| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (197)

Posted: Aug 30th 2011 9:06AM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
LOL @ pics :-)

Posted: Aug 30th 2011 11:10AM Resurge said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified) I agree, absolutely epic selection of photos here - Eliot would be proud, now you just need a wacky non-sequiter in the title, and you're good to go!

oh, and yea i agree with you on this, companies are being greedy, and it's starting to show. Unfortunately, i don't really know a solution. The market will stand what the market will stand, and tbh the next company to put out a really stellar game that can compete with WoW on a significant level can sort of write the new rules as they go along. We can either go along with it, or we can sit on the outside looking in, all the while screaming "unfair!!" but i doubt it will change much.
Reply

Posted: Aug 30th 2011 11:32AM fallwind said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Resurge here's the thing though...

how much did it cost to develop EQ? how much did it cost to make SWTOR? And as for why... how many developers did it take in the 90's to make a game vs today? for pete's sake people this isn't hard math.

and yet people expect to pay the exact same fees? hell if you account for inflation your sub costs have gone down ~5% in the last ten years while the costs to make and maintain a game have gone up by a factor of 10-50. Used to be you could get a dev to make that new sword model because it was, what, 20 polygons and you had 5 animations of 10 frames each? there are more poly's in the average hand in new mmos then used to exist in whole models, that takes time, time costs money.

You are fully welcome to call me one of those who sing the praises of this "double dipping" but as a member of a single income household I for one can not afford $30-40/m sub fees and I'm rather fond of my AAA experience that I get with a sub based game combined with being able to pick and chose what upgrades *I* want to get in the months when money is not as tight.
Reply

Posted: Aug 30th 2011 12:15PM SFGamer69 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@fallwind

Much of what you are saying I can go with, except that..if the assets that are being drop into the "cash" shop are actual newly created art assets, then all is good to a certain extent. But if they are simply re-skinned/slightly altered versions of already existing artwork..then I would call foul. As someone in this industry on the art side of things, i can attest to how little or how long it takes to create a good amount of the assets I have seen in games that feature the sub + CS model. And sadly, many of them are simply using re-skinned assets.

In addition, though you don't "need" to have the vanity items that make up these shops, the devs will be inclined to create the "cooler" items specifically for the cash shops simply because they know that it's something people will want. Unless it's also available in game for a bit of time cost, I'd say again, foul.

But those are just my thoughts. Fact is, i am one of those that will not support a game that chooses to double dip in this way. As much as I love SWTOR, I'll will play the base game only, i will not support it's shops, and if those shops at any point provide obvious items of superior quality than can be obtained within the game itself, i will no longer support the game either.
Reply

Posted: Aug 30th 2011 1:07PM DeadlyAccurate said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@fallwind But what if it ended up costing you $30/month in order to play the game the way *you* wanted to? What if you paid your $15/month, and then in order to raid (or PvP or do dungeon instances or any part of the game you find most enjoyable) you had to buy a special ticket in the store. So, to play the game the way you're currently playing it, you end up spending another $15/month. Wouldn't you start to wonder what your subscription is even going for?

Reply

Posted: Aug 30th 2011 2:35PM fallwind said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
@DeadlyAccurate simple, then on the months where money is tight I don't buy the new raid(s), but can still play the base game for the base price. When the money is less tight I can buy the raids that came out that I missed. At least this way I get to keep in touch with my guildies and I can work on other parts of the game that I do have access to.

People are delusional if they don't realize the costs of making and maintaining a high quality MMO has gone through the roof (hasn't this very site mentioned time and time again how much TOR cost to make?). Those costs need to be paid somewhere, and unless you have a printing press in the basement that cost WILL be shouldered by the consumer.

It is the same with any industry, as the costs of production go up and up there is only so long that the manufacturer can continue to offer the same old price until they start operating at a loss. Those costs can either be forced on the consumer (you must buy everything we produce whether you are interested in it or not), or you can offer them a-la-carte.

I prefer the latter, for those who are willing to pay a lot more and get everything, well, you can STILL pay a lot and get everything... it just takes more than one transaction.
Reply

Posted: Aug 30th 2011 2:58PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified) Please stop replaying to my post 1000 times. Make your own!
Reply

Posted: Aug 30th 2011 6:19PM Ordegar said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@fallwind

Are you forgetting that we buy the game before we subscribe? Subscriptions are not for paying for development; buying the game pays for development. And, original development costs include game asset building tools in most cases, which costs will not be incurred in further development such as expansions which we pay almost as much as the original game for. If pre-orders are any indication, Bioware will easily make a nice profit just on the sale of Star Wars: TOR; but they know from their Dragon Age games that people will pay extra for more stuff, so they will have a cash shop for TOR.

I like the way Turbine has their Dungeons and Dragons Online and The Lord of the Rings Online games set up. They have a cash shop, but subscribers get shop currency with their subscription, AND players can earn the shop currency by playing the game. They also have the option to not subscribe, and pay for your game-play a la carte through the cash shop. Note that the upcoming The Lord of the Rings Online expansion is not free, to subscribers or non-subscribers; they're recouping their development costs from sales.
Reply

Posted: Aug 30th 2011 9:07AM blackcat7k said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
My main problem with cash shops is that inevitably lead to Pay to Win items being sold in the stores. It seems that developers don't understand that when their games loose the sense of fair play that many people won't hang around when people can pay to skip aspects of the gameplay.

Posted: Aug 30th 2011 12:37PM real65rcncom said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@blackcat7k

WoW didn't put Pay To Win items in their shops after how many years?

Yeah, it's inevitiable alright. /petfacepalm
Reply

Posted: Aug 30th 2011 1:24PM Apakal said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@blackcat7k

Slippery slopes are slippery.
Reply

Posted: Aug 30th 2011 1:38PM Masync9 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@blackcat7k

Spot on! Its too tempting to press for more cash and the simple reality is people are baited for it and they are responding. Classic business is hit them, hit them again and if they don't bite then find another way to get at their $$$.

In the past most did not like these "money systems" but now the current populous seems content to get their hard earned $$$ vacuumed right out of them.

Maybe it has to do with short term memory loss, need for quick ego satisfaction, fast food culture, etc. Whatever it is, as long as people keep paying then Corps will continue to push more down the same path.

Reply

Posted: Aug 30th 2011 2:19PM Ehra said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@real65rcncom

Pff, people on the WoW forums used to argue that the mounts alone were pay-to-win because it saved you so much gold in mount and riding training costs across every character you made on every server.

Once people get it in their minds that cash shops are evil, there's no arguing.


If people want their MMOs to be pretty and have all of these complex features, developers are going to have to pull in more money than through the $15 a month that's supported the genre since the 90's. People can complain about the "forced" cost of the cash shop all they want; but you can't compare it to just that and the $15 a month sub. The issue is really between spending $30 every month between your sub and the cash shop or $20-30 a month on the sub.

Developers need more money to keep developing all of this complex content and high end art; and they're going to get it one way or another.
Reply

Posted: Aug 30th 2011 2:40PM fallwind said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Ehra exactly.... not to mention that once you buy your sparkle pony you don't need to buy it again next month.

$15 + buy what you want *once*
vs
$30-40 every month for every item whether you want it or not.

Unless they come out with $15-20 a month in new content for the shop (unlikely) then it is cheaper for the player in the long run to have the shop as you only need to buy what they add to fuel your completist needs.
Reply

Posted: Aug 30th 2011 2:43PM real65rcncom said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Apakal: Your slippery slope comment makes no sense. It's internet meme.

How long has WoW had a cash shop? And how long did it take them to sell Pay to Win items?

Yep. Long time. Nope, still haven't sold any. There are other games as well that don't sell PTW cash shops.
-----------------------------

Masync9 said: "Spot on! Its too tempting to press for more cash and the simple reality is people are baited for it and they are responding. Classic business is hit them, hit them again and if they don't bite then find another way to get at their $$$."


Please see the above comment. It apparently wasn't too tempting to WoW and other games so this line of thinking is just bad logic. It's just your own fears but not how every game does it.
-------------------
Reply

Posted: Aug 30th 2011 3:20PM Apakal said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@real65rcncom

Slippery Slope makers perfect sense. Its not an internet meme, its a long-standing logical fallacy in regards to suggesting that because of A, B will follow, even though there's no real evidence to suggest that B would in fact be the next step. Its basically an assumption argued as fact.

Blackcat is suggesting that because a cash shop is in a game, it will inevitably sell Pay-2-Win items. But as you've nicely pointed out, WoW has a cash shop that sells only vanity items (as do other games, or at the very worst sell items that are also attainable in game).

In The Secret World, since gear is entirely vanity and most all of combat is dependent on the skills you choose and the role you intend to fill (deck-building mechanics basically with the exception of weapons I suppose), I find it hard to believe that TSW's cash shop will in any way be Pay-2-Win, unless they flat out sell skills; and even then, those skills will logically also be available in game, so its basically a moot point.
Reply

Posted: Aug 30th 2011 9:46PM blackcat7k said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Apakal

WoW's cash shop items are vanity, but they're cash only. There's no in game way to obtain the items sold in the shops. That doesn't mean much to the average player, but I do know some that were put of by this since they enjoy collecting mounts, and pets. To slap 10-25 dollars on each of those items is kind of over the top.

The Secret World is a Funcom game.Funcom's Age of Conan already allows you to buy armor sets. It doesn't allow you buy the best sets of the game but they do allow you to buy items that a player would have to earn through gameplay. Will the TSW do this? Who knows, what I do know is that a company is not the customers friend, they are a business.

None these companies come out and make a clause saying that they won't make Pay-to-Win items. They always leave that option open to themselves. Realize that before you believe a company has a consumer's best interest at heart in making a cash shop.
Reply

Posted: Aug 31st 2011 2:16AM ClownyDaggers said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@blackcat7k

"a company is not the customers friend, they are a business."

Any service-related company with that business model is a company that is sure to fail. If Funcom wants my money, they need to listen to the players and price their game fairly. I was super-excited for this game, but no way in hell I'm paying monthly fees for a game with half the items locked away in a cash shop, especially not when there a so many other top-quality games out there that stick to one pricing model.
Reply

Posted: Aug 30th 2011 9:08AM Nerves said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
For me , really depends on what's in the shop. Cash shops are a slippery slope, though. LoTRO has completely jumped the shark in this department, and any semblance of 'convenience, not pay to win' is long gone. If funcom can somehow restrain themselves from offering combat bonuses from the store, that for me is enough. Am I going to buy anything in TSW cash shop? Probably not. Maybe. Probably, but just a little.

Posted: Aug 30th 2011 11:39AM happyfish said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Nerves My favorite part of "convenience" not "advantage" is those stupid maps that drop just to show that everything in the store can be gotten in game, except stuff you want, like stat tomes and relic scrolls. Lol we had a "map to hobbiton" drop off some boss last night. I like when people try to sell that stuff for 20g in the trade channels :)


Reply

Featured Stories

MMO Week in Review: Happy New Year!

Posted on Dec 28th 2014 8:00PM

The Stream Team: Warlords of Draenor dungeon fun

Posted on Dec 28th 2014 7:00PM

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW