    YashaX