Author Topic: TIMING OF LEGACY PROJECTS  (Read 35164 times)

Nightwatch

  • Lieutenant
  • ***
  • Posts: 61
TIMING OF LEGACY PROJECTS
« on: November 11, 2013, 02:35:56 PM »
I have a vague recollection of this being discussed in passing in another thread some time back but can't seem to find it now.  In any case, there may be a little more certainty on projections now.

I'm wondering if the Plan Z folk are able to better guesstimate when their plans might see reality.  My recollection is that someone mentioned a year ago that we should 'hope' for 7 years, but I noticed that the City of Titans people are now scheduling their kickstarter rewards for July - November 2015, which appears to assume an earlier start than previously guessed at.

I assume there are many, many variables in all of this so no-one could reasonably hold any of our Plan Z folk to a specific timetable; but it would be nice to get some updated conjecture on timing.

Kudos to all the Plan Z crowd.  Whenever (even if ever) your plans see fruition, you're heroes to us all.

downix

  • Phoenix Project Technical Lead
  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,962
Re: TIMING OF LEGACY PROJECTS
« Reply #1 on: November 11, 2013, 03:39:38 PM »
It should take 7 years to reach fully developed. What we did was figure out how much we could trim to deliver sooner. So, we won't be at level cap, have all power suites, or have all zones, but we can be in beta by 2015. Then we have 4 years worth of expansions.

JaguarX

  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,393
Re: TIMING OF LEGACY PROJECTS
« Reply #2 on: November 11, 2013, 09:20:01 PM »
It should take 7 years to reach fully developed. What we did was figure out how much we could trim to deliver sooner. So, we won't be at level cap, have all power suites, or have all zones, but we can be in beta by 2015. Then we have 4 years worth of expansions.
that's a good plan.


Then after the release it gives a chance to see in actual numbers and stuff of what you all are working with as far as income, time, player styles and features that are working as intended and those that are not.


Although, I don't think it was very clear. Many people still think you all are aiming for everything in two years, some say it's impossible and say it's even tighter deadline than full scale paid experienced big studios release game in. I think if they know or somehow reinforced that in 2015 it's a game but more to come over the years they may see that it's not as crazy of a deadline as they think.

Segev

  • Plan Z: Interim Producer
  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,573
Re: TIMING OF LEGACY PROJECTS
« Reply #3 on: November 11, 2013, 09:51:35 PM »
To be fair, we've said variants on that theme almost every time we've discussed our planned schedule. I suspect we're just going to have to produce what we're planning, and let the chips fall where they may. The success of the game at each stage will be all the convincing that the world will need, in the end.

JaguarX

  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,393
Re: TIMING OF LEGACY PROJECTS
« Reply #4 on: November 11, 2013, 10:18:29 PM »
To be fair, we've said variants on that theme almost every time we've discussed our planned schedule. I suspect we're just going to have to produce what we're planning, and let the chips fall where they may. The success of the game at each stage will be all the convincing that the world will need, in the end.
Yeah that is true but more variants more chances of tangles and list in translations.

Really looking forward to the first release.

Me personally I hope it turn out more than simply a COX clone with new skin to "poke at a certain company" and end up more being that CoT is CoT standing on it's own. ANd even more so, may be pipe dream or too much hope talking that it will finally put super hero games on the map and not just a miniature map that a very small percentage of gamers play and or know about but big enough and successful enough to be mentioned in the same page and same manner on the same level as the big dogs of the mmo world. When it comes out, I hope there is lot of "Hey, you could do that in an MMO?" instead of "Good game, it's like COX in this way, it plays like COX in that way, that map look like COX, that power plays like COX, this is not like COX, that is not like COX, this aint COX, This is COX." and instead be like "this is CoT bringing stuff in an MMO that never been brought before." Kind of like Halo did. FPS shooter and storyline? Prior to Halo that was unheard of and considered not belonging in a FPS. Halo came out, threw out that rule and now FPS can hardly be said without mentioning Halo. I wish CoT to be on that level. Of course that means taking risks, questioning the rules of MMO that been laid down by fantasy game builders that most mmo makers don't question or are a afraid to question. Even COX took the first step and those that played, most loved it. Now I hope CoT take the the next steps that COX couldn't. To me, that is what being a successor means. Not merely being a copy with new skin and new graphics or doing stuff that COX would have done if the engine was up dated. But take their path and where they fell, get keep going up that mountain of "Hey, EQ rules says an MMO is suppose to have this this and that and play like this and people are supposed to team and supposed to have recharge and slow combat and supposed to be nudged into social." and blow that mountain up make your own rules and dare someone to say something. If that happens win or fail, CoT will then be remembered not merely a COX copy but a set of devs that started something. And then people will be trying to copy CoT, and od it how CoT did it and tweak the way CoT did it. Instead of well lets do it this way because the guys from the EQ era said it's supposed to be done this way while ignoring the fact that the reason those games were hits because they made their own rules. And you are not going to beat a 900lb gorilla at it's own rules. That is why they made them and want people to follow them so that they can remain the 900lb gorilla and everyone get what every money is left over. And sadly too many game makers been too content on doing just that instead of aiming for greatness. Even if one fall short of greatness they are still good. But if they merely aim to be good enough, if they fall short then they end up not good.

