Star Citizen | Wing Commander Reborn - Page 9
Forum Index > General Games |
Coriolis
United States1152 Posts
| ||
Noocta
France12574 Posts
On November 21 2012 05:53 CycoDude wrote: how about you talk to rsi first. e-mail sandi@cloudimperiumgames.com she should get you taken care of. . I'm sending one to see if it can help. Thanks. | ||
CycoDude
United States326 Posts
| ||
Psyonic_Reaver
United States4318 Posts
On November 21 2012 06:46 Coriolis wrote: I could probably do it, to be honest any CPU made in the past 4 years should handle it no sweat. Bandwith wise I know a guy who could host one off 1mb up, though only about 6 people before it became incredibly laggy. I think to start that would be fine. If it gets full all the time maybe we could do a chipin and donate to upgrade server. | ||
Coriolis
United States1152 Posts
| ||
Psyonic_Reaver
United States4318 Posts
| ||
HardlyNever
United States1258 Posts
My biggest concerns are that it is too big/ambitious to be executed or controlled. Even if they manage to do most (big if) of what they are advertising, with such a complex game it seems very easy to "break." By this I mean any number of hacks/bugs/exploits could be discovered and it seems too large (and the company too small) to have any chance of controlling it. My second concern is that they say it isn't "pay to win," but it seems almost exactly that. Not only can you start the game with amazing ships with the current pledge system, you can outright buy in-game currency (from what I've read on the official site). I don't really see how that isn't "pay to win." I realize doing this game without a publisher means they have to have a reliable way to make money, but it might compromise the fun of the game itself. I'll be watching this closely, as I really want this to succeed, but I'm honestly pretty skeptical right now... Chris Roberts has promised huge things in the past and hasn't really delivered. | ||
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom8727 Posts
On November 23 2012 03:49 HardlyNever wrote: I've been a space sim fan since wing commander 1. I played privateer and freelancer (which was good for what it was, but wasn't designed to last very long). This game, in theory, looks like everything a space-sim fan could ever hope for (and possibly more). My biggest concerns are that it is too big/ambitious to be executed or controlled. Even if they manage to do most (big if) of what they are advertising, with such a complex game it seems very easy to "break." By this I mean any number of hacks/bugs/exploits could be discovered and it seems too large (and the company too small) to have any chance of controlling it. My second concern is that they say it isn't "pay to win," but it seems almost exactly that. Not only can you start the game with amazing ships with the current pledge system, you can outright buy in-game currency (from what I've read on the official site). I don't really see how that isn't "pay to win." I realize doing this game without a publisher means they have to have a reliable way to make money, but it might compromise the fun of the game itself. I'll be watching this closely, as I really want this to succeed, but I'm honestly pretty skeptical right now... Chris Roberts has promised huge things in the past and hasn't really delivered. Go and ask them on their website? They are very good at responding to user concerns/complaints... EDIT: I asked in the chat on their website and was told the following: "The ships that you begin with by pledging lots of money are NOT amazing ships, and you would be able to acquire them by investing time in the game." "You can buy in game credits, but it will be limited" "Nothing is out of reach without spending any money in the game" "Better ships does not necessarily equal an easier/more fun game experience, the combat will be complex enough that the more skilled player should be able to win fights with a lesser ship" | ||
HardlyNever
United States1258 Posts
On November 23 2012 04:12 Jockmcplop wrote: Go and ask them on their website? They are very good at responding to user concerns/complaints... EDIT: I asked in the chat on their website and was told the following: "The ships that you begin with by pledging lots of money are NOT amazing ships, and you would be able to acquire them by investing time in the game." "You can buy in game credits, but it will be limited" "Nothing is out of reach without spending any money in the game" "Better ships does not necessarily equal an easier/more fun game experience, the combat will be complex enough that the more skilled player should be able to win fights with a lesser ship" Yeah I read some of those answers. TBH some of them seem decent/realistic, some seem like they don't really solve the problem (how high will the limit be on buying currency will be? Do you really think they are going to turn down peoples' money?). I do believe the pledge ships won't be absolutely top-end, but they will certainly give a big leg-up over people that have the basic start (less of a concern for me). The bigger issue with MMO or MMO-esque games is hacks and bots. While Blizzard does a