The EVE uproaor, how does it apply here?


Pathfinder Online

51 to 100 of 127 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Goblin Squad Member

Bluddwolf wrote:
Nihimon wrote:
I would really, really like Goblinworks to remove every valid reason to use alt accounts. I've been pushing for that for a very long time.

If GW allows for unlimited character slots and can still offer discounts for multiple training subscriptions (ie Eve Online's Power of Two), then it would be fine to have one account for all characters.

Without that, the idea of limiting accounts is limiting revenue, and I would think the point if PFO is to make money for GW / Paizo.

In the EVE model, each account can have three characters and all are available for play while the account remains active. However you need to pay separately to train each account if you want to increase its skills.

Many EVE players have their main character training continually but only train the other two far enough to be useful. Often one spare account will receive a single months training to allow it to fly haulers and freighters and the other account receive a months training to allow basic mining skills.

Note that whilst all three are available to use regardless of whether they are training or not they cannot be used simultaneously in seperate windows or on different computers. If players want to "multibox" and use two or three different characters at the same time they will still need ALT accounts.

Goblin Squad Member

Yes, I understand that. It has also been suggested that we can multibox within the same account of PFO. In other words, both our main character and DT can be active at the same time, on the same computer.

But this is a different discussion than what the OP has brought up.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bluddwolf wrote:
...both our main character and DT can be active at the same time, on the same computer.

We're not completely sure about that one point yet, I believe:

Ryan Dancey wrote:

There is no practical limit to how many characters you'll be able to train in parallel.

(This is my objective. Technical limitations beyond my control might affect this but at this time I see none.)

You will be able to log in more than one character on the same account. So you can run the client twice, or run the client on two computers logged into the same account. (This is commonly called "multiboxing").

(Ditto to previous disclaimer).

You MAY NOT be able to log in your Destiny's Twin character at the same time you are logged in to another character on that account. I haven't thought through all the complexities yet.

I think the primary thing separating our Twins from other alts might end up being no multi-boxing for them. If it's too high a tech hurdle, perhaps they'll just be plain old alts after all :-).

Goblinworks Executive Founder

DT characters have been mentioned as possibly different from regular alts, in that regular alts are permitted to multibox but DT characters are probably not.

Goblin Squad Member

Yes, but not paying for the training of the twin as long as the main has training is well worth it to me. I rarely need to be on my Crafter and my Assassin at the same time

Goblin Squad Member

DeciusBrutus wrote:
DT characters have been mentioned as possibly different from regular alts, in that regular alts are permitted to multibox but DT characters are probably not.

So there's no advantage to single-accounting, but two advantages to multi-accounting: the inherent security advantage of not having all of your characters behind one username & password, and this added advantage of unrestricted multibox combinations.

Multiple accounts also has the advantage of disposable accounts useful for short-term goals that require bending or breaking the ToS, but that's not any different in either case, since a DT isn't disposable and breaking the ToS with it still gets the main banned. If they want to mitigate possible losses due to disposable characters (player losses and their own potential loss of the players themselves) they'll ned a probationary period in which a character earns the right to communicate and trade in certain ways dependent upon their paid training time. Those who play through the EE period will likely have built up paid time before many features are even available to be missed, but those coming in OE might need a minimum number of months paid for in order to unlock certain features.

CEO, Goblinworks

5 people marked this as a favorite.

I'd rather lose one person who scammed the community, than have a community that thinks scamming is ok behavior.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Keovar wrote:
...there's no advantage to single-accounting...

We've heard enough that we can bet pretty safely that GW will give us some sort of reason to strongly consider single accounts; they've acknowledged they'll never be able to stop multiples by fiat alone, so they'll not try. I look forward to seeing what they tease us with economically.

It'd be an interesting twist if the community became okay with multi-boxed characters and disparaging of players whom they found, via whatever mechanism, to have multiple accounts.

Goblin Squad Member

Keovar wrote:
DeciusBrutus wrote:
DT characters have been mentioned as possibly different from regular alts, in that regular alts are permitted to multibox but DT characters are probably not.

So there's no advantage to single-accounting, but two advantages to multi-accounting: the inherent security advantage of not having all of your characters behind one username & password, and this added advantage of unrestricted multibox combinations.

Multiple accounts also has the advantage of disposable accounts useful for short-term goals that require bending or breaking the ToS, but that's not any different in either case, since a DT isn't disposable and breaking the ToS with it still gets the main banned. If they want to mitigate possible losses due to disposable characters (player losses and their own potential loss of the players themselves) they'll ned a probationary period in which a character earns the right to communicate and trade in certain ways dependent upon their paid training time. Those who play through the EE period will likely have built up paid time before many features are even available to be missed, but those coming in OE might need a minimum number of months paid for in order to unlock certain features.

There are more ways to use a second account then to break the rules. I can think of several but sorry, not sharing... (and if you cant think of it...)

I can tell you one way I lost an account in Eve and had no bad intentions. A friend of mine, a long time friend, and I would change each others skills... I let it slip in a petition that he was changing my skills (forget the petition reason) and my account was permabanned. Now if you played Eve back in '06 then you would know why it was a good idea to let someone else change your skills... No skill que...

Need less to say I read the EULA after that...

I had no issue with this friend changing my skills, he was a friend of 15+ years at the time. He would not do anything the EULA is trying to prevent. But I still lost the account. If I didnt have another character, and if I had put too much time into the character I lost (only 1.5msp)... I wouldnt be playing now.

Oh and this friend still logs in to change my skills from time to time.

Goblin Squad Member

If it is okay to have more than one character active on an account then I don't see a reason why anyone would be interested in having more than one account unless more than one person would be playing their characters (such as father & daughter).

Goblin Squad Member

There are several

Goblin Squad Member

Being wrote:
If it is okay to have more than one character active on an account then I don't see a reason why anyone would be interested in having more than one account unless more than one person would be playing their characters (such as father & daughter).

I would hope that Goblinworks would take a serious look at all of the valid reasons players use multiple accounts, and attempt to support that use on a single account.

Goblin Squad Member

Ok. I am repentant. After studying the issue. I have deleted my other alts. I am only going to be Soldack for this game with no alts.

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:
Being wrote:
If it is okay to have more than one character active on an account then I don't see a reason why anyone would be interested in having more than one account unless more than one person would be playing their characters (such as father & daughter).
I would hope that Goblinworks would take a serious look at all of the valid reasons players use multiple accounts, and attempt to support that use on a single account.

Ryan said he is not going to hinder multiple accounts.

Goblin Squad Member

Xeen wrote:
Ryan said he is not going to hinder multiple accounts.

I know. I've acknowledged that I don't expect to see any attempt to make multiple account usage a violation of the TOS pretty much every time I've posted on the topic.

I still hope they make a serious effort to support single-account use enough that there aren't any compelling reasons for honest people to use multiple accounts.

Goblin Squad Member

There is one in game reason to use multiple accounts, that does not break the EULA or ToS, and GW will have no way to work around it.

And I mean no way what so ever.

I will not tell you what it is, as I plan to use it.

If anyone in GW would like to know, they can message me.

Goblin Squad Member

Bold statement given we have not sighted the EULA or TOS as yet.

Goblin Squad Member

Jiminy wrote:
Bold statement given we have not sighted the EULA or TOS as yet.

Not at all, it will not be much different then others... the differences will not affect this

Goblin Squad Member

Xeen wrote:
...GW will have no way to work around it.

We've seen every indication that they've no intent to work around it, so I've somehow failed to understand the message of your posts.

Ryan Dancey wrote:
Unfortunately, the resources required to attempt to try to enforce a ban on multiboxing are usually wasted. Those who want to do it have more ways to work around the systems designed to stop it than we have time or money to add new detection methods. Its an arms race the development team can never win.
Ryan Dancey wrote:
Multiple characters training on a single account will not reduce griefing, multiboxing, or any other behavior that you don't like beyond one player, one character. Sorry, but there's no way to stop it mechanically, and trust me, every idea you have has been tried. An idea that would actually work would revolutionize the internet, and would make you a stone cold billionaire. MMOs wouldn't be your customers. Amazon, Google, and eBay would. On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog.

Goblin Squad Member

Spying or multi-boxing.

Either he doesn't want people to be able to see his multiple characters if PFO has the equivalent of an API key, because organizations require to see yours before you can join (A common practice in EVE), or he just wants to run multiple accounts at the same time so he can harvest while his main does other things. If the combat system requires as little skill as EVE, he can also run multiple combat accounts at once. I've known several people in EVE that are their own fleet. It's one of the big reasons I oppose tab-targeting and dumbing down PFO's combat system too much, beyond my enjoyment of faster paced action. IMO any game that can be multi-boxed in combat is a pay-to-win game.

Goblin Squad Member

Jazzlvraz wrote:

I've somehow failed to understand the message of your posts.

Then read above, past that I cannot help you

Andius wrote:

Spying or multi-boxing.

Either he doesn't want people to be able to see his multiple characters if PFO has the equivalent of an API key, because organizations require to see yours before you can join (A common practice in EVE), or he just wants to run multiple accounts at the same time so he can harvest while his main does other things. If the combat system requires as little skill as EVE, he can also run multiple combat accounts at once. I've known several people in EVE that are their own fleet. It's one of the big reasons I oppose tab-targeting and dumbing down PFO's combat system too much, beyond my enjoyment of faster paced action.

The people who multibox PVP in Eve and are not using software to do it, are either in massive fleets where your skill above clicking F1 is not requried... Or they are really only playing about 66% of each character.

Because you cannot fully use tactics in Eve while you multibox... Unless one character is in dumbed down mode.

Multiboxing will be possible in PFO with 1 account

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Most of them ARE using software to do it. I had a guy who I lived in null sec with show me the program he uses to multi-box. I don't remember the name but the site had demo videos showing 1 guy playing a full party in WoW.

Setting up a system where you press 1 key and all of your accounts lock and fire on the same target is pretty easy in a tab-target game. With that established, it becomes very easy to run a solo-zerg.

A single character played by a single player is going to be better than each member of the zerg, but even with 66% effectiveness, 5 multi-boxed alts vs. 1 pro w/same gear/stat level will win every time. It's pay to win.

Not possible in a game that doesn't rely on tab-targeting. That's why all alts in Darkfall are harvesters. I would imagine a smart target system would work the same in that regard.

Goblin Squad Member

Andius wrote:

Most of them ARE using software to do it. I had a guy who I lived in null sec with show me the program he uses to multi-box. I don't remember the name but the site had demo videos showing 1 guy playing a full party in WoW.

Setting up a system where you press 1 key and all of your accounts lock and fire on the same target is pretty easy in a tab-target game. With that established, it becomes very easy to run a solo-zerg.

A single character played by a single player is going to be better than each member of the zerg, but even with 66% effectiveness, 5 multi-boxed alts vs. 1 pro w/same gear/stat level will win every time. It's pay to win.

Not possible in a game that doesn't rely on tab-targeting. That's why all alts in Darkfall are harvesters. I would imagine a smart target system would work the same in that regard.

It was probably IsBoxer. There are videos of a single person running an incursion fleet with it.

Alts are definitely going to happen, I plan on using a bunch myself for various activities (mostly related to data collection and logistics). The biggest thing is to not have alts be a requirement to succeed.

Goblin Squad Member

Sintaqx wrote:
The biggest thing is to not have alts be a requirement to succeed.

It's virtually impossible to reconcile that requirement with the requirement to make it easier to succeed in a group than playing solo. This is precisely because it's impossible to know who the human being is behind the character.

Goblin Squad Member

Andius wrote:

Most of them ARE using software to do it. I had a guy who I lived in null sec with show me the program he uses to multi-box. I don't remember the name but the site had demo videos showing 1 guy playing a full party in WoW.

Setting up a system where you press 1 key and all of your accounts lock and fire on the same target is pretty easy in a tab-target game. With that established, it becomes very easy to run a solo-zerg.

A single character played by a single player is going to be better than each member of the zerg, but even with 66% effectiveness, 5 multi-boxed alts vs. 1 pro w/same gear/stat level will win every time. It's pay to win.

Not possible in a game that doesn't rely on tab-targeting. That's why all alts in Darkfall are harvesters. I would imagine a smart target system would work the same in that regard.

Well yeah, with same gear and stats... I dont know about tab targeting, but Control Click maybe.

Yeah its ISBoxer Ive heard used.

Most do not use software. There are some that do.

LOL, and for Same Gear, 5vs1 thought... 4 Friends and I took out a fleet, and I mean literally a fleet of Ravens... Had to be an ISBoxer guy... All fitups were the same and all the character names were similar. Roughly 15 or so Ravens if I remember right. They all died due to tactics.

It is by no means pay to win. Its more like pay to lose your fleet. When I talk about Tactics with Eve Im not joking... If you dont use tactics then you will fail.

Goblin Squad Member

In EVE there are easy to meet conditions that can make one target entirely immune to another.

1. You have longer range / are faster than they are.
2. You are too small and too fast for their guns to track.
3. You are too fast for their missiles to track.
4. You have them ECM jammed.

I'm sure there's more.

Anyway, the points is, a raven is a battleship class missile boat. If you close in with a fleet of smaller and faster ships, games over vs. 15 identical ravens unless they brought webs and painters. I'm sure if that isn't what you did, it was something similar. The guy should have used something without such a major weakness but to this debate that's irrelevant.

Those kind of tactics don't make sense in a fantasy setting. Do we really want the see a half-orc ranger unable to hit a halfling monk because he's too small/fast? I don't mean more likely to miss, I mean unable to hit. Do we want to see a ranger who pumps movement speed able to move full speed away from a target while firing at it?

The lack of things like that will guarantee victory for the multi-boxers in PFO, even if they were the ones who were dumb enough to fly 15 identical ships an easily exploitable weakness in EVE.

CEO, Goblinworks

Nihimon wrote:
I still hope they make a serious effort to support single-account use enough that there aren't any compelling reasons for honest people to use multiple accounts.

I'm curious as to why you care?

If someone can multibox, and have multiple logged in characters on a single account, to you, the player, the fact that someone is running multiple characters from multiple accounts is impossible to detect unless you're able to access their account login info for some sort of group security policy reason.

Goblin Squad Member

Ryan Dancey wrote:
I'm curious as to why you care?

Mostly because I can't shake the idea that there's value in terms of encouraging players to make themselves more subject to the rules by putting all their eggs in one basket.

Other than that, it's just that I personally don't want to be in a position where adding a second account makes more sense than adding a new character to my existing account.

Goblin Squad Member

It's why I also think there should be some benefit that accrues to the account over time (based on paid training, probably) that improves the experience of every character, so that players have a strong incentive to pool their resources into a single account.

I realize that my ideas might be naive, and might be incompatible with other, less naive ideas.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nihimon wrote:

It's why I also think there should be some benefit that accrues to the account over time (based on paid training, probably) that improves the experience of every character, so that players have a strong incentive to pool their resources into a single account.

I realize that my ideas might be naive, and might be incompatible with other, less naive ideas.

But there are some of us who do agreed with you and your ideas on one account to one player.

Goblin Squad Member

Andius wrote:

In EVE there are easy to meet conditions that can make one target entirely immune to another.

1. You have longer range / are faster than they are.
2. You are too small and too fast for their guns to track.
3. You are too fast for their missiles to track.
4. You have them ECM jammed.

I'm sure there's more.