Never know how high one can reach until they aim for it and break the bonds of the rulers. Look over at the internet, gamers are itching for something new and not merely an update of the same old stuff for the past 20 years. It's a whole market gold mine that mmo makers been ignoring mostly thus far. One man trash is another man's treasure. Eventually someone will scoop them up. Will it be CoT? Or will they pass? Will they say years down the road could of should would of and try to play the impossible catch up later on when another set of game makers take that risk and run with it and hit it big when that could have been CoT? Or will CoT take their opportunity to get it first strike and make everyone else catch up to them and really start a revolution. Like I said, it may be too much hope, but one day it will happen. I hope that it is a super hero game and not another fantasy crew that take the opportunity again like they did in the 90s and again in the 2004 to keep their stronghold on the market.

The reality of it is that MWM isn't the first small company to try and create a game. Most of the big wigs started off  like that. And they probably wont be the last. The difference is with things like kickstarter and the vast internet, it's easier than ever for small companies to come up. They just have to stop playing by rules of what is a MMO game or RPG or even super hero game must be and make CoT and then say CoT is a super hero game and reach great success and rewrite the rules. All the games that are in power went through this without kickstarter and crowd funding. They grew so powerful that they have people scared to buck their trend. That is what they want. They don't want anyone bucking the trend until they decide to buck the trend and make even more money and everyone still have to follow their lead. As I said COX bucked the trend a little. Super hero MMO? prio to 2003, the idea got laughed at. Now super hero mmos are cropping up and are considered legit MMO. That is COX legacy. What will be CoT legacy? There are hundreds if not thousands of games that simply followed the rules, and end up failing and don't even have a legacy or even remembered. Buck the trend, even if the fish hit shan, CoT at least can go down being remembered for bucking the trend and maybe have others follow suite or even better, leave enough opening in the door to try it again more refined. AKA going through all this trouble all this warm fuzzy all this bucking against the corporate in speech, at go hard. What is the point of an Indie game maker if they are just going to follow the corporate rules of how a mmo is supposed to be? Many indie companies found out the hard way that there isn't a point and they are not remembered and their game ended up being a complete failure by any measure besides another showing out of the thousands showings of a group of people can get together and make a game.

At the same time though I think MWM know what they are doing for better or worse and all I said is probably nothing new or something they didn't know. But now the hard part come. They could take easy street or climb the mountain. Either way could result in a great game. And yeah there probably will be set backs, mysterious bugs, features that looked good on paper that didn't work well in practice, WTF moments, joyous moments, "anyone see this? Hello? Why is no one paying attention to this great accomplishment?" moments, "Why are they paying attention to such a little detail? Get off our backs!" moments, "Just throw it in there and see what happens" moments , fist through computer monitor moments, damned if you do damned if you don't moments and etc that every game maker from WoW, from when Blizzard was some small company when people was saying "Who the hell is Blizzard. They have no experience in making games. They will fail.", to Sony to EA, and Valve all went and go through. But one thing the MMO world is lacking and probably one of the reasons console games are eating MMO games alive all the while encrouaching onto MMO territory without challenge is that many MMO makers get power and forget all about the players, the money, the supporters that got them there. And what I mean by that is not focus merely on the supporters that are "yes people" but all supporter and all the players so when they enter the product they feel like they were kept in mind instead of getting itno the game to find out only one section of the supporters were paid attention to and the rest get "thanks for the money, but no soup for you." That is what lead to so many games downfall, many that had great opening and great fanfare but within a year or two faded into obscurity. They forget all their supporters in favor of focusing on their personal belief of what the game should be and reward only those that  agreed with their every move.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2013, 10:37:25 PM by JaguarX »

SerialBeggar

  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 720
    • Serial Beggar
Re: TIMING OF LEGACY PROJECTS
« Reply #5 on: November 11, 2013, 11:23:06 PM »
Agh!  :gonk:  Wall of text!
Teams are the number one killers of Soloists.

saipaman

  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 921
Re: TIMING OF LEGACY PROJECTS
« Reply #6 on: November 12, 2013, 01:39:35 AM »

JaguarX

  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,393
Re: TIMING OF LEGACY PROJECTS
« Reply #7 on: November 12, 2013, 02:20:59 AM »
sorry had to make sure I cover everything and make myself clear. Really didn't want anyone to have room for assumptions.

The original version was much longer. I hopefully with it cut down and shortened I didn't leave anything out.

saipaman

  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 921
Re: TIMING OF LEGACY PROJECTS
« Reply #8 on: November 12, 2013, 03:55:54 AM »
Once the actual game comes out, I see the further potential for crowd funding to expand the game.  Costume sets being the best example.

Segev

  • Plan Z: Interim Producer
  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,573
Re: TIMING OF LEGACY PROJECTS
« Reply #9 on: November 12, 2013, 02:05:14 PM »
Being oft guilty of walls of text, myself, JaguarX, one technique I've found helps a little is to make a post that just bullet-points the topics/headings of the sentences, and promises to elaborate on them more later. Let people chew on and respond to the big points, and you can elaborate thereafter if their responses indicate they don't follow your meaning. Try to keep each post to one of the topics, if possible.

I'm not the best at following my own advice, mind. But that tends to work better.

JaguarX

  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,393
Re: TIMING OF LEGACY PROJECTS
« Reply #10 on: November 12, 2013, 11:39:14 PM »
Being oft guilty of walls of text, myself, JaguarX, one technique I've found helps a little is to make a post that just bullet-points the topics/headings of the sentences, and promises to elaborate on them more later. Let people chew on and respond to the big points, and you can elaborate thereafter if their responses indicate they don't follow your meaning. Try to keep each post to one of the topics, if possible.

I'm not the best at following my own advice, mind. But that tends to work better.
Yeah tried that in the past, not the bullets, but when stuff is left out, people seem to assume and make their own conclusions and no matter how one may try to explain it, they already have it in their head their version is right and that conversation hardly ever ends well. So I make sure to leave little room for that the first time.

Some subjects, I don't mind a little battle. Other subjects, like this one, I make sure I'm clear, no assumptions can be made and no room for shill, troll, and etc like words to be thrown around because they missed the point or rather filled in the point with their own version and who can blame them if it isn't there. Thus have to make sure it's there. When I see less assuming or more open minded assuming instead of assuming always to the negative view, then I'll feel more comfortable leaving stuff open to interpretation and more people are willing to actually discuss the points instead of telling me what I really meant or inventing conclusions that wasn't made or at least talk about it without attacking, then I'll move to the bullet point method.

But right now I rather simply keep the peace and make my entire point and maybe resay it once again just in case it was missed the first time and no room for people to tell me what I meant to say. Because from the old forum and even here, I seen how far people take things and it just simply ruins the entire conversation when things are left out and room for them to make up their own negative conclusions.
« Last Edit: November 13, 2013, 12:07:10 AM by JaguarX »

Twisted Toon

  • New Efforts # 13,000!
  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 830
Re: TIMING OF LEGACY PROJECTS
« Reply #11 on: November 13, 2013, 12:55:29 AM »
Agh!  :gonk:  Wall of text!
It looks more like a few hedgerows of text, to me. But I'm weird, don't take what I say for Granite. :p
Hope never abandons you, you abandon it. - George Weinberg

Hope ... is not a feeling; it is something you do. - Katherine Paterson

Nobody really cares if you're miserable, so you might as well be happy. - Cynthia Nelms

silvers1

  • Boss
  • ****
  • Posts: 247
Re: TIMING OF LEGACY PROJECTS
« Reply #12 on: November 13, 2013, 03:23:05 AM »
Well, after reading some of the "wall of the text", the main gist is that CoT shouldnt try to copy CoH and be its own game, which I agree with to a certain point.

Completely throwing away everything just for the sake of being different - probably not a good idea.  CoH had a lot of good features that I hope will be brought forward.

1.  It didnt have a FPS feel to the interface that you see in a lot of modern RPGs and MMORPGs.  For example, I absolutely loath the reticle interface in games like Skyrim and Neverwinter.

2.  Dont like the FPS elements of combat in many newer games. I'm not a young guy.  Dont have great reflexes and never will.
The "avoid the red patch of doom" mechanic in Neverwinter, for example, drives me nuts.   I just want a straight up fight - not a game of dodge-em.
And CoH delivered just that, with the exception of a few of the newer TFs and iTrials.

3.  I like the voice responses of NPCs in newer games.  CoH, in many respects, was too silent and it felt kind of old school archaic because of it.

4.  I have mixed feelings about adding enemy combat responses.   Some are ok, but after hearing the same grunts and threats over and over, it can get old.

5. Do NOT want pay2win stores.  That's what Neverwinter is all about.   Paying for cosmetic stuff is fine, as long as its not too expensive.  I think CoH went a bit overboard with some of the pricing.

6.  I loved the way the powersets interacted in CoH and made the whole greater than the individual parts.  Every team felt different, and I've never seen that anywhere else.

7.  I liked the way that TFs were accessible to people of varying skill levels and "build level".   You didnt have to be tweaked out or an expert at your class to have a chance to complete most end-game content.  Again, this is unique to CoH.

8.  I like 8 man groups.  Allowed for great flexibility - instead of the tank, healer, 3 DPS model in everything else out there.  Also resulted in less pressure being put on certain members of the group, such as the tank or healer.

9.  Loved the CoH costume designer and the divorce between appearance and equipment.

10.  The soundtrack, from the beginning, in CoH never felt right to me.   Hopefully they can get a professional musician to create sound tracks for the various zones and maps.    The break in music as you progressed from neighborhood to neighborhood was jarring.  There needs to be one soundtrack for each zone.

11.  Didnt like the war-walls.  Needs to be a seemless transition from zone to zone.

12.  Didnt like the subway system.   Needs to have a map teleport system.

13.  Loved all the combat animations.  Put everything else out there to shame, even to this day.

14.  The powerset graphics could sear your eyeballs.  I'm REALLY hoping in this new game, there's some way to tone it down or turn off other people's graphic effects.

15.  I dont like inventory limits.  Period.  Dont know why every game insists on it, but it needs to end.

16.  There needs to be an easier way to transfer items between characters.   Maybe a large global bank or something.

17.  Mission Architect and Base Builder were nice, but could have been made much better.  Hopefully the new game takes it to the next level.

18.  I didnt like the way the CoH Dev team would implement something like MA,then abandon the system.   Their focus was always on the next new shiny sub-system, and it felt like older systems that could have been improved were forgotten or ignored.

19.  Each zone needs to be regularly updated with new content/story arcs.  The CoH team occasionaly updated zones like FaultLine,but it was fairly rare.

Lots of other things I could probably add, but I'll end my own wall of text here.  Just my 2 cents.


--- Hercules - Freedom Server ---

JaguarX

  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,393
Re: TIMING OF LEGACY PROJECTS
« Reply #13 on: November 13, 2013, 03:39:27 AM »
Well, after reading some of the "wall of the text", the main gist is that CoT shouldnt try to copy CoH and be its own game, which I agree with to a certain point.

Completely throwing away everything just for the sake of being different - probably not a good idea.  CoH had a lot of good features that I hope will be brought forward.

1.  It didnt have a FPS feel to the interface that you see in a lot of modern RPGs and MMORPGs.  For example, I absolutely loath the reticle interface in games like Skyrim and Neverwinter.

2.  Dont like the FPS elements of combat in many newer games. I'm not a young guy.  Dont have great reflexes and never will.
The "avoid the red patch of doom" mechanic in Neverwinter, for example, drives me nuts.   I just want a straight up fight - not a game of dodge-em.
And CoH delivered just that, with the exception of a few of the newer TFs and iTrials.

3.  I like the voice responses of NPCs in newer games.  CoH, in many respects, was too silent and it felt kind of old school archaic because of it.

4.  I have mixed feelings about adding enemy combat responses.   Some are ok, but after hearing the same grunts and threats over and over, it can get old.

5. Do NOT want pay2win stores.  That's what Neverwinter is all about.   Paying for cosmetic stuff is fine, as long as its not too expensive.  I think CoH went a bit overboard with some of the pricing.

6.  I loved the way the powersets interacted in CoH and made the whole greater than the individual parts.  Every team felt different, and I've never seen that anywhere else.

7.  I liked the way that TFs were accessible to people of varying skill levels and "build level".   You didnt have to be tweaked out or an expert at your class to have a chance to complete most end-game content.  Again, this is unique to CoH.

8.  I like 8 man groups.  Allowed for great flexibility - instead of the tank, healer, 3 DPS model in everything else out there.  Also resulted in less pressure being put on certain members of the group, such as the tank or healer.

9.  Loved the CoH costume designer and the divorce between appearance and equipment.

10.  The soundtrack, from the beginning, in CoH never felt right to me.   Hopefully they can get a professional musician to create sound tracks for the various zones and maps.    The break in music as you progressed from neighborhood to neighborhood was jarring.  There needs to be one soundtrack for each zone.

11.  Didnt like the war-walls.  Needs to be a seemless transition from zone to zone.

12.  Didnt like the subway system.   Needs to have a map teleport system.

13.  Loved all the combat animations.  Put everything else out there to shame, even to this day.

14.  The powerset graphics could sear your eyeballs.  I'm REALLY hoping in this new game, there's some way to tone it down or turn off other people's graphic effects.

15.  I dont like inventory limits.  Period.  Dont know why every game insists on it, but it needs to end.

16.  There needs to be an easier way to transfer items between characters.   Maybe a large global bank or something.

17.  Mission Architect and Base Builder were nice, but could have been made much better.  Hopefully the new game takes it to the next level.

18.  I didnt like the way the CoH Dev team would implement something like MA,then abandon the system.   Their focus was always on the next new shiny sub-system, and it felt like older systems that could have been improved were forgotten or ignored.

19.  Each zone needs to be regularly updated with new content/story arcs.  The CoH team occasionaly updated zones like FaultLine,but it was fairly rare.

Lots of other things I could probably add, but I'll end my own wall of text here.  Just my 2 cents.

yup. and you see, look at that list that COX added. makes many forget the stuff  that cox did copy from other games. i'm saying CoT should add it's own and if they will copy some stuff that worked. don't copy it merely because that is what some elf builder said is how supposed to do. Take it, copy it, make it their own because it works fro them not because some elf builder from the mid 90s said so.

HEATSTROKE

  • Lovin' bein' an
  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
Re: TIMING OF LEGACY PROJECTS
« Reply #14 on: November 16, 2013, 05:47:30 PM »
i had no issue with Pay to Win.. I liked the ability to just pay for stuff I wanted instead of farming for it over and over and over again.. And the way I figured it.. people pay.. game makes money.. no issue with that.. I definitely dont want a store that only affords me costume pieces..

downix

  • Phoenix Project Technical Lead
  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,962
Re: TIMING OF LEGACY PROJECTS
« Reply #15 on: November 16, 2013, 06:48:13 PM »
i had no issue with Pay to Win.. I liked the ability to just pay for stuff I wanted instead of farming for it over and over and over again.. And the way I figured it.. people pay.. game makes money.. no issue with that.. I definitely dont want a store that only affords me costume pieces..
That's not Pay to Win. Pay to Win is where the *only* way to get anything of consequence in the end game is to pay for it. Getting salvage through a cash store is not pay to win, it is pay-to-reduce-the-amount-of-time-playing-for-those-with-more-money-than-time.

Eoraptor

  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 614
Re: TIMING OF LEGACY PROJECTS
« Reply #16 on: November 17, 2013, 05:06:57 PM »
That's not Pay to Win. Pay to Win is where the *only* way to get anything of consequence in the end game is to pay for it. Getting salvage through a cash store is not pay to win, it is pay-to-reduce-the-amount-of-time-playing-for-those-with-more-money-than-time.
This here. Pay to Win or pay to advance is a strategy used by some MMOs and a LOT of cell-phone games, where in the only way to make meaningful progress in the game is to spend real cash in their virtual store. Games where your only choice is "spend seventy five turns farming (X) which is the only way to conquer this objective, or buy it. oh, and you only recieve one or two turns a day, three if you're pimping us on facebook."

Alternately, pay to win is when you can go into the shop and buy an item which gives you a truly massive advantage in game, such as perhaps 25% health regen spiffs. Yes you can complete the game without it, and in a reasonable time, but it so skews the odds and the enjoyment to the people willing to pay that it damages the community.

I'd say if you "don't have a problem" with this sort of player manipulation you should ask why you're playing games in the first place instead of just flushing money down a hole for fun.
"Some people can read War and Peace and come away thinking it's a simple adventure story, while others can read the back of a chewing gum wrapper and unlock the secrets of the universe!"
-Lex Luthor

JaguarX

  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,393
Re: TIMING OF LEGACY PROJECTS
« Reply #17 on: November 17, 2013, 06:22:15 PM »
This here. Pay to Win or pay to advance is a strategy used by some MMOs and a LOT of cell-phone games, where in the only way to make meaningful progress in the game is to spend real cash in their virtual store. Games where your only choice is "spend seventy five turns farming (X) which is the only way to conquer this objective, or buy it. oh, and you only recieve one or two turns a day, three if you're pimping us on facebook."

Alternately, pay to win is when you can go into the shop and buy an item which gives you a truly massive advantage in game, such as perhaps 25% health regen spiffs. Yes you can complete the game without it, and in a reasonable time, but it so skews the odds and the enjoyment to the people willing to pay that it damages the community.

I'd say if you "don't have a problem" with this sort of player manipulation you should ask why you're playing games in the first place instead of just flushing money down a hole for fun.

Me personally I see it no  problem with pay to win. It's no different than someone with 25 billion worth of influence using that influence to buy the good stuff. While those that don't have 25 billion influence cant reach that level that easily. Only difference is currency and both use their currency that the average person may not have available to them to give them the advantage. Yes there are in game market guides that show how to make a bunch of in game. Guess what there are guides to make a lot of money in real life too. Just as people say that "Well they should learn to play the market and make a lot of money." Why cant they learn how to play the real life market and make a lot of money and then they could have money to spend like that too?"   Pay to win, in game currency pay to win, farming, forced teaming to win, Luck to win it's all the same. People simply like what benefits them for their situation and hate the ones that is not in their favor and see no point in it or think it's waste. When in reality all of them have their ups and down and have their waste and really are not so much different than one another. I.E People get lucky and those tha tare think the system fair but don't give a damn about those that are not as lucky.  People have bunch of friends think teaming system is fair but don't give a damn or think about those that may not have a bunch of friends that play.

Well now, with the pay to win being like flushing money down a hole for fun, well, that depends. I know people who view any game playing as especially sub based game as a total waste of money, pay to win or not. Some people view game playing period as a waste of time and thus waste of money because they could be doing something more productive than sitting around playing a child activity. What is viewed as a total waste by some is viewed as good worth the investment to another as long as they get their enjoyment out of it. Just like some people refuse to go beyond free to play in any game they play while some people will buy up every single time in the game to ensure they do their part that game have income because they enjoy the game. Some people are willing to put up $1000 or a few hundred or so on merely the idea, while others view that as worst than flushing money down the toilet and a slap in the face of every hungry/less fortunate person in America. Thus some people have fun pay to win some dont but neither way is more valid than the other because both ways or merely playing a game is also viewed by people as worse or just as wasteful as flushing money down a hole.

Segev

  • Plan Z: Interim Producer
  • Elite Boss
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,573
Re: TIMING OF LEGACY PROJECTS
« Reply #18 on: November 18, 2013, 09:00:02 PM »
That's not Pay to Win. Pay to Win is where the *only* way to get anything of consequence in the end game is to pay for it. Getting salvage through a cash store is not pay to win, it is pay-to-reduce-the-amount-of-time-playing-for-those-with-more-money-than-time.
One of my goals with CoT is to actually translate this into a mechanism for players with more-money-than-time to help those with more-time-than-money to experience the full game, while simultaneously implementing this mechanism for helping those with more-money-than-time to have fun at the pace their time and money will allow.

Specifically, this is why I want to enable players to sell items on the AH not just for in-game currency, but for Stars (our c-store currency).

A player who spends a lot of time and gets a lot of stuff he doesn't need for his own advancement can sell it for in-game currency, of course, but he can also sell it for Stars, and thus gain them without having to spend money on them. Those Stars can then be used to access anything that is "behind a pay wall."

It may even short-circuit gold sellers; why give somebody your credit card to pay them real money when you can go to the AH and spend Stars on it? Players will thus naturally set a conversion rate based on scarcity of each.

Styrj

  • Boss
  • ****
  • Posts: 154
Re: TIMING OF LEGACY PROJECTS
« Reply #19 on: November 18, 2013, 09:20:47 PM »
Segev, I really like this idea.  I am retired and have more time than money. :)

BTW, any idea when the Toon Box (character creater) will be available?
If it ain't broke, don't fix it!  Infinity Server...