decent job at controlling hacks in WoW, no company has ever really gotten a handle on botting. While creating a bot that can "dog-fight" really well and run hard missions might be difficult (but not impossible), creating a bot that runs an easy trade route over and over again (you're not playing it, who cares how boring it is), is definitely something feasible(and could completely wreck the economy in more ways than one if lots of people do it). I wouldn't expect them to have concrete or legitimate answers to these questions, as the game isn't even in alpha. And as always, they can promise the world on how hack-free and bot stringent they are going to be (almost every game developer does), it is all about the reality of the execution. Not trying to be overly negative on this, it is just stuff you have to wait until at least beta (if not release) to really get a sense of how good a job they are going to do in that department. | ||
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom8727 Posts
| ||
AntiGrav1ty
Germany2310 Posts
| ||
Psyonic_Reaver
United States4318 Posts
| ||
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On November 23 2012 06:28 AntiGrav1ty wrote: Not gonna lie. I find it pretty obnoxious that they want 6 million of crowdfunding, sell their game at retail price and they are gonna do the microtransaction shit on top of that. I am not happy with microtransactions as well. Those might work for F2P games but not for ones you pay up front. At best these should be cosmetic only, all these bullshit about buying ingame currency is just bullshit and will turn away a lot of people. | ||
CycoDude
United States326 Posts
On November 23 2012 03:49 HardlyNever wrote:My second concern is that they say it isn't "pay to win," but it seems almost exactly that. Not only can you start the game with amazing ships with the current pledge system, you can outright buy in-game currency (from what I've read on the official site). I don't really see how that isn't "pay to win." it's not pay to win because you can get the same items by playing the game. while you may have an advantage at start, it won't last. furthermore, the fact that someone starts out with a different ship than you doesn't affect your game unless you're being dumb and exploring the middle if "no man's land" in a stock ship vs a bunch of pirates in better ships. you can always stick to safer areas until you better equip your ship, or get a better ship. On November 23 2012 06:52 -Archangel- wrote: I am not happy with microtransactions as well. Those might work for F2P games but not for ones you pay up front. At best these should be cosmetic only, all these bullshit about buying ingame currency is just bullshit and will turn away a lot of people. the game costs money to make (a lot more than 6 million), and money to maintain. you are not required to spend any more money than you do to purchase the game. you do not need to buy anything in-game if you don't want; it's completely optional. | ||
AntiGrav1ty
Germany2310 Posts
| ||
HardlyNever
United States1258 Posts
On November 23 2012 09:10 AntiGrav1ty wrote: Yeah sure you can get items by playing. Just like you can get 10k gold by just playing in WoW. It doesnt matter if you can get them. Money for ingame advantage is always bad. At least stick to interface or cosmetics with micropayment. And that in a game that costs full retail and didnt even stem it's own production cost. This. Of course there is no "winning" in a game like this, so defining "pay to win" will also be a bit subjective, however if I can pay $100 or play 100 hours to get to certain(same) point, it feels like the guy who paid $100 and got to that point in a day "wins." While I would never pay that much for fake currency or trying to "get ahead" in a game, if I find out there are a lot of people who dropped 100s of extra dollars on the game, have amazing ships/equipment and are experiencing the "real game"(pvp, big shipments, making game affecting decisions and actions) while I'm stuck running pre-scripted pve events to build up some credits, I can't help be feel a little cheated and that it is indeed "pay to win." If you can bypass tens or hundreds of hours of playing (grinding, depending on what it is and how you look at it) by simply paying more, then you're going to have a massive community problem really quickly. These games are always a function (to some degree) of how much time you dump into them. If it becomes a time or money decision, I feel like the people who don't either a) devote their life to the game or b) are willing to drop a lot of real-life money into it are going to feel like they are completely left behind. It is early, and they keep assuring "skill will be able to overcome credits" etc., but what if you have someone that is decent at the game AND put a lot of money into it? That could feel very "pay-to-win"(pay to get ahead might be more accurate) to me. Something I learned from my WoW days is that a successful MMO has to have more than in-game currency massing(something harder to acquire like raid loot, etc.) in order to keep the game-play entertaining and level the playing field a bit between the "rich" and "poor" players. | ||
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom8727 Posts
| ||
HardlyNever
United States1258 Posts
On November 23 2012 10:14 Jockmcplop wrote: Remember that they are listening to community feedback, so you might as well take your concerns to them and see what they say, instead of writing it here where they are not going to read it. I'll probably post most of these concerns on the forums once I figure out exactly what I'm concerned about and how I want to express that. Bouncing them around here first seems like a good idea. | ||
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom8727 Posts
| ||
CycoDude
United States326 Posts
On November 23 2012 10:09 HardlyNever wrote:Of course there is no "winning" in a game like this, so defining "pay to win" will also be a bit subjective, however if I can pay $100 or play 100 hours to get to certain(same) point, it feels like the guy who paid $100 and got to that point in a day "wins." While I would never pay that much for fake currency or trying to "get ahead" in a game, if I find out there are a lot of people who dropped 100s of extra dollars on the game, have amazing ships/equipment and are experiencing the "real game"(pvp, big shipments, making game affecting decisions and actions) while I'm stuck running pre-scripted pve events to build up some credits, I can't help be feel a little cheated and that it is indeed "pay to win." If you can bypass tens or hundreds of hours of playing (grinding, depending on what it is and how you look at it) by simply paying more, then you're going to have a massive community problem really quickly. These games are always a function (to some degree) of how much time you dump into them. If it becomes a time or money decision, I feel like the people who don't either a) devote their life to the game or b) are willing to drop a lot of real-life money into it are going to feel like they are completely left behind. It is early, and they keep assuring "skill will be able to overcome credits" etc., but what if you have someone that is decent at the game AND put a lot of money into it? That could feel very "pay-to-win"(pay to get ahead might be more accurate) to me. Something I learned from my WoW days is that a successful MMO has to have more than in-game currency massing(something harder to acquire like raid loot, etc.) in order to keep the game-play entertaining and level the playing field a bit between the "rich" and "poor" players. great points! as had been mentioned before, there will be limits on how much money someone can spend to get in-game credits. we don't yet know what that is yet, and i suspect we won't until the game is a little further along in development and those issues are addressed and balanced before they get into the game. for example, there are already discussions about gaming the system in various ways (insurance fraud, etc) before the alpha is even out. the devs will know these issues well in advance, and you're obviously not the only person with these concerns. as for the concept of spending money to get credits and upgrade your ship faster, sure, those people will have that advantage. however, you can only upgrade your ship so much...eventually people who started with the stock ship and didn't pay anything will catch up. personally, i don't feel these things would affect my game play at all...i'll be doing my own thing independently. so what if someone starts with a constellation or corvette? it doesn't affect my game at all; i'll get what i want regardless of what they do or have. someone who plays a lot (or is good) and dumps money into the game...you have no control over that. it goes back to the first point, you can only upgrade things so far...eventually people will catch up if they play enough. if they only have a couple of hours a week to dedicate to the game, it's irrelevant that the money-for-credit system exists or not...other people who play a lot more would get ahead regardless. at least there's an option for people who can't play as much to still get cool hardware that would otherwise take too long to get. so...people who play a lot + spend money = upgrade quickly. people who play a lot = upgrade quickly. people who play less = upgrade slowly, BUT they have that money option if they want it. i do have experience with this having played tribes: ascend...you get xp (to unlock stuff or upgrade current hardware) based on time played. you can also spend money to get xp boosters so you can unlock things faster, or spend money to unlock new items right away. is it pay to win? NO! everything, aside from aesthetic items, can be unlocked with xp earned from playing the game. it's the same situation there...the people who play a lot, or started sooner, or spent some money will get new stuff faster. but there's only so much stuff you can get; eventually people catch up if they play long enough. finally, there will be some items that can't be bought, such as capturing enemy ships or finding cool hardware in some abandoned base. you can also find new jump points and sell their co-ordinates for a large profit. | ||
| ||