Avatar

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Badges

Phaserlight

Born far-Easterner by circumstance, not descent. Played Marathon for Mac, X-Wing, Escape Velocity. Went to the University of Chicago and discovered Vendetta Online. Lived in Colorado for a year, rode Crested Butte for 70 days. Worked as a Geoscientist. I have always enjoyed designing games; would love to do it for a living.

About

Username
Phaserlight
Joined
Visits
4,685
Last Active
Roles
Member
Points
1,381
Rank
Rare
Favorite Role
Support
Currently Playing
Vendetta Online
Posts
2,427
Badges
43
  • Star Citizen and refunds.

    MaxBacon said:
    Actually started a post on this related thing:
    https://new.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/8zbz59/refunds_cig_should_just_say_no_instead_of/

    CIG is taking one ridiculous approach to the requests, they already changed their policy over 2 years ago, yet they kept granting refunds, either they do or do not presently is of little bother to me, the problem is their refusal to clarify their position, and stonewalling the requests for months giving people false hopes.
    They are stonewalling because right now it's their best option.

    Denying a refund on a purchase in which G/S were not conferred is illegal (edit: in some cases), and right now CIG is operating in kind of a grey area (if it's not a purchase then why is VAT being applied?).

    If they came right out and stated "no refunds" to each and every backer requesting a refund that might open them up to a consumer fraud suit if it could be proven that "pledges" are in fact purchases and CIG failed to deliver; something that remains to be seen.  Their policy is obviously no refunds... but beyond their TOS they can't continually state that to every backer trying to get one because it would be feeding them ammo.

    For the record, I have very little sympathy for people who pledged thousands of dollars back in the day and are now trying to get it back.  Use better judgement, if that money is important to you.

    /2c
    Kyleran
  • Is Crowdfunding Good? - MMORPG.com

    Red Thomas, I agree with your objective truth. I am out precisely $0 due to crowdfunding, but it can be a good thing. Exhibit A, the Oculus Rift:

    https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1523379957/oculus-rift-step-into-the-game

    Sometimes you also wind up with indie gems like these God knows whether they would have seen the light of day otherwise:

    https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/doublefine/double-fines-massive-chalice
    Red_Thomasinfomatz
  • How I Feel About Star Citizen At This Point

    MaxBacon said:
    It's not at all the same; I can only surmise your MMO gameplay experiences have been limited to vertical progression with "pay-to-win" mechanics.

    This is completely different from a game with horizontal progression where player skill matters, and you can't buy power with real-life currency.

    Discussing where Star Citizen falls along this spectrum is still (hilariously) theory crafting, because we won't really know until they release the game.  However, CIG launching campaigns such as a $27k "Legatus" kit have caused some such as YongYea to conclude "stay as far away as humanly possible".  I can't help but wonder if he's right, recalling the parable of boiling frogs.
    One open world MMO with PvEvP mixed will never equal to that balance of say a game of chess even without the ability to put up money on the game.

    You gave the example of someone paying to promote a pawn to queen, I'll counter that example: Simply by playing more time than you, could have done 3 or 4 turns before you came back to the game again, simply playing for longer than you game me the advantage over you without the having to pay, the end result is the same for you. For several different reasons there is no real balance on this type of open world pvp because people will always be at different stages of progression; to me I'm more the strategy type on a game like this and I don't worry about blaming X or Y either that player(s) earned that ship or bought that ship(s), I worry to strategize and adapt to the situations I end up on.

    And exactly why I think guild-play will be a core pillar of SC and will add a lot of more variables to this, I don't think this will be any solo-type of game when its main competitive aspect is to be minded.
    Difference being one is an expenditure of a resource equally given to everyone (everyone gets 24 hours a day), money is not.
    Again, @MaxBacon you are taking my (perhaps poor) analogy in the context of a vertical progression game.

    In a horizontal progression game, it's more like two players have the opportunity to sit down and play a game of chess at any point during the day; we each get the same number of turns: the rules are fair. 

    One player may have had the opportunity to practice for thousands of hours: it doesn't mean I am never going to beat him even if I have a separate career and only get to play one hour per week. However, I don't mind losing in this instance simply because someone has played a better game than me due to practice. 

    On the other hand, if someone can suddenly pay real money to rank a pawn up to a queen in an instant, this defeats the purpose of building skill in the game to begin with. 

    I really can't believe this requires any explanation, and it seems my efforts are falling on deaf ears. 
    Kefo
  • How I Feel About Star Citizen At This Point

    MaxBacon said:
    The difference is that you are not allowed to spend $5 in a game of chess to promote a pawn to a queen. I don't resent losing to someone who has spent thousands of hours to study things like the Najdorf defense. I do resent pulling out a strategy like the Najdorf defense and losing to someone who pays $5 to promote a pawn to queen.

    Playing in a sandbox against someone who has spent $27,000 on a Legatus fleet is still playing against someone who has spent $27,000 for an advantage. It also goes without saying that the sandbox nature of Star Citizen remains to be seen in detail, if it even ever emerges at all.
    It doesn't matter much, the end result is the same, if you join one MMO after it released for a while where the reality is PvPvE like SC, then you can forget about "keeping up" (like you starting today playing EvE), you should focus on your own gameplay and that's it. This desire to be "full equality to everyone else" in one MMO is just wishful thinking, paying or not paying, when you are in disadvantage you are in disadvantage, it's about playing smartly on a game where balance is risk vs reward, and higher reward adds the competitive risk of PvP, that's how it goes.
    It's not at all the same; I can only surmise your MMO gameplay experiences have been limited to vertical progression with "pay-to-win" mechanics.

    This is completely different from a game with horizontal progression where player skill matters, and you can't buy power with real-life currency.

    Discussing where Star Citizen falls along this spectrum is still (hilariously) theory crafting, because we won't really know until they release the game.  However, CIG launching campaigns such as a $27k "Legatus" kit have caused some such as YongYea to conclude "stay as far away as humanly possible".  I can't help but wonder if he's right, recalling the parable of boiling frogs.
    MadFrenchierpmcmurphy
  • How I Feel About Star Citizen At This Point

    What I'd like to see is the answer to a question asked near the end of the first video I linked: 'if you have players dropping $27k to unlock everything in the game, honestly what's the point in playing?'

    By playing of course I mean playing the game, not playing keep up with the wallet warriors.
    Cotic