Pay2Win made it to Elite

[House0fDerp]

That's a (very minor) problem of capitalism, and easily solved by self restraint.

No it's not. Self restraint doesn't affect the negative consequences imposed on you by the pursuit of ever more capital. It just slowly dwindles the goods and services you can partake in as more and more encroaches on whatever limitations you may have set.

This is because when voting with your wallet it's only the spenders votes that count. If you can convince enough people something has a subjective value then it's lack of worth to you won't keep anyone from raising the price and/or piecemealing the purchase.

 

[Rat Catcher]

This is because when voting with your wallet it's only the spenders votes that count.

So the whole world shouldn't be buying anything as it may push the price up for those who can't or don't buy a particular good or service?

 

[House0fDerp]

So the whole world shouldn't be buying anything as it may push the price up for those who can't or don't buy a particular good or service?

That's an absurd non starter as it causes a total collapse of all economic activity and a massive over exaggeration of the notion that other people rewarding anti-consumer practices incentivizes more anti-consumer practices even if you haven't bought in.

Yeah, you can try to expand the idea of anti consumer to being charged at all for anything but that leads to the paradox of nothing being produced or traded which is also anti consumer so... v0v.

 

[Rat Catcher]

That's an absurd non starter

It certainly sounded that way when

This is because when voting with your wallet it's only the spenders votes that count.

..sounding as if anyone buying anything is anti-consumer...

Using the same rhetoric for a computer game is brilliant, I must admit...
I get it, you don't like Frontier deciding to charge for new product access, (or even ships?) for whatever reason, as I'm certain that reason is valid for you.

Uphold your ideals, that is admirable... and tolerate others doing what they wish?

Edit: ... and, of course, this is just a video game, nobody has to support the game / developer if they consider their actions to be anti-consumer, they just walk.

 

[Jack Winter]

Just watched Yamik's take on this. Personally, I really don't care about Pay2Win. But a good point about that is when its successful from the company's standpoint, it will naturally encourage them to add more grind. And then add the Pay2win option to skip that grind. Its a revenue driven cycle that doesn't add creativity or innovation into the game. Gamers lose out in the long run.

The thing is that not all companies are predatory, some are even ethical in how they do business. IMO, so far Frontier has been far from predatory and this latest move doesn't seem overly predatory. Of course this might still change, but I'll save my tears until I see that I'm getting nickled and dimed to death.

 

[House0fDerp]

It certainly sounded that way when

..sounding as if anyone buying anything is anti-consumer...

In context, no, it