Pay2Win made it to Elite

[IstvaanDCIV]

They should have done this much earlier, at the very least beginning with the introduction of fleet carriers. That these weren't sold for real money is a missed opportunity, and now we have places overcrowded with them. This was totally foreseeable but now you can't go back on what is already released, then the outcry would be justified. As things are, I see no issue as they are open about its release schedule and you can make an informed choice whether you want to spend money or credits. Pay to win? Come on, that's nonsense. You get the same ship, the premium is only for having it a little earlier. Gamers can be so irrational...

While I do think it's too early to get out the torches and pitchforks in this case, there are more than enough examples of truly egregious monetisation schemes that I don't blame anyone for being wary.

Personally, my line will be crossed if FDev ever start selling ships with exclusive modules/abilities that can't be acquired in normal gameplay, or if they introduce lootbox mechanics. But it seems that plenty of others draw their lines differently.

 

[[VR] DDM_Reaper20]

A zero-rebuy ship would also be very useful for flying around Deciat updating your block list.

Didn"t think of that, my block list is as empty as the head of Germany's "secretary of economics"...

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

They should have done this much earlier, at the very least beginning with the introduction of fleet carriers. That these weren't sold for real money is a missed opportunity, and now we have places overcrowded with them. This was totally foreseeable but now you can't go back on what is already released, then the outcry would be justified. As things are, I see no issue as they are open about its release schedule and you can make an informed choice whether you want to spend money or credits. Pay to win? Come on, that's nonsense. You get the same ship, the premium is only for having it a little earlier. Gamers can be so irrational...

What would monetized carriers have changed with the overcrowding? Nothing.

 

[[VR] DDM_Reaper20]

How on Earth (or in space) can you say "What's the issue with zero rebuy?" It's effectively paying to circumvent a major game mechanic.
If you've got an engineered fleet, billions in the bank etc. then that's an argument for increasing rebuy, not getting rid of it.
And I see people are still using the 'how does that affect your gameplay?' argument to justify every naff decision round here.

Tell you what, I'll accept P2W and zero rebuy on one condition - Frontier also remove the hollow triangle icon denoting players on the scanner and make PCs indistinguishable from NPCs without a scan.

AFAIK, zero rebuy applies to the ship as sold. So, if you decide to modify it by chucking in extra components, say, expensive armour, swap modules for something better, and rip out the weapons because they don't suit you (replacing them with engineered weapons of a different stripe), you'll be paying rebuy for all those modules. (I don't know what happens if you engineer modules already installed, but I'd be in favour of making players pay the full rebuy for those engineered modules -- otherwise, they'll only get the ORDINARY modules back... Yes, I am mean. I hear that a lot of times.)

My corvette has a rebuy of just over 40 million credits. The actual ship is about 20% of that (less, actually, I bought it in Jameson's Memorial, but the you get the general idea).

SOME players MIGHT be happy with what's on the ship. Others might decide to throw everything out, and suffer the consequences.

 

[Morbad]

Pay2Win is only a thing if it directly effects your abilities in PvP or against other players. As PvP in Elite is organised via discord/forums etc there's no impact. The game has no proper PvP other than ganking, which most of the time results in a combat log and pushes more into private group or solo. No one really cares if you level up and gain stuff quicker in one player mode... I don't care if some commander I never see buy 10 ships with money, I do care he's funding Elite's future. We don't even have PvP mission board, leaderboard or kill stats to show there is active PvP.

Essentially every assertion in your post is highly subjective or outright false.

This is an online only, multiplayer only, game with a persistent shared setting, all irrespective of mode. There is little one can do that doesn't contribute to the setting that every other player engages with through their CMDR. I'd wager most players have some sort of goal for their CMDRs and it's essentially impossible to work toward most of those goals without leaving a mark on the rest of the galaxy. Individual contributions may be small, but they are there, and what we do matters. This has long been one of the game's main advertising points and attractions.

Direct PvP is not required to see an advantage from in-game assets. PvP is also not as narrow in scope as you presume, even in the current game.

And, of course, I, and many others, do care what CMDRs we'll never see do to the setting out CMDRs exist in, that we cannot help (as the game has no offline mode, other than the training missions) but interact with. Likewise, many of us are indifferent, at best, to players giving Frontier money that may or may not be reinvested in Elite's development, development that may well expand this overtly pay-to-win trend.

Pay to win? Come on, that's nonsense. You get the same ship, the premium is only for having it a little earlier. Gamers can be so irrational...

Timing is a factor in many of the activities many players engage in. Getting access to a tool sooner is a material advantage.

I don't know what happens if you engineer modules already installed

Engineering doesn't change the value of a module, nor it's rebuy.

 

[PiLhEaD]

.... So I don't think we'll see 'Seal Clubbing'. Not that I've ever seen Seal in a night club anyway.

I saw him on Top of the Pops. Probably. Or have I gone a little bit crazy....?

 

[Alaska Sædelære]

While I do think it's too early to get out the torches and pitchforks in this case, there are more than enough examples of truly egregious monetisation schemes that I don't blame anyone for being wary.

Personally, my line will be crossed if FDev ever start selling ships with exclusive modules/abilities that can't be acquired in normal gameplay, or if they introduce lootbox mechanics. But it seems that plenty of others draw their lines differently.

What I mean is, if you know what you're getting, when you are getting what, and that everybody can have it for the same conditions, you at least have a choice. I know some other games where this is common practice, but only one of them makes access competitive with the consequence that players outbid each other for things with artificially limited supply. That is really pay-to-win but even there, people know it and make their decisions. Other developers do it by subscriptions, if that was the case for us I wouldn't be here but that has to do with other things than moral considerations.

Whichever way, money has to come from somewhere if you need to maintain ongoing development and operating costs.
This was different in the 1980s when this game started, things got sold as a finalized product and it wouldn't make a difference to the buyer whether the company continued to exist. I suspect it's therefore that it probably goes against Mr. Braben's heart as well, which is why FD is coming a tad late with this, but it's in no way outrageous for the industry. This is just my impression though, maybe we'll hear some official comment if the dust here doesn't settle soon.

 

[MPL3D]

Time to support the game guys

 

[PiLhEaD]

David Braben wouldnt be OBE if it werent for WE

Hugely untrue.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

The one caveat I will add to that position is that we shouldn't ever see large, or the expensive end of medium ships on sale for ARX.

They've already confirmed that there'll be a pre-build available for the Python II (though not the exact spec for it), which is presumably going to be about as "expensive medium" as it gets.

Was it it an actual promise made? As I started playing in late 2022, I wasn't around for the alleged promise of "cosmetics only", which I believe was made in 2019 IIRC.

The reference is as I understand to this post - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threads/lavecon-2019-content-reveal.516705/
"As always with our optional additional purchases, ARX can only be used to buy cosmetic Game Extras and will not be used to introduce and acquire pay-to-win purchases."

Whether that's a promise for the future or just a statement of fact about what the store contained then is nowadays irrelevant, of course.

i am not sure but wasnt his OBE for work done with the pi?

He received his OBE in June 2014 "For services to the UK Computer and Video Games Industry." - so not just the Pi, though that certainly was a big part of it. Since Elite Dangerous wasn't released until December 2014 it's unlikely to have been anything to do with that unless QE2 was really impressed with the Alpha build, though.

 

[Morbad]

I really cant see how this is different than my Mercenary Starter Pack I got when I joined BETA in 2014. I got a bigger ship for buying in early.

That was pay-to-win too. The only difference is that we were lead to believe the pre-order benefits wouldn't be repeated and there was no way to separate them from the ability to play the game at all. In late 2014, if one wanted to play, one had to buy into the beta which came with all sorts of undesirable (from my perspective) baggage. In game assets and character discounts should never have been used as an incentive, IMO.

Does it really matter to people how others came about their assets?

Yes.

I want to immerse myself in a coherent setting governed by rules with a modicum of internal consistency. The game fails in this respect a million different ways, from it's lack of an actual economy, to the absence of a demographic simulation, to the lazy and negligent substitutes we have for player moderation...but I do not see these failings as an excuse to fail harder by injecting more non-contextual material into the setting.

 

[CMDR M Kozak]

I want to immerse myself in a coherent setting governed by rules with a modicum of internal consistency. The game fails in this respect a million different ways, from it's lack of an actual economy, to the absence of a demographic simulation, to the lazy and negligent substitutes we have for player moderation...but I do not see these failings as an excuse to fail harder by injecting more non-contextual material into the setting.

I dont want to come across as rude, but it sounds like thats "all in your head". If you like flying spaceships this is not in any way changing that.

Its still just a Python shooting at you... no matter how it was payed for.
The MKII could be a special case for three months - i will admit to that. But it's available to all - with different currencies. Had it only been available for a short period and then no more - like the Cobra4 - it could potentially be bad. But even that I dont understand all the fuss about.

To be honest... to me, this discussion is in the same camp as those who complain about not getting the Titan stickers because they do not have time to shoot the titans.

Question about the MKII: Would it have been better if they sold it as a "ship expansion" on Steam with PP2 as headline feature?

 

[Comandante]

They ought to make the Cobra MkIV available to purchase. That would generate LOADS of cash.

Disclaimer: I own one anyway.

 

[Rat Catcher]

but then if you take that to its logical conclusion you would be letting in some very predatory practices which would extend far beyond elite.

Those already exist, don't they?

This is a game, saying no to anything is an option, even to playing at all.

The sky actually isn't falling because FD have decided to offer a pre-release of a ship for Arx (which could easily have been earned in the past year for just playing, ask me how I know) and pre-built ships in their store, real soon...

Players can reject any idea FD have to relieve them of their money, if sufficient do just that their idea flops and other action taken.
The thing that may drive it to success is that time poor players might see a pre-built ship as an opportunity to play more, just for a tenner...

 

[Morbad]

I dont want to come across as rude, but it sounds like thats "all in your head".

I don't want to come off as rude, only mildly snarky, but you do realize that this game, and all like it, are worlds of fantasy make believe, do you not? You are not actually a Pilots Federation CMDR, but in this fantasy setting, the character that you play certainly is.

I mean, no **** it's in my head; that's what immersion is. It may surprise you, but this is the whole reason many of us play games, or read books, or whatever...they give feedback and structure to, or otherwise aid in, our imaginings. I'm not surrounding myself with the trappings of fantastic far-future spaceflight just to watch numbers tick up while practice my hand eye coordination. I want to have a damned adventure, or a good illusion of one...preferably while still safe and sound in my climate controlled home.

Problem, depending on one's perspective, is that this is a multiplayer game, and to have a multiplayer game, it needs to provide some common ground. Different rules for different players degrades that. Crap that doesn't make sense in the established context, or refusal to establish consistent context, degrades that.

Its still just a Python shooting at you... no matter how it was payed for.

That a Python is shooting at my CMDR is the least important aspect. My CMDR is no fool and is a seasoned combat veteran, he will almost certainly emerge unscathed from this encounter. And if he doesn't...well they don't let PF CMDRs die anyway (though I like pretending it's possible).

However, I, as a player may well notice some serious incongruencies that reduce my entertainment by needlessly poking holes in my sense of verisimilitude.

Where did that Python come from? What is the provenance of the parts that were used to assemble it and the crew that pilots it? The answers matter, not so much the details themselves--I'm entirely fine with abstraction--but in how they reflect the fantasy reality the setting is supposed to depict.

Question about the MKII: Would it have been better if they sold it as a "ship expansion" on Steam with PP2 as headline feature?

I'm of the opinion that anyone and everyone able to log in and influence the same setting should be playing by the same overarching set of rules. I've never liked the system where there are multiple product tiers in a multiplayer game.

And I don't use Steam.

 

[Scoob]

Personally speaking, as long as these changes do legitimately include things that reduce the amount of material grind I need to do when I engineer my ships and modules myself, I'm good with that.

I stand by what I've said many times at this point. If they really want to reduce the material grind, let us roll a G5 right away, none of this G1 to G4 , like it was originally with Engineering. So, if we've unlocked an Engineer to G5, we can just do a G5, or any grade up to the level we've unlocked. Keep the predictable results from the new system. This means that all those (fairly) readily available low-level materials are there for those new to engineering. As they unlock higher grades as their level with individual Engineers increases, they can continue with decent, middle-of-the-road rolls for solid benefits, or work a little harder to get the better materials.

With original Engineering, I was usually pretty happy with your average G3 roll. ONE, I repeat ONE roll and I had what I wanted. Now, to get the same, it's at least three rolls to get the same result, with the materials spent on the lower grade rolls wasted.

 

[zimms]

Imho it's more about avoiding lawsuits for FDev.

Nah, it's about looks. Frontier wouldn't have to be afraid of lawsuits.

People don't buy ships, they buy ARX. That's one of the many advantages of ingame currencies.

 

[Rory12]

I see many people do not understand the simplest thing. Engineers, early access is just the beginning.

New ships must be better than the old ones in some way for players to want to buy them. This is the only way.

As a result, in a few years the entire balance of the game will be destroyed. This has already happened in garbage games like WoT.

 

[Darkfyre99]

Pay2Win is only a thing if it directly effects your abilities in PvP or against other players. As PvP in Elite is organised via discord/forums etc there's no impact. The game has no proper PvP other than ganking, which most of the time results in a combat log and pushes more into private group or solo. No one really cares if you level up and gain stuff quicker in one player mode... I don't care if some commander I never see buy 10 ships with money, I do care he's funding Elite's future. We don't even have PvP mission board, leaderboard or kill stats to show there is active PvP.

I'll link to my reply to a similar sentiment on this thread:

Pay2Win made it to Elite

but is it the same as what CIG is doing? I mean, i do think that selling pre-built ships is a bit of a cheap move - however i do expect to have a good laugh when it will be revealed what prebuilt-ships means in FDev Vision (C-rated of B-rated ships? Maybe A-rated Ships? I dont really expect G5...

forums.frontier.co.uk

TLDR: It isn't about PvP, and single-player games can also contain pay-to-win. It's a monetization strategy designed to get players to spend more money on a game than they would without it.

 

[Darkfyre99]

What would monetized carriers have changed with the overcrowding? Nothing.

It would've made the overcrowding, and thus "housing" spam, even more annoying than it is now.