Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Michael Arck
Anubis Prime Syndicate
1579
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 02:54:00 -
[1] - Quote
I was just reading on EVE forums about someone wanting to make EVE free to play. A comment by I Sellsstuffz said and I quote...
Quote: If eve goes F2P ill likely quit. Seriously the way it is now keeps most of the rabble out, going F2P would just increase the level of stupidity to unbearable levels,
Thats just my $0.02
And I agree with this statement with my interactions with some folks of the community. No I'm not a saint but sometimes I do wonder if the console community is what pushes some players away from the game or withholds the game from becoming greater than what it is now. That some of the wants are essentially immediate gain instead of long term gain.
Of course, its too early to consider but its been nagging at my mind as of late. From ranting discussions about blueberries who aren't team oriented or strategically inclined to optimize their on field performance.
Now I know this might have been discussed before but I just want to touch back on it and see how the community responds to it.
I love Dust. It has its drawbacks but to me, the overall experience nullifies those drawbacks instantly. If I were to ever leave New Eden, it wouldn't be for good. It would be just to take a break and come back. But I have talked to some folks who said they don't want to revisit New Eden because the constant whining of the community detracts from their enjoyable experience.
The hard line is respected in EVE but in Dust 514, it does not.
Now this isn't a "I'm pointing my finger at you" type of thread. I just wanted to get a discussion going. Is the F2P model hurting Dust? Does F2P inevitably opens it doors to riff raff aka trollers and short term gamers? If it were subscription based, what would be the difference?
Express yourself and lets hear what you have to say |
Scotty-the-Matchmaking AI
Kinsho Swords Caldari State
20
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 02:58:00 -
[2] - Quote
Some of the people i meet make me want to blow the planet up and kill every human. |
Michael Arck
Anubis Prime Syndicate
1579
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 02:59:00 -
[3] - Quote
Scotty-the-Matchmaking AI wrote:Some of the people i meet make me want to blow the planet up and kill every human.
LOL!!! I just spit out my drink!!! |
Thurak1
Psygod9 D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
316
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 03:04:00 -
[4] - Quote
Sure everyone can afford to play dust since it is free to play. So natural there will be a lot of people which means a lot of ego's and a lot of idea's. Unfortunately this also means a lot of stupid people as well. Free to play games however have been very profitable when done well. I can't remember many right now but there have been several pay to play games that have gone FTP and there are many games that came out as FTP and are profitable. So really going FTP should allow the company to spend more resources on the game to make it even better. They just have to filter through the idea's and realize which ones are good and which ones are best ignored. |
Amruk Jackal
R 0 N 1 N
17
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 03:15:00 -
[5] - Quote
For this game, I think a tutorial is HIGHLY recommended for newcomers. The amount of griefers is pretty much at a minimal since there's no teamkill for them to troll you. Other than proto-stomping, I don't see any other way someone can troll you, probably through the chat channels and mail and that's about it, oh and the forums too. But it's quite easy to ignore those people though.
Seriously though, the blueberries would probably be much better if they stayed in the battle academy longer and had a tutorial guide so they can at least be decent cannon fodder instead of headless chickens. |
ThePrinceOfNigeria
Zumari Force Projection Caldari State
103
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 03:17:00 -
[6] - Quote
Sounds an awful lot like elitist scum talk here... may need to taze you bro. *starts humming the national anthem of twinkyland* AIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!! Attack! |
Michael Arck
Anubis Prime Syndicate
1580
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 03:22:00 -
[7] - Quote
Thurak1 wrote:Sure everyone can afford to play dust since it is free to play. So natural there will be a lot of people which means a lot of ego's and a lot of idea's. Unfortunately this also means a lot of stupid people as well. Free to play games however have been very profitable when done well. I can't remember many right now but there have been several pay to play games that have gone FTP and there are many games that came out as FTP and are profitable. So really going FTP should allow the company to spend more resources on the game to make it even better. They just have to filter through the idea's and realize which ones are good and which ones are best ignored.
It's profitable due to some of the community who is dedicated (the pack buyers and such) while the majority of the community gripes and complains about everything they can get their hands on. From this perspective, it seems like 60 percent complains while 40 percent are dedicated.
