First, I am a stand up guy...
Second, I have played games for around 30 years so I would say that qualifies me to know what I do and do not like. Simply stating my opinion like everyone else.
I would be willing to bet that true fans of original EQ and or Vanguard, which has a lot to do with the reason Pantheon is being created, are most likely going to be against cash shops. It is definitely a modern trend in MMOs that make obtaining trivial perks immediate (cash shops), and the main reason is because people are not loyal to one game anymore. So games have to gain funds anyway they can to be profitable and keep the game alive as long as they can. It is MUCH more competitive these days as we all know.
Look. if later in the game I am really liking it, and VR decided they had to do certain things via cash shop to keep current team / functions in place, I am all for it... I just hope they look at other technology or means of donations first before offering to buy things we can use in game via the cash shop.
Pyye
Pyye said:First, I am a stand up guy...Second, I have played games for around 30 years so I would say that qualifies me to know what I do and do not like. Simply stating my opinion like everyone else.
I don't think anyone was questioning whether or not you do or don't like anything. I'm questioning you about your underlying reasoning. Everyone has opinions. Justification becomes more important than anything else when forming a coherent argument for a position.
Pyye said:I would be willing to bet that true fans of original EQ and or Vanguard, which has a lot to do with the reason Pantheon is being created, are most likely going to be against cash shops. It is definitely a modern trend in MMOs that make obtaining trivial perks immediate (cash shops), and the main reason is because people are not loyal to one game anymore. So games have to gain funds anyway they can to be profitable and keep the game alive as long as they can. It is MUCH more competitive these days as we all know.
This paragraph starts out with a "no true scotsman". I don't really appreciate being called a non-true fan of EQ and Vanguard.
I also think this is a vast oversimplification. Where is the evidence that cash shops and game loyalty have a correlation? Cash shops provide additional revenue for companies, that much can't really be disputed. If anything, this supports the position that Pantheon should have a cash shop, because of the highly competitive landscape of modern gaming and the need for funding to stay afloat.
Pyye said:Look. if later in the game I am really liking it, and VR decided they had to do certain things via cash shop to keep current team / functions in place, I am all for it... I just hope they look at other technology or means of donations first before offering to buy things we can use in game via the cash shop.Pyye
Donations aren't really going to compel any meaningful income when people are already paying a subscription. People need an incentive to spend money. That said, I still haven't seen anything that addresses why cash shops are specifically bad, as opposed to their implementation. Implementation is everything.
Liav said:Pyye said:First, I am a stand up guy...Second, I have played games for around 30 years so I would say that qualifies me to know what I do and do not like. Simply stating my opinion like everyone else.
I don't think anyone was questioning whether or not you do or don't like anything. I'm questioning you about your underlying reasoning. Everyone has opinions. Justification becomes more important than anything else when forming a coherent argument for a position.
Pyye said:I would be willing to bet that true fans of original EQ and or Vanguard, which has a lot to do with the reason Pantheon is being created, are most likely going to be against cash shops. It is definitely a modern trend in MMOs that make obtaining trivial perks immediate (cash shops), and the main reason is because people are not loyal to one game anymore. So games have to gain funds anyway they can to be profitable and keep the game alive as long as they can. It is MUCH more competitive these days as we all know.This paragraph starts out with a "no true scotsman". I don't really appreciate being called a non-true fan of EQ and Vanguard.
I also think this is a vast oversimplification. Where is the evidence that cash shops and game loyalty have a correlation? Cash shops provide additional revenue for companies, that much can't really be disputed. If anything, this supports the position that Pantheon should have a cash shop, because of the % highly competitive landscape of modern gaming and the need for funding to stay afloat.
Pyye said:Look. if later in the game I am really liking it, and VR decided they had to do certain things via cash shop to keep current team / functions in place, I am all for it... I just hope they look at other technology or means of donations first before offering to buy things we can use in game via the cash shop.Pyye
Donations aren't really going to compel any meaningful income when people are already paying a subscription. People need an incentive to spend money. That said, I still haven't seen anything that addresses why cash shops are specifically bad, as opposed to their implementation. Implementation is everything.
Tl;dr- cash shops obviously make money and obviously are 99% of the time game ruiners for anyone who has put time into the game. only game doing it 50% bearable is ffxiv
My underlying reason for not wanting any cash shop whatsoever is that if you don't have one then there is no need to argue what constitutes pay to win because nothing will be sold for cash.
As for my definition of pay to win--anything sold that gives an advantage is pay to win. Sure, it may not be your (general you, not any one person in particular) definition, but I'm not going to argue it with you (again, the general you, not you in particular). Opinions are like...well you know.
Not even a fluff store because if you don't put the temptation in in the first place, there will never come a time where slippery slope becomes a true argument. NO INGAME CASH STORE PLEASE.
Tuhart said:If in the future I want to buy costume items like a pink wizards hat that has absoulty no impact on the way my character plays, why not.
Im happy, VR get some cash, everyone ones.
Because some of us do not want to have to wonder if the "pink wizards hat" was bought or earned... Most of us want to be able to ask in confidence, "Hey, where did you loot or earn that pink wizards hat?" The reason has to do with a mind set while playing the game. Knowing there is no outside influence to game features inside makes you clearly want to get involved with aquiring such stuff, and ask questions about how to obtain them.
Cash shops tend to get out of control and I am not a fan of seeing a flaming death mount that a level 1 is using. That should be a high level mount drop from Raid content.
Now, I would certainly entertain the idea of tradeskills being able to build up to the point where someone could make and sell in game a "pink wizards hat" or similar things. This would fall under the "earned" category and helps the player driven economy inside the game.
Pyye
Some of us want pink wizard hats.!
Some of us will ask did you buy or loot / craft that. it looks awesome we will say, and have an extra interaction with a fellow player. We will hve a chuckle to ourselves as to its silliness and our day will have been made even brighter.
I trust VR, that in the future if they so wish, cash shops of some sort will be managed to the benefit of all.
When I open up my pink wizard Hat stall, you sir / madam will be charged double.
Signed by Some of us.
Pyye said:Tuhart said:If in the future I want to buy costume items like a pink wizards hat that has absoulty no impact on the way my character plays, why not.
Im happy, VR get some cash, everyone ones.
Because some of us do not want to have to wonder if the "pink wizards hat" was bought or earned... Most of us want to be able to ask in confidence, "Hey, where did you loot or earn that pink wizards hat?" The reason has to do with a mind set while playing the game. Knowing there is no outside influence to game features inside makes you clearly want to get involved with aquiring such stuff, and ask questions about how to obtain them.
Cash shops tend to get out of control and I am not a fan of seeing a flaming death mount that a level 1 is using. That should be a high level mount drop from Raid content.
Now, I would certainly entertain the idea of tradeskills being able to build up to the point where someone could make and sell in game a "pink wizards hat" or similar things. This would fall under the "earned" category and helps the player driven economy inside the game.
Pyye
completely agree. Also what someone said above... This game has a monthly fee, cash shop p2w garbage is meant for terrible free to play games.
Liav said:Donations aren't really going to compel any meaningful income when people are already paying a subscription. People need an incentive to spend money. That said, I still haven't seen anything that addresses why cash shops are specifically bad, as opposed to their implementation. Implementation is everything.
You're right - implementation is everything - an internal, in-game cash shop should never be implemented.
I have no idea how you can't see the negative repercussions of a cash shop. Anything that offers an in-game advantage immediately trivializes content/challenges/itemization. You're persistence on timing/implentation is just 100% wrong. In a persistent world with hopefully continued expansions, there is no time-frame where your characters will be permanently maxed level. So, in 6+ months, when an expansion is released, the exp potions that are available trivializes content and challenge. I know you say EXP gain does not equal challenge - but I 100% disagree. Part of the challenge in an MMO is obtaining Max level/AAs whatever that may be, challenge doesn't always have to equate directly to Mob vs Player. If you don't view the "journey" to 50 as part of the challenge then we won't ever agree.
I'd compare the challenge of a 5k race versus a 10k versus a half marathon. All are the same activity, but, you can't argue that a 5k is more challenging than a half marathon. Leveling to 50 is much the same. Yes, you are consistently taking the same action, but if you reduce the time to level in half, than it is easier to obtain max level.
Further, if you're leveing using exp bonuses, you'll be much more likely to bypass level-specific content which again, I want Pantheon to replicate the EQ experience and make it a vast, meangingful world - not a race to end-game.
