|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Cat Merc
Fatal Absolution
General Tso's Alliance
15001
   |
Posted - 2015.02.07 22:27:00 -
[1] - Quote
*Licks his furr*
Eww, too much touchy feely, got to get clean of this.
Also, reached 15k likes.
Yay
Cat Merc for C¦¦P¦¦M¦¦9¦¦ CPM Nyan!
Vote 'Keshava' for the new Gallente vehicle name!
|
Cat Merc
Fatal Absolution
General Tso's Alliance
15016
|
Posted - 2015.02.08 13:38:00 -
[2] - Quote
I would have to reiterate a point that Pokey brought up, Kevall.
We only have 5 subsystems, and it takes 3 years (From estimations flying around) to max it out.
3 years for 5 subsystems out of 14.
Isn't that asking for slightly too much?
Let's compare it to the SP system.
Within 2 years of playing this game, I have every single weapon to Proto level, I have my core skills maxed out and I have nearly every single Gallente suit to Prototype level.
That's within 2 years, I have nearly maxed out infantry gear I want, and maxed out my specific specialization (Gallente Assault).
And that's mostly boosted passive, I almost never ever cap, I don't even remember the last time I did (aside from the current bug).
Some players have nearly double my SP at this point.
And the biggest insult to injury is that with just 100 dollars (Again, from estimations I've seen flying around), you can bypass it all.
3 years bypassed with 100 dollars.
3 years.
To top it all off, this timer locks us from getting a 5% damage boost and Experimental/Officer gear (Kane tells us daily about what he got from the lab, officer gear is common), and you can see why people are not exactly happy.
What we have now should not even take half the time, and Aurum should only boost the speed, not make it instant.
You cannot stretch out this tiny amount of content over 3 years, this is ridiculous.
Cat Merc for C¦¦P¦¦M¦¦9¦¦ CPM Nyan!
Vote 'Keshava' for the new Gallente vehicle name!
|
Cat Merc
Fatal Absolution
General Tso's Alliance
15030
|
Posted - 2015.02.08 20:54:00 -
[3] - Quote
Jaysyn Larrisen wrote:Kevall, pokey, et all...
"Saying it is so over and over again simply does not make it so." Please note that this ascertation could equally be applied to your (Kevall's) definition of P2W and areas of commentary.
Honestly I'm all for a healthy monetization of Dust. Healthy is a somewhat defined by where you sit in the process and most of the concern is being genereated by those in the customer side of the equation. As Pokey noted a component of this is transparency...just a bit of plain up front communication.
I'm personally at the point where I think would simply prefer a subscription similar to what I pay for with my EVE accounts as far as monetization models. The shaping and alignment of the game to the current monetization model is quite indicative of many of the things that drove me away from quite a few other games. I'm fairly confident with positive interaction (in both directions) there can be an optimal solution arrived at for some model.
I'm re-evaluating my level of support to Dust 514 - no this isn't a "fix mah stuffz or I'll quit!" type comment. I have no more information than the average player that pays attention to goings on and that's the sum of data / information that I can base decisions on as a customer. I don't have the inside baseball of the CPM and the Dust Dev team as good as they are in communicating about granular in-game matters rarely communicate about the game in longer term matters. To Rattati's credit, I honestly believe he would be a quite transparent and forthright if he were allowed to do so.
I'm simply stating that I'm personally not prepared to put real money down, particularly in the current monetization structure, based on the overall information environment. This is juxtaposed by my desire to actually support the game that I do sincerely wish gets off the ground as we all wanted it to.
You have summed up my feelings pretty well.
Cat Merc for C¦¦P¦¦M¦¦9¦¦ CPM Nyan!
Vote 'Keshava' for the new Gallente vehicle name!
|
Cat Merc
Fatal Absolution
General Tso's Alliance
15030
|
Posted - 2015.02.08 20:56:00 -
[4] - Quote
MINA Longstrike wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:Kevall Longstride wrote:Thanks again to Pokey for his continued feedback.
The CPM and CCP are already having detailed discussion as to how the system can be iterated upon to address the legitimate concerns that some have expressed. We will hopefully be able to speak more as to those discussions once an agreed course of action is in place. Good to hear. Maintain transparency and people will be far nicer to you guys and CCP  EDIT: Also note that while I am aware that you can get components to drop randomly...that's too reliant on RNG. There needs to be a way to consistently generate a slow but steady flow of components from playing the game. If you want to keep the large chunk of components as a random drop, that's fine by me. I had a conversation with a friend about this last night, and one of his initial reactions was based upon the premise of generating one warbarge component per minute of gameplay. It sounded crazy at first, that someone who played for five hours worth of matches straight could get 300 components, but then after a bit of thought he went "Well, not everyone plays that much... and those that do are actually very invested in the game". It would feel much like the current SP system where your character growth is largely determined by your actions as a player. Even if it was two thirds of that (one component for every 1m30s in match) to prevent 'grinding' it would still feel relevant and meaningful to your growth as a player for actually PLAYING the game.
If you actually do the math, it's still incredibly slow.
Not even the SP system is that slow.
50 components a match is honestly closer to the SP system.
Cat Merc for C¦¦P¦¦M¦¦9¦¦ CPM Nyan!
Vote 'Keshava' for the new Gallente vehicle name!
|
|
|
| |
|