So can we say that FTP is being benefited by those who aren't dedicated but those dedicated are, in a sense, exploited by the majority of the community who brings unnecessary complaints which effect the game? The dedicated will support while the others will just bring about their shenanigans for kicks. Due to this, doesn't that affect how the developer can respond to players?
Someone paying me money to correct something, I'm right on it. Some work I do for "free", I'm not that excited to work for. Especially if they're complaining every step of the way.
BTW, I miss the merc pack. |
Chunky Munkey
Amarr Templars Amarr Empire
1833
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 03:24:00 -
[8] - Quote
I wouldn't play Dust if it wasn't f2p. I would never have started. I'm currently approaching 25mil SP and have bought 2 merc packs.
I know this is only a sample size of one, but I'd say players like this are both common and vital to Dust's success. |
Michael Arck
Anubis Prime Syndicate
1580
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 03:25:00 -
[9] - Quote
ThePrinceOfNigeria wrote:Sounds an awful lot like elitist scum talk here... may need to taze you bro. *starts humming the national anthem of twinkyland* AIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!! Attack!
And this is an example right here by this post. He responds to the superficial instead of reading my whole post. How can he claimed to have read my post when he responds superficially to it?
I'm looking for an intellectual discussion here. I didn't know I had to wave a banner that says "Hey, I'm not trying to change it to P2P but does the F2P model affect the overall growing persistence of this game"
I thought you would have figured that out yourself...
It's a broad scope I'm talking here |
Xaviah Reaper
Nyain San
148
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 03:28:00 -
[10] - Quote
I would support making Dust514 P2P, if development was dramatically sped up. I would want to see immediate results from the game becoming P2P. most players i know have aurum items, so i dont see why those people wouldnt throw in some money to keep playing.
maybe we could adopt the EVE way, something related to buying subscription time with ingame currency? we could throw 10m isk a week/month into membership. no new player will gain 10m, but after a month or two, they will be getting close.
thoughts? |
|
Michael Arck
Anubis Prime Syndicate
1580
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 03:38:00 -
[11] - Quote
Xaviah Reaper wrote:I would support making Dust514 P2P, if development was dramatically sped up. I would want to see immediate results from the game becoming P2P. most players i know have aurum items, so i dont see why those people wouldnt throw in some money to keep playing.
maybe we could adopt the EVE way, something related to buying subscription time with ingame currency? we could throw 10m isk a week/month into membership. no new player will gain 10m, but after a month or two, they will be getting close.
thoughts?
I'm not an advocate for it but if it means dedicated development and a filtration of the community, I'm all for it.
It's my theory that the majority of the community harms the development of this game. For instance, a thread was created on where should Dust go next. Should it be core or content? It got me thinking, they've been working on the core for some time. Has the community been at fault for leading CCP down dead end roads because CCP wants to maintain a player base?
If you're paying, you are caring about your investment.
Even reading the EVE forums, the attitude and demeanor over there is much different. Yes, they do have their trolls and some foolishness like every other forum. But the majority of the community there is dedicated. They want the game to continue its growth.
These are just some of the thoughts I've been pushing around in my head. The ups and downs of F2P...
|
Ludvig Enraga
KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION
586
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 03:42:00 -
[12] - Quote
That's total BS. Dust is not an MMO RPG. You only communicate with your corp and only if you want to. Last I checked ppl mostly keep quiet in pubs. So F2P does not push you toward fraternizing with ex-convicts. Also, somehow I don't think that $10 a month is a solid barrier against idiots in video games.
F2P is a curse though for an entirely different reason. F2P means a cheaply made game that sets low expectations and never generates enough revenue to accomplish anything worthwhile. |
Thurak1
Psygod9 D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
317
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 03:47:00 -
[13] - Quote
Michael Arck wrote:Thurak1 wrote:Sure everyone can afford to play dust since it is free to play. So natural there will be a lot of people which means a lot of ego's and a lot of idea's. Unfortunately this also means a lot of stupid people as well. Free to play games however have been very profitable when done well. I can't remember many right now but there have been several pay to play games that have gone FTP and there are many games that came out as FTP and are profitable. So really going FTP should allow the company to spend more resources on the game to make it even better. They just have to filter through the idea's and realize which ones are good and which ones are best ignored. It's profitable due to some of the community who is dedicated (the pack buyers and such) while the majority of the community gripes and complains about everything they can get their hands on. From this perspective, it seems like 60 percent complains while 40 percent are dedicated. So can we say that FTP is being benefited by those who aren't dedicated but those dedicated are, in a sense, exploited by the majority of the community who brings unnecessary complaints which effect the game? The dedicated will support while the others will just bring about their shenanigans for kicks. Due to this, doesn't that affect how the developer can respond to players? Someone paying me money to correct something, I'm right on it. Some work I do for "free", I'm not that excited to work for. Especially if they're complaining every step of the way. BTW, I miss the merc pack. That is one thing that is nice the devs have no idea who is paying and who isn't generally. They simply have to filter out the stupid idea's from the good idea's. What they really need to do often times is to pay attention to trends in the game. Which they do and rather than the forums guiding what gets nerfed and doesnt let the numbers prove it. Being a FTP game allows essentially for many micro transactions I forget how much aurum sells for since i buy packages when i have the money. This allows people to spend even small amounts of money on the game essentially for virtual gear that has an infinite stock. |
Coleman Gray
GunFall Mobilization Covert Intervention
826
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 03:53:00 -
[14] - Quote
Do you feel Dust is good enough at the moment to be retail price? |
Michael Arck
Anubis Prime Syndicate
1580
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 03:54:00 -
[15] - Quote
Ludvig Enraga wrote:That's total BS. Dust is not an MMO RPG. You only communicate with your corp and only if you want to. Last I checked ppl mostly keep quiet in pubs. So F2P does not push you toward fraternizing with ex-convicts. Also, somehow I don't think that $10 a month is a solid barrier against idiots in video games.
F2P is a curse though for an entirely different reason. F2P means a cheaply made game that sets low expectations and never generates enough revenue to accomplish anything worthwhile.
But we are not talking about what qualifies the game as a F2P. So basically you saying that this game was doomed from the start. That's the point I'm making as well. If it was P2P, your sentiments would have been expressed differently. Or you just wouldn't be here, which would leave the dedicated helping to mold the game that both developer and gamer wants in existence.
If the game is "cheaply made" and "setting low expectations", then why do you choose to come to these forums or fight in New Eden? What is your purpose if you play this game begrudgingly? Don't your words effect the enthusiasm of newcomers and members of the community? These are things I consider when I think about how P2P/F2P with Dust.
LOL @ ex convicts? Uh what? |
Michael Arck
Anubis Prime Syndicate
1580
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 03:57:00 -
[16] - Quote
Coleman Gray wrote:Do you feel Dust is good enough at the moment to be retail price?
Honestly, I've played David Cage games that are shorter than Dust. Yes I would pay retail price for this game. I rather enjoy immensely. My fiance (love her for her understanding) knows just how much because she sees me right in front of that TV screen with KBM and DS3 playing Dust almost daily. |
Thurak1
Psygod9 D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
318
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 04:23:00 -
[17] - Quote
Coleman Gray wrote:Do you feel Dust is good enough at the moment to be retail price? Given that on average a new ps3 game sells for 50$ I dont honestly think that dust would get me to spend 50$ on it. The graphics are OK but not great and the game itself isnt even 1080 format either. I would pay 30$ for it but not 50$ and i defiantly would not pay a subscription. |
Hellkeizer
The Avutora Complex
157
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 04:44:00 -
[18] - Quote
Well if dust had discs, I would've probably have given it back to Gamestop or something like that. If it was only downloadable I wouldv'e been screwed |
Cosgar
ParagonX
6132
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 04:45:00 -
[19] - Quote
Coleman Gray wrote:Do you feel Dust is good enough at the moment to be retail price? I used a free $20 PSN credit on this game and feel ripped off... |
Xaviah Reaper
Nyain San
154
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 21:50:00 -
[20] - Quote
Michael Arck wrote:Xaviah Reaper wrote:I would support making Dust514 P2P, if development was dramatically sped up. I would want to see immediate results from the game becoming P2P. most players i know have aurum items, so i dont see why those people wouldnt throw in some money to keep playing.
maybe we could adopt the EVE way, something related to buying subscription time with ingame currency? we could throw 10m isk a week/month into membership. no new player will gain 10m, but after a month or two, they will be getting close.