Offering purchasable in-game items with stats is self-explanatory - as it can trivialize challenge/itemization. You no longer have to "earn" your gear - let's just buy it!
Offering cosmetic items trivializes in-game "comsetic" loot. Especially with those concerned about their character's appearance. If fluff cosmetic gear is going to be in game, then it should be tailor-made, dropped, crafted, etc.
Offering Bank Slots trivializes player economy/inventory management. Part of the difficulty of EQlaunch was the very limited inventory space and the extreme importance of bags. You had to be selective with what you kept.
Offering purchable backpacks/inventory slots/weight reduction backups trivializes a player economy/inventory management. Again see above. Part of the extreme difficult in EQ1 was the balance between selling/encumberance - especially when you were an evil race in a good area. It really added "weight" pun intended, to your choices. Remove all these seemingly small elements and you water down the overall vision.
There are plenty of ways VRI can make additional revenue, i.e. external store selling shirts, sweatshirts, sweaters, coffee mugs, etc., they should most definitely not go down the slippery slope of an in-game cash shop.
As far as supporting the game/supporting a cash shop argument, again, completely bogus. The game I'm supporting is contigent on not having the gimmicky, pay-to-win, convenience options of the current theme park MMOs. I've donated to support an Old-School Subscription model MMO. If Pantheon changes their tune and sells out to a Current-Age Theme Park, F2P, Cash Shop MMO, then it's simple - they most likely wouldn't have my support any longer.
And, you have no proof that donations won't supplement revenue either. There are many people with very large wallets that would pay a premium for the game they want to play. Obviously, I can't support that it will happen, but there's no proof that it would not.
Anything that offers an in-game advantage immediately trivializes content/challenges/itemization.
Yep 100% agree, but thats not what was muted, a cash shop could be a way of raising additional funds as long as anything you could buy did not offer an advantege.(no pay to win)
I want pink wizards hat please.
Tru
x
Tuhart said:Anything that offers an in-game advantage immediately trivializes content/challenges/itemization.
Yep 100% agree, but thats not what was muted, a cash shop could be a way of raising additional funds as long as anything you could buy did not offer an advantege.(no pay to win)
I want pink wizards hat please.
Tru
x
Again - 100% disagreed. See cosmetic items above. If there's a tradeskill that allows for creation of diplomacy gear, appearance gear, etc., then it does trivialize content as it effectively diminishes a trade skill. Let's buy the Pink Wizard Hat from the Cash Shop versus the Wizard Hat from the tailor (and have to dye it Pink). Pay to win in the traditional meaning of adding character power? Maybe not as long as the wizard hat was cosmetic, but it does trivialize aspects of content/gameplay.
Yes, you could argue perhaps that tailoring wouldn't offer Pink Wizard Hats in Pantheon, but if those were ever in-game, they should never be from a cash shop - they should be player-made from in-game crafted materials.
I just wanted to post and clarify our stance on cash shops. In my post, I was being diplomatic and covering all of our options in case we ever wanted or needed to have a cash shop in the future with cosmetic or fluff items for revenue but our stance right now is very clear and I have edited my posts and posts that quoted me to reflect our stance, which is, we will not have a cash shop. :)
My post was made with the mindset of thinking ahead 5-10 years down the track when there may be need for extra revenue, so please don't think we are contemplating this anytime soon, so anyway I wanted to just clarify this quickly before anyone got the wrong idea :)
Raidan said:Liav said:Donations aren't really going to compel any meaningful income when people are already paying a subscription. People need an incentive to spend money. That said, I still haven't seen anything that addresses why cash shops are specifically bad, as opposed to their implementation. Implementation is everything.
You're right - implementation is everything - an internal, in-game cash shop should never be implemented.
I have no idea how you can't see the negative repercussions of a cash shop. Anything that offers an in-game advantage immediately trivializes content/challenges/itemization. You're persistence on timing/implentation is just 100% wrong. In a persistent world with hopefully continued expansions, there is no time-frame where your characters will be permanently maxed level. So, in 6+ months, when an expansion is released, the exp potions that are available trivializes content and challenge. I know you say EXP gain does not equal challenge - but I 100% disagree. Part of the challenge in an MMO is obtaining Max level/AAs whatever that may be, challenge doesn't always have to equate directly to Mob vs Player. If you don't view the "journey" to 50 as part of the challenge then we won't ever agree.
