Smed sez, come in for free and then pay out the ass for anything remotely decent

[Surlyboi]

Smed's keynote

The gist? No monthly fees, but you've gotta pay for phat lewtz, kinda like Project Entropia, except controlled by a complete fucktard named Smedley.

[tazelbain]

One main factor when you look at this issue, is whether there is playable game out paying.  Puzzle Pirate's Doubloon Server is free and there is a basic game to play plus with enough effort non-paying players have access to all premium content. In contrast with PE, where the non-paying players have nothing to play and no way to access even the most basic content.

I bet now that dofus is free, we'll see a premium content for them also.

[Hoax]

Isn't that the Korean model?  I first saw it with Gunbound, GunzOnline also works this way for the non international versions.

\/\/\/\/\/\/
Actually it isn't all bad because Gunz, Dofus and Gunbound all involve player skill to various degrees.  Gunz being the most pronounced.

[Lt.Dan]

It's bad enough that time played is used as the ladder to success in MMOs but buying success.  No thanks, not for me. 

[schild]

Can't blame Smed for this. While Robert Garriot believes that the subscription model will still dominate America, many MANY other devs and business types on MMOGs agree that the micropayment shit will be The Money Of Zee Future. Whatwith Xbox Marketplace bringing this system to the forefront, it's only a matter of time. Personally? This sort of thing should only exist in skill based games like Gunz. Not games where weapon-stats rule all.

[Margalis]

I can predict how this will pan our right now, and in 5 years I will brag that I was right.

1: Someone introduces a game popular in the US where you pay for individual items.
2: Devs then nerf certain items or duping bugs are discovered.
3: Enter major lawsuit.

Right now the law seems to lean towards the notion that when you play a MMORPG you own nothing because you are buying a service. If that changes into buying particular goods that argument is dead in the water. If I buy a VCR from you 6 months later you can't come over to my house and smash it with a hammer. Similarly if I buy a sword of werewolf slaying 6 months later you can't low the stats on it or add item decay. You may not even be able to double the power of werewolves.

It is only a matter of time. Almost inevitable IMO.

[Shockeye]

1: Someone introduces a game popular in the US where you pay for individual items.
2: Devs then nerf certain items or duping bugs are discovered.
3: Enter major lawsuit.

Sony is avoiding this trap by only helping buyers and sellers get together and then taking a "transaction fee". Buyer beware if item that is sold changes in the future. I can see selling levels, but selling items is too much of a risk. Better to make money off other people selling them through your game.

[Sky]

I've reversed my position on RMT. I now see it as proper financial darwinism, at the unfortunate expense of a few years of development goals.

You buy that sword, girl.

[schild]

I've reversed my position on RMT. I now see it as proper financial darwinism, at the unfortunate expense of a few years of development goals.

You buy that sword, girl.

See, I don't think the money is there if you're just selling the Sword of Uberness. That may work in...MU*s, but not in MMORPGs. The money there is in SOEBay style dealings, the unlocking of special content/features (like a new area, or race or class to play), value-added shit (a guild message board in game or hosted by the company with a lot of datamining accessible by the guild), and gimmicky shit (like pets). If you do that, the problem of balance is still in the developers hands and Margalis' scenario becomes a bit more unlikely.

[Alkiera]

I've reversed my position on RMT. I now see it as proper financial darwinism, at the unfortunate expense of a few years of development goals.

You buy that sword, girl.

See, I don't think the money is there if you're just selling the Sword of Uberness. That may work in...MU*s, but not in MMORPGs. The money there is in SOEBay style dealings, the unlocking of special content/features (like a new area, or race or class to play), value-added shit (a guild message board in game or hosted by the company with a lot of datamining accessible by the guild), and gimmicky shit (like pets). If you do that, the problem of balance is still in the developers hands and Margalis' scenario becomes a bit more unlikely.

I agree.  If you are going to sell items...  You're going to run into problems.  Achaea does this, and I think it's only the small population that has kept them out of trouble, tho Matt might be able to say more on the topic.

Alkiera

[HaemishM]

They are selling only extra levels (catass content, otherwise known as the loser tax) and upgrades to items. Sounds to me like a motherfucking gold mine waiting to happen. And the perfect way to avoid the lawsuit shit? When you have to nerf the upgrades (and you will), you offer credit to the store so you can purchase a different upgrade and respec it.

It's a brilliant idea. Of course, it's also the kind of brilliant, assraping, moneygrubbing shitheel idea that only a pigfucker with the heart of an adding machine could think up.

Also, crotchpheasants.

[Surlyboi]

Ah, Haemish... your eloquence astounds as always.  :-D

And yeah, I totally agree.

[Sky]

It's a brilliant idea. Of course, it's also the kind of brilliant, assraping, moneygrubbing shitheel idea that only a pigfucker with the heart of an adding machine could think up.

Here, man. Just take it.

[Venkman]

SOE's call to arms seems to, of late, be "look to Asia".

Unfortunately, the result could be a game that only sells in Asia.

Micropayments are all well and good, but the American gamer community is a long series of veterans creating sociological conditions for newbs. Either the vets predated the newbs in a game, or brought their veteran ways from another while forming the critical mass of culture.

Whatever it is, and regardless of just how wonderful and rosy the bottom lines are for RMT companies, gamers don't buy games because of micropayments.

They buy them because they're fun.

So when SOE starts talking about the game portion of the game, I'll begin to wonder on its potential. Having watched them drop the equivalent of full development budgets to buy up other games, I'm beginning to wonder where their game creativity went.

Unless our's is no longer the compelling market for them.

[Surlyboi]

Actually, I think SOE's look to Asia may be a little cockeyed, considering they're killing their Japanese SWG servers.

Just sayin'

[Hoax]

If micropayments mean we get the good asian MMO's then I'm all for it.  Gun-kata robots 4tw and whatnot.

*whoa finger slippage and whatnot*

[Surlyboi]

If micropayments mean we get the good asain MMO's then I'm all for it.  Gun-kata robots 4tw and whatnot.

This is Smedco... Gun-kata robots? Nah. Cheesy ways to take your cash? Sure.

[Merusk]

It's a brilliant idea. Of course, it's also the kind of brilliant, assraping, moneygrubbing shitheel idea that only a pigfucker with the heart of an adding machine could think up.

Thing is, he didn't think it up until he saw his son playing Runescape.  So he's really just stealing someone else's idea and running with it on a larger budget.  Go go Microsoft gameplan. 

[Shockeye]

It's a brilliant idea. Of course, it's also the kind of brilliant, assraping, moneygrubbing shitheel idea that only a pigfucker with the heart of an adding machine could think up.

Thing is, he didn't think it up until he saw his son playing Runescape.  So he's really just stealing someone else's idea and running with it on a larger budget.  Go go Microsoft gameplan. 

I fail to see where this is a problem.

[HaemishM]

And he and McQuaid didn't think up EQ til they started playing DikuMuds instead of D&D with Cheesy Poofs. When has Smed ever had an original thought?

[Hoax]

This is Smedco... Gun-kata robots? Nah. Cheesy ways to take your cash? Sure.

I meant that if an American adoption of the pay for items formula proves successful we might get good games, you know ones not designed by SOE.

[Venkman]

When micropayments result in what is commonly perceived as a good game, I'll know it is time to take my ancient ass out of gaming for good.

All items are transitory. The games are built around planned obsolescence. If this intrinsic part of the Diku-inspired iterations requires additional money, then no greater a separation between the Haves and Have Nots will exist. Look at the links to crime. Look at the national campaigns to limit exposure to this obvious ponzi-like scheme in China and Korea.

This is the future of MMOGs? I think not. But it'll be interesting to see what happens to the companies that try along the way. 

[Azazel]

I hate the idea of rich kids dominating a game because they can afford the best characters, weapons etc. Having said that, us poor folk could organise ourselves and re-enact the French Revolution by lynching those rich players. Now that is something I would pay money for.

Got this quote from the link. I just want to say I love reading these posts from whiny little bitches crying about what "the rich kids" have over them, the "poor folk" (who can apparently still afford a computer, monthly sub fees, etc etc). Sorry, I just love laughing at the entitlement whore mentality.

[DevilsAdvocate]

When micropayments result in what is commonly perceived as a good game, I'll know it is time to take my ancient ass out of gaming for good.

All items are transitory.

Ah, but so is money. :)

The question in my mind: Is this an attempt to progress further down the road of the disposable society? When we buy things we get solid items that we can see as value for what we spent on it. Yet, games are almost entirely digital in nature. One of the primary arguments against digital distribution is the lack of flesh world product. Consumers want a physical object they can show for the money they spent, even if the end result of purchasing the product is chucking the box and disc in a corner and never touching them again.

So, why is there a different mentality for games than there is for, say, cable tv? When you pay for cable tv, all you receive is a signal through a cable that allows you to watch a tv show. Is there a subconscious feeling of having received physical goods because of the receiver and remote they give you that allows the consumer to have that piece of mind?

What about internet connectivity? When we pay for that all we have is access, no physical product. How do people leap over that mental hurdle?

I just want to say I love reading these posts from whiny little bitches crying about what "the rich kids" have over them, the "poor folk" (who can apparently still afford a computer, monthly sub fees, etc etc).

A computer is usually a one time purchase. Monthly sub fees are a tolerable fee to access the content of a game that everyone pays. It is a barrier to entry that prevents people not willing to pay from even playing. Anything beyond those fees is what folks are objecting too. Especially if those fees are used to bar entry to parts of the game or items that may be needed to advance.

I feel like often the whiners are pointing out the worst scenario possible: at some point, advancement in the game may be completely based on paying your way forward. When advancement is based on your bank account, the "poor folk" will definitely cry foul.

[JoeTF]

Let me point out, that for now every micropayment game was a total shit, especially CS-wise.
Think typical mmorpg, but company treating everyone as they're playing for free. Moreover, those companies seems to be struggling getting on plus.

Well, we will see it with Roma Victor:P

[Mesozoic]

I hate the idea of rich kids dominating a game because they can afford the best characters, weapons etc. Having said that, us poor folk could organise ourselves and re-enact the French Revolution by lynching those rich players. Now that is something I would pay money for.

Got this quote from the link. I just want to say I love reading these posts from whiny little bitches crying about what "the rich kids" have over them, the "poor folk" (who can apparently still afford a computer, monthly sub fees, etc etc). Sorry, I just love laughing at the entitlement whore mentality.

...

Wouldn't the entitlement whores be the ones buying their way through the game, as opposed to playing the game and advancing by right of that play?   

[HaemishM]

I hate the idea of rich kids dominating a game because they can afford the best characters, weapons etc. Having said that, us poor folk could organise ourselves and re-enact the French Revolution by lynching those rich players. Now that is something I would pay money for.

Got this quote from the link. I just want to say I love reading these posts from whiny little bitches crying about what "the rich kids" have over them, the "poor folk" (who can apparently still afford a computer, monthly sub fees, etc etc). Sorry, I just love laughing at the entitlement whore mentality.

It isn't entitlement, jackass. It's the idea that you already pay to play the game, you should have the same opportunities as anyone else. Paying to shortcut those opportunities is in essence cutting ahead in line just because you have money. It's something outside the game.

But hey, I'd rather SOE got the money than cocksucking nutsack child molesters like IGE.

[Fabricated]

I would like to point out that Micropayments for anything online makes me ill. It's a way of making stupid people spend more money than they would normally by dazzling them with small numbers.

For god's sake, Scott McCloud supports micropayments.

[HaemishM]

I like micropayments because it removes one of the barriers to consumer spending. It's great marketing. I'd love being able to pay small amounts $1-$2 to download an episode of a TV show I missed, or a novel or comic book.

[Shockeye]

It isn't entitlement, jackass. It's the idea that you already pay to play the game, you should have the same opportunities as anyone else. Paying to shortcut those opportunities is in essence cutting ahead in line just because you have money. It's something outside the game.

America is the land of the free, home of the rich. People with money will always have better opportunities than those that don't.

But hey, I'd rather SOE got the money than cocksucking nutsack child molesters like IGE.

Having the company who makes and runs the game set up a marketplace for the trade of items for money makes me feel warm and fuzzy compared to having to deal with fly by night operations that may or may not deliver the goods.

[tazelbain]

Let me point out, that for now every micropayment game was a total shit, especially CS-wise.
Think typical mmorpg, but company treating everyone as they're playing for free. Moreover, those companies seems to be struggling getting on plus.

Well, we will see it with Roma Victor:P

It already is shit. At least I am not paying for the crappy service I am not using.

Personally, I don't mind micropayments.  I'll judge system on it's own.  For things like PE and MTGO, its more like macro-payments and a no-go.

[Trippy]

Apparently the latest online gaming fad in Asia are "relationship" games where you pay real money to buy items to furnish your virtual apartment with which you then show off to other players (presumably of the opposite sex). Think The Sims Online except everything you buy in game you pay for with real money (which for some people is how they played TSO...). I saw a report on this while I was on vacation in China this past week and a half. According to the report the original game started in Taiwan and it and various copycats are now sweeping through China in a big way.

[DevilsAdvocate]

I like micropayments because it removes one of the barriers to consumer spending. It's great marketing. I'd love being able to pay small amounts $1-$2 to download an episode of a TV show I missed, or a novel or comic book.

This is a good idea, but would you love to pay for the first 30 minutes of a show and have to pay for the rest? Or chapters of a book? Or pages of the comic book? I could easily see stupid ideas like that getting implemented.

I think it would depend on the medium and how often the product is produced.

Of course, with the things you mentioned, they would have some sort of DRM associated with them, I would bet. And that is another whole can of worms...

[penfold]

Its not even a remotely feasible prospect I will use real money to pay for in video game/virtual items. Never, not in one million years, not if its the last video game on the entire fucking planet, not a single solitary chance.  Companies are getting greedy these days, just because technology allows for micropayments and DRM and what have you, doesnt mean Im stupid enough to fall for that shit. Subs are bearable, because at least you know your monies are go towards bandwidth, dev costs, storage space and what have you., but pay for a sword/house/furniture? in video game? people are stupid.

[tazelbain]

Even if you'd end up paying unless, have more flexibily?
I've been playing PP sporadiclly for 4 monthes.  If I had a subscription, it'd have cost $40.  But I have payed only $20 and still have enough left over for another couple months.  What I like is I can come and go as I please, there is no pressure to "get my money's worth" like with a subscribtion.