Back from popular BAN! "Reverand's Rant"

Pay-to-win is a mechanic, where you can skip parts of the gameplay for money. Exactly what you're proposing.

The fact that by owning DLC you're having an advantage over non-DLC player isn't exactly the same. It might seem unfair, but in a game like Elite it's hardly a problem. It's not PvP focused, and frankly, Base Elite is more like test drive, where you can check if the rest is worth investing into.
I love that you mentioned this. The descriptions of the game in the Play Station Store have changed as well. Where the vanilla game is now considered DEMO, and the DLC is now called the Full-Game-Unlock. Which might be true, if the price wasn't doubled for the unlock key... lol. The Vanilla is still the same price as it was before the DLC.
 
On #1: When seen by itself, as possible player to player transaction, it would make absolute sense. Without even needing the artificial limitations to it. Just like it doesn't make any sense from an in-world point of view, to not be able to buy materials with credits, etc.

Once you look at the complete game design, things change. Right from the start FD blocked credit transactions. You can transfer goods, but thanks to how fast you can scoop or collect with limpets and capacity limits of instances, it's slow and cumbersome and thus not being used too much.

Then credits lost their value as currency. Be honest: anybody who still cares for credits is an absolute beginner without much knowledge of the game yet. Once you learned your way around, credits are just something you have. The actual currency are materials. That's not unique to ED, either. Just look around at many games out there. Each new content has it's own trinkets and stuff to collect, which you then can trade for rewards.

The prime example would be GW2, where each new mini-zone comes with it's own "currency", be it petrified wood, frost berries, pearls or whatever else. As they are not transferable, it means no matter how much a veteran somebody is, he actually has to play the content instead of just dropping a few thousand gold on it and be done for.

So while the player to player trade would make absolute sense from an in-game point of view and it's absence is against all in-world logic, it makes perfect sense from a game design point of view to not allow this transfer.

The question really is what you consider more valuable. The logic of the simulated world, or gameplay design.


On #2 I also throw in a hard NO!
Up to now ARX is just cosmetics. I could not discuss that I liked the old shop more, as prices were more evident.

I know that the old shop didn't work for consoles and I do understand that they wanted to unify and streamline the system, instead of having to support two completely different shopping infrastructures. Yet I an also say that I have bought several things in the old shop, and not a single thing since ARX is around. Merely due to not being immediately able to see how much something now costs and not caring enough to do the calculation. I just don't buy instead.

With that out of the way (sorry, I just had to write it once again.... ), I still want all microtransactions to only be cosmetical, with no technical advantages. Selling engineering materials for actual money might be one of the few moves, which could actually annoy me enough to quit the game.


I've received 137 likes from 34 different threads in the last 24 hours.
Add one. :D
 
Last edited:
I'd have only one solution that also encourages MultiPlayer/MMO interaction :

- while docked at the same Station/Outpost etc., permit Player-to-Player trade

Any Player can mark Materials and a trade limiter for all Elements/Materials/Data (things offered to trade away + things the Player is requiring/accepting + optional "Credits accepted"), "offering to trade" is broadcasted to the Station Services.
While any Player docked with this offer enabled, Station Services display something like "Materials Trading of Opportunity" which other Players can check for.

That way and intuitive/hassle-free, Players can do limited ad-hoc trading with random others while docked.

Fixed Trade ratios or the Credit fee as set by FDev.

So dock at any busy place and see what's in the pool.
Alternatively, Players operating in a Group/Power/PMF/Squadron can do this in a somewhat organized manner.

Pros - no fixed requirement to visit Mat Trader, a positive and beneficial/logical social/MMO aspect (meeting random strangers can now pay off)
Cons - you might not get what you want nor the desired quantity (merely an Opportunity); Players aren't Mat Traders with unlimited stocks after all, which remains their unique Quality
I could get behind this idea.
Every Cmdr is their own mat trader BUT for predefined amounts of mats....that could be cool - best idea in this thread if you ask me!
Most of the other ideas I suspect would run the risk of killing off gameplay (even if you don't like said gameplay, some probably do!) or lead directly to 'gold farming'.
Careful what you wish for - it may have unintended consequences 😢
 
Wow, some one asking for pay to win again... I never understand this kind of mentality, there's always someone who want to buy progress using real money instead of earning it... (n)
In all honesty, I don't have much of a problem with it. Whether you pay with money or time made a different for me in the past. But the older I get the more valuable time becomes for me, and the less I seem to have it, in contrary to money. One can never buy experience, so it will never be more pay to win than it already is, in my opinion.

That about the 2nd idea, the first one sucked and failed to make sense, but that's prolly me as well...
 
again... ED is indeed P2W. As are all the others you're trying to separate it from
You clearly have no idea what P2W means. Is it also unfair that people who don't own the game have a disadvantage in the game? Or that people on consoles who don't pay for the multiplayer services? Or people will inferior internet connections? People who don't have a good control setup? Smaller monitor? I could spend time doing dishes instead of engineering my ships, would a dishwasher be P2W?
 
Game companies usually try to avoid this phenomenon.
...because they generally want to cash in on that market.

MTG has been trying to figure out how to do this, and 25-30 years later have they finally figured it out.

I find it interesting that you refer to the secondary market as a "third party black market".
 
1. Engineering is already very difficult for new players to get into. Let's make it even harder by making it only reasonably available to an already super bored and ultra rich.
2. No. Just no.
Even as a longer time player, the meta progression of the Egnineers and the like is not something I look forward to when playing the game. It's just a means to an end. It'd be nice if it were better incorporated contextually in the game and didn't undermine player play styles to the extent that it does, but that seems to be asking for too much. Apparently we're all supposed to play as mindless, treasonous drone Commanders selling ourselves to the highest bidder to stockpile our own personal arms races. :unsure:

It's cool if some people want to play that way, but I often have better things to do, or at the very least, wish I did.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom