Star Citizen: Chris Robert`s new space sim (the Wing Commander guy)

[BrightCandle]

Planet side 2 ends up being pay 2 win because the grind to get stuff is so long, and your character is so crippled without it that despite everything being available it ends up being P2W anyway. Buying anything non cosmetic has the chance of p2w depending on the mechanics of the game and how long it takes to get those things. So far the numbers aren't encouraging, its a significant investment in time and grind to match those that paid. So star citizen is a pay 2 win game from what we currently know, and it appears they are even adding combat matching to try and counter the negative problems it brings.

 

[irishScott]

So basically what you are saying is to counter the inherient disadvantage they intend to match you off with people with equally crippled gear. Presumably that also means less reward for the PvP to begin with. Either that or you can go play on your own and not play the same Star Citizen game everyone else is, the one where those who spent more money get to rape and pillage the rest. Its a real possibility that will be necessary but one of the big draws of this game is its MMO appeal.

I know some people don't see a problem here but I do, I have seen this happen time and time again in games where a real benefit is dangled out to make money out of customers (some of the worst behaviour especially for a game that is already being sold) that gives them either nothing or a lot of benefit. The end result is sometimes a game people abandon in droves, not because the game is bad but because its unbalanced by design. If you throw the people who refuse to buy a $100 ship together they at least don't see the unbalance initially but just with WoT eventually it will catch up and you'll be facing something you can't even hurt because you outgrew kindergarten.

If you have an Idris at the beginning you will probably turn the PvP flag on. You'll go PvP more and that is what you'll get more experience and skill in. Ultimately you start ahead of someone who didn't spend the money and that either makes the "free players" not PvP or make their own game or only play with the other "free players" until such time as they can't anymore.

These mechanics don't fix it, there is no game mechanic I know of that fixes an inbalance in the game implemented for the purpose of making money. Star trek online charges for ships, the end result is to compete at PvP you need to spend serious money in that game, despite all the apparent things that say you don't have to. This has a lot of potential to end badly.

I've played Star Trek Online, and I quit because the costs to buy decent ships were ridiculous and clearly designed to coerce you to pay, you'd have to spend multiple hundreds of hours to get the STO equivalent of an Idris without paying hard cash. We've been promised that Star Citizen will avoid exactly that.

You're also seem to be forgetting the fact that there is no "experience" or "levels" in Star Citizen, there is only skill at the game and reputation. If you're in an Aurora and for some stupid reason are facing an Idris alone, you have the option to run. In UEE protected space, which from what we've told will be a sub-universe unto itself and not just be a few starter systems, PVP will be all but impossible if someone doesn't want it and will be balanced such that the player doesn't get an unfair fight.

You clearly haven't been paying that much attention, because you're criticizing what is likely the most equal, new-player friendly MMO ever designed for being unequal and hostile to new players; and you're making a lot of demonstrably false assumptions to do so.

 

[irishScott]

Planet side 2 ends up being pay 2 win because the grind to get stuff is so long, and your character is so crippled without it that despite everything being available it ends up being P2W anyway. Buying anything non cosmetic has the chance of p2w depending on the mechanics of the game and how long it takes to get those things. So far the numbers aren't encouraging, its a significant investment in time and grind to match those that paid. So star citizen is a pay 2 win game from what we currently know, and it appears they are even adding combat matching to try and counter the negative problems it brings.

Apples and Oranges. Star Citizen is not Star Trek Online or Planetside 2, not by a longshot. It doesn't even have the same payment model. Chris Roberts has expressly promised the opposite of this complaint.

 

[Nintendesert]

Planet side 2 ends up being pay 2 win because the grind to get stuff is so long, and your character is so crippled without it that despite everything being available it ends up being P2W anyway. Buying anything non cosmetic has the chance of p2w depending on the mechanics of the game and how long it takes to get those things. So far the numbers aren't encouraging, its a significant investment in time and grind to match those that paid. So star citizen is a pay 2 win game from what we currently know, and it appears they are even adding combat matching to try and counter the negative problems it brings.

I don't disagree with you about long grinds designed to coerce the player being a cancer on the industry. This is related to DLC and microtransations too.

Due to the way you're zoned against players similar to yourself, I'm curious as to what your definition of win is? If you're primarily fighting people of the same ship and skill level, is it just an overall someone out there is in a better ship that's bothering you?

 

[irishScott]

I don't disagree with you about long grinds designed to coerce the player being a cancer on the industry. This is related to DLC and microtransations too.

Due to the way you're zoned against players similar to yourself, I'm curious as to what your definition of win is? If you're primarily fighting people of the same ship and skill level, is it just an overall someone out there is in a better ship that's bothering you?

