These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: Skill trading in New Eden

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Berrice Silf
Academy of the Imperial Guards
#2181 - 2016-02-22 21:56:22 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Berrice Silf wrote:
I dont know if you intentionally missed my point here or not, The free 2 play model offers its playerbase the opportunity to gather certain resource(s) at a set level per day allowing you access to build, create or develop, If you want to then speed it up by way of said resources, coins, materials you can by purchasing. Apart from the fact we are still paying monthly for EvE the whole game now is based around the freeplay design.
Sounds like you're taking an overly broad yet somehow amazingly narrow approach to the definition of F2P design. To draw from my limited F2P experience:

GW2 and WoT wouldn't count as F2P despite actually being free to play due to not having, so far as I remember when I played them, daily allowances of resources where you could have bought our way around limits.

Meanwhile a sub game, in this case Eve, does count as F2P due to what is in my view still a mischaracterization of an already existing condition being enabled by other mechanics prior.

We're just getting more divergent here, before we were just disagreeing on whether this made Eve F2P, now I think we've moved into disagreeing on what F2P design is.

Berrice Silf wrote:
No, It's new but its always going to be charging the seller twice for the privilege of moving those skill points even more so when you take into account the diminishing returns as the player pool of skill points will only diminish leaving farming a viable restocking source. The aurum sale is only for so long then they will rise in price not lessen.
CCP charges to move anything around, as such the expectation to do so for free would have to be made in ignorance of concepts like PLEX prices relative to a sub and character transfer fees. Further while stock will decrease to just that produced by farms demand for SP shouldn't stay constant I'd estimate. Especially with rising costs for diminishing returns as buyers build more SP.

Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Can be.
Use your imagination and pretend you have more friends than your enemy.
Maybe you should be less cryptic and state what you mean. How does having friends or not having friends prevent me from purchasing, injecting, and queuing skills? Seems to be working fine either way.
Maybe your confused because GW2 is buy to play not f2p.

In an interview with Polygon earlier this week to prepare for the announcement, O'Brien told us that this shift to free for the base game doesn't change the studio's core approach buy-to-play, a model he has "been championing since the original Guild Wars a decade ago."
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2182 - 2016-02-22 22:10:29 UTC
Berrice Silf wrote:
Maybe your confused because GW2 is buy to play not f2p.

In an interview with Polygon earlier this week to prepare for the announcement, O'Brien told us that this shift to free for the base game doesn't change the studio's core approach buy-to-play, a model he has "been championing since the original Guild Wars a decade ago."
I'm genuinely uncertain how that works, where one can and does enter the game and play for free while not being free to play. Further I'm not sure how that statement alters the facts of the strategy.

Reminds me of DC Universe online really, to the point of being indistinguishable (tiered membership with locked areas, limited character slots, inventory, currency and abilities, and various other limits) buy they had no qualms calling it F2P.
Berrice Silf
Academy of the Imperial Guards
#2183 - 2016-02-22 22:38:16 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Berrice Silf wrote:
Maybe your confused because GW2 is buy to play not f2p.

In an interview with Polygon earlier this week to prepare for the announcement, O'Brien told us that this shift to free for the base game doesn't change the studio's core approach buy-to-play, a model he has "been championing since the original Guild Wars a decade ago."
I'm genuinely uncertain how that works, where one can and does enter the game and play for free while not being free to play. Further I'm not sure how that statement alters the facts of the strategy.

Reminds me of DC Universe online really, to the point of being indistinguishable (tiered membership with locked areas, limited character slots, inventory, currency and abilities, and various other limits) buy they had no qualms calling it F2P.

You have to purchase the product in question and register it, once completed you then play online at no additional cost.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2184 - 2016-02-22 22:44:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
Berrice Silf wrote:
You have to purchase the product in question and register it, once completed you then play online at no additional cost.
The page blatantly starting with "Play Guild Wars 2 for free" and ending with "Sign Up and Play For Free." suggest otherwise.

Edit: Further reading seems to confirm this is indeed F2P now. Buy 2 Play refers to the now retired core game purchase which has been converted to a "core" account, with different limits than those of a free account, the current manner of getting into the base game.
Berrice Silf
Academy of the Imperial Guards
#2185 - 2016-02-22 22:52:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Berrice Silf
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Berrice Silf wrote:
You have to purchase the product in question and register it, once completed you then play online at no additional cost.
The page blatantly starting with "Play Guild Wars 2 for free" and ending with "Sign Up and Play For Free." suggest otherwise.
They are giving the base game of GW2 away for free now because the new expansion which you have to buy is being released, you need the base game to be able to play the expansion.

"We've seen cases in the industry where a game is buy-to-play, it comes out with expansion packs, and you want to get your friends into the game, but they can't just buy the latest thing and play with you," said O'Brien. "You have to buy the prerequisites. You have to buy the base game and each expansion pack just to be qualified to buy the latest. It's just a barrier to entry. Guild Wars 2 is the game about tearing down those barriers and making it easy to play with your friends."

EDIT:
"We're not using the phrase 'free-to-play' for Guild Wars 2," O'Brien said. "Some people will call it that. But there's that stigma that it's a different business model. We're not actually doing that. We're not going back and changing the way the game is monetized. We're not going to make it so it starts free but has its hand out asking for money.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2186 - 2016-02-23 00:02:25 UTC
Berrice Silf wrote:
They are giving the base game of GW2 away for free now because the new expansion which you have to buy is being released, you need the base game to be able to play the expansion.

"We've seen cases in the industry where a game is buy-to-play, it comes out with expansion packs, and you want to get your friends into the game, but they can't just buy the latest thing and play with you," said O'Brien. "You have to buy the prerequisites. You have to buy the base game and each expansion pack just to be qualified to buy the latest. It's just a barrier to entry. Guild Wars 2 is the game about tearing down those barriers and making it easy to play with your friends."

EDIT:
"We're not using the phrase 'free-to-play' for Guild Wars 2," O'Brien said. "Some people will call it that. But there's that stigma that it's a different business model. We're not actually doing that. We're not going back and changing the way the game is monetized. We're not going to make it so it starts free but has its hand out asking for money.
Which factually describes a F2P scenario with a content gate. They could have just as easily stopped selling the vanilla game and replaced it with expansion + vanilla packs exclusively to those who didn't already have the game creating the same lack of division for a single purchase.

Instead they created a second and third tier between the expansion, grandfathered buy to play players, and new free to play accounts.

This just comes off as semantics. Their using the same model and taking the same actions as other F2P games, but aren't because he says so. I think I'm pretty far in the right here not buying it. Basically I think ArenaNet is being about as straightforward there as you believe CCP is being here.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#2187 - 2016-02-23 02:25:38 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Can be.
Use your imagination and pretend you have more friends than your enemy.
Maybe you should be less cryptic and state what you mean. How does having friends or not having friends prevent me from purchasing, injecting, and queuing skills? Seems to be working fine either way.
They are objects that cost ISK.
Either try and drive someone to being poor or try and limit their access. You can do this as a consequence of other more "fun" actions.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2188 - 2016-02-23 02:45:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Can be.
Use your imagination and pretend you have more friends than your enemy.
Maybe you should be less cryptic and state what you mean. How does having friends or not having friends prevent me from purchasing, injecting, and queuing skills? Seems to be working fine either way.
They are objects that cost ISK.
Either try and drive someone to being poor or try and limit their access. You can do this as a consequence of other more "fun" actions.
So basically normal training is in no way impeded by the "motorcyclists" even through skill books.

What you're referring to is an entirely separate group than injector users at this point, and that's IF said group has the capacity to deny skill book purchases, something not reasonable given NPC seeding for most of them, and neither made beneficial nor enabled by skill trading for the rest.

I'm just trying to figure out the vector of impalement that these motorcyclists are doing to us normal training users. What you're giving me instead is just some existing means to mess with markets not related to the advent of skill trading.
Berrice Silf
Academy of the Imperial Guards
#2189 - 2016-02-23 07:46:26 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Berrice Silf wrote:
They are giving the base game of GW2 away for free now because the new expansion which you have to buy is being released, you need the base game to be able to play the expansion.

"We've seen cases in the industry where a game is buy-to-play, it comes out with expansion packs, and you want to get your friends into the game, but they can't just buy the latest thing and play with you," said O'Brien. "You have to buy the prerequisites. You have to buy the base game and each expansion pack just to be qualified to buy the latest. It's just a barrier to entry. Guild Wars 2 is the game about tearing down those barriers and making it easy to play with your friends."

EDIT:
"We're not using the phrase 'free-to-play' for Guild Wars 2," O'Brien said. "Some people will call it that. But there's that stigma that it's a different business model. We're not actually doing that. We're not going back and changing the way the game is monetized. We're not going to make it so it starts free but has its hand out asking for money.
Which factually describes a F2P scenario with a content gate. They could have just as easily stopped selling the vanilla game and replaced it with expansion + vanilla packs exclusively to those who didn't already have the game creating the same lack of division for a single purchase.

Instead they created a second and third tier between the expansion, grandfathered buy to play players, and new free to play accounts.

This just comes off as semantics. Their using the same model and taking the same actions as other F2P games, but aren't because he says so. I think I'm pretty far in the right here not buying it. Basically I think ArenaNet is being about as straightforward there as you believe CCP is being here.
No because there is no content gate all is available to play you have restrictions on when you can join the world pvp and have less inventory space on the base model only but on purchasing the expansion all restrictions are lifted. CCP have gradually over the years turned there pay to play model into some kind of cash sucking hybrid, we still have to pay to play but everything that you do in it's base play design can now be speeded up by purchasing in game.
Suede
State War Academy
Caldari State
#2190 - 2016-02-23 12:53:41 UTC
Berrice Silf wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Berrice Silf wrote:
They are giving the base game of GW2 away for free now because the new expansion which you have to buy is being released, you need the base game to be able to play the expansion.

"We've seen cases in the industry where a game is buy-to-play, it comes out with expansion packs, and you want to get your friends into the game, but they can't just buy the latest thing and play with you," said O'Brien. "You have to buy the prerequisites. You have to buy the base game and each expansion pack just to be qualified to buy the latest. It's just a barrier to entry. Guild Wars 2 is the game about tearing down those barriers and making it easy to play with your friends."

EDIT:
"We're not using the phrase 'free-to-play' for Guild Wars 2," O'Brien said. "Some people will call it that. But there's that stigma that it's a different business model. We're not actually doing that. We're not going back and changing the way the game is monetized. We're not going to make it so it starts free but has its hand out asking for money.
Which factually describes a F2P scenario with a content gate. They could have just as easily stopped selling the vanilla game and replaced it with expansion + vanilla packs exclusively to those who didn't already have the game creating the same lack of division for a single purchase.

Instead they created a second and third tier between the expansion, grandfathered buy to play players, and new free to play accounts.

This just comes off as semantics. Their using the same model and taking the same actions as other F2P games, but aren't because he says so. I think I'm pretty far in the right here not buying it. Basically I think ArenaNet is being about as straightforward there as you believe CCP is being here.
No because there is no content gate all is available to play you have restrictions on when you can join the world pvp and have less inventory space on the base model only but on purchasing the expansion all restrictions are lifted. CCP have gradually over the years turned there pay to play model into some kind of cash sucking hybrid, we still have to pay to play but everything that you do in it's base play design can now be speeded up by purchasing in game.


I think CCP should make eve online to Free To Pay Model as it just don't justify in paying a subscription fee for time or to wait on skill to train when CCP went and changed way eve is as a model and more to Pay To Win or Get your money out to jump the skill queue.

There just no value for money for money in paying a subscription Fee to Wait on skills when you can just Pay for the Skill there no justification. CCP will do better if they just make Eve to Free to play model instead of milking it Alpha/Beta players

Just a Sad way of CCP to rob all its loyal based players twice over on subscription Fees.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2191 - 2016-02-23 19:32:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
Berrice Silf wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Berrice Silf wrote:
They are giving the base game of GW2 away for free now because the new expansion which you have to buy is being released, you need the base game to be able to play the expansion.

"We've seen cases in the industry where a game is buy-to-play, it comes out with expansion packs, and you want to get your friends into the game, but they can't just buy the latest thing and play with you," said O'Brien. "You have to buy the prerequisites. You have to buy the base game and each expansion pack just to be qualified to buy the latest. It's just a barrier to entry. Guild Wars 2 is the game about tearing down those barriers and making it easy to play with your friends."

EDIT:
"We're not using the phrase 'free-to-play' for Guild Wars 2," O'Brien said. "Some people will call it that. But there's that stigma that it's a different business model. We're not actually doing that. We're not going back and changing the way the game is monetized. We're not going to make it so it starts free but has its hand out asking for money.
Which factually describes a F2P scenario with a content gate. They could have just as easily stopped selling the vanilla game and replaced it with expansion + vanilla packs exclusively to those who didn't already have the game creating the same lack of division for a single purchase.

Instead they created a second and third tier between the expansion, grandfathered buy to play players, and new free to play accounts.

This just comes off as semantics. Their using the same model and taking the same actions as other F2P games, but aren't because he says so. I think I'm pretty far in the right here not buying it. Basically I think ArenaNet is being about as straightforward there as you believe CCP is being here.
No because there is no content gate all is available to play you have restrictions on when you can join the world pvp and have less inventory space on the base model only but on purchasing the expansion all restrictions are lifted. CCP have gradually over the years turned there pay to play model into some kind of cash sucking hybrid, we still have to pay to play but everything that you do in it's base play design can now be speeded up by purchasing in game.
Yes, there is a content gate, it's called the Heart of thorns expansion. That's on top of the various level gates imposed on accessing content that isn't present on core accounts. Add to that to the other restrictions and the free account basically amounts to classic restricted F2P.

At this point I'm not sure why you're clinging to the idea that a F2P game is somehow not F2P. The website for the game calls it F2P, players call it F2P, gaming news sites call it F2P. A single interview claimed it wasn't, but the rest of the company didn't seem to get the memo since everywhere else it's being marketed as F2P.

So are the vast majority of people wrong about what F2P means because one person got to redefine it? Or is that just a positive spin on what some players may see as a negative move invalidating their prior purchase? I'm leaning towards the latter.

Suede wrote:
I think CCP should make eve online to Free To Pay Model as it just don't justify in paying a subscription fee for time or to wait on skill to train when CCP went and changed way eve is as a model and more to Pay To Win or Get your money out to jump the skill queue.

There just no value for money for money in paying a subscription Fee to Wait on skills when you can just Pay for the Skill there no justification. CCP will do better if they just make Eve to Free to play model instead of milking it Alpha/Beta players

Just a Sad way of CCP to rob all its loyal based players twice over on subscription Fees.
There is only 1 type of player who can realistically see skill trading as a better dollar/isk value than skill training: those who are bad at math.

Also if you don't want to pay twice over on sub fees, don't pay twice over on sub fees. CCP isn't forcing you to do that in any way shape of form and probably shouldn't need to feel bad that you're throwing money at them because they simply offered a service.

As stated prior Eve hasn't changed at all in cost for me since this launched. But then I guess having agency over ones own spending on a luxury is considered rare around here.
Berrice Silf
Academy of the Imperial Guards
#2192 - 2016-02-23 21:15:20 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Yes, there is a content gate, it's called the Heart of thorns expansion. That's on top of the various level gates imposed on accessing content that isn't present on core accounts. Add to that to the other restrictions and the free account basically amounts to classic restricted F2P.

At this point I'm not sure why you're clinging to the idea that a F2P game is somehow not F2P. The website for the game calls it F2P, players call it F2P, gaming news sites call it F2P. A single interview claimed it wasn't, but the rest of the company didn't seem to get the memo since everywhere else it's being marketed as F2P.

So are the vast majority of people wrong about what F2P means because one person got to redefine it? Or is that just a positive spin on what some players may see as a negative move invalidating their prior purchase? I'm leaning towards the latter..
I take it you don't realise who Mike O'brien is then seeing as he's just one person ??

Heart of thrones is not a content gate, Once you purchase the expansion your free account gets upgraded to a full access core account unlocking the world pvp for lower level characters and your inventory is maxxed. What don't you possibly understand about Buy 2 play lol.

"This is a buy-to-play game, and we are making the core game free."

"Let’s make it so that anybody who wants to check out Guild Wars 2 can check out Guild Wars 2. And can really check out the game, not some free-to-play monetised version of the game."

Seeing as you struggle with whats happening in eve it's hardly surprising you dont grasp basic business models Roll
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2193 - 2016-02-23 21:30:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
Berrice Silf wrote:
I take it you don't realise who Mike O'brien is then seeing as he's just one person ??
Not sure what you're asking here. Are you saying he's more than one person? Or that who he is specifically has the capacity ti qualify him as more than one person?

Or perhaps this is some appeal to his authority that makes his statement worth more than all the people stating the contrary including those responsible for the materials presenting the game?

Berrice Silf wrote:
Heart of thrones is not a content gate, Once you purchase the expansion your free account gets upgraded to a full access core account unlocking the world pvp for lower level characters and your inventory is maxxed. What don't you possibly understand about Buy 2 play lol.
Wait, so there is content locked behind this expansion, but the expansion isn't a content gate. Also the expansion isn't needed to play the core game, in fact no purchase is. You can obtain and play it for free, not on a trial basis but actually for free, but it's not free to play.

Ok.

Berrice Silf wrote:
"This is a buy-to-play game, and we are making the core game free."

"Let’s make it so that anybody who wants to check out Guild Wars 2 can check out Guild Wars 2. And can really check out the game, not some free-to-play monetised version of the game."

Seeing as you struggle with whats happening in eve it's hardly surprising you dont grasp basic business models Roll
Whelp, I'll stick with actually identifying the model over taking a single person's word that their not using that model because they say so. And further lets be honest, gems and gem related purchases were additional monetization on top of buy to play back when it was exclusively buy to play. They already had an additionally monetized version of the game, complete with XP boosts and currency purchases.

I'll take to heart what you think I can't grasp when you can actually get some facts about what you're talking about somewhere in the general vicinity of actually correct instead of basing your stance on corporate swill. Especially from a man who says one thing but has his own company do another.
Berrice Silf
Academy of the Imperial Guards
#2194 - 2016-02-23 22:27:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Berrice Silf
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Berrice Silf wrote:
I take it you don't realise who Mike O'brien is then seeing as he's just one person ??
Not sure what you're asking here. Are you saying he's more than one person? Or that who he is specifically has the capacity ti qualify him as more than one person?

Or perhaps this is some appeal to his authority that makes his statement worth more than all the people stating the contrary including those responsible for the materials presenting the game?

Berrice Silf wrote:
Heart of thrones is not a content gate, Once you purchase the expansion your free account gets upgraded to a full access core account unlocking the world pvp for lower level characters and your inventory is maxxed. What don't you possibly understand about Buy 2 play lol.
Wait, so there is content locked behind this expansion, but the expansion isn't a content gate. Also the expansion isn't needed to play the core game, in fact no purchase is. You can obtain and play it for free, not on a trial basis but actually for free, but it's not free to play.

Ok.

Berrice Silf wrote:
"This is a buy-to-play game, and we are making the core game free."

"Let’s make it so that anybody who wants to check out Guild Wars 2 can check out Guild Wars 2. And can really check out the game, not some free-to-play monetised version of the game."

Seeing as you struggle with whats happening in eve it's hardly surprising you dont grasp basic business models Roll
Whelp, I'll stick with actually identifying the model over taking a single person's word that their not using that model because they say so. And further lets be honest, gems and gem related purchases were additional monetization on top of buy to play back when it was exclusively buy to play. They already had an additionally monetized version of the game, complete with XP boosts and currency purchases.

I'll take to heart what you think I can't grasp when you can actually get some facts about what you're talking about somewhere in the general vicinity of actually correct instead of basing your stance on corporate swill. Especially from a man who says one thing but has his own company do another.
There is a huge difference between a game that was buy 2 play being released to all free as opposed to a free 2 play game. You say to me semantics lol.

It wasnt an additional monetized version, gem store has been there all the time and you can't go to it and oh look instant max toon or buy the latest best flavour of anything - XP boosters - tomes - scrolls arn't just from the store either theyre from event weeks / weekends holiday specials, Freebies for doing things in game ....... not having the hand always out, we want more style.
edit: infact i still log onto gw occasionally when someone wants a pet / primeval skins / tormented weapon and needs a hand to get them for there HoM's all things that are free basically skins the kind of thing we get rooked for here.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2195 - 2016-02-23 22:41:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
Berrice Silf wrote:
There is a huge difference between a game that was buy 2 play being released to all free as opposed to a free 2 play game. You say to me semantics lol.
Feel free to quantify it. Further please explain how a pay to play game is easier to equate to free to play due to allowing players to trade experience than a game that is actually free to play in the very real and factual sense that you do not have to pay to play it.

Berrice Silf wrote:
It wasnt an additional monetized version, gem store has been there all the time and you can't go to it and oh look instant max toon or buy the latest best flavour of anything - XP boosters - tomes - scrolls arn't just from the store either theyre from event weeks / weekends holiday specials, Freebies for doing things in game ....... not having the hand always out, we want more style.
It has always been additional monetization, it was never a necessary part of a buy to play model. It still isn't. That's what makes it additional, not when it was added, it was there when I played well prior to F2P being an option.

And yes, it's exactly hand out we want more. Because that's what their offering. You have the events, rewards and gifts, but then there's the "more" in the store that people pay for because they want it, and the dev has the hand out offering it because they want more cash. Kinda like how there's training here but injectors for those that want it. And ironically SP comes easier here, but this is the game you condemn.

And yes, you can use XP boosters to max out, granted when combined with activity, but then the isk used to buy injectors always originates with some activity.
Berrice Silf
Academy of the Imperial Guards
#2196 - 2016-02-24 13:22:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Berrice Silf
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
you can use XP boosters to max out, granted when combined with activity, but then the isk used to buy injectors always originates with some activity.
Yeah takes alot of determination to crack open the wallet and type them numbers into the website to buy your plex !!!

Im so pleased you mentioned activity because i will point you back to one of the first things i said to you, what is the point of even starting something when with no effort you can have everything in the game ?
Suede
State War Academy
Caldari State
#2197 - 2016-02-24 14:33:59 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Berrice Silf wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Berrice Silf wrote:
They are giving the base game of GW2 away for free now because the new expansion which you have to buy is being released, you need the base game to be able to play the expansion.

"We've seen cases in the industry where a game is buy-to-play, it comes out with expansion packs, and you want to get your friends into the game, but they can't just buy the latest thing and play with you," said O'Brien. "You have to buy the prerequisites. You have to buy the base game and each expansion pack just to be qualified to buy the latest. It's just a barrier to entry. Guild Wars 2 is the game about tearing down those barriers and making it easy to play with your friends."

EDIT:
"We're not using the phrase 'free-to-play' for Guild Wars 2," O'Brien said. "Some people will call it that. But there's that stigma that it's a different business model. We're not actually doing that. We're not going back and changing the way the game is monetized. We're not going to make it so it starts free but has its hand out asking for money.
Which factually describes a F2P scenario with a content gate. They could have just as easily stopped selling the vanilla game and replaced it with expansion + vanilla packs exclusively to those who didn't already have the game creating the same lack of division for a single purchase.

Instead they created a second and third tier between the expansion, grandfathered buy to play players, and new free to play accounts.

This just comes off as semantics. Their using the same model and taking the same actions as other F2P games, but aren't because he says so. I think I'm pretty far in the right here not buying it. Basically I think ArenaNet is being about as straightforward there as you believe CCP is being here.
No because there is no content gate all is available to play you have restrictions on when you can join the world pvp and have less inventory space on the base model only but on purchasing the expansion all restrictions are lifted. CCP have gradually over the years turned there pay to play model into some kind of cash sucking hybrid, we still have to pay to play but everything that you do in it's base play design can now be speeded up by purchasing in game.
Yes, there is a content gate, it's called the Heart of thorns expansion. That's on top of the various level gates imposed on accessing content that isn't present on core accounts. Add to that to the other restrictions and the free account basically amounts to classic restricted F2P.

At this point I'm not sure why you're clinging to the idea that a F2P game is somehow not F2P. The website for the game calls it F2P, players call it F2P, gaming news sites call it F2P. A single interview claimed it wasn't, but the rest of the company didn't seem to get the memo since everywhere else it's being marketed as F2P.

So are the vast majority of people wrong about what F2P means because one person got to redefine it? Or is that just a positive spin on what some players may see as a negative move invalidating their prior purchase? I'm leaning towards the latter.

Suede wrote:
I think CCP should make eve online to Free To Pay Model as it just don't justify in paying a subscription fee for time or to wait on skill to train when CCP went and changed way eve is as a model and more to Pay To Win or Get your money out to jump the skill queue.

There just no value for money for money in paying a subscription Fee to Wait on skills when you can just Pay for the Skill there no justification. CCP will do better if they just make Eve to Free to play model instead of milking it Alpha/Beta players

Just a Sad way of CCP to rob all its loyal based players twice over on subscription Fees.
There is only 1 type of player who can realistically see skill trading as a better dollar/isk value than skill training: those who are bad at math.

Also if you don't want to pay twice over on sub fees, don't pay twice over on sub fees. CCP isn't forcing you to do that in any way shape of form and probably shouldn't need to feel bad that you're throwing money at them because they simply offered a service.

As stated prior Eve hasn't changed at all in cost for me since this launched. But then I guess having agency over ones own spending on a luxury is considered rare around here.


Free-to-play (F2P) refers to video games which give players access to a significant portion of their content without paying. There are several kinds of free-to-play games, but the most common is based on the freemium software model. For freemium games, users are granted access to a fully functional game, but must pay microtransactions to access additional content. Free-to-play can be contrasted with pay-to-play, in which payment is required before using a service for the first time.

I don't have a problem with people paying money to progress faster towards the point of a game that they consider to be enjoyable. Now, keep in mind, "Pay-to-Progress" is different from "Pay to Win", where cash shops will have items or perks that can't be obtained without paying. I do not agree with a "Pay-to-Win" model.

It goes hand-in-hand with the work-ethic philosophy of "time = money".

• Let's say you make $15 per hour at your job.
• Now, lets say it takes 5 hours to grind the equivalency of $15 worth of in-game items.
• You are better off grinding your job for 1 hour to buy those items instead of grinding the game for 5 hours.
• This way, you can play the game for the remaining 4 hours instead of grinding it.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2198 - 2016-02-24 21:42:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
Berrice Silf wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
you can use XP boosters to max out, granted when combined with activity, but then the isk used to buy injectors always originates with some activity.
Yeah takes alot of determination to crack open the wallet and type them numbers into the website to buy your plex !!!

Im so pleased you mentioned activity because i will point you back to one of the first things i said to you, what is the point of even starting something when with no effort you can have everything in the game ?
PLEX doesn't originate isk. That should be obvious enough to go without saying. One cannot pay directly to create isk, so any mention of credit card numbers is wholly irrelevant to the time it takes to actually generate isk. I'm not here to judge what people spend their isk or money on though, we apparently have you for that.

Suede wrote:
Free-to-play (F2P) refers to video games which give players access to a significant portion of their content without paying. There are several kinds of free-to-play games, but the most common is based on the freemium software model. For freemium games, users are granted access to a fully functional game, but must pay microtransactions to access additional content. Free-to-play can be contrasted with pay-to-play, in which payment is required before using a service for the first time.
So looking at this definition, a game that allows access to the entirety of it's base content free of charge for either the client software or continued access would and should be classed as free to play even if a portion of the content is locked behind a paywall of some sort.

I'd call the entirety of the base GW2 game significant unless the content exclusively accessible in HoT manages to somehow completely dwarf the whole vanilla game experience in scale. If the claim is that it does, reducing the base game to being synonymous with a brief trial, then that's different. If not, we have easily defined it as F2P.

Suede wrote:
I don't have a problem with people paying money to progress faster towards the point of a game that they consider to be enjoyable. Now, keep in mind, "Pay-to-Progress" is different from "Pay to Win", where cash shops will have items or perks that can't be obtained without paying. I do not agree with a "Pay-to-Win" model.

It goes hand-in-hand with the work-ethic philosophy of "time = money".

• Let's say you make $15 per hour at your job.
• Now, lets say it takes 5 hours to grind the equivalency of $15 worth of in-game items.
• You are better off grinding your job for 1 hour to buy those items instead of grinding the game for 5 hours.
• This way, you can play the game for the remaining 4 hours instead of grinding it.
I don't really have an issue either, especially in the case where the positive effects on a personal level get routed back to other players, which is the case here. There is a positive feedback that's obviously supposed to be created, people wanting isk but not SP engage for mutual benefit with those wanting more SP than training allows and in turn either generate isk and promote activity themselves or entice others to do so via PLEX. Fact is both the sub and game activity are still happening, they're just shifting to the people who want to do them the most.
Berrice Silf
Academy of the Imperial Guards
#2199 - 2016-02-24 22:43:12 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Berrice Silf wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
you can use XP boosters to max out, granted when combined with activity, but then the isk used to buy injectors always originates with some activity.
Yeah takes alot of determination to crack open the wallet and type them numbers into the website to buy your plex !!!

Im so pleased you mentioned activity because i will point you back to one of the first things i said to you, what is the point of even starting something when with no effort you can have everything in the game ?
PLEX doesn't originate isk. That should be obvious enough to go without saying. One cannot pay directly to create isk, so any mention of credit card numbers is wholly irrelevant to the time it takes to actually generate isk. I'm not here to judge what people spend their isk or money on though, we apparently have you for that.
CCP don't seem to agree with you Lol

Since the collapse of the EVE Gate, humans in New Eden have longed for never-ending piles of ISK. CCP recognizes this demand, and provides PLEX – as a completely legal option for turning your real life cash into precious space bucks.

Source
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2200 - 2016-02-25 00:13:59 UTC
Berrice Silf wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Berrice Silf wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
you can use XP boosters to max out, granted when combined with activity, but then the isk used to buy injectors always originates with some activity.
Yeah takes alot of determination to crack open the wallet and type them numbers into the website to buy your plex !!!

Im so pleased you mentioned activity because i will point you back to one of the first things i said to you, what is the point of even starting something when with no effort you can have everything in the game ?
PLEX doesn't originate isk. That should be obvious enough to go without saying. One cannot pay directly to create isk, so any mention of credit card numbers is wholly irrelevant to the time it takes to actually generate isk. I'm not here to judge what people spend their isk or money on though, we apparently have you for that.
CCP don't seem to agree with you Lol

Since the collapse of the EVE Gate, humans in New Eden have longed for never-ending piles of ISK. CCP recognizes this demand, and provides PLEX – as a completely legal option for turning your real life cash into precious space bucks.

Source
Sweet, so we're back on semantics over reality. Glad we took this productive turn. Lets just ignore what we know about how PLEX and RMT work due to that statement, even though that's the relevant context of the statement.