thoughts? I'm not an advocate for it but if it means dedicated development and a filtration of the community, I'm all for it. It's my theory that the majority of the community harms the development of this game. For instance, a thread was created on where should Dust go next. Should it be core or content? It got me thinking, they've been working on the core for some time. Has the community been at fault for leading CCP down dead end roads because CCP wants to maintain a player base? If you're paying, you are caring about your investment. Even reading the EVE forums, the attitude and demeanor over there is much different. Yes, they do have their trolls and some foolishness like every other forum. But the majority of the community there is dedicated. They want the game to continue its growth. These are just some of the thoughts I've been pushing around in my head. The ups and downs of F2P...
i'd rather a whole load of broken content opposed to one perfect aspect of the game. Getting very bored |
|
First Prophet
Unkn0wn Killers
1276
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 22:08:00 -
[21] - Quote
Michael Arck wrote:Coleman Gray wrote:Do you feel Dust is good enough at the moment to be retail price? Honestly, I've played David Cage games. Well there's your problem. |
ThePrinceOfNigeria
Zumari Force Projection Caldari State
109
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 22:21:00 -
[22] - Quote
Michael Arck wrote:ThePrinceOfNigeria wrote:Sounds an awful lot like elitist scum talk here... may need to taze you bro. *starts humming the national anthem of twinkyland* AIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!! Attack! And this is an example right here by this post. He responds to the superficial instead of reading my whole post. How can he claimed to have read my post when he responds superficially to it? I'm looking for an intellectual discussion here. I didn't know I had to wave a banner that says "Hey, I'm not trying to change it to P2P but does the F2P model affect the overall growing persistence of this game" I thought you would have figured that out yourself... It's a broad scope I'm talking here
I think you took my super serious post too seriously brah... like serious n' stuffGäó |
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll
Osmon Surveillance Caldari State
257
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 22:21:00 -
[23] - Quote
They don't have the developer force nor the speed required to make his P2P. They have to develop it as a F2P. |
Horse Schitt
Turalyon 514 Turalyon Alliance
25
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 22:32:00 -
[24] - Quote
Eve has been always been pay to play, and it's economy is based entirely around that. Making it free to play would destroy balance and ruin the game for a long ass time.
Dust is free to play, and hopefully will always be. I'm sure this will present challenges with these two games having the same economy, but is it a curse? Nah. I think it's just a feature. |
Phazoid
The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY
61
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 22:57:00 -
[25] - Quote
the deal with F2P games is they are available to everyone, and "Veterans" complain about that, but free to play give everyone the fair chance to play, and player looking to boost their experience invest on the game |
Operative 1171 Aajli
Bragian Order Amarr Empire
619
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 23:04:00 -
[26] - Quote
Yes and yes. I have discovered what ppl from EVE were claiming. The console community is a generally lower quality player base. Yes to moving this to the PC.
Free to play adds to the lol factor of this game. No investment means no responsibility which means no respect. Ppl just troll the game and in turn ppl like me that would otherwise take the game more seriously just say F it and dabble with it for general enjoyment. Having to pay a monthly fee would keep out the rabble (usually the young ppl that need daddy's credit card to play).
Oh well, whatcha gonna do? They warned us PC folk about the fast twitch FPS GTA morons. I stay because I like the world and backstory CCP has created and I like ground warfare. I esp like sci-fi based ground warfare.
You've already got ppl tearing this game down to a pissing contest about kd/r and usefulness judged on just hacking a stupid objective. This game was supposed to be more than that and the EVE connection was supposed to do that. If CCP were truthful those promotional cgi videos would be vastly different. Seriously, do you see any hacking going on in those videos? |
Michael Arck
Anubis Prime Syndicate
1585
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 23:59:00 -
[27] - Quote
First Prophet wrote: Well there's your problem.
LOL I don't see one. I like to game. I'm not specifically tied to one genre or mainstream gaming. If I like it and I feel its worth it, I will pay for the experience
ThePrinceOfNigeria wrote:
I think you took my super serious post too seriously brah... like serious n' stuffGäó
Well I can be a serious guy. Especially when I like to have discussions on different topics.
Operative 1171 Aajli wrote:Yes and yes. I have discovered what ppl from EVE were claiming. The console community is a generally lower quality player base. Yes to moving this to the PC.
Free to play adds to the lol factor of this game. No investment means no responsibility which means no respect. Ppl just troll the game and in turn ppl like me that would otherwise take the game more seriously just say F it and dabble with it for general enjoyment. Having to pay a monthly fee would keep out the rabble (usually the young ppl that need daddy's credit card to play).
