Not to mention that they've most likely worked on PP2 and engineering changes for a long time already..
Pay2Win made it to Elite
- Thread starter Einar Donarsson
- Start date
Let's hope the new mystery feature isn't P2W....
A certain amount of P2W is OK afaic. Giving new players a quick boost in the form of preoutfit ships to get into their desired trade a bit faster is not really a big deal to me. It does not harm my game in the slightest. Even if they were to sell G3-5 suits, I don't think it would bother me. (I would prolly by G5 Artemis and Maverick suits because you can't remove the mods and I really don't want to grind out another couple G5 suits because I made some questionable mod choices.) Fully kitted out and engineered meta combat ships in the hands of someone that can't fly yet is also not an issue for me really. I can understand how it might be an issue for others though.
How far will they take it though? There are levels of P2W I would be unwilling to stick around for myself. If cash shop anything has any sort of sizeable impact on PP, upcoming PP2, or the BGS, it's going to alienate a large block of players.
I love ED, and if a bit of P2W cash can extend it's life, and maybe even add/improve features, I am all for it. P2W does have the ability to kill the game if taken too far though. I just hope Fdev is thinking it through.
How far will they take it though? There are levels of P2W I would be unwilling to stick around for myself. If cash shop anything has any sort of sizeable impact on PP, upcoming PP2, or the BGS, it's going to alienate a large block of players.
I love ED, and if a bit of P2W cash can extend it's life, and maybe even add/improve features, I am all for it. P2W does have the ability to kill the game if taken too far though. I just hope Fdev is thinking it through.
I suppose you can argue that P2W indirectly harms all players if it was an early game feature since material drop rates would have to be ner-, adjusted in order to entice players to pay cash to skip some of the grind. But since ED only started adding pre-built ships almost 10 years from release, I don't think it applies here.
It feels more like a hail Mary after all feasible methods of generating sustainable income from a decade old game has been exhausted.
It feels more like a hail Mary after all feasible methods of generating sustainable income from a decade old game has been exhausted.
As some have pointed out, that’s not newLet's hope the new mystery feature isn't P2W....
Seven years would be a rather extreme example. I think at that point it would fall under the more general "do you even know what you're talking about" rather than "you stopped playing so your opinion doesn't count".
It's an example from the real world, sadly.
It doesn't sound like a significant number of people, though, or like it's worth punishment.
How is it any different to a car pack in a racing game? Nobody criticises Forza for releasing a game with x number of cars, and then adding y cars in a car pack that can only be accessed by paying after release. The players that buy the pack can use those cars to compete on leaderboards, race against other players, etc. I really don't see how paying for new content is an issue. A new ship is new conten, in the same way a new landmass is an RPG is new content, or a new car in a racing game, or a new plane in a flight sim.
Arguments against pre-builds I can understand, but treating a new ship like a mini-expansion seems perfectly reasonable to me. They're even giving it out free in three months, assuming you care enough about the game to have bought Odyssey (new ships were never part of the deal with Odyssey)! I understand there's precedent of new ships being free (included in the DLC lifespan) in that past, but I don't think some players understand how lucky we were to get that when we did. I would have no issue at all with brand new ships and variants being a flat "pay ARX to unlock access at a shipyard to buy for credits" type approach. I don't mind paying for that work that has been done.
It becoming normal for fully-paid games to still lock content behind microtransactions doesn't mean it's a good idea for the game. It just means that more companies have figured out they can charge more for less.
Then it's no different and I'd have exactly the same criticisms. The odds of me buying a license to any Forza title went from low to exactly zero upon reading your post.
I'm not a huge car fan, but if I was, I would avoid this franchise, significantly on the basis of P2W DLCs...and the fact that it's via XBox. I'm even more adverse to paying Microsoft than I am Valve.
That's literally the same thing, it does not matter what kind of acronym you prefer.
Those practices are actually pretty heavily criticized even if people do buy them cars. There was some other racing game where it cost 60$ per car I think?
More similar would be DCS and it's thousands of dollars of plane DLCs - it's even more niche than even more sim racer.
But lets judge the new stuff as a content:
Is 11-13€ for a new ship for a 10 year old game really good value?
The prebuilts also aren't new content and while we don't know the costs yet, probably aren't worth the arx tho.
That's your choice and prerogative I guess. I'm amazed you find anything to play these days as the vast majority of games have expansions, large or small. By what I'm reading about P2W philosophies even back in 2003 things like Tribunal and Bloodmoon for Morrowind weren't morally acceptable as they allow access to gear that makes other parts of the base game easier as they're more powerful to handle the scaled up expansion content.
Maybe I'm brainwashed by modern sensibilities because I don't think asking to be paid for work done after the fact is such a terrible thing. I make x, charge y for it. I then make z to complement x, but I'm not allowed to charge for it, and have to give it away for free? That doesn't sound right. If you bought x, then you have x. If you want z too, then you need to pay for it, surely?
As I've always said, we're all free to vote with our wallets, and I respect that you will do just that. I'm just amazed there's anything left on the market with live service elements that meets those standards.
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
Note i am not arguing with you here, i am not bothered either way about the 3 month lead time on the python mk2..... but just to play devils advocate........... FD have categorically NOT treated the new ship as a mini expansion...... because if they were then players with the life time expansion pass would get it for free
more specifically with car and flight sims , it is perhaps a little different anyway. the quality of the cars and planes is a whole huge level up from anything in Elite. This isnt a criticism of Elite, just a (hopefully inarguable - but you can never be sure here) truth.
cars in forza or planes in something like DCS are real, therefore they need to be accurate and are painstakingly recreated to the point you can crawl around in them and every kn ob, gear and button is perfect (yes i am that sad! i have in VR!!!) .
then there is the physics and sounds (both things i love in Elite) but in a real world sim they cant just be cool they have to be accurate, so the vehicles are recorded perfectly and their specs examined in total detail,
and then on top of all that there is licensing to real world companies as well. Turn 10 cant just decide to add a ferrari into forza and that is it!.
Last edited:
Ah, so now we're merely haggling price. That's subjective and nobody can tell anyone else what is or isn't good value. I've refused to buy games at release because I didn't think the content was worth it; £70 is nuts for some games if you want all the content.
As I get older, and my financial situation becomes stronger though? Well, that slider starts to move a bit. £10 to support a game that I've already had phenomenal value from? That starts looking a bit more tempting. Not saying that's right for everyone, but surely you can see why some people might be happy to pony up some money if they're invested in a product?
Note i am not arguing with you here, i am not bothered either way about the 3 month lead time on the python mk2..... but just to play devils advocate........... FD have categorically NOT treated the new ship as a mini expansion...... because if they were then players with the life time expansion pass would get it for free
Yea, not a fan of the early access stuff either.
That's why i keep saying i will probably get it in early access if i find that i really want it 3 months earlier - but this depends on a series of factors.
After all, i may spend the 16k arx on something else and get the ship for free later on
I sometimes wish that ED was in a similar position to Frontier CMS games, where chucking out regular PDLCs seems to do the job. Everyone knows where they stand, the ‘rules‘ were set at the beginning and adhered to because it’s in everyone’s interests.
Elite Dangerous has always been a different case. If you start funding with a KickStarter you’re positively encouraging backers to get involved rather than just treat it like any other business transaction. If you never ‘Jonty’’d on a Friday, it difficult to appreciate how unified the community was at the inception of the game.
I suspect this is causing at least some of the wringing of hands because it appears to be invalidating a pledge that Frontier made. Micro transactions were only to be for cosmetic items, full stop (period). Frontier acquired a few other ‘liabilities’ when they sold lifetime expansion passes, which clearly sold future income for ‘now’ income. That was Frontier’s decision at KickStarter time. Now it appears that Frontier want their cake and to eat it too.
It’s a strange method of trying to raise income, if that is the purpose. Unless you’re already in the game, you’re unlikely to know about either the P2 or the catch up ship builds, so it appears this is largely aimed at the existing player base. As mentioned in the forums, many existing commanders have an ARX balance that can cope with this price point. So limited revenue there.
There are others who won’t touch this for a variety of reasons, objection to ARX as a concept, objections to Pay2(whatever) or not an offering they want. No revenue there.
So who is the perceived market?
Elite Dangerous has always been a different case. If you start funding with a KickStarter you’re positively encouraging backers to get involved rather than just treat it like any other business transaction. If you never ‘Jonty’’d on a Friday, it difficult to appreciate how unified the community was at the inception of the game.
I suspect this is causing at least some of the wringing of hands because it appears to be invalidating a pledge that Frontier made. Micro transactions were only to be for cosmetic items, full stop (period). Frontier acquired a few other ‘liabilities’ when they sold lifetime expansion passes, which clearly sold future income for ‘now’ income. That was Frontier’s decision at KickStarter time. Now it appears that Frontier want their cake and to eat it too.
It’s a strange method of trying to raise income, if that is the purpose. Unless you’re already in the game, you’re unlikely to know about either the P2 or the catch up ship builds, so it appears this is largely aimed at the existing player base. As mentioned in the forums, many existing commanders have an ARX balance that can cope with this price point. So limited revenue there.
There are others who won’t touch this for a variety of reasons, objection to ARX as a concept, objections to Pay2(whatever) or not an offering they want. No revenue there.
So who is the perceived market?
Everything else aside and not a criticism or anything..................... i really miss those times, the camaraderie on the forums - even through the enthusiastic discussion of game features - the excitement and optimism for the game was palpable. Everything else aside i got (some not all) of my monies worth of my pledge for the game in those years leading up to release before i even got in my sidewinder..
Elite was the 1st game i ever pledged for, and i doubt I will ever do it again because as others have correctly noted, the investment in the game that encourages can be unhealthy, but it was a fun ride, with the dev diaries and peeks of the week etc.