J-Lewis
Edimmu Warfighters
Gallente Federation
99
   |
Posted - 2013.05.22 21:02:00 -
[2] - Quote
xxMERIDAxx wrote:J-Lewis wrote:J'Hiera wrote:It's not P2W by gaining skill points faster.
P2W is defined by spending real money to get an advantage people who don't spend real money, can't achieve.
Good thing we don't have infinite free use gear then! Oh wait... BPOs...  Oops :ccp: BPOs are crap,Free sure but useless all the same. All BPOs have a in gamematch for the most part anyhow.Uesing Aur gear gives you no real advantage because the matchmakeing in game will toss players with 1mill sp and 10 mill sp into the same pub matchs.Dust is just a brutal game for new players no amount of real money helps that and Vets dont use BPOs or Aur stuff to stomp when all the top gear costs ISK.
The advantage isn't in the quality of the gear; it's in what it exempts you from: the economy. In other words, when you use BPO gear, you are not risking anything. Additionally, the standard gear that some BPOs are based on will become undesirable for production should we eventually get manufacturing of some sort. Death is meaningless in a BPO suit, and that is against the design principles of New Eden.
Here's an interesting quote from CCP Soundwave at Fanfest 2013 -- I've underlined the principles that BPOs violate to some extent:
Game Design - Balancing Tears and Laughter: CCP Soundwave gave a talk about 9 game design principles that ideally guide CCP's development process. In order of presentation...
CCP Soundwave wrote:
1. "No game should be more complex than it absolutely needs to be to meet its goals."
2. "A good feature can be based on positive or negative interaction, neither is inherently more valuable."
3. "Other players will always be more interesting, for longer, than designed experiences. Give players tools to maximize the variety and impact of their decisions."
4. "Every system should affect, and be affected by, the wider world."
5. "Here are the tools, do something cool with them."
6. "The social experience is more important than the practical system balance; the interaction between winners and losers is more interesting than mechanical equality."
7. "Interactions should be reaching out and touching, more than reading numbers."
8. "Things in the world need to make sense."
9. "Players are not entitled to success. The most aspirational goals are coveted by many but reached by few."
Here's my reasoning behind each of those 5 violations:
3. Players cannot impact BPO users in any meaningful way through direct game play; beyond ruining their KDR and rage mailing.
4. BPOs are immune to being affected by the wider world, however they also affect the wider world.
6. BPOs water down the interactions between winners and losers by reducing or removing the impact of loss for the BPO user.
8. BPOs do not make sense; there is no cost associated with their continued use. In a universe that runs on consumption and a cycle of destruction, BPOs break the cycle at both the loss, and creation stage.
9. Players are not entitled to success. BPOs guarantee that regardless of the outcome of the match, you will have made a profit; kill board is green, OP success. Doesn't matter if you don't run with a squad; doesn't matter if you die 50 times. Success is measured in ISK, and what that ISK enables, because ISK makes the world go round.
I'll also add that BPO gear is far from useless; I've personally gone 27/9 with that stuff (against prototype squads I might add), add to that that those 9 deaths hardly cost me anything, if at all (say, because I used BPOs). It's an anecdotal fallacy so I won't continue down that path, but suffice to say that succeeding in BPO gear is more than possible, and regardless of match outcome, 100% of the reward is profit -- in other words, there is no risk factor. |