Oh well, whatcha gonna do? They warned us PC folk about the fast twitch FPS GTA morons. I stay because I like the world and backstory CCP has created and I like ground warfare. I esp like sci-fi based ground warfare.
You've already got ppl tearing this game down to a pissing contest about kd/r and usefulness judged on just hacking a stupid objective. This game was supposed to be more than that and the EVE connection was supposed to do that. If CCP were truthful those promotional cgi videos would be vastly different. Seriously, do you see any hacking going on in those videos?
I agree with some things of your post. For starters, I wouldn't want it to go PC because I'm not a PC gamer. I have always been drawn to console gaming since my youth. Also about the promotional videos, its concept. Its not uncommon nor odd that developers create "a vision" of what they would like to bring. The execution always stray from that as reality of what can be done and how it can be brought to the console platform changes over time.
But I agree with everything else. F2P just brings about the troll creatures, it seems. I wouldn't mind paying subscription because I know how console gamers are and also paid subscriptions automatically help fund the project. Not only that but its a monetary symbol that the gamer wants to be a part of the experience. Not just some gamer who enters the game because its free to play and seeks to disrupt the experience of others. The majority of console gamers seem to have this mentality that the developers should submit to their demands and if not, its ultimate death for the team, for lack of better terms. (I.E. The community's take on CCP Shanghai post in this forum) We can police the developers but we cannot police ourselves?
I remember playing Atari and getting my butt whooped because the game cheated me often. Did we cry about it back then? No, we sought ways to beat the developers' pixelated hell. Nowadays, games have gotten easier with hand holding and such. Gamers were praising Demon's Souls for its difficulty as if it was the first to do it. Yet games were like that, before internet gave the power of anonymity to gamers who spat venom from their keyboards with their threatening petitions all because they refused to adapt and overcome.
Even with Dust 514, people complained about the difficulty of this universe, especially for the new players. Oddly enough, its difficulty and "no holds barred" type aspect is what attracted me to it, along with the science fiction lore. Me getting my butt whooped in New Eden was a bitter taste. But I wasn't going to let it "beat" me, so the grind began as I learned from my mistakes and still seek to improve. Why can't the gamer be challenged?
My fault for going off on a tangent. I just can't help but take a step back and wonder at the possibilities of P2P and the conduct of the community at times. I know EVE is different for so many reasons but I would like to see more dedication from the community like EVE players are with EVE. Less whining and more cohesive, constructive and objective opinions. And it makes me wonder often, if it was P2P, would that be easier realized?
All in all, thanks to all who responded and offered their input on this topic
|
Dunk Mujunk
RestlessSpirits
156
|
Posted - 2013.10.19 00:35:00 -
[28] - Quote
I would not mind a P2P model at all. Been playing for 3 months and I enjoy the game enough to pay.
As long as lag switching and glitch exploitation are punished immediately and severely. I'm talking if you get caught lag switching and or exploiting a glitch 1 time, you are out. Forever.
I don't know how much lag switching is really going on. There are players and Corps who I am convinced are doing these things, but I of course don't really know, and can't prove it, so I generally keep my thoughts to myself.
But if I am going to pay a monthly fee to play, CCP would have to actually uphold their EULA and start banning people. Before they even switched to P2P.
Unfortunately, as many have brought up before, with the games health what it is, CCP cannot afford to lose any players, thus the naughtiness is over looked.
So, unfortunately, no to P2P. Dust is already riddled with STDs (that's Sexually Transmitted Diseases, not Standard) that will be with it forever. CCP would really have to put in some serious work and make some serious examples of people before I started paying every month to play.
|
Summ Dude
Militaires-Sans-Frontieres
67
|
Posted - 2013.10.19 01:17:00 -
[29] - Quote
I think that this video kinda says a lot about the subject. But on the topic of being P2P keeping out 'the riff-raff', just look at CoD on the 360. It costs $60+ upfront plus that Xbox live monthly subscription. And does any of that really help to keep the community not dickish? |
Yelhsa Jin-Mao
Mannar Focused Warfare Gallente Federation
35
|
Posted - 2013.10.19 01:53:00 -
[30] - Quote
Xaviah Reaper wrote:I would support making Dust514 P2P, if development was dramatically sped up. I would want to see immediate results from the game becoming P2P. most players i know have aurum items, so i dont see why those people wouldnt throw in some money to keep playing.
maybe we could adopt the EVE way, something related to buying subscription time with ingame currency? we could throw 10m isk a week/month into membership. no new player will gain 10m, but after a month or two, they will be getting close.
thoughts?