He seems to be assuming this is going to be a FTP MMO for some reason, when in fact there's going to be a one-time cost to buy the game and it's arguably not even an MMO RPG, it's an MMO Space Sim. The advantages/disadvantages one has in an RPG of any variety simply won't exist in most forms.

 

[BrightCandle]

He seems to be assuming this is going to be a FTP MMO for some reason, when in fact there's going to be a one-time cost to buy the game and it's arguably not even an MMO RPG, it's an MMO Space Sim. The advantages/disadvantages one has in an RPG of any variety simply won't exist in most forms.

No I am not. I am looking at the early way in which they have made the money to develop the game and how they are choosing to pay back those players.

Its a wider concern for me related to the move to kickstarter and crowd funding, especially in games that have a multiplayer aspect where the benefits of backing early or with large sums is beyond something cosmetic. The investors take on all the risk, they take on the risk of the game being unbalanced to support early backers and we get none of the spoils of the success of the game, we simply funded something almost completely unseen.

I have been looking through the SC forums and there are a lot of early backers showing the same concern, some of which are gifting their credits and leaving the community. The noises being made by Chris and his developers are putting those people that really dislike P2W mechanics in a nervous state because the game as it develops is looking more and more like its going to be more MMO than we previous anticipated (the scale of the game has gone up immensely with money rolling in) and those paying in for advantages want and expect those advantages.

There are plenty of people that like P2W, that allows them to pay money to do well in a game, I am not doubting that. SC wasn't initially sold as one of those, early backers like myself however are starting to question the direction and mechanics to try and keep both groups happy. Its was inevitable really based on the way they chose to make their money.

 

[Fallen Kell]

I know and I actually feel sad pointing out again and again the fallacy of his arguments with how the game is being designed. This game isn't EVE. It isn't designed to be EVE. You will not be going to a place and taking complete control of an area by having station/gate camps. Why? Because every area has multiple instances. The instance that the "camp" is located in will not be the same as the instance that other players will necessarily join (in fact there are incredibly good odds that you will not join their instance based on load balancing alone let alone PvP flags and filters). The end result is that you can not "own" space like in EVE simply due to having "better" ships/equipment. What you can do in Star Citizen is go out into the more dangerous NPC controlled areas and be able to stay longer and/or do more things then on your own.

 

[Fallen Kell]

I have been looking through the SC forums and there are a lot of early backers showing the same concern, some of which are gifting their credits and leaving the community. The noises being made by Chris and his developers are putting those people that really dislike P2W mechanics in a nervous state because the game as it develops is looking more and more like its going to be more MMO than we previous anticipated (the scale of the game has gone up immensely with money rolling in) and those paying in for advantages want and expect those advantages.

If you actually read the SC forums, then you would see the people that are doing this are the people who thought they WERE paying to win. People are getting more and more upset that the Idris they bought doesn't equal automatic win. That the actually need to have multiple people manning the Idris with them, and not NPC crew. That the Idris guns will not track well enough to fight off small craft. That they won't be able to sit off a station and kill everyone that tries to leave or dock up because they will only be on one instance of the station. That they will not even get instanced with other people that don't choose to be instanced with other PvP players... In other words, they are all complaining that they thought they bought the Win button, and it turned out it wasn't.

 

[irishScott]

No I am not. I am looking at the early way in which they have made the money to develop the game and how they are choosing to pay back those players.

Its a wider concern for me related to the move to kickstarter and crowd funding, especially in games that have a multiplayer aspect where the benefits of backing early or with large sums is beyond something cosmetic. The investors take on all the risk, they take on the risk of the game being unbalanced to support early backers and we get none of the spoils of the success of the game, we simply funded something almost completely unseen.

I have been looking through the SC forums and there are a lot of early backers showing the same concern, some of which are gifting their credits and leaving the community. The noises being made by Chris and his developers are putting those people that really dislike P2W mechanics in a nervous state because the game as it develops is looking more and more like its going to be more MMO than we previous anticipated (the scale of the game has gone up immensely with money rolling in) and those paying in for advantages want and expect those advantages.

There are plenty of people that like P2W, that allows them to pay money to do well in a game, I am not doubting that. SC wasn't initially sold as one of those, early backers like myself however are starting to question the direction and mechanics to try and keep both groups happy. Its was inevitable really based on the way they chose to make their money.

So you weren't paying attention to the pledge packages? Because I backed the kickstarter and it was pretty obvious that bigger pledge = bigger ship even before the initial specs were released. All they've done since then is extend the pledging period over years of development. Nothing has changed in that regard since the game launched.

And as Fallen Kell said, the people abandoning the project aren't those concerned that the game will be pay to win, they're the people who thought they were paying to win and now feel screwed over because of various restrictions.