Leveling is going to be largely irrelevant pretty shortly after release. People's characters WILL be permanently maxed level, unless you artificially gate them with some really dumb "you can only earn 1 level per week maximum" mechanic. It's inevitable, it will happen.
Raidan said:I'd compare the challenge of a 5k race versus a 10k versus a half marathon. All are the same activity, but, you can't argue that a 5k is more challenging than a half marathon. Leveling to 50 is much the same. Yes, you are consistently taking the same action, but if you reduce the time to level in half, than it is easier to obtain max level.
A large number of people are going to be max level within a few weeks to a couple months at most. If they wait a year to release exp potions, 90% of the people using them will be using them to level their third alts. Is there a reason your third alt should have to level at the same rate as your main, outside of arbitrarily punishing them because Pantheon is supposed to be "hardcore"?
Raidan said:Further, if you're leveing using exp bonuses, you'll be much more likely to bypass level-specific content which again, I want Pantheon to replicate the EQ experience and make it a vast, meangingful world - not a race to end-game.
It will already be the race to endgame for a lot of players regardless of the existence of experience potions. Delaying their release for several months to a year just makes sure that they aren't a part of the initial push to endgame, which is sufficient in my opinion.
Raidan said:Offering purchasable in-game items with stats is self-explanatory - as it can trivialize challenge/itemization. You no longer have to "earn" your gear - let's just buy it!
I don't think anyone is disputing that.
Raidan said:Offering cosmetic items trivializes in-game "comsetic" loot. Especially with those concerned about their character's appearance. If fluff cosmetic gear is going to be in game, then it should be tailor-made, dropped, crafted, etc.
No it doesn't. In games with cash shops people don't exclusively use appearance gear from the shops. It's just an additional way to keep the art team busy while making money for the game. That said, I don't understand why every single aspect of the game has to have you fighting an uphill battle to achieve a result.
I understand that people want Pantheon to be challenging, but making people go to extreme lengths to play dress-up with their characters seems kind of silly.
Raidan said:Offering Bank Slots trivializes player economy/inventory management. Part of the difficulty of EQlaunch was the very limited inventory space and the extreme importance of bags. You had to be selective with what you kept.
No. No it doesn't. It definitely doesn't. EQ inventory management only served to inconvenience and frustrate. You'd be hard pressed to convince me that it was a valuable feature of the game, or that the economy would have been "trivialized" because I couldn't carry two stacks of bat wings.
The cool part about game economies is that they are trivially scalable. If I can hold two stacks of bat wings instead of one, you can adjust the game to compensate for the extra cash flow instead of putting silly restrictions on inventory management.
There's a reason they removed coin weight from EQ. It's because it sucked and didn't actually serve a purpose aside from occasionally trolling some newb with 10000 copper.
Raidan said:Offering purchable backpacks/inventory slots/weight reduction backups trivializes a player economy/inventory management. Again see above. Part of the extreme difficult in EQ1 was the balance between selling/encumberance - especially when you were an evil race in a good area. It really added "weight" pun intended, to your choices. Remove all these seemingly small elements and you water down the overall vision.
This is just a slippery slope fallacy. Name me one game that has been ruined because of inventory management. In addition to this, I'd like to know why "difficulty" is so often conflated with "frustration". The prevailing attitude here still seems to be that we should just copy EQ mechanics verbatim into a new game engine. There are so many things about EQ that are great, and equally as many that are terrible and should never be done in another game ever. I feel that coin weight and artificially low inventory space is among them.
Raidan said:There are plenty of ways VRI can make additional revenue, i.e. external store selling shirts, sweatshirts, sweaters, coffee mugs, etc., they should most definitely not go down the slippery slope of an in-game cash shop.
It's interesting to me that "slippery slope" is referred to as a viable argument for something when, in reality, the term originated from an error in logic.
There is no evidence that an in-game cash shop is a "slippery slope" to something else. Anti-cash shop mentality is just a bandwagon effect. Once again, I point to EQ and EQ2 which still don't sell anything even remotely approaching "pay2win" after nearly a decade of having the marketplace.
Where is the evidence that a cash shop leads to a failing/bad game?
Raidan said:As far as supporting the game/supporting a cash shop argument, again, completely bogus. The game I'm supporting is contigent on not having the gimmicky, pay-to-win, convenience options of the current theme park MMOs. I've donated to support an Old-School Subscription model MMO. If Pantheon changes their tune and sells out to a Current-Age Theme Park, F2P, Cash Shop MMO, then it's simple - they most likely wouldn't have my support any longer.
Really? The best you can do to criticize a cash shop is to dismiss it as "something only those dumb modern gamers like"?
Raidan said:And, you have no proof that donations won't supplement revenue either. There are many people with very large wallets that would pay a premium for the game they want to play. Obviously, I can't support that it will happen, but there's no proof that it would not.
There is little doubt that donations would technically increase revenue. There is, however, a lot of doubt that it would be enough supplemental revenue to matter.
You can already pay thousands of dollars for advantages with the current founder's pack model, yet I don't hear you complaining about that, only arbitrarily singling out cash shops.
Kilsin said:I just wanted to post and clarify our stance on cash shops. In my post, I was being diplomatic and covering all of our options in case we ever wanted or needed to have a cash shop in the future with cosmetic or fluff items for revenue but our stance right now is very clear and I have edited my posts and posts that quoted me to reflect our stance, which is, we will not have a cash shop. :)
My post was made with the mindset of thinking ahead 5-10 years down the track when there may be need for extra revenue, so please don't think we are contemplating this anytime soon, so anyway I wanted to just clarify this quickly before anyone got the wrong idea :)
Excellent news!!!!
@ Kilsin - Appreciate the clarification and I know the following discussion is a moot point, but I enjoy a nice debate.
@Liav
You asked for counterpoints on why cash shops are bad - I gave them. We obviously don't agree. Debating a topic with you when you claimed there hasn't been any counterpoints given isn't complaining, it's offering rebuttal to your claim. And, before you try to single me out for not discussing the pledge rewards as offering in-game advantages, you may want to try the /search function or look at my message history. I created a thread back in January 2015 and have recently linked it again. It discusses removing the cash shop and any pledge rewards that would offer an in-game advantage. My stance on that is well-known by the developers - this thread was specifically about the cash shop. So yes, I have "complained" to have the pledge rewards removed as well.
https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/1637/pair-of-sprinter-s-boots
If you didnt think inventory management, encumberance, coin weight and other mechanics weren't important - than it really seems you haven't played EQ - at least not at launch. A monk's class was partially defined based off the amount of weight they carried, and, the allowed weight limit increased as you leveled. If you played an evil race but were leveling in Unrest, Crushbone, etc., not having the appropriate faction to sell created a huge issue. It made choosing starting races matter. Encumberance, limited inventory, and coin weight amplified meaningful factions and helped the community. I and many other evil races traded lower level players Copper/Silver for Plat, Bags of Fine steel for X amount of Plat, etc. This also created an advantage of playing a human as they could sell in nearly every city, which offset their racial penalities like night blindness. These weren't frustrating factors - this is what made Everquest feel like a living, breathing world versus a game. Where I will agree with you though is some of the non-stackable materials at launch was overboard and should have been addressed earlier (especially tradeskill materials). And, coin weight was changed for many reasons, but mainly due to people complaining, inflation of plat (was removed around 2008/2009ish?), and 100% coin reduction bags already basically replicating the effect. Either way, it was changed long after the original Vision from EQ was barely existing.
Further, your rebuttal to my points often rephrases my meaning, interjects your own opinions, or ignores points.
1st Example: I said "seemingly small elements" and "water down the overall vision" ref: inventory management, which is a pretty far cry from "ruining the game" as you claimed. The point being, if you water down enough of those seemingly small elements, they add up, and the sum of the elements does ruin and trivialize the game. Inventory management being one of many of those elements.
And to your point - I couldn't name you any game that was ruined, as I haven't seen another game replicate EQ's inventory management. But, I believe my above examples from EQ can at least clarify my opinions on the importance.
2nd Example: You ignore the point in my discussion about the Exp potions being released during newly released expansion timelines. People most likely will have reached the Pantheon Launch level cap of 50 after 6 months (hopefully not 3 weeks, but I'm sure there will be a few), and I agree there will always be people rushing to max level, but even they won't always be maxed unless an expansion never raises a level cap. And, the majority of players aren't power levelers. And hopefully the end-game is ever changing (meaning Pantheon is successful). Look at EQ as an example - the endgame has changed for almost 17 years. And for the record, I don't want artifical restrictions on leveling, which when the Rights of Passage system was first annouced here as a possible leveling gate - I was highly skeptical of it.
Also, I'm not aganist offering an advantage to alts - I would just like it to make sense in the game world, not by external purchases. I'm not aganist controlled twinking based off skill/level caps (see MMORPG threads) that make sense or think of a more controlled EQ1 system that had damage caps at 10/20 etc., so your 2nd/3rd alt would still level quicker.
3rd Example: In my critique of the cash shop, I didn't single out modern MMO gamers. I was describing the game I pledged for - Pantheon, which was announced as a challenging, subscription based MMO. It did have a psuedo cash shop to start, which I was firmly aganist, and it has been removed. I never said "dumb modern gamers" - that's your interpretation. If Pantheon turned that direction of the current theme park MMO, it's fine, I'm sure many would still play, but I most likely would no longer support it.
If you don't think EQ's current cash shop doesn't sell anything Pay to win, then we may never agree. I quit EQ after nearly 15 years of off and on play, because the cash shop/game was extremely overboard gifting Heroic Characters, AAs, purchasable exp potions, etc. I only remained during that time due to the challenge and the ever-dangling carrot. That carrot became much less meaningful when nearly 1/3 of my character's advancement was gifted to players (and that was a nearly maxed player at the time). I stopped leveling alts with the annoucement as the "gifted" characters would have had more AAs than my alts - why level them at that point? Admittedly, it wasn't the only reason, but it was a major one as character advancement was one of the defining elements of EQ for me.
Again, it just appears that we disagree, which is ok, but I won't be convinced that a cash shop won't be detrimental and it appears that you won't either that it will be.
Raidan said:You asked for counterpoints on why cash shops are bad - I gave them. We obviously don't agree. Debating a topic with you when you claimed there hasn't been any counterpoints given isn't complaining, it's offering rebuttal to your claim. And, before you try to single me out for not discussing the pledge rewards as offering in-game advantages, you may want to try the /search function or look at my message history. I created a thread back in January 2015 and have recently linked it again. It discusses removing the cash shop and any pledge rewards that would offer an in-game advantage. My stance on that is well-known by the developers - this thread was specifically about the cash shop. So yes, I have "complained" to have the pledge rewards removed as well.
Alright, but then it just becomes a semantics argument about what constitutes an in-game advantage. Do you consider alpha access to be an in-game advantage worth removing? What specific things offered do you actually feel constitute an advantage worth removing?
See, "advantage" is an extremely broad term that encompasses a lot of offered things. I'm not convinced that they should all be treated equally and tossed out without individual consideration.
Raidan said:If you didnt think inventory management, encumberance, coin weight and other mechanics weren't important - than it really seems you haven't played EQ - at least not at launch. A monk's class was partially defined based off the amount of weight they carried, and, the allowed weight limit increased as you leveled. If you played an evil race but were leveling in Unrest, Crushbone, etc., not having the appropriate faction to sell created a huge issue. It made choosing starting races matter. Encumberance, limited inventory, and coin weight amplified meaningful factions and helped the community. I and many other evil races traded lower level players Copper/Silver for Plat, Bags of Fine steel for X amount of Plat, etc. This also created an advantage of playing a human as they could sell in nearly every city, which offset their racial penalities like night blindness. These weren't frustrating factors - this is what made Everquest feel like a living, breathing world versus a game. Where I will agree with you though is some of the non-stackable materials at launch was overboard and should have been addressed earlier (especially tradeskill materials). And, coin weight was changed for many reasons, but mainly due to people complaining, inflation of plat (was removed around 2008/2009ish?), and 100% coin reduction bags already basically replicating the effect. Either way, it was changed long after the original Vision from EQ was barely existing.
I've played EQ since 2001, ironically, I mained a Monk as well. I'm aware of how the weight mechanics work.
We've established a few things. Encumberance existed, yep. Coin weight existed, yep. Were they important to monitor in gameplay, as in, your gameplay experience would be bad if you didn't? Sure.