KILL YOURSELF!
I've already spent over -ú150.00 on this game buying packs, and I would likely Nuke CCP and all of Iceland If I had to pay to then access that content! |
|
Michael Arck
Anubis Prime Syndicate
1589
|
Posted - 2013.10.19 07:25:00 -
[31] - Quote
Summ Dude wrote:I think that this video kinda says a lot about the subject. But on the topic of being P2P keeping out 'the riff-raff', just look at CoD on the 360. It costs $60+ upfront plus that Xbox live monthly subscription. And does any of that really help to keep the community not dickish?
yes I think it would still. That's COD. This is Dust 514. Gamers won't make that gamble. Xbox charges you for MP access in it's entirety. A monthly sub for access to one game's MP is another story actually. Especially when you factor in the glaring differences in detail when you hold those two in comparison. |
Operative 1171 Aajli
Bragian Order Amarr Empire
620
|
Posted - 2013.10.19 11:23:00 -
[32] - Quote
Michael Arck wrote:First Prophet wrote: Well there's your problem.
LOL I don't see one. I like to game. I'm not specifically tied to one genre or mainstream gaming. If I like it and I feel its worth it, I will pay for the experience ThePrinceOfNigeria wrote:
I think you took my super serious post too seriously brah... like serious n' stuffGäó
Well I can be a serious guy. Especially when I like to have discussions on different topics. Operative 1171 Aajli wrote:Yes and yes. I have discovered what ppl from EVE were claiming. The console community is a generally lower quality player base. Yes to moving this to the PC.
Free to play adds to the lol factor of this game. No investment means no responsibility which means no respect. Ppl just troll the game and in turn ppl like me that would otherwise take the game more seriously just say F it and dabble with it for general enjoyment. Having to pay a monthly fee would keep out the rabble (usually the young ppl that need daddy's credit card to play).
Oh well, whatcha gonna do? They warned us PC folk about the fast twitch FPS GTA morons. I stay because I like the world and backstory CCP has created and I like ground warfare. I esp like sci-fi based ground warfare.
You've already got ppl tearing this game down to a pissing contest about kd/r and usefulness judged on just hacking a stupid objective. This game was supposed to be more than that and the EVE connection was supposed to do that. If CCP were truthful those promotional cgi videos would be vastly different. Seriously, do you see any hacking going on in those videos? I agree with some things of your post. For starters, I wouldn't want it to go PC because I'm not a PC gamer. I have always been drawn to console gaming since my youth. Also about the promotional videos, its concept. Its not uncommon nor odd that developers create "a vision" of what they would like to bring. The execution always stray from that as reality of what can be done and how it can be brought to the console platform changes over time. But I agree with everything else. F2P just brings about the troll creatures, it seems. I wouldn't mind paying subscription because I know how console gamers are and also paid subscriptions automatically help fund the project. Not only that but its a monetary symbol that the gamer wants to be a part of the experience. Not just some gamer who enters the game because its free to play and seeks to disrupt the experience of others. The majority of console gamers seem to have this mentality that the developers should submit to their demands and if not, its ultimate death for the team, for lack of better terms. (I.E. The community's take on CCP Shanghai post in this forum) We can police the developers but we cannot police ourselves? I remember playing Atari and getting my butt whooped because the game cheated me often. Did we cry about it back then? No, we sought ways to beat the developers' pixelated hell. Nowadays, games have gotten easier with hand holding and such. Gamers were praising Demon's Souls for its difficulty as if it was the first to do it. Yet games were like that, before internet gave the power of anonymity to gamers who spat venom from their keyboards with their threatening petitions all because they refused to adapt and overcome. Even with Dust 514, people complained about the difficulty of this universe, especially for the new players. Oddly enough, its difficulty and "no holds barred" type aspect is what attracted me to it, along with the science fiction lore. Me getting my butt whooped in New Eden was a bitter taste. But I wasn't going to let it "beat" me, so the grind began as I learned from my mistakes and still seek to improve. Why can't the gamer be challenged? My fault for going off on a tangent. I just can't help but take a step back and wonder at the possibilities of P2P and the conduct of the community at times. I know EVE is different for so many reasons but I would like to see more dedication from the community like EVE players are with EVE. Less whining and more cohesive, constructive and objective opinions. And it makes me wonder often, if it was P2P, would that be easier realized? All in all, thanks to all who responded and offered their input on this topic
Speaking of Atari, this game is at E.T. Level atm. Lol. |
Crash Monster
Snipers Anonymous
1690
|
Posted - 2013.10.19 11:34:00 -
[33] - Quote
Michael Arck wrote:Now this isn't a "I'm pointing my finger at you" type of thread. I just wanted to get a discussion going. Is the F2P model hurting Dust? Does F2P inevitably opens it doors to riff raff aka trollers and short term gamers? If it were subscription based, what would be the difference?
