To clarify exactly, P2P or F2P

[Dreamin]

EvilKitten, that is an old discussion. The Devs need to make money, guess who can give them money? The players who HAVE money. Are you telling me that someone having a convenience boost is going to affect your enjoyment of the game? Especially since this game is COOP vs AI styled.

Your argument is someone having the ability to spend money to progress faster lowers your enjoyment, then I counter with people who have more time to play than I do lowers my enjoyment. Solution: Cap how much EXP can be gained per 24 hour period so that people who have more time cant use it. Balance between the Haves and Have Nots.

Does that sound like it makes sense? Yet that's what you're proposing. There are elements that are P2W, obviously. The question is: Can you directly buy POWER with MONEY? If the answer is no, then it's not P2W. If you can buy items that speed up progress (within reason) then it is NOT P2W.

Subs for convenience are good for Devs and for Players.

IMO: HAHAHA.. I think I like typing that even more since my last reply posting.

Uhm, that is just a big load of ...; to discredit the other players statement. BoutlikIemfittintadu.

Yes some are effected by the idea that someone else has some "thing", "ability", "experience", etc. that they themselves "CAN NOT HAVE". Additionally, the reasoning why those players "CAN NOT HAVE" is not even a relevant part of the that discussion. While these concerns can be considered during development, the idea of for purchase "boosts" will happen. They will be titled or labeled as cosmetic/convenience but they will exist. Example 1 from FF - gliders; Example 2 from FF - transportation

I believe their are some important points many are missing, this is a resource based game*, it is intended for all players to be able to have unique frame builds to their specific play style with (100s) of possibilities*, the algorithm required to calculate exactly what is fair for ALL always results a zero return.

*Resource based game - Are you suggesting that "buying" a resource booster is not P2W?
*Keeping up with the Jones's - Yo bro, the Jones's hardcore grinded the resources to craft that equipment, they are on welfare and mobility challenged. What should someone else be able to "purchase" to get the same stuff?

As far as I have read, no one player with any amount of unfair advantage is going to be able to make a grand difference playing solo in Em8er, so what do you believe a "boost" should do for a player? Allow them to make that difference? With that, the suggestion is that most commonly players will be grouping together to "get things done" (whatever things are). If any one of those players, and again the reason does not actually matter, is receiving any "thing", sans random drop, that every other player is not receiving due to a "purchased" "thing" THEN IT IS PAY TO WIN!

Now, after all that. My budget does not quite match Torque_Joey (+1), though I enjoy enhancing my gaming too and expressing my gratitude to the developers of the game monetarily. I believe others should as well. Support development, I thinks that's the right way to pay to win; boost the developers' motivations, encourage their creativity and reward their successes. Most importantly, this entire conversation (if they read it) is a distraction from both developing and playing games.

 

[EvilKitten]

Ugh, ok sorry if I come across as a flaming asshole (I may be evil but that is besides the point). I am perhaps a bit frustrated over the communities inability to treat ember as anything other than a traditional MMO.

Let me point out a couple of key facts here:

1. As Dreamin stated above, this game is supposed to be based as much on pure skill as possible, any advantage that is paid for instead of earned via skill negates this.
2. There is no personal progression (AKA XP) to boost.
3. All unlocks are global and done by the community as a whole, you can disappear for 6 months and return to the same point as everyone else without any need to play catch up.
4. Most of your resources will go towards defense building and the Tshi-hu combat. I do not believe based on the things Mark has said that resources will ever be a bottleneck towards crafting gear.

So in a game with no personal progression where you are always caught up with the jonses and who's resource based gameplay is not a critical factor in crafting gear...there is no point in breaking the skill focus.

 

[Grummz]

Game will sell at upper indie price with no subscription fee.

 

[Torgue_Joey]

*Torgue_Joey joins the Battle*
WHAT BATTLE. I SEE NO F*CKING BATTLE.
F*CK THIS SH*T.

FIRST:

Ugh, ok sorry if I come across as a flaming asshole (I may be evil but that is besides the point).

STAY LIKE THAT. EVIL KITTEN DO WHAT EVIL KITTEN DO.

FIRST OF ALL. I GOT NO F*CKING CLUE WHY SOME BROUGHT THE SH*TTY P2W TERM INTO THE F*CKING PVE BRANCH.

FIRSTLY. I'F A GAME BECOME SOLO-ABLE THAT WAY, BUT NOT SUPPOSED TO BE. THEN THE GAME IS SH*T OR DEV ARE F*CKING IDIOTS OR MECHANICS FLAW OR BLABLABLA.

AS THE HOLY GRUMMZIFIAN LAW STATED:

You shall not bear false badassery against Rabbits.

I BOUGHT ALL THE COSMETIC CURRENTLY ON STOCK. WHAT THE F*CK IMMA DO WITH THE REST OF THOSE IN-GAME CURRENCY? WASTE IT ON POINTLESS BOOSTER (resource booster, cooldown booster, movment speed, regen booster ETC (End of Thinking Capacity) ON THINGS. THAT JUST MAKE FUNS.

THOSE "MINI-NUKES" (if our great Lord Grummzifer is able to bring them) GONNA COST SH*T LOAD OF RESOURCES.
AND. I AM. G.O.D (God Of Destruction)
NOW. GIMME THOSE RESOURCE. BOOSTER. (even if those Nukes got a 2hr cooldown)

BOOSTER DON'T HAVE TO GO TOWARD STATS 'N SH*T. SERIOUSLY, A BUILD THAT IS HEAVILY DEPENDENT ON BOOSTER IS ONE HELL IF A SH*TTY BUILD. WHAT PERIODIC N00B DOES THAT? NOT ME.

BOOSTER TO EXPAND THE FUN FOR A DURATION IS FUN.
MORE ADRENALIN RUSH
*BOOM*
MORE RAGE
*BOOM*
(*SUICIDAL) SPEED ACTION
*KA-BOOOOOOOM*

(*we take no responsibility for deaths caused by suicidal behavior /or idiotic act)





PS: I just finished this crap after lunch and forgot what this was all about.

 

[Rayce Kaiser]

TL;DR: Rebuttal to Dreamin and EvilKitten's posts

Will make 2nd Post after this regarding my thoughts and opinions on pros and cons of having a convenience boosting optional Sub.

IMO: HAHAHA.. I think I like typing that even more since my last reply posting.

Uhm, that is just a big load of ...; to discredit the other players statement. BoutlikIemfittintadu.

Yes, that is how debates work. Person A says Thing A, Person B says why they disagree with Thing A and proposes Thing B. That is how making Things(TM) better than they were works.

Yes some are effected by the idea that someone else has some "thing", "ability", "experience", etc. that they themselves "CAN NOT HAVE". Additionally, the reasoning why those players "CAN NOT HAVE" is not even a relevant part of the that discussion.

Whether they perceive that are affected or not is the not the discussion. Whether said Thing(TM) affects gameplay is. Observe Gameplay without Thing(TM) and observe Gameplay with Thing(TM). Has the Gameplay of player changed? If not, then it is a cosmetic/convenience boost and is consumer friendly. If Gameplay has changed then impact on the game and player need to observed and Thing(TM) needs to be tweaked until desired results are met.

While these concerns can be considered during development, the idea of for purchase "boosts" will happen. They will be titled or labeled as cosmetic/convenience but they will exist. Example 1 from FF - gliders; Example 2 from FF - transportation

From your phrasing, do I correctly infer that you are pro cosmetic/convenience boost?

I believe their[sic] are some important points many are missing, this is a resource based game*,[...]*Resource based game - Are you suggesting that "buying" a resource booster is not P2W?

I am not only suggesting, I am stating this to be fact. (Caveat: a badly designed resource booster can break the economy) As CEO, Mark Kern would have had a hand in implementing the FF subscription model and that model was designed to be a convenience booster and not P2W. Another example of a good model for subs is EVE, which lets players use RL currency to buy PLEX which in turn can be sold to other players for in-game currency, thus giving players the ability to literally purchase in-game currency with RL currency. One could make the false claim that this P2W, but this would be untrue as the system was well designed and properly implemented and does not affect gameplay.

it is intended for all players to be able to have unique frame builds to their specific play style with (100s) of possibilities*,

Lots of choice for builds: great for the players. Balancing said choice: nightmare for the dev team. Some builds will be more optimal than other builds. Someone will sit down, crunch numbers and find the optimal way to DPS/Tank/Heal/etc. There will be 2-3 builds per class that outperform other builds. I do wish my sincere best wishes to whomever is going to try to create a class based PvE game with dozens of viable (and not situational) horizontal builds per class. (Srsly, no snark, if someone manages to do this, they would literally be redefining the genre of MMOs.)

the algorithm required to calculate exactly what is fair for ALL always results a zero return.

I don't really understand what hypothetical algorithm you're talking about. Even without that, nothing is fair. We're not discussing justice, we're discussing law.

*Keeping up with the Jones's - Yo bro, the Jones's hardcore grinded the resources to craft that equipment, they are on welfare and mobility challenged. [Why] should someone else be able to "purchase" to get the same stuff?

You forgot to mention the McJones's, who live in Australia and play on a toaster. Lets nuke the game down to 480p and 10FPS so they can play too. Also one sister is blind, the other is deaf, so please balance the game so it's fair for blind people and for deaf people.[/sarcasm] The WHY will be answered in the post after this one.

As far as I have read, no one player with any amount of unfair advantage is going to be able to make a grand difference playing solo in Em8er, so what do you believe a "boost" should do for a player? Allow them to make that difference? With that, the suggestion is that most commonly players will be grouping together to "get things done" (whatever things are). If any one of those players, and again the reason does not actually matter, is receiving any "thing", sans random drop, that every other player is not receiving due to a "purchased" "thing" THEN IT IS PAY TO WIN!

Yes it is. Which is why I never said that. You literally are the only person talking about purchasing power in the game. Which is not what any of us are talking about. I would ask you to carefully read what people wrote, before running off on a witch hunt.

Now, after all that. My budget does not quite match Torque_Joey (+1), though I enjoy enhancing my gaming too and expressing my gratitude to the developers of the game monetarily. I believe others should as well. Support development, I thinks that's the right way to pay to win; boost the developers' motivations, encourage their creativity and reward their successes. Most importantly, this entire conversation (if they read it) is a distraction from both developing and playing games.

And you end your post agreeing with most of what I have been saying. Cool. Thanks.

Response to EvilKitten

Ugh, ok sorry if I come across as a flaming asshole (I may be evil but that is besides the point). I am perhaps a bit frustrated over the communities inability to treat ember as anything other than a traditional MMO.

Eh, I've dated girls who would put you to shame in the flaming, asshole and evil CATegories(pun intended) Horizontal progression isnt a new concept, simply one that has not been executed well before. A large drive in playing video games is the sense of personal progression. That's why games like CoD and LoL have personal progression, as that massively ups player stickiness.

Let me point out a couple of key facts here:

1. As Dreamin stated above, this game is supposed to be based as much on pure skill as possible, any advantage that is paid for instead of earned via skill negates this.

Agreed, I never suggested purchasable power, only a convenience boost.

2. There is no personal progression (AKA XP) to boost.

Until the game is launched, this is hypothetical. Even if it does launch in such a state, there will be some form of personal progression, because that's a HUGE part of what makes games everything fun.

3. All unlocks are global and done by the community as a whole, you can disappear for 6 months and return to the same point as everyone else without any need to play catch up.

Until the game is launched, this is hypothetical. Also, see personal progression point

4. Most of your resources will go towards defense building and the Tshi-hu combat. I do not believe based on the things Mark has said that resources will ever be a bottleneck towards crafting gear.

Until the game is launched, this is hypothetical. Also, if resources are not bottle necked (to a reasonable extent) then that makes resources virtually useless in the grand scheme of the game. Resources need to make a difference for the individual who earned and spent them, as that is the incentive to go out and get more resources and thus the secondary game loop is formed. Games cannot survive on a primary game loop alone, this is a fact of player retention.

So in a game with no personal progression where you are always caught up with the jonses and who's resource based gameplay is not a critical factor in crafting gear...there is no point in breaking the skill focus.

Then why are you opposed to an OPTIONAL sub, for something in lieu of +10% on all resources gained?

 

[SomeUnregPunk]

I'm lost and I think Rayce Kaiser is too.

 

[Nunaden]

@Rayce Kaiser
+10% this and +10% this and + 10% these is literally buying power, and total shit: "Hey, GZ you power grinded your perfect equip set with shitty equip with in a record time, but sry, some1 else already did that in half of the time with 90% less effort, have fun" -> that is your booster.

I don't need personal progression to stick to games, i mostly played FF 'Cause i could run around, turn chosen into bullet pillows, climb shit that almost none climbs and then go wreck the BK with the rest of the comm. Insurgency doesn'T posses progression and i still play it, 'cause it's just fun fighting the (cheating) AI with some cool dudes form the cool community or to shoot down other players.

Also there is no "best" build (i know that best lol) since every1 demands something else, in FF ppl loved to play offense firecat, while i ran around with a genocide Biotech (still love that shit, was genius AF xD) or a spray mammoth. The "best" builds are noob builds which are aimed at total easy to use and trying to be good at everything or multiple things (which is impossible), they may beat a build that is difficult to use and aimed at one niche in that category, but totally get doomed in the category the other build is specialized on.
eg.: The "jack-of-all-trades"-build may beat an AoE build when it is about fighting one single strong enemy, but gets beaten into shit when it is about dealing with masses and masses of weak enemies.
The "jack-of-all-trades"-build my be better than a tank when you need speed but will totally suck shit when it is about surviving extreme suppressing fire or high dmg melee attacks.
A heal-focus healer may support a group of ppl better than speed-focus healer, but for that the speed-focus healer will survive far better on his/her own.

reaching 100 different possibilities is easy, get 10 categories and 10 options for each and you got 10^10 builds = 100

 

[Mallot]

There'll be microtransactions though?

I honestly don't understand how games are supposed to keep afloat without them, or maybe I'm just dramatically overestimating server costs.

 

[Rocket]

1. As Dreamin stated above, this game is supposed to be based as much on pure skill as possible, any advantage that is paid for instead of earned via skill negates this.