Anyway, the points is, a raven is a battleship class missile boat. If you close in with a fleet of smaller and faster ships, games over vs. 15 identical ravens unless they brought webs and painters. I'm sure if that isn't what you did, it was something similar. The guy should have used something without such a major weakness but to this debate that's irrelevant.

Those kind of tactics don't make sense in a fantasy setting. Do we really want the see a half-orc ranger unable to hit a halfling monk because he's too small/fast? I don't mean more likely to miss, I mean unable to hit. Do we want to see a ranger who pumps movement speed able to move full speed away from a target while firing at it?

The lack of things like that will guarantee victory for the multi-boxers in PFO, even if they were the ones who were dumb enough to fly 15 identical ships an easily exploitable weakness in EVE.

You dont need to be immune to win.

If I was in a small/fast ship and approached a fleet of Ravens I would die. Nano setups have been nerfed... Missiles WILL hit you unless you spend 10 billion on a frigate setup. Even before the nerf, if you fly right at them... You will die.

The ranger not hitting the monk could happen in High Power vs Low Power. Meaning the Ranger has high skills, and gear that puts him over the top compared to the Monk.

Ranger moving faster then other characters is something we will see. The slow guy will likely be able to fire back as well.

All I Win Buttons eventually get nerfed.

Multiboxing does not guarantee victory in any situation.

CEO, Goblinworks

Nihimon wrote:
Other than that, it's just that I personally don't want to be in a position where adding a second account makes more sense than adding a new character to my existing account.

I can see a few reasons why you might want to do this but they're all special cases.

You want to share an account with your SO. There are a lot of SOs out there who don't play as much as their partner and if the partner doesn't keep the SO's character's advancing the SO will quit and that usually kills the partner's ability to play too. (Every MMO says this is against the EULA and the TOS, and everyone who runs an MMO knows it happens with great frequency.)

You want to run multiple accounts for business reasons. Some folks blog and call those expenses business related for tax purposes. Some people actually work in the business and want to keep those expenses separate from personal accounts.

You're reasonably worried that a security check that penetrates your account info will doom you. People deeply involved in the espionage or HUMINT gameplay will not want to take any more risk of exposure than necessary.

You want to build & sell accounts. Eventually we'll have to have a system for this because not doing it will cause us more grief than directly supporting it. There are people who make a living making and selling MMO characters. You might be one of those people.

You have a massive life change like switching genders and you want to abandon most connections to your previous life, but you don't necessary want to just terminate a pre-existing account.

You acquire accounts from someone else, and don't want to merge the characters (which may not be a free service). Maybe someone gives you an account, or you take over an account that's a part of a Settlement's organizational structure - you could find yourself with multiple accounts that aren't combinable.

Goblin Squad Member

Good stuff

Goblin Squad Member

@Ryan Dancey, I agree with you that those are all valid reasons to use multiple accounts, and there are probably more.

I realize it's a bit of a cop out, but I was trying to speak precisely when I said something like "provide support for all the valid reasons to use multiple accounts".

I think it's perfectly reasonable to allow multiple users on a single account, especially since we're paying for Characters and not Accounts. It would be great to be able to assign Characters to individual Users, so that my daughter can't log on my Wizard.

I think it would be great to allow multiple payment methods for a single account, with each payment method applying to one or more characters.

If you want to support espionage and HUMINT, and think it's okay for people to ask your users for their authentication credentials in order to examine their account, then I think it would be great to support secure alternate credentials that only allow access to particular elements of the account.

I applaud your desire to allow your customers to buy and sell Characters/Accounts. I think it would be great to also support seamlessly integrating these into a single account.

With the secure alternate credentials mentioned above, a person could start a new life and never see the evidence of their prior life - until they wanted to. That seems the same as not deleting the pre-existing account after gender reassignment.

And I think it would be great to allow Players to take a Character, or a group of Characters, or whatever entity is used to model the collection of configurations applicable to the secure alternate credentials and easily transfer that to another account.

Like I said, I know it's a bit of a cop out, but I'm not at all saying there aren't valid reasons to run multiple accounts. I just think it would be cool if all of those valid uses could also be handled under a single account.

And I'm very, very clear that this is not a priority for Goblinworks, and I really don't expect to change your mind or anyone else's. I consider myself extremely lucky that you've already departed from the industry standard enough to allow multiple characters from the same account to be online at the same time.

Goblin Squad Member

Andius wrote:
Not possible in a game that doesn't rely on tab-targeting. That's why all alts in Darkfall are harvesters. I would imagine a smart target system would work the same in that regard.

Depends on coloration. There's a tutorial on the AHK forums that teaches you how to write a headshot script for a first person shooter that reads nothing but pixel colors to lock on. If there is a unique color anywhere on a target, you can use the known distance from that color to the head to program a perfect and undetectable headshot script (undetectable except for the fact that a guy keeps getting headshots).

And failing a unique color that can be used in that way, there's an other tutorial on how to write a script that generates quick small mouse movements to compensate for gun recoil so you can use heavy machine guns like sniper rifles.

Goblin Squad Member

It's virtually impossible to create a system that can't be automated. That's one of the reasons I'd kind of like to see them just open it up and sanction "headless clients". I don't expect that to happen, though. And I'm well aware it might be a naive position that is incompatible with other, less naive positions.

Goblin Squad Member

Ok then I guess missiles and/or T2 frigates got changed but knowing EVE, unless you had really stacked kinetic resistances or a cap ship I know you used some tactic where he either did no damage to you, or much less than 15 ravens should have been doing using speed, range, sig-radius or a combo of all three.

There will not be situations in PFO where it is entirely impossible for one character to hit another because of disparity in gear / skills. I can't find the exact quote but there have been numerous statements to that effect. This is not WoW where the vets will be untouchable gods that simply cannot receive damage from a newb.

In EVE, a frigate facing a battleship is so small and fast that they are nearly untouchable to larger ships outside very select circumstances (coming head on at a long range) or they are using modules designed to make small ships killable (webs/painters). This is the only way they can make player flown frigates and battleships that each require a crew of 1 able to inhabit the same world.

This isn't a factor in PFO, where each player plays one character ranging in size from a gnome to a half-orc. Everyone will be able to hit everyone else with some level or regularity.

While a ranger/barbarian/monk will hopefully be faster than other classes who aren't mounted, the standard combat a kiter in EVE would expect is the equivalent of making a sprint action directly away from your opponent while firing over your shoulder using a longbow with no penalty to speed, accuracy, or range. I can almost guarantee it won't work that way in PFO.

My guess is that if I multibox 15 characters in PFO, you can expect most of their attacks to land and do damage, and I don't care how good you are, you shouldn't expect to win that battle without a comparable group of players.

That is, unless they design a combat system that requires too much player input and situational awareness for that to work. Such a system would not be tab targeted.

@Blaer- I've certainly encountered aim-botters. That's one of the reasons I think smart-targeting is great. It's effectively giving everyone a built-in aimbot. However I've never seen anyone multi-box aim-botted characters in all my time playing manual aim games, where in EVE, one of the first people I met in null-sec multiboxed 10 miners and 3 combat ships, all paid for with PLEX (Which PFO will have.) I was actually one of the only people I met in our corp who didn't multi-box.

My hardware and connection simply can't support that, and it makes the game feel inaccessible to me.

Goblin Squad Member

Id bet they botted, not just multibox.

As for the frigate discussion, they have changed things a bit. Like I said, for missiles, you cant out run them unless you spend a ridiculous amount of ISK... Now for guns that is different, you can get under guns and not be hit... But and a big but, if you are not fit to defend that then there is the problem. Every gun ship type in game can take out frigates. One way or another.

Goblin Squad Member

Jazzlvraz wrote:
Keovar wrote:
...there's no advantage to single-accounting...

We've heard enough that we can bet pretty safely that GW will give us some sort of reason to strongly consider single accounts; they've acknowledged they'll never be able to stop multiples by fiat alone, so they'll not try. I look forward to seeing what they tease us with economically.