Express yourself and lets hear what you have to say
I'm late to the party... but this sounds like a player segregation model to me.
If you pay a monthly subscription, instead of just being a free to pay account, then you can play in the subscriber only sandbox as well as the F2P sandbox.
Of course, provide slightly higher rewards or salvage rates as well as posting privileges to subscriber only forums. Allow the free players to read those forums but not contribute.
Make sure it isn't pay to win in any capacity.
Finally, release new content into the subscriber pool a release before it shows up in the free pool.
Optional self-segregation that raises income... |
Dunk Mujunk
RestlessSpirits
159
|
Posted - 2013.10.19 11:40:00 -
[34] - Quote
Nowhere near enough players to justify both models. |
Crash Monster
Snipers Anonymous
1690
|
Posted - 2013.10.19 12:12:00 -
[35] - Quote
Dunk Mujunk wrote:Nowhere near enough players to justify both models.
We'd need PVE to help compensate for low player count... though PVE alone would probably help build player base if done reasonably well. |
Dunk Mujunk
RestlessSpirits
162
|
Posted - 2013.10.19 16:04:00 -
[36] - Quote
You know, I wasn't a big supporter of PvE being a possible saver for Dust, but then I started playing Eve, and yeah. Not sure how much PvE I would do personally (if any), but I do feel now that could give Dust a nice boost.
|
A'Real Fury
D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
389
|
Posted - 2013.10.19 17:41:00 -
[37] - Quote
Aurum & Packs - there is a big difference between choosing to buy something and being required to pay I.e. subscriptions.
I would think that the people on the forums make up the minority of the people who play the game. So stating how bad the community is based on what goes on in the forums may not be the strongest base to stand on.
They may exist but I can not remember any subscription based FPS games. However, think of it in these terms how many games out there that are similar to Eve and how many are similar to Dust. I believe if you are being honest you would say there are far more games that fall into the same gaming bracket, Online FPS, than for Eve. As such Dust faces far more competition than Eve and paid products being produced are far more complete than Dust.
Finally, I believe you would loose more than 80% of the player base if CCP required current players to make a one off -ú50 payment, for a disc, and even more players if they wanted a subscription. The 80% is just my guess and I only used it to indicate what you have suggested is very high risk and could in fact destroy a game we both enjoy.
Requiring players to pay money would raise the barrier for entry to this game to high. Paying money increases expectations and if you think backlash is bad now it would be far worse with a higher price tag. |
Michael Arck
Anubis Prime Syndicate
1594
|
Posted - 2013.10.20 01:18:00 -
[38] - Quote
A'Real Fury wrote: I would think that the people on the forums make up the minority of the people who play the game. So stating how bad the community is based on what goes on in the forums may not be the strongest base to stand on.
Point taken. Though I do understand it raises the barrier, in fact, that's what I was thinking about and how it could possibly be a plus for the game. It could have good and bad points. I didn't quote overall what you posted but I did like what you posted. You have a solid opinion. Thanks for commenting. |
Thurak1
Psygod9 D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
324
|
Posted - 2013.10.20 06:45:00 -
[39] - Quote
Summ Dude wrote:I think that this video kinda says a lot about the subject. But on the topic of being P2P keeping out 'the riff-raff', just look at CoD on the 360. It costs $60+ upfront plus that Xbox live monthly subscription. And does any of that really help to keep the community not dickish? Awesome video. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |