Hellgate London Alpha

[Slayerik]

I plan to play with only friends or solo.  I've had enough of random internet assholes.

Will you play with me? In that sexy white t-shirt no less.

And I thought that completely homo LOTRO character was just a joke! ;)

[Yegolev]

I plan to play with only friends or solo.  I've had enough of random internet assholes.

Will you play with me? In that sexy white t-shirt no less.

And I thought that completely homo LOTRO character was just a joke! ;)

Oh, jeez, no... give him your XBL name.  You'll see.   

[lariac]

Lariac, the whole point of that list is to drive players to Elite status. It's no different from how other games drive players to expansions by releasing new content/features they can only get by doing so. Nor different from Fileplanet gimping anyone who doesn't pay some sort of subscription.

At the same time, them doing this means they can offer anything at all to people who don't want to pay the fee. You can't play legit/official WoW for free.

I understand what you are saying Darniaq, and I don't have an issue with them charging for new content, but some of those items listed should be part of the initial package you get when you purchase the game.

It is as if I bought Oblivion and had to purchase my mount, my house and my banking slots on top of my initial purchase. It just doesn't sound all that fair to me.

I have no issue if in Hellgate your 10 bucks allowed you to add different graphics to your mount or a different mount, maybe a bigger house, or access to your bank from many different locations rather than one or two locations, however removing key gameplay enhancing abilities from the game and charge extra for it just rings of a jailhouse bendover.

[Furiously]

But you could win oblivion without a house, without a bank and without a mount.  The same is true of Hellgate. You are paying extra for something extra.

[lariac]

But you could win oblivion without a house, without a bank and without a mount.  The same is true of Hellgate. You are paying extra for something extra.

You are absolutely right.

However, we are talking about a quasi MMO here and from previous experience in many different MMO's those particular items I just listed have major gameplay advantages associated with them.

DAOC/SWG - in house merchants that allowed you to sell good at no cost or very little compared to NPC AHs.

DAOC/SWG/WOW/ - Anytime you have a mount, you can earn cash faster, get to pvp faster, go anywhere faster. If you can earn cash faster or get to the fight faster than the next guy, that is a clear advantage.

More bank slots means that you can hold more stuff and since you will not be able to create mules unless you have multiple accounts, your gonna have to unload your stuff on NPCs who give you a song for what you could sell it to other players for. On top of that you will not be able to trade between characters, so your forced to sell only to NPCs.

Cash is king in MMO games and severely limiting it causes you to be at a disproportionate advantage to the other guy. I mean hell, this is why people bitch about Chinese farmers.

edit: I am just not gonna suck the Hellgate dick because of the people creating it and I think that it will set a nasty precedent for all gamers if gamers buy into this pricing plan. What is to stop other developers from doing the same nickel and diming of key gameplay elements to us gamers?

[cmlancas]

In response to your edit:

Don't play the game. I won't be playing HG:L specifically because of this. It's some third-rate bullshit that is on the scale of dedicated GM support a la Legends EQ1 server.


Fuck that noise.

[Venkman]

lariac, I think you hit the nail on the head by calling it a "quasi-MMO". By not calling it a straight-up MMO, they can change pretty much everything. This could be good or bad, but free-to-play is where a lot of games come from, knowing full well they'll get the cash from you some other way.

As it is, I agree with you. But to be honest, I'm used to paying for that stuff in these games already, so if I liked HA, I'd happily for them there too.

[Rendakor]

It is as if I bought Oblivion and had to purchase my mount, my house and my banking slots on top of my initial purchase. It just doesn't sound all that fair to me.

I have no issue if in Hellgate your 10 bucks allowed you to add different graphics to your mount or a different mount, maybe a bigger house, or access to your bank from many different locations rather than one or two locations, however removing key gameplay enhancing abilities from the game and charge extra for it just rings of a jailhouse bendover.

So you weren't one of the screaming masses that bashed Bethesda something fierce for Oblivion's horse armor pack? And if you made the bank accessable in 1 location for free and 10 with the fee, people would make the same arguement as they do for the mount: more timesinks for the non-paying customers.

In response to your edit:

Don't play the game. I won't be playing HG:L specifically because of this. It's some third-rate bullshit that is on the scale of dedicated GM support a la Legends EQ1 server.


Fuck that noise.

Some of us are willing to pay extra for extra features. I can't think of how many times in the first 6 months of EQ2 I'd have shelled out an extra $10/month for a Legends server.

I really don't see what the big deal is with this anyway. HG:L Isn't the first game to do this; from the Dungeon Runners website:

Membership status costs US$4.99 per month and currently includes the following benefits:
Access to the highest quality in-game items
Log-in queue priority
Bank Storage
Stacking potions

You can't even use your "epic lewts" without paying their monthly fee. But no public outcry. (or was there, and I missed it?) Is HG:L just getting the attention because it's a bigger name title?

[NiX]

I plan to play with only friends or solo.  I've had enough of random internet assholes.

Will you play with me? In that sexy white t-shirt no less.

And I thought that completely homo LOTRO character was just a joke! ;)

Oh, jeez, no... give him your XBL name.  You'll see.   

You're the one with the provocative pictures!

[WindupAtheist]

10 bucks a month (on top of your initial $50 dollar purchase) gets you...

So basically, it's an MMO.  Being able to play it for free is about as meaningful as being able to play Runescape or something for free.  Pity, I thought it was going to be like Diablo.

[sam, an eggplant]

It's exactly like diablo. You can experience everything that comes in the box online without paying them anything. As they add content, you need to pay to get access.

Of course a couple of months after release when new content is available nobody will ever actually play online in the "free" areas, so in a sense you're right after all.

[UnSub]

I really don't see what the big deal is with this anyway. HG:L Isn't the first game to do this; from the Dungeon Runners website:

Membership status costs US$4.99 per month and currently includes the following benefits:
Access to the highest quality in-game items
Log-in queue priority
Bank Storage
Stacking potions

You can't even use your "epic lewts" without paying their monthly fee. But no public outcry. (or was there, and I missed it?) Is HG:L just getting the attention because it's a bigger name title?

Yes. With prettier graphics and a better pedigree.

[sam, an eggplant]

Nobody particularly cares about dungeon runners, because it's a D-grade game. Nobody expected great things. HG:L is exactly the opposite, it's a AAA title.

[lariac]

lariac, I think you hit the nail on the head by calling it a "quasi-MMO". By not calling it a straight-up MMO, they can change pretty much everything. This could be good or bad, but free-to-play is where a lot of games come from, knowing full well they'll get the cash from you some other way.

As it is, I agree with you. But to be honest, I'm used to paying for that stuff in these games already, so if I liked HA, I'd happily for them there too.

Fair enough Darniaq. Leave it at that.

[Rendakor]

Nobody particularly cares about dungeon runners, because it's a D-grade game. Nobody expected great things. HG:L is exactly the opposite, it's a AAA title.

...Touche.

[WindupAtheist]

Question:  Can I play it single-player, offline, and see and use absolutely everything short of paid expansion content?

[schild]

Question:  Can I play it single-player, offline, and see and use absolutely everything short of paid expansion content?

Other than multiplayer specific areas, yes.

[Sky]

Oh, that's cool then. I need to keep reading this thread to remind myself it's a diablo game and thus I really don't want to play it. But it's good to know that all this extortion stuff is multi-player only.

Or is the phat lewtz not in the single player? Because that would be true mmo style, to bar solo players from the phattest letwzorz.

[Typhon]

Or is the phat lewtz not in the single player? Because that would be true mmo style, to bar solo players from the phattest letwzorz.

But if you play the solo game only, on your own pc, you wouldn't know about phat lewtzorz unless you did some research.  If you didn't know, you wouldn't care, unless the game was too hard for the level of loot that was available (and really, isn't the complaint that Diablo-style games are too easy?).

[Sky]

(and really, isn't the complaint that Diablo-style games are too easy?).

I'd say obnoxiously mouse-clicky, repetetive and bland.

[Nonentity]

(and really, isn't the complaint that Diablo-style games are too easy?).

I'd say obnoxiously mouse-clicky, repetetive and bland.

CLICKCLICKCLICKCLICK

[Slayerik]

(and really, isn't the complaint that Diablo-style games are too easy?).

I'd say obnoxiously mouse-clicky, repetetive and bland.

CLICKCLICKCLICKCLICK

Pikarape. I'm gonna click you!

[Typhon]

(and really, isn't the complaint that Diablo-style games are too easy?).

I'd say obnoxiously mouse-clicky, repetetive and bland.

 :-D I have you given any thought to your compulsion to post in a thread that is about a topic you find not-fun?  /duck!

[Broughden]

Im presently MMO'ed out. AoC is on my radar, but with my present job and significant other Im not sure I have time in my life anymore to pour hours into a MMO.

Since this is more Diabloesque and should therefore be easier to pick up and put down when ever needed, Im looking at it.

I need a new laptop though. (DX10 aside mine is going on 4 years)  Which is in direct competition with all the camping gear Im still trying to acquire.

[Nonentity]

(and really, isn't the complaint that Diablo-style games are too easy?).

I'd say obnoxiously mouse-clicky, repetetive and bland.

CLICKCLICKCLICKCLICK

Pikarape. I'm gonna click you!

IVYSAUR DISLIKES RAPE

[Sky]

(and really, isn't the complaint that Diablo-style games are too easy?).

I'd say obnoxiously mouse-clicky, repetetive and bland.

 :-D I have you given any thought to your compulsion to post in a thread that is about a topic you find not-fun?  /duck!

I'm mildly interested in the game if it strays far enough from the Diablo roots, I always thought Diablo was a good game that just didn't get finished (Divine Divinity). I do apologize for bashing the game, I hate when people do that when the thread is clearly for people who enjoy it, but he asked and I was being honest.

[Amaron]

Lariac  you're correct that the whole elite thing is basically a marketing trick to make sure people pay for the online fee unless they absolutely can not do so.   Are you angry that it's basically a marketing trick though or that the game even has a pay for model?

If it's the second Diablo 2's secure play servers actually cost quite a bit of money to maintain.  The only reason they could do it for free was because it's Blizzard and the game was bound to be a huge success thus the costs could be easily subsidized by box sales.   It's probably impossible for a newly started company to take such a risk on their first big release though.    Also I doubt the game would of even been properly funded if it wasn't being pitched to investors as a game that would use an MMO pricing model.

[jdun]

I believe FSS has already made a nice profit by licensing the game to Asian companies.

[Amaron]

I believe FSS has already made a nice profit by licensing the game to Asian companies.

The game or the game engine? If you meant the game I wasn't aware the licensing schemes gave so much payout before the game is even released.  Do you have more details?

[lariac]

Lariac  you're correct that the whole elite thing is basically a marketing trick to make sure people pay for the online fee unless they absolutely can not do so.   Are you angry that it's basically a marketing trick though or that the game even has a pay for model?

If it's the second Diablo 2's secure play servers actually cost quite a bit of money to maintain.  The only reason they could do it for free was because it's Blizzard and the game was bound to be a huge success thus the costs could be easily subsidized by box sales.   It's probably impossible for a newly started company to take such a risk on their first big release though.    Also I doubt the game would of even been properly funded if it wasn't being pitched to investors as a game that would use an MMO pricing model.

I see your point. It does piss me off that they are gouging gamers for items that should be included in the game; However they don't have the resources (like blizz) to bank a no fee policy. I still think though that they should just charge 10 bucks for new content and leave it at that. But didn't take the perspective you outlined above until now.

[schild]

To be fair, most MMORPG style games give you Nothing For Free. Except a demo on an island or sommat.

$10 for updated lewts and areas?

Everything else is gravy. This is seriously just One of Those Things Not Worth Complaining About.

[Tarami]

What ticks me about the HG:L subscription fee is that it has a distinct overtone of post-WoW bitterness, in addition to the assumption every gamer is now prepared to pay for continous play. Yes, WoW did break monthly fees into the so called casual market, but it still feels like a shitty thing. Will it work? Almost certainly. Thousands of Internet sites apply the same payment system - pay some extra dough to get the almost essential, but not quite, bling-bling. I'm currently subscribing to three different games, but while that doesn't dig any holes into my finances as I got a job, subscription fees are a considerable expense to kids.

I think it has generated alot of bad-will for FSS, is all, something that they possibly could have avoided by introducing "eliteness" a few months down the road. HG:L is currently signalling "If you want to play for real, you better pay for real, biatch" rather than "You're playing for real now, but in a while we'll have some extras for the catasses that want it." Having subscriptions is not necessarily an evil thing to do, it just seems a little clumsy.

[schild]

It's like anything else.

You get what you pay for.

That's how we come to bitching about $10 goddamn dollars a month. I spend more than that on energy drinks before noon. Five days a week. I just finished a $3 can of Jolt. It's all about priorities. Don't want to pay the $10 for ALL the content. Don't pay it. But don't bitch about it, that's just lame. It's not like there aren't 500 other games that are worth playing.

People really only bitch about stuff they want, but don't want to pay for. At least in videogames that's how it goes.

[WindupAtheist]

If all us MMO vets, long since introduced to the concept of paying for game subscriptions, are bitching about the fee then they're doing something wrong.  We are not twelve year olds looking at WoW for the first time and going "WUTS U MEAN I GOTTA PAY EVRY MONTH?? SHOLD BE LIKE BNET!"

[Slayerik]

If they make a good enough game, I'll be glad to shell over a hot and ready pizza and a coke per month. Seriously, ten bucks these days is nothing. I break a fifty and its gone. Hell, it costs 20 bucks for my 4 person family to eat at cheaper fast food joints.

I understand the costs of server support, infrastructure upgrades, content updates, and a new boat for their top exec.

Either way, if the game isnt good enough... dont sub. 


I'm kinda sounding like schild's echo here, but I agree with him completely on this one.