Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

Microtransactions - how far is too far?

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > General Discussion
Microtransactions - how far is too far?

Ignicity's Avatar


Ignicity
06.21.2012 , 11:33 PM | #41
Quote: Originally Posted by Tuscad View Post
Because companies are getting more ballsy and unfortunately people are willing to pay for anything, just look at some of the posts in this thread.
Yea! People are actually paying 15 bucks a month to post on these forums... geez

Esmeree's Avatar


Esmeree
06.21.2012 , 11:50 PM | #42
Quote: Originally Posted by Ellipsys View Post
At this point, ANY hint of heading down this road will cause an immediate cessation of subscription. I've already removed auto-renew, yet I wish to see the game improve to win another 3 months from me. However, I'll just say it plainly - This is a Subscription MMO. I expect to have access to the ENTIRE set of in-game content, COSMETIC CONTENT INCLUDED for the price of my subscription. Adding additional expenditures atop it is a breach of the tacit agreement of subscription. Yes, people can bleat on and on sheepishly that "durr that not what subscription mean etc." , but lets be reasonable...

In the West, the subscription model is the very thing that brought the MMO to prominence. Ultima Online, EverQuest, Dark Age of Camelot and even World of Warcraft's meteoric rise in subscriptions all came as a result of a pure subscription model (it wasn't until after their huge playerbase that Activision's tendrils started their inevitable greedspawn policies). This is why MMOs are a good value for entertainment - players pay a fixed (reasonable!) amount per month, between $5 and $15 or so, and have unlimited access to game content. Play as little or as much as you like. Spend your time obtaining just the right outfit or defeating the biggest bad guy. All content is open to you for your "entrance fee". I will NOT support the bastardization of this concept by the inclusion of additional fees once you've paid for entrance; its despicable double-dipping.

I don't care if "everyone else is doing it" - there's a reason why I've quit "everyone else" and have been less willing to invest in new games even on a trial basis. I don't want to see this greed validated by players who continue to support making games I would otherwise be interested in playing be more expensive and have less content? Unacceptable.

It is especially so for SWTOR which is so deficient in terms of content and polish compared to other modern MMOs and for the amount of money behind the project. It isn't feasible for ANYONE these days to say "oh no, but we need to charge you extra for cool graphics", but especially for EA/Bioware to even try to play poor saying "We need to do this to keep the game afloat", is twice as insulting. If the game is sinking, it is because of poor content and mismanagement. Think about it, there was a HUGE influx of players at launch and it retained relatively few because of its lack of solid polish and general cut-corners... now its going to say "We need to cut off more corners and sell them to you extra to make more money, when you weren't willing to spend 'less' earlier?" Come on now...
this

also please find a job , 15$ a month.. even i live in 3rd world country could afford that

WLpride's Avatar


WLpride
06.22.2012 , 12:04 AM | #43
primary type - account wide buff (char slot/legacy/xfer bank/other QoL type)
secondary type - in game luxury - pet/color/style/look
forbidden type - purchased levels/p2w buff/speed buff in PvP

lets see it

cyberfreaq's Avatar


cyberfreaq
06.22.2012 , 12:13 AM | #44
Aesthetics and fluff are fine for microtransactions.

How can that apply in TOR?
  • Improved companion customizations
  • Ship exterior and interior customizations
  • Legacy fluff
  • Character recustomization (like you do when you first create one) - including renaming
  • Gear coloring
  • Different color crystals (no different stats, but different colors)
  • Unique looking orange gear (with no mods or anything, just like social gear)

As long as one does not pay for actual content or any cr*p like that, it is not too far. Given the game is already free to play.

You can't imagine how many would pay for a simple skin or special customization, which have no actual impact on the game itself. League of Legends is a prime example of that. It is a game which survives 90% because of skin sales, nothing more.
So such a method can be applied here as well. And I am sure no one will object.
I.like.pie

IdrianDave's Avatar


IdrianDave
06.22.2012 , 12:19 AM | #45
Quote: Originally Posted by stineo View Post
I am of this point of view. When a game turns into a "pay to win" I am gone.
Yeah this sums up my feelings on the subject

cyberfreaq's Avatar


cyberfreaq
06.22.2012 , 12:28 AM | #46
Quote: Originally Posted by IdrianDave View Post
Yeah this sums up my feelings on the subject
That is true. I believe that we've been too blinded by the Asian type microtransaction system that we are dismissing the idea from the very start, even if it means a different implementation, more towards aesthetics rather than powerful items.

For years we've seen nothing but Asian f2p games which sell powerful items and damage boosts and so on. And we are right to think that f2p is a bad idea.
However, it is not the fault of the f2p idea, but the fault of those people who implemented it in their games.
And just like every badly implemented idea there better ways to use it. And I have given an example of that in my previous post here.

The number of current p2p games is something you can count on the fingers from one hand !
If f2p catches on (and it already is) more and more will lean towards this business model. So it is logical to assume that the devs will try to differentiate themselves more from the competition, otherwise they will lose players (it is much easier to lose people in a f2p game than in a p2p game).

And if the majority of players are against pay to win, then the devs will have to adapt, or eventually die.
Actual f2p p2w games are successful in Asia, but not so much in Europe and NA. The market here is generally different and has a different mentality.
So what I see is a competition between different MMOs to attract the most people. And the way the f2p model is implemented will be one of the aspects players will look at first.

The thing is we, as customers should always be open to new alternatives, because it is our money.
If it is 5$, 15$, 60$ or 10.000 $, it does not matter. The sum is irrelevant. The simple fact is that we are the ones paying and the game needs us to survive more than we need it. And at the end of the day, the developers should and must be open to alternatives, as long as they do not insult the customer.

A huge advantage of a mt system is that it brings many players in the game. The more players it attracts, the more potential buyers for a customization, a skin or fluff, meaning more money. As long as it is stuff we can live without, I am fine with the idea of mts. Who wants a skin or a legacy perk, fine, let them buy it. No one is forcing me to get one.
I.like.pie

fptackle's Avatar


fptackle
06.22.2012 , 02:24 AM | #47
I say bring on the microtransactions.

In particular, paid server transfers, additional character slots, renames (both for characters and for legacy), species changes, etc. My gaming experience changes as time moves on; being locked into a rigid decision made 6 months ago with the only options being "start over" or "deal with it" is pretty brutal.

After 4 months the Body #4 has lost it's appeal? Pay a few bucks and size down. Cathar introduced and you don't want to throw away 6 months of work in order to finally play one? Pay a few bucks and switch your guy over. Any decision that doesn't effect other players negatively is nobody else's business. What do I care how fast John levels with his new XP Boost? It's not like he's taking a portion of my experience out of the deal; nothing's actually changed for me. Same goes if somebody else wants to change their Race, Hairstyle, Gender, Name, etc. Does not effect me, so let them play however they enjoy most. Just don't start offering Blaster of +10,000 Scoundrel Slaying.

Mogsey's Avatar


Mogsey
06.22.2012 , 03:03 AM | #48
Anything Pay to win is a no no.

I mean in World of Tanks it's ruddy hilarious when a P2W shell takes the roof of your tank even though you managed to sneak up and get a few shots of first.

Yeah right, if they implement any such advantage items they can kiss this goodbye.

Nyla's Avatar


Nyla
06.22.2012 , 03:52 AM | #49
Quote: Originally Posted by cyberfreaq View Post
Aesthetics and fluff are fine for microtransactions.

How can that apply in TOR?
  • Improved companion customizations
  • Ship exterior and interior customizations
  • Legacy fluff
  • Character recustomization (like you do when you first create one) - including renaming
  • Gear coloring
  • Different color crystals (no different stats, but different colors)
  • Unique looking orange gear (with no mods or anything, just like social gear)

As long as one does not pay for actual content or any cr*p like that, it is not too far. Given the game is already free to play.

You can't imagine how many would pay for a simple skin or special customization, which have no actual impact on the game itself. League of Legends is a prime example of that. It is a game which survives 90% because of skin sales, nothing more.
So such a method can be applied here as well. And I am sure no one will object.
Thoses are content you are removing from the people that wants to pay 15$ and have a complete game like it was at launch.

Halfadozen's Avatar


Halfadozen
06.22.2012 , 03:54 AM | #50
Quote: Originally Posted by jarjarloves View Post
quick name one pay to play mmo that has microtransactions that pay for items that aren't cosmetic
lotro.