None of these really do well to convinced me that it SHOULD have existed, though. Vanguard didn't have coin weight, neither did EQ2. Neither game suffered for not having such an annoying mechanic.
Raidan said:Further, your rebuttal to my points often rephrases my meaning, interjects your own opinions, or ignores points.1st Example: I said "seemingly small elements" and "water down the overall vision" ref: inventory management, which is a pretty far cry from "ruining the game" as you claimed. The point being, if you water down enough of those seemingly small elements, they add up, and the sum of the elements does ruin and trivialize the game. Inventory management being one of many of those elements.
This is still a "slippery slope" argument. Not to mention the biased choice of words, "water down", that only serves to show that you're married to your position.
Raidan said:And to your point - I couldn't name you any game that was ruined, as I haven't seen another game replicate EQ's inventory management. But, I believe my above examples from EQ can at least clarify my opinions on the importance.2nd Example: You ignore the point in my discussion about the Exp potions being released during newly released expansion timelines. People most likely will have reached the Pantheon Launch level cap of 50 after 6 months (hopefully not 3 weeks, but I'm sure there will be a few), and I agree there were always be people rushing to max level, but even they won't always be maxed unless an expansion never raises a level cap. And, the majority of players aren't power levelers. And hopefully the end-game is ever changing (meaning Pantheon is successful). Look at EQ as an example - the endgame has changed for almost 17 years. And for the record, I don't want artifical restrictions on leveling, which when the Rights of Passage system was first annouced here as a possible leveling gate - I was highly skeptical of it.
I'm not ignoring your point, I just don't really see it having this detrimental effect that you feel it will.
In 1999 people took things more slowly. Knowledge was scarce and information wasn't as widely available as it is now.
I foresee the vast majority of Pantheon players hitting their arbitrary level caps pretty shortly after every game release, unless they (as I said) add some artificial gates or make the numbers behind the levels disgustingly high. Neither are hallmarks of good design, imo.
Raidan said:Also, I'm not aganist offering an advantage to alts - I would just like it to make sense in the game world, not by external purchases. I'm not aganist controlled twinking based off skill/level caps (see MMORPG threads) that make sense or think of a more controlled EQ1 system that had damage caps at 10/20 etc., so your 2nd/3rd alt would still level quicker.
What is the source of this constant appeal to "making sense in the game world" that perpetuates such vehement opposition to cash shops? I don't get it.
Raidan said:3rd Example: In my critique of the cash shop, I didn't single out modern MMO gamers. I was describing the game I pledged for - Pantheon, which was announced as a challenging, subscription based MMO. It did have a psuedo cash shop to start, which I was firmly aganist, and it has been removed. I never said "dumb modern gamers" - that's your interpretation. If Pantheon turned that direction of the current theme park MMO, it's fine, I'm sure many would still play, but I most likely would no longer support it.
This is a false dichotomy. It isn't "cash shop/themepark" vs. "no cash shop/sandbox". It never has been. The two concepts are completely unrelated to eachother. It's entirely correlative, not a causative relationship.
Raidan said:If you don't think EQ's current cash shop doesn't sell anything Pay to win, then we may never agree. I quit EQ after nearly 15 years of off and on play, because the cash shop/game was extremely overboard gifting Heroic Characters, AAs, purchasable exp potions, etc. I only remained during that time due to the challenge and the ever-dangling carrot. That carrot became much less meaningful when nearly 1/3 of my character's advancement was gifted to players (and that was a nearly maxed player at the time). I stopped leveling alts with the annoucement as the "gifted" characters would have had more AAs than my alts - why level them at that point?
With the absurd xp bonuses in the game, you can have a character at heroic level with an equal number of AAs in under a week.
They added heroic characters because of their bad game design. Nobody visits the early game world anymore, so they made heroic characters to funnel new players into a concentrated area rather than have them make a level 1 in the ghost town that is now Kelethin or whatever other city.
Raidan said:Again, it just appears that we disagree, which is ok, but I won't be convinced that a cash shop won't be detrimental and it appears that you won't either that it will be.
Fair enough.
Ok I agree, but I still want a pink wizard's hat at some point pretty please with a cherry on top.
Oh and yes 'group Hugs to eveyone' come on now, you know you want too.
Tru
x
Liav said: Alright, but then it just becomes a semantics argument about what constitutes an in-game advantage. Do you consider alpha access to be an in-game advantage worth removing? What specific things offered do you actually feel constitute an advantage worth removing?
See, "advantage" is an extremely broad term that encompasses a lot of offered things. I'm not convinced that they should all be treated equally and tossed out without individual consideration.
That's a fair point, and you're correct, playing in Alpha/Beta is very advantageous to becoming familiar with the game/mechanics. However, it is also necessary evil in order to release a successful, bug-free game; whereas, an in-game cash shop isn't. You also agree that gear with stats available in a Cash Shop is pay to win. So based on that point, it appears that even you wouldn't want pay-to-win gear in a cash-shop, but who would determine the cut-off, as what is considered pay-to-win is obviously subjective based on our discussions. As Marilee stated earlier, it's easier to just not implement it so those determinations never have to be made.
Liav said: I've played EQ since 2001, ironically, I mained a Monk as well. I'm aware of how the weight mechanics work.
We've established a few things. Encumberance existed, yep. Coin weight existed, yep. Were they important to monitor in gameplay, as in, your gameplay experience would be bad if you didn't? Sure.
None of these really do well to convinced me that it SHOULD have existed, though. Vanguard didn't have coin weight, neither did EQ2. Neither game suffered for not having such an annoying mechanic.
I appreciate your honesty (especially when many posters wouldn't be), but it does support my point that you didn't play at launch. Depending on when you started in 2001, Velious was already out for at least a year and if if was near the end of 2001, Luclin was nearly released (or it was released if it was December). Many weight reduction bags were already common in 2001 - Evil Eye/Supplier Bag, etc. I suppose my compromise to your argument that inventory management was hugely impactful at EQlaunch, but less so in two years+ post-release due to many factors: weight reduction bags, a higher level player base (easier ports), more zones available, etc.
Liav said: This is still a "slippery slope" argument. Not to mention the biased choice of words, "water down", that only serves to show that you're married to your position.
Good catch on the water down - it wasn't intentional. But yes, I do think many of the minor mechanics of EQ were extremely important and I'm married to that position for reasons already discussed.
Liav said: I'm not ignoring your point, I just don't really see it having this detrimental effect that you feel it will.
In 1999 people took things more slowly. Knowledge was scarce and information wasn't as widely available as it is now.
I foresee the vast majority of Pantheon players hitting their arbitrary level caps pretty shortly after every game release, unless they (as I said) add some artificial gates or make the numbers behind the levels disgustingly high. Neither are hallmarks of good design, imo.
Fair enough - we just disagree here that the majority will; although I do agree with the knowledge availability portion quickening the leveling speed. I'm just hoping Pantheon's leveling curve is steeper than you expect without artificial restrictions.
Liav said: What is the source of this constant appeal to "making sense in the game world" that perpetuates such vehement opposition to cash shops? I don't get it.
Again, we just disagree here. I'd rather having a level playing field based off itemization, time invested, etc. in game, than options to trivialize that gameplay externally.
Liav said: This is a false dichotomy. It isn't "cash shop/themepark" vs. "no cash shop/sandbox". It never has been. The two concepts are completely unrelated to eachother. It's entirely correlative, not a causative relationship.
I just got lazy in my too long 2nd reply there. I agree with you, and my original reply to you was the modern Free to Play, Pay to Win, Theme Park game, not simply Theme Park
Liav said: With the absurd xp bonuses in the game, you can have a character at heroic level with an equal number of AAs in under a week.
They added heroic characters because of their bad game design. Nobody visits the early game world anymore, so they made heroic characters to funnel new players into a concentrated area rather than have them make a level 1 in the ghost town that is now Kelethin or whatever other city.
Not as a level 1 player, untwinked, even in EQ today. But point taken, the leveling curve is ridiculous, I agree. I also agree it was poor design to make older zones a ghost town, but it doesn't make it any less pay to win for me that they're being offered.
Raidan said: Again, it just appears that we disagree, which is ok, but I won't be convinced that a cash shop won't be detrimental and it appears that you won't either that it will be.
Liav Said: Fair enough.
I'm glad we could at least cordially discuss our differing opinions - one of the reasons I think that Pantheon's community has the possibility of being EQesque.
*Edit quotes - side note, can't wait till the new forums!