As would a player market, and yet a game such as this might need a player economy.

2. There is no personal progression (AKA XP) to boost.

Progression can be measured in many ways. Crafting many Frames might be one. There are others. It doesn't require XP. Having lot's of time to grind things out is still paying. It's just paying for an advantage with time instead of money. It's simply a matter of what you personally value more.

 

[Nunaden]

There'll be microtransactions though?

I honestly don't understand how games are supposed to keep afloat without them, or maybe I'm just dramatically overestimating server costs.

Yes there will, but it was stated that it will be á la Kern-FireFall, meaning, the most things you cab buy are cosmetics.

Also, yeah, costs for servers that can handle true MMO-FPSs would be pretty high, it sure will take hell to process the data of >200 players in the FPS manner, though it depends, like in every online game, on the netcode etc. (data received, data filtering, data processing and then sending aaaaand more i suppose)

 

[EvilKitten]

As would a player market, and yet a game such as this might need a player economy.

Agreed on the first point, kinda hoping we don't have a whole marketplace but won't be surprised if it isn't added. I am sure a lot of players would be up in arm if there wasn't a marketplace, even if including it would hurt the overall game design.

 

[Astro]

Agreed on the first point, kinda hoping we don't have a whole marketplace but won't be surprised if it isn't added. I am sure a lot of players would be up in arm if there wasn't a marketplace, even if including it would hurt the overall game design.

From what I heard and understood in the last Chief Chat, there will be no marketplace or even player to player trade.

 

[Dreamin]

TL;DR: Rebuttal to.... Rayce, my time has been; short could reply.

Yes, that is how debates work. Person A says Thing A, Person B says why they disagree with Thing A and proposes Thing B. That is how making Things(TM){-- lol, I like that.} better than they were works.

Whether they

{ It "we" or "a player" or "players" etc, unless Mark has you on payroll of course.}

perceive that are affected or not is the not the discussion. Whether said Thing(TM) affects gameplay is. Observe Gameplay without Thing(TM) and observe Gameplay with Thing(TM). Has the Gameplay of player changed? If not, then it is a cosmetic/convenience boost and is consumer friendly. If Gameplay has changed then impact on the game and player need to observed and Thing(TM) needs to be tweaked until desired results are met.

Execellent 'reasoning', do you have any other capitalist justifications that would make you more proud for making this option?

From your phrasing, do I correctly infer that you are pro cosmetic/convenience boost?

Yes

I am not only suggesting, I am stating this to be fact. (Caveat: a badly designed resource booster can break the economy) As CEO, Mark Kern would have had a hand in implementing the FF subscription model and that model was designed to be a convenience booster and not P2W. Another example of a good model for subs is EVE, which lets players use RL currency to buy PLEX which in turn can be sold to other players for in-game currency, thus giving players the ability to literally purchase in-game currency with RL currency. One could make the false claim that this P2W, but this would be untrue as the system was well designed and properly implemented and does not affect gameplay.

fact check -1

Lots of choice for builds: great for the players. Balancing said choice: nightmare for the dev team. Some builds will be more optimal than other builds. Someone will sit down, crunch numbers and find the optimal way to DPS/Tank/Heal/etc. There will be 2-3 builds per class that outperform other builds. I do wish my sincere best wishes to whomever is going to try to create a class based PvE game with dozens of viable (and not situational) horizontal builds per class. (Srsly, no snark, if someone manages to do this, they would literally be redefining the genre of MMOs.)

Good for those industrious players, I'm glad they have found an additional part of gaming they enjoy. Maybe I can get some tips from them. As for the detail needed to accomplish it, meh... that is what developers do.

I don't really understand what hypothetical algorithm you're talking about. Even without that, nothing is fair. We're not discussing justice, we're discussing law.

After reading this statement, no worries

....

Yes it is. Which is why I never said that. You literally are the only person talking about purchasing power in the game. Which is not what any of us are talking about. I would ask you to carefully read what people wrote, before running off on a witch hunt.

So by now I'm sure you have reread your post and realized this was in reference to your promotion of convenience boosts immediately followed by a debate statement relating spending funds for progression. Additionally, your correct, I should have read further back and gained a better understanding of the entire conversation. Hugs?

And you end your post agreeing with most of what I have been saying. Cool. Thanks.

Yeah... in FF I was small fry but, 10+ gliders, 10 -ish bikes, rocket pack, truck that wouldn't let me in driver's seat, 6 - 7 pets, copa arc port, reusable garage, etc... OH! and an inventory full of those useless boosts.

edited for spelling correct.

 

[xmesaj2]

Go FFFP~Free For Firefall Players

 

[Nunaden]

Go FFFP~Free For Firefall Players

won't happen, and we got already a reward for EX FF players