Goblin Squad Member
|
The most important thing to know about a Titan is that it's not something you could rationally ever expect to make yourself. Making one requires the labor of thousands of players. That's why they're not only valuable, they're rare.It may take hundreds of dollars, but I could buy one with real world money. (thousands?)Apparently $7600 to be exact, according to this:
http://jumponcontact.com/2010/02/the-ships-of-eve-online/...and might I add: holy s***!
Great link thanks!
So I wonder, if I bought a titan, who would get it in the divorce settlement.... lol
Better yet, what would I have to give away to keep it....
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The most important thing to know about a Titan is that it's not something you could rationally ever expect to make yourself. Making one requires the labor of thousands of players. That's why they're not only valuable, they're rare.
OK, everyone, it sounds like we have a goal!
Titan by the end of Early Enrollment! We can do it!
<begins putting up Rosie the Riveter posters>
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think that's going to be the beauty of this game. PvPers aren't going to be rolling in, a step from demi-god status with their leet PvP gear and wafflestomping other players.
Death has meaning. And a hefty cost. There might be an unspoken rule that a person who is about to die might /surrender and offer the winner gold, items or even service in exchange for all their rare and costly gear not being destroyed/looted before they get back.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't play eve, but am I understanding this correctly? $7,600 real world dollars for an imaginary warship that could theoretically be destroyed by other players?
Does it have a womprat sized port that leads to the main reactor?
Apparently a continuing design flaw...I don't play eve, but am I understanding this correctly? $7,600 real world dollars for an imaginary warship that could theoretically be destroyed by other players?
Does it have a womprat sized port that leads to the main reactor?
Ever see the family guy Star Wars crossover?
Day of the battle:
Stewie Vader: "Could we put a board over it or something?"
Mook: "Well, if money is no object we could do it today...or we could get estimates"
Stewie Vader: "Get estimates."
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Apparently a continuing design flaw...I don't play eve, but am I understanding this correctly? $7,600 real world dollars for an imaginary warship that could theoretically be destroyed by other players?
Does it have a womprat sized port that leads to the main reactor?
Ever see the family guy Star Wars crossover?
Day of the battle:
Stewie Vader: "Could we put a board over it or something?"
Mook: "Well, if money is no object we could do it today...or we could get estimates"
Stewie Vader: "Get estimates."
LOL Yeah, I have seen it. Pretty funny.:)
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
While you could technically arrange to buy one as an individual, practically you can not actually do so. Titans have restrictions about where they can travel, how they travel, and what happens when the pilot flying them logs off which make them incredibly vulnerable.
Even if you managed to find a Titan-capable Alliance that would sell you one, after the purchase you would basically be stuck deep in that Alliance's territory, and even if they did not simply turn on you and kill the Titan as a security threat, you'd be faced with running a gauntlet of hostile ships and systems the minute you emerged from the seller's systems. Without hundreds of other pilots to support you, and a secure system to fy to as a destination, your odds of keep that ship intact are close to zero.
Like many things in EVE, Titans are not for lone wolves. That pisses some people off. You can't be über in a good sandbox MMO just by being real-world rich in time or money. You're going to need to be a social participant.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
While you could technically arrange to buy one as an individual, practically you can not actually do so.
Yeah, if you read the article on that websites blog that goes along with that image, he basically talks about how Titans are only ever really owned and controlled by HUGE alliances and organizations. This also makes estimating their actual value very difficult because they are never really sold over the open market.
I've actually never played EVE myself, but I find that blog very informative. I only started reading about EVE recently after learning about PFO and what a sandbox MMO was. I do find it fascinating!
Like many things in EVE, Titans are not for lone wolves. That pisses some people off. You can't be über in a good sandbox MMO just by being real-world rich in time or money. You're going to need to be a social participant.
Also, this ^^. As much as I love being a lone-wolf, I also love social interaction in a persistent world environment. So this comment sounds like it bodes well for a lot of people concerned in this thread.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally, I dislike seeing people buy anything made in-game with real world money. I know it may be the new way for game companies to make income rather than subscription fees, but I still don't like it. I keep my in-game and out-of-game as separate as possible.
I know...I'm a dinosaur.
I'm with Hobs on this one. However, PFO really doesn't strike me as much of a "gear" game in the same sense that most other MMO's are....so while buyng gear with RMT is still kinda offensive from an ideological standpoint....in the end, I don't think it really gets one all that much in terms of real power in PFO. Hopefully I'm not wrong about that assumption.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That said, an Alliance that could field a few titans in addition to the main warfleet would be incredibly powerful. I've just started EvE, and people tell me that holding a Titan in reserve, then warping into the battle once the enemy fleet has started to move, specifically moving in ABOVE or BELOW them can really screw with their fleet tactics.