It'd be an interesting twist if the community became okay with multi-boxed characters and disparaging of players whom they found, via whatever mechanism, to have multiple accounts.

You clipped that out of context. I was responding to the statement that DT characters would be a special case, not allowed to be logged on at the same time as the main/paid character.

That means there's no advantage to creating more than the main and DT on a single account. It would be more secure, more transferrable, and more flexible in multibox combinations to have one character per account.

I also said that the one-character-per-account approach would make it easier to create disposable characters for activities that might cause negative consequences.

Dark Archive Goblin Squad Member

tbh, if you go for solo account and depending on what you want to achieve you can do it. However...

If you go for a single account you will be hard pressed to specialise. For example you will want to take some skills to defend against PvP, monsters etc. While on the other hand you will want to get some skills for your gathering, crafting etc.

(this will be voided if you are part of a settlement ofc...) But if you look at eve and the reason why people have multiple accounts... They have a PvP char and that char needs to be funded with ISK to ensure you can blow up ships and lose more shinies. Hence why people have 2 or 3 accounts (or they have another account to hold their SC / Titan ) so that they can stil pewpew with their main char.

Overall, multiple accounts will happen for obvious reasons and people will want them as well for those reasons (I know I will get a 2nd account just for the fact I will need a dedicated gatherer / crafter since I am not going to risk my pvp char to lose skill training time because of the need to focus on that.


Ryan Dancey wrote:
You want to build & sell accounts. Eventually we'll have to have a system for this because not doing it will cause us more grief than directly supporting it. There are people who make a living making and selling MMO characters. You might be one of those people.

Temporarily lifting my "lurker" status.

I get that people will buy and sell accounts whether it's against the EULA or not. I get that MTXs are fine so long as they're cosmetic. But I don't get this.

A skilled/geared character is not cosmetic. How is supporting these third party transactions not supporting third party pay-to-win?

Once this support is in place, the obvious small step for GW to take is offer similar characters in the cash shop as MTXs. In that eventuality, could you explain how this would not be pay-to-win?

I recently quit WoW because they're sticking their big orc toes over the line with their latest cash shop ideas and I see the writing on the wall (one reason among many). People are on the forums in droves asking "Why can't I just buy a max level toon?" not getting why it isn't an appropriate question. It's like all of a sudden the colloquial meaning of pay-to-win changed from giving someone the slightest edge to giving someone a raid-ready toon.

It seems pay-to-win doesn't really mean anything anymore, and I would like to know what it will mean in PFO.

Dark Archive Goblin Squad Member

Hudax wrote:
Ryan Dancey wrote:
You want to build & sell accounts. Eventually we'll have to have a system for this because not doing it will cause us more grief than directly supporting it. There are people who make a living making and selling MMO characters. You might be one of those people.

Temporarily lifting my "lurker" status.

I get that people will buy and sell accounts whether it's against the EULA or not. I get that MTXs are fine so long as they're cosmetic. But I don't get this.

A skilled/geared character is not cosmetic. How is supporting these third party transactions not supporting third party pay-to-win?

Once this support is in place, the obvious small step for GW to take is offer similar characters in the cash shop as MTXs. In that eventuality, could you explain how this would not be pay-to-win?

I recently quit WoW because they're sticking their big orc toes over the line with their latest cash shop ideas and I see the writing on the wall (one reason among many). People are on the forums in droves asking "Why can't I just buy a max level toon?" not getting why it isn't an appropriate question. It's like all of a sudden the colloquial meaning of pay-to-win changed from giving someone the slightest edge to giving someone a raid-ready toon.

It seems pay-to-win doesn't really mean anything anymore, and I would like to know what it will mean in PFO.

Advice, read up how CCP is doing it (and they are making money from it as well :) )

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Xeen wrote:

There are more ways to use a second account then to break the rules. I can think of several but sorry, not sharing... (and if you cant think of it...)

{story about breaking the rules and getting banned}

Any advantage to having multiple accounts is probably a failure of the incentive structure.

CEO, Goblinworks

1 person marked this as a favorite.

MTX pay to win: An MTX item is meaningfully better than the best item that can be created via player action in-game. No meaningful human interaction.

Selling Characters: A human had to play them to make them good, thus creating meaningful interaction with other humans in the process. The purchased character has no intrinsic superior benefit to a character you played from inception yourself.

Goblin Squad Member

DeciusBrutus wrote:
Xeen wrote:

There are more ways to use a second account then to break the rules. I can think of several but sorry, not sharing... (and if you cant think of it...)

{story about breaking the rules and getting banned}

Any advantage to having multiple accounts is probably a failure of the incentive structure.

Did you read Ryan's response? He listed many, but not the one I refer to.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Hudax wrote:
Ryan Dancey wrote:
You want to build & sell accounts. Eventually we'll have to have a system for this because not doing it will cause us more grief than directly supporting it. There are people who make a living making and selling MMO characters. You might be one of those people.

Temporarily lifting my "lurker" status.

I get that people will buy and sell accounts whether it's against the EULA or not. I get that MTXs are fine so long as they're cosmetic. But I don't get this.

A skilled/geared character is not cosmetic. How is supporting these third party transactions not supporting third party pay-to-win?

Once this support is in place, the obvious small step for GW to take is offer similar characters in the cash shop as MTXs. In that eventuality, could you explain how this would not be pay-to-win?

I recently quit WoW because they're sticking their big orc toes over the line with their latest cash shop ideas and I see the writing on the wall (one reason among many). People are on the forums in droves asking "Why can't I just buy a max level toon?" not getting why it isn't an appropriate question. It's like all of a sudden the colloquial meaning of pay-to-win changed from giving someone the slightest edge to giving someone a raid-ready toon.

It seems pay-to-win doesn't really mean anything anymore, and I would like to know what it will mean in PFO.

The simple fact is, Character sales, game money sales, and others like this can not be stopped. They can be slowed up a bit with a lot of effort. So why not just take that effort away from this and put it else where? If you cannot stop it, may as well make it part of the game and make some money off it.

The cash shops are a different story. Thats the game itself selling you stuff for cash. They are already selling you the game, then if they add items more powerful then player crafted stuff... They break their own game and people leave from boredom.

Best thing about a skill based sandbox, there are no max level characters.

Goblin Squad Member

Ryan Dancey wrote:

MTX pay to win: An MTX item is meaningfully better than the best item that can be created via player action in-game. No meaningful human interaction.

Selling Characters: A human had to play them to make them good, thus creating meaningful interaction with other humans in the process. The purchased character has no intrinsic superior benefit to a character you played from inception yourself.

Hey Ryan, are you planning to implement account to account character transfers? That is something I would be interested in.

Goblin Squad Member

Psyblade wrote:

If you go for a single account you will be hard pressed to specialise.

...

I know I will get a 2nd account just for the fact I will need a dedicated gatherer / crafter since I am not going to risk my pvp char to lose skill training time because of the need to focus on that.

It sounds like you're not aware that you can train multiple characters on a single account at the same time. And you can also log those multiple characters on a single account into the game at the same time.

If you are aware of that, then could you please explain how it makes a difference whether you have your dedicated gatherer / crafter on a different account?

Goblin Squad Member

Ryan Dancey wrote:
Selling Characters: A human had to play them to make them good, thus creating meaningful interaction with other humans in the process. The purchased character has no intrinsic superior benefit to a character you played from inception yourself.

To me, it's like the difference between leveling up all the necessary skills and harvesting all the necessary resources to make yourself a Sword, versus buying that Sword.

Goblin Squad Member

DeciusBrutus wrote:
Any advantage to having multiple accounts is probably a failure of the incentive structure.

I expect some folks will simply fail to understand this point.

51 to 100 of 127 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Licensed Products / Digital Games / Pathfinder Online / The EVE uproaor, how does it apply here? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.