I think you're just stubbornly hanging onto an irrational idea because it's your idea and God forbid you could be wrong. Simple fact is your concerns have no current basis in reality beyond blind suspicion, false assumptions and fallacious comparisons. That's just a fact, whether you admit it or not.

Also you're re-defining "pay-to-win" as "pay for even the slightest advantage". Because "pay-to-win" is an evil term and "pay-for-a-slight-advantage" not so much. Your infomercial-level spin doesn't seem to be attracting many supporters here.

 

[VtPC83]

SC is not P2W... it is Pay 4 Convenience. There is a HUGE difference. F2P games are all Pay 4 Convenience (WOT gold ammo is actually P2W).

Unless you CANNOT get equivalent items with in-game currency that you can with real money it is F2P, NOT P2W.

Once more, P2W means you must pay REAL money to get item/skills that CANNOT be obtained from the game itself.

You are using the wrong terminology.

 

[Jules]

SC is not P2W... it is Pay 4 Convenience. There is a HUGE difference. F2P games are all Pay 4 Convenience (WOT gold ammo is actually P2W).

Unless you CANNOT get equivalent items with in-game currency that you can with real money it is F2P, NOT P2W.

Once more, P2W means you must pay REAL money to get item/skills that CANNOT be obtained from the game itself.

You are using the wrong terminology.

You can use regular credits on.

 

[irishScott]

SC is not P2W... it is Pay 4 Convenience. There is a HUGE difference. F2P games are all Pay 4 Convenience (WOT gold ammo is actually P2W).

Unless you CANNOT get equivalent items with in-game currency that you can with real money it is F2P, NOT P2W.

Once more, P2W means you must pay REAL money to get item/skills that CANNOT be obtained from the game itself.

You are using the wrong terminology.

Well to be fair Star Citizen isn't going to be FTP, you buy the game but no subscription required. Also many "technically" FTP games require outrageous time investments to earn the in-game currency required for decent gear, meaning if you have anything resembling a life you effectively have to pay real money. From what we know Star Citizen isn't going to be like this, just clarifying the terminology.

 

[VtPC83]

Good points on both you, I didn't realize WoT was allowing Gold Ammo to be purchased with in-game currency now and totally forgot there is an upfront cost to SC but no monthly subscription.

Irish, I agree that F2P games try to direct you in the path of paying for things that would take forever to get but I would also point out that technically those things are still available through in-game methods, no matter how absurd the time sink is for them.

I think a lot of people get this part confused with P2W... it isn't, it is Pay 4 Convenience. People are thinking buying this stuff will make you win, no, it will put you on an even playing field quicker. That's not winning, it's a poor game/business model, but not winning.

SC isn't item based, I bet if I was a good enough pilot in an Aurora I could take a Super Hornet if that pilot was less capable. Thus, in this case, the person paying for the Hornet is definitely not winning.

 

[preslove]

Planet side 2 ends up being pay 2 win because the grind to get stuff is so long, and your character is so crippled without it that despite everything being available it ends up being P2W anyway. Buying anything non cosmetic has the chance of p2w depending on the mechanics of the game and how long it takes to get those things. So far the numbers aren't encouraging, its a significant investment in time and grind to match those that paid. So star citizen is a pay 2 win game from what we currently know, and it appears they are even adding combat matching to try and counter the negative problems it brings.

Just go away, you idiot troll.

PS2 is a free to play game that is only PvP. Star Citizen is a game you have to buy, which is primarily focused on PvE. They're totally different games. Just stop whining and derailing the thread.



No personal attacks. Attack the post, not the poster.

Anandtech Adminsitrator
KeithTalent

 

[Nintendesert]

You can use regular credits on.

True, historically it is a good example of what P2W is though.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Its funny I'm starting to think the whole star citizen P2W possibility is simply a Gen X way of thinking vs a Gen Y way of thinking. To me (as a Gen X) I see the early supporters getting something extra essentially enough to justify spending money on but obviously nothing over powering because the game needs to sell to make money and have more players involved. Even if the expensive ships give an unfair advantage simply don't buy the game, play on a private server or don't go into PVP.
Thoughts especially from Gen Y folks who want everything to be even for everyone?

 

[xantub]

Its funny I'm starting to think the whole star citizen P2W possibility is simply a Gen X way of thinking vs a Gen Y way of thinking. To me (as a Gen X) I see the early supporters getting something extra essentially enough to justify spending money on but obviously nothing over powering because the game needs to sell to make money and have more players involved. Even if the expensive ships give an unfair advantage simply don't buy the game, play on a private server or don't go into PVP.
Thoughts especially from Gen Y folks who want everything to be even for everyone?

The problem is basically PvP and multiplayer PvE. If the game is pure PvE then who cares if someone buys a "mega ship of mega powah" for an extra $10 that destroys anything with one click.

But for PvP, how can you compete against that? It does affect your enjoyment if someone beats you silly regardless of what you do just because he "paid to win". Also in multiplayer PvE (like MMOs), your acceptance to raids and guilds may be depending on your having the "mega ship of mega powah", so your enjoyment also suffers because you refused to "pay to win".

Even those who say that you can grind for days to get the same thing without paying, that doesn't stop those who "paid to win" from also grinding, which they'll do faster or grind for better stuff, so their advantage actually increases with time.

 

[irishScott]

Its funny I'm starting to think the whole star citizen P2W possibility is simply a Gen X way of thinking vs a Gen Y way of thinking. To me (as a Gen X) I see the early supporters getting something extra essentially enough to justify spending money on but obviously nothing over powering because the game needs to sell to make money and have more players involved. Even if the expensive ships give an unfair advantage simply don't buy the game, play on a private server or don't go into PVP.
Thoughts especially from Gen Y folks who want everything to be even for everyone?

Hey I'm Gen Y, as are many people who have backed the game, and we don't think that way at all. Just saying.

 

[irishScott]

The problem is basically PvP and multiplayer PvE. If the game is pure PvE then who cares if someone buys a "mega ship of mega powah" for an extra $10 that destroys anything with one click.

But for PvP, how can you compete against that? It does affect your enjoyment if someone beats you silly regardless of what you do just because he "paid to win". Also in multiplayer PvE (like MMOs), your acceptance to raids and guilds may be depending on your having the "mega ship of mega powah", so your enjoyment also suffers because you refused to "pay to win".

Even those who say that you can grind for days to get the same thing without paying, that doesn't stop those who "paid to win" from also grinding, which they'll do faster or grind for better stuff, so their advantage actually increases with time.

Which goes back to the original counter-argument: How is this different from any other game?

By that logic the game should be released for exactly one day then never sold again. Because otherwise a year later people will be buying the game and be at a full year disadvantage! Oh the humanity! They've have to integrate themselves into an established community!!! We've never seen such horror in a game before!

Even if that wasn't true, there is no "winning" in Star Citizen. What good is a fully crewed and decked out Idris if my Aurora LN is faster? What good is a fully decked out pirate Idris against a Pirate Fleet?

Organizations are going to trump individuals anyway, mine has many Idrises to its name, hundreds of ships in total. No individual player is going to be able to fuck with that no matter how much they've "paid" to supposedly "win"; and we accept ships of all classes (although dedicated combat roles require certain specific classes).


I think people complaining about stuff like this have fundamental misunderstandings about the nature of the game or are just whiny. Star Citizen is a largely NPC run persistent universe where players are citizens. Think about what that means. It's about participating in a given Universe, not bending it to your will; and those that try are going to whine extremely loudly on day 1.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Hey I'm Gen Y, as are many people who have backed the game, and we don't think that way at all. Just saying.

Much respect Irish

 

[irishScott]

Much respect Irish

Thanks, I'll admit Gen Y has more of a maturity gap though. Last I read Gen Y was anyone born from 1983 - 2000, so about 1/2 of us haven't even graduated college, about 1/3 haven't graduated high school. (I'm 1987)

 

[vshah]

Thanks, I'll admit Gen Y has more of a maturity gap though. Last I read Gen Y was anyone born from 1983 - 2000, so about 1/2 of us haven't even graduated college, about 1/3 haven't graduated high school. (I'm 1987)

there should be a middle gen for children of the 80s. 1985 here, do not want to associate with most everyone born after 1989

 

[norseamd]

Its funny I'm starting to think the whole star citizen P2W possibility is simply a Gen X way of thinking vs a Gen Y way of thinking. To me (as a Gen X) I see the early supporters getting something extra essentially enough to justify spending money on but obviously nothing over powering because the game needs to sell to make money and have more players involved. Even if the expensive ships give an unfair advantage simply don't buy the game, play on a private server or don't go into PVP. Thoughts especially from Gen Y folks who want everything to be even for everyone?

if it should not be a microtransaction then it should not be a exclusive backer bonus. or it should at least be available later to acquire even if for money

 

[Fallen Kell]

if it should not be a microtransaction then it should not be a exclusive backer bonus. or it should at least be available later to acquire even if for money

There has been only 1 ship that is close to that definition, and that is the Scythe. But it will also be able to acquired in the game (may need to disable one, capture it, and then transform/modify the cockpit/life support systems for human use, or it might be on a secret black market, or might have been separated from its fleet after being damaged and then drifted only to be later found by you (or someone else) and put on the market, etc...).

 

[norseamd]

was thinking about backing

how good is the combat simulator?