Furthermore, the sheer destructive power of a Titan, coupled with it's thick shields and armor plating, make it a formidable threat to any sizeable fleet, especially when you factor in it's ability to 'jump' a fleet BY ITSELF into an otherwise locked-down sector.
With the corporate hanger, it's entirely possible for the Titan itself to act like a Carrier ship, ferrying agile but otherwise fragile fighters into the fight. Plus it has it's own drones, which depending upon who you talk to, should be additional fighters to cripple equally large ships who have trouble targeting smaller vessels or repair-drones to keep their shield and hull operational for longer.
If a Player in Pathfinder Online ends up at the 'Titan' level ... they're toast.
Somebody is walking around with millions of gold-coin's worth of items and hundreds of hours of crafting, plus the training costs in time and money, yes, they're going to be !@#$ing hard to kill.
But the payoff will be soooooooo worth it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You're going to need to be a social participant.
This was one of the earliest realities that I really grasped and embraced about PFO. It turned my "normal" behavior upside-down, and caused me to realize the importance of joining a larger social organization - even made me willing to do so very early and based solely on my interaction with others on these boards.
I expect it won't be quite as stark in PFO as it is in EVE, though.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If you can invent a system that keeps people from exchanging real money for virtual goods, while still retaining the idea that characters should be able to exchange items and buy and sell items on an In-game market economy, you will be rich beyond imagining. Every MMO publisher on earth will license your idea - and not a few national governments will too.
Ryan,
Respectfully, there is a difference between being able to prevent something from being sold through a black market and officialy sanctioning the sale of something through a Developer provided/supported mechanism. Same holds true for real world goods as well. At least forcing someone to use black-market channels imposes some risks and downsides (market inflation, security threats, stolen ID's/Payment Info) that don't exist through legitimately sanctioned channels.
I'm not going to beat GW about the head for needing to bend to the economic pressures of running an MMO today and frankly you guys seem to be going for one of the least egrigious examples of RMT that I've seen. Still that doesn't mean that being unable to prevent something is the ethical or functional equivalent of officialy supporting it. I'm sure you guys will be unable to prevent exploits or account hacking with 100 percent surety...but that doesn't mean you are going to officialy condone thier use and provide a sanctioned mechanism to engage in such activity.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
At least forcing someone to use black-market channels imposes some risks and downsides...
The unfortunate reality behind that is that Goblinworks will end up paying huge costs in terms of customer service when their customers experience those "downsides". The vast majority of WoW's customer service is dealing with players who got hacked because they bought gold, but since there's not a hard and fast way for Blizzard to differentiate the people who got hacked buying gold from innocent customers, they have to give all their customers the benefit of the doubt.
If there's a huge black market for something, that's a sign that the legitimate market is too regulated and should be loosened up.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
@Ryan, I hope you find a way to make money without resorting to the things I see in other games such as:
- Lottery Tickets - treasure chests that can only be opened with keys that can only be bought in the cash shop.
- Supremacy Goods - "best-in-class" goods that can only be bought in the cash shop.
- Pay-to-Cheat - cash shop items that allow the player to circumvent a rule, like removing a lockout timer.
That said, I do want to emphasize the part where I said "I hope you find a way to make money" :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@GrumpyMel - I think letting people spend real money to make playing my game more fun is a good thing, not a bad thing.
Ryan,
Fair enough. I simply offer for your consideration that things which enhance some peoples fun, detract from others and taken to an extreme will push an activity into something that is no longer even considered a "game" by many.
Example: If a team in softball were allowed to purchase extra "strikes" or "outs" some people might consider that "fun" others wouldn't and would no longer consider said activity a "game" anymore. It might be an "interactive form of entertainment" but "games" tend to have very strict definitions for some of us... YMMV.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If there's a huge black market for something, that's a sign that the legitimate market is too regulated and should be loosened up.
Agree to disagree, Nihimon. There is a huge market for stolen ID's and stolen credit cards. That doesn't mean that stolen ID's and stolen credit card info should have a legitimate market channel.
Some people want all sorts of things that are not ethical and come at the expense of others.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not interested in any game where I don't have an unfair advantage. :-)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...Account sharing is by definition against most terms of service, which is in general a pre-req to pay someone elses subscription...
If I want to pay for my son's or my daughter's play I should be able to. It is much more convenient to do so using my own plastic than it is to continuously buy them pre-paid game cards.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If there's a huge black market for something, that's a sign that the legitimate market is too regulated and should be loosened up.Agree to disagree, Nihimon. There is a huge market for stolen ID's and stolen credit cards. That doesn't mean that stolen ID's and stolen credit card info should have a legitimate market channel.
Some people want all sorts of things that are not ethical and come at the expense of others.
I would suggest the black market for stolen IDs and stolen credit cards is not remotely "huge" relative to the ID and credit card user base in the same way that the market for buying gold is "huge" relative to the total WoW user base.
Unless you're going to suggest that some 5% of legitimate credit card users also buy stolen credit cards...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think this is definitely promoted to the "hot buttons league" including:
1. Monetization (impact on gameplay)
2. Alignment (evergreen!)
3. PvP
4. Kickstarter exclusives?
maybe one or two others.
Nihimon, appears on the right tracks. Might need to hold GW to certain community consensus or at least negotiation:
1. Ok types of MT's
2. No-go types of MT's
3. Fuzzy types that need a bit of debate
4. Agreement and Conensus
5. Reassessment/double-check after implimentation ie on parole/bail!
There's always going to be some arm-wrestle in this, as it's commercial but if there is check with the players, I think that's a good sign instead of that hideous feeling playing big corporate company games, where you feel the devs are brainstorming ways to milk/leech more money from all the players (edit: scrubs original analogy) - it's more the disconnect between doing a "fun" activity while the devs are manipulating behind the scenes that is the really grating thing about some games out there on the market. I think what Ryan is saying above, is that the emphasis is not this, but on allowing players to purchase more fun (obviously not screwing over other players!), so providing that extra value, not forcing it on players via coercive means - before they bolt through the shop door! ;)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Bringslite, I very much resent every dime I've given Vanguard for their "Adventurer's Packs", which are bags that have about 50% more space than the largest player-crafted bags.
I also resent every dime I've spent buying Skeleton Keys to unlock their stupid treasure chests, which usually have useless crap but occasionally have something extremely useful/valuable.
The most important thing to know about a Titan is that it's not something you could rationally ever expect to make yourself. Making one requires the labor of thousands of players. That's why they're not only valuable, they're rare.It may take hundreds of dollars, but I could buy one with real world money. (thousands?)Apparently $7600 to be exact, according to this:
http://jumponcontact.com/2010/02/the-ships-of-eve-online/...and might I add: holy s***!
Great link thanks!
So I wonder, if I bought a titan, who would get it in the divorce settlement.... lol
Better yet, what would I have to give away to keep it....
As far as I understand RL you don't own the EVE ship. The CCP is providing a service to you (game account) that includes using any ship owned by the character you play. I guess that services are not subject to divorce settlement so you (probably) wouldn't lose that. Of course nothing would prevent your ex-wife from finding you in game and shooting you down.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Bringslite, I very much resent every dime I've given Vanguard for their "Adventurer's Packs", which are bags that have about 50% more space than the largest player-crafted bags.
I also resent every dime I've spent buying Skeleton Keys to unlock their stupid treasure chests, which usually have useless crap but occasionally have something extremely useful/valuable.
If I had a dime for every dollar I've wasted...
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's a good theory making the rounds in the MMO development community that goes like this:
In the beginning, a lot of people who played MMOs felt rewarded when they did something first, best, most often or most complete. Call these people "achievers".
The presence of these people drove a lot of design decisions in MMOs. Not surprisingly, there may be a high correlation between the kinds of people who work on MMOs and these kinds of players.
This is where the "grind" came from. The idea that there's a value in just persevering to the end, regardless of how boring and unfun that process is, some folks got a lot of positive reinforcement from having done the grind.
For these people, anything that allows you to short-circuit the grind reduces their reward for completing it. If getting the thing at the end of the grind becomes easier, it de facto makes the time & effort the "achievers" spent in getting that thing less valuable to them.
Do this enough times and the "achievers" ragequit. They go find some other game that is closer to their platonic ideal where they're rewarded for simply being more willing to commit to the game than others.
The theory is that the "achievers" are starting to burn out. They're finally reaching the end of their own tolerance for the grind. They're increasingly likely to value "having fun" over "finishing hard stuff most other people don't". And since there's a high assumed correlation between these kinds of people and the kinds of people who make MMOs, there's an implicit connection that the shift in many MMOs to reward "just having fun" and the expense of "grinding" is due in part to that shift in attitude.
If this theory is accurate, the remaining "achievers" will get increasingly frustrated as they see game after game shifting emphasis from "achievement" focused rewards to "fun" focused rewards. But the shift is likely inevitable, as the 20+ million MMO players in the market are going to get what they want regardless of how loud the complaints are from the folks being left behind as the games change.
Pathfinder Online is going to have some grind. You're going to have to work hard to get some rewards. But we're not making the grind the central driving element of the game design. If you want, you'll be able to use real money to buy shortcuts. The clever twist (if it can be said to be clever at this point) is that the shortcuts are produced by achievers.
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
@Nihimon - putting a game element with selective, reducing positive feedback into a design is one of the quickest ways to induce psychological addiction in a human being. It was the thing that transformed Magic: the Gathering from a curiosity into a world-beating brand that restructured a whole industry. It's the reason Las Vegas exists. To some extent, it explains the behavior of otherwise rational investors in the stockmarket chasing improbable returns.
The rapid proliferation of that design pattern into MMOs is due to their prevalence in Asia, where they're just an expected part of many entertainment experiences. The influence of Asian developers and Asian investors in western games is going to drive further introduction of those systems in a lot of the entertainment you'll see in the future, for the simple reason that it works. It gets people to pay a lot more money for their entertainment than they otherwise would.
Caveat emptor.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If you want, you'll be able to use real money to buy shortcuts. The clever twist (if it can be said to be clever at this point) is that the shortcuts are produced by achievers.
I really hope my intuitive understanding of this statement is the same as yours.
I have no problem whatsoever with giving you real money for something that I can then sell to other players for in-game Coin to make my life easier. In fact, I think that rewarding your "free players" for making life easier for your "paying customers" is spot-on brilliant.
Even more, my wife and I have a very clear understanding that the money we spend on gaming is in lieu of spending that money going to a bar, etc. So, I really don't have a problem occasionally (okay, infrequently at best) dropping $100 on a weekend spree.
I just hope you're able to give me things to spend that money on that I value without resentment. I imagine you want the same, and that we both want me to still be giving you my money 10 years from now when The Seventh Veil shows up in a PFRPG source book :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Bringslite, I very much resent every dime I've given Vanguard for their "Adventurer's Packs", which are bags that have about 50% more space than the largest player-crafted bags.
I also resent every dime I've spent buying Skeleton Keys to unlock their stupid treasure chests, which usually have useless crap but occasionally have something extremely useful/valuable.
I have to admit, to me, that is the developers sticking two fingers up at me and waving their tongue/raspberry for extras!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm just saying that, if I resent the money I give you, I'll start looking for ways to make myself stop. I'm giving Vanguard money right now, but I resent the hell out of it, and I can't wait to stop. I don't want to ever feel that way about PFO.... it works...
Caveat emptor.
I think for a long-term partnership with a game world, this strategy is short-sighted way of treating the customer. Also people eventually wise up. And I'm sure players are; even kids who might have already been exposed to MTs on smart devices; their tolerance and "detection of skinnerbox carrots" I guess is going to be sharper going forwards into the future?
Generally with mmorpgs if the game launches with severe conditions to start earning profit, or in a market where it has not stood out or with F2P and a strong incentive to monetize as fast as possible the most number of people - then the monetization is going to be aggressive and the devs are going to try all the tricks in the book to get the customers to cough up cash.
If the game is doing well on it's own merits, and does not have that "mortgage" I think that sort of scenario works in favour of a symbiotic relationship between players and devs. EVE's success very much is in that category of contract.
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
Most players don't wise up - they quit anyway. A VERY successful MMO might be able to keep 20-30% of its players on a long-term basis. The reason these kinds of "slot machine" design patterns are being introduced into MMOs is because they massively increase the amount of money the game extracts from the 70-80% of players who are going to quit anyway.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Nihimon
If you are conscious and capable of making your own decisions, how can you resent a purchase that you make of your own free will?
Well, I can be "conscious and capable of making [my] own decisions" and still be human and subject to common human failings. As Ryan said above, "it works".
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
I start resenting microtransactions when the program offers me an item with only one way of interacting with it, and that interaction tells me to select a payment option.
Crates that need keys (even if those keys can technically be found) are the best example, but things like EQ's appearance items also tick me off. Note that I don't typically need to actually purchase those things in order for me to resent them.
Things that don't link directly to a paywall don't bother me nearly as much; when I run out of plat in EQ, I don't get a pop-up reminding me I can buy Krono (PLEX-equivalent) and resell it to fund a tailoring binge. I don't resent it when I do drop cash on Krono (it helps that the market is inefficient enough that one can slowly profit from arbitrage with a large initial bankroll.
In short, what should be effective marketing of MTX makes me more likely to ragequit.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Most players don't wise up - they quit anyway. A VERY successful MMO might be able to keep 20-30% of its players on a long-term basis. The reason these kinds of "slot machine" design patterns are being introduced into MMOs is because they massively increase the amount of money the game extracts from the 70-80% of players who are going to quit anyway.
Ah I think I see where a cash shop works in PFO and what it's function is. Basically it's to "help" those 70-80% if they don't convert or dont' wish to convert to longer-term engagement with the game. Why not, in that case.
I think the point that makes the cash conversion tolerable to long term players NOT trying to 'pay to win' is that the long term game is more determined by social interactions. It's possible to imagine one settlement who all 'pay to win' and gain some advantage, but 'churn' (item theft/destruction/other factors) will still even out that advantage unless they are constantly paying up big-time. Outside of that scenario, whether or not a SPECIFIC player is 'paying to win' is less important for their role in the larger game, since things not reducable to game mechanics (that are 'purchasable') are just as valuable to larger scale organizations. Sure, being friendly to the 'pay to play' crowd will have benefit to organizations, but just because somebody doesn't want to 'pay to play' doesn't mean they will be shunned by such groups. And realistically, look at the large range of governance options: A long-term succesfull group who has had dedicated members from the beginnning can even implement governance which grants more power to those who demonstrate 'intangible'/un-purchasable qualities, while still accepting 'pay to play' characters and providing them the chance to prove themselves, those in it for the long haul (regardless of pay to play) may well have a priviledged position - because they are 'force multipliers' for the settlements' 'pay to play' members. It's easy enough to see how players who join very early can continue to play succesfully whether or not they 'pay to play', but even new players who join down the road should be able to find ways to cooperate with established groups who recognize their contributions regardless of 'pay to play'/wealth.
I do agree that the devil is in the details and balancing the exact degrees of power shift that 'pay to play' can achieve. And functionally, the higher the price that GW can command for cash to (in game) gold conversion, the less disruptive it will be. I don't know how they will govern that, whether a floating mechanism solely to maximize cash-flow, or some modified system. Probably the initial phases of the game will have strong limitations just not to overwhelm the game economy, and eventually let market demand / cash-flow maximization concerns to progressively determine conversion rates. It seems in GW's interest for the game to develop it's own organic economy not signifigantly distorted by 'pay to play' at least at the beginning, since if 'pay to play' is the main factor from the beginning and organic economy will be hard to develop. So early adopters shouldn't have to worry too much about signifigant 'pay to play' distortion at first, and while it may rise later, the early adopters should still be in the best position regardless: later 'pay to play' players will be WORKING for them :-).
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually the cash shop in Pathfinder Online is to increase the revenue we get per player above the default $15/mo subscription average that most current Western MMOs charge without having to get into a huge PR battle over having a premium-priced subscription for a game that's undergoing continuous Crowdforging.
Pathfinder Online is going to be pretty far from the cutting edge of modern MMO design - it is not being engineered into a Frankengame that is really just a badly disguised Skinner box / Vegas casino for an elite group of wealthy patrons, nor is it being built around the idea that most players will be casual "once in a while" visitors from whom a few pennies can be extracted, but which constitute a huge audience in bulk.
It's going to look a lot more like a game from the mid '00s that assumes players are very active and extremely engaged, but we want a relatively flat revenue curve where most players contribute something close to the average revenue.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Ryan,
I believe the dynamic changes a bit when you have games that involve DIRECT PLAYER COMPETITION. It may simply be an "achiever" that feels cheated when you allow someone to purchase a "shortcut" that gets a player toward an end goal more quickly.....and I'll admit from a purest persepective that may well apply to my feelings.
However when players are in direct competition with one another (as much of PFO seems geared toward). However, I believe a much broader base of people would consider it "cheating" to allow players to purchase direct play advantages when players are in direct competition. Even when said advantages may be achievable in play through other means.
Is it acceptable to purchase on demand power plays in hockey or penalty shots in soccer or basketball? Many developers seem intent on convincing us that it is. I remain unconvinced.....I also believe players ARE cheating when purchasing advantages in PVE, however in that instance the effect is largely limited to the individual themselves....with competitive play others are involved as well.