Anybody want to buy some tulips?
The Star Citizen Thread v5
- Thread starter Brett C
- Start date
- Status
I love that their "fans" jump on anyone and everyone like a pack of rabid dogs being thrown a piece of meat. I can't stand communities like that, why would anyone want to play SC MP if that's the type of players you will be playing alongside?
Uh, no. Pay-to-win applies when you can purchase power for real money. E.g. if you could buy legendaries in WoW, yes, it would be pay-to-win.
That doesn't define anything, you're really reaching. There is no sacred, emblazoned on gold tablets definition of P2W that insists it "only apply when an items of a specific value or power cannot be get in the game for use." That's just what the people making P2W games say because pay 2 win sounds sleazy and who wants to be called sleazy? Considering CIG do sell things that can't be gotten in the game for use right NOW, tho... dunno why you'd even make this weak point. Are we to believe that one day they'll STOP selling ships? After your impassioned statement that ships have value?
Hmmm.
Last edited:
Yup. Remember when Frontier announced that they won't be able to do a true offline mode after all? Sure, that announcement came very late, and even though they offered refunds eventually it wasn't the best thing happening to Elite. But that's just it, the media coverage of this was insane, even the BBC reported on it. Star Citizen feels a bit like Donald Trump in that there's been so many missed deadlines and so many gaffes (customer support tag shaming, copyright infringement, misuse of backer money for expensive barista machines and an expensive prop door, the feigned AC multiplayer launch that turned out to be singleplayer only for months, the star marine desaster, etc) that it actually doesn't matter anymore in the grand scheme of things.
Can I put them round my organ?...
I wonder if there will be a big Hammond or Rowley in the space bars at Arc Corp?
You "win" in a space game by acquiring credits to get better ships and equipment, by getting rich and having an endgame ship (or ships). This increases your survivability and earning potential making for an easier win.
If you can buy ships or game currency directly from the store then it 's about as pay to win as it's possible for this type of game to be.
The optional ability to not cheat yourself out of entire sections of the game by buying ships doesn't change that.
I think you are confusing compulsory spending (subscription to play) with optional spending to advance (pay2win).
They really think they are being clever when saying stuff like "But how could you win? There's no winning!" along with "Yeah but that's the easy part, that's only the hull and what about upkeep and expenses?" -- the second response is always amusing because of course, why couldn't you just pay for THAT as well?
Then this argument generally tends to involve someone claiming how important and busy they are so they want to get right "to the good part" and skip all the "grinding," despite playing games generally being what's involved when you play games. I suppose growing up I could've paid somebody to pass the first few boards of Ms. Pac-Man since I was awfully busy and important even as a toddler, but it still seemed more fun to actually play the games I claimed to like.
Bottom line: selling off game assets and rungs on the ship progression ladder is sleazy stuff. You can claim it isn't a progression and all the ships have roles, but are you going to claim the Aurora is the perfect fit for ANY of them?
Then this argument generally tends to involve someone claiming how important and busy they are so they want to get right "to the good part" and skip all the "grinding," despite playing games generally being what's involved when you play games. I suppose growing up I could've paid somebody to pass the first few boards of Ms. Pac-Man since I was awfully busy and important even as a toddler, but it still seemed more fun to actually play the games I claimed to like.
Bottom line: selling off game assets and rungs on the ship progression ladder is sleazy stuff. You can claim it isn't a progression and all the ships have roles, but are you going to claim the Aurora is the perfect fit for ANY of them?
Last edited:
You are right.
The p2w argument has no real conclusion. And therefore an discussion on this topic will also lead to no definitive end as it is bound to the own opinion and view.
Some argue that even the slightest advantage like buy premium on World of Tanks to help the player advance through the level faster as normal is p2w.
Others only refer to it that it apply when the player has no chance to actually receiving an item that is in every way better than any items in an game without paying for it.
As for the CIG project I do not see that this argument can be applied. None of the items a player can buy now is intended to be locked behind a payment wall for the finished game and even now - as I stated - a player does not need to buy a bigger ship to try it out. The starter package is enough.
This is my view on this topic. You are welcome to have your own. And it does not really matter.
[video=youtube;vQsgKBaYKoo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQsgKBaYKoo[/video]
They really, really, REALLY shouldn't have shown those unwrapped textures anywhere.
Pay2Win does not apply to Star Citizen.
Currently IMHO, it's Pay to be dissappointed
Currently IMHO, it's Pay to be dissappointed
. Being in permanent grubby crowdfunding mode doesn't look very good when it's no longer a tiny indie but a 120+ million vanity project almost four full years AFTER the Kickstarter.
The same arguments have happened in ED, someone once posted a thread complaining that they'd lost their uninsured anaconda blaming the game. They were asked how the got an anaconda without ever seeing the insurance screen and used all the above arguments to justify having bought a second hand account with lots of in game cash for real money. They crashed on takeoff with all available money in cargo and the ship and lost everything. When someone mentioned account trading being naughty the OP's posts got edited to remove the account trading stuff.
That players still around the forum and they worked their way back up from the bankruptcy sidewinder and enjoy the game.
Moral of the story a noob in a endgame ship is still a noob, he just skipped lots of game-play and fun and hasn't learned the basics. Which isn't a win in my book but then I don't like pay2win.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
I believe that Chris Roberts has confirmed ship sales will continue after release.
To my untrained eye, that looks like really nice work by the Art Department... Then again, apart from disagreements on some of the actual designs, most people don't critique the artwork, beyond hardened critics saying "That is sooooo 2011, girlfriend!".
I wonder exactly how that level of detail will reveal in-game? If most of the time people are running round with space helmets on. Or is this where the "flip" gets resurrected?
To me there is still something a bit "uncanny valley" about them. Maybe that is just me, maybe it is because they were "heads on poles" with no body movement to naturalise them? After all, very few people have zero head movement whilst they talk or make faces.
I wonder exactly how that level of detail will reveal in-game? If most of the time people are running round with space helmets on. Or is this where the "flip" gets resurrected?
To me there is still something a bit "uncanny valley" about them. Maybe that is just me, maybe it is because they were "heads on poles" with no body movement to naturalise them? After all, very few people have zero head movement whilst they talk or make faces.
If that's the case, I stand corrected, and SC is p2w by the very definition of it.
Eyes look a little large and shiny, shiny skin too. But very good. I suspect the pay off is mostly with the sq42 story?
Well, there should be a lot of NPCs in the space stations and planetside.
Thought the same thing, showing them off on a "pole" doesn't really make them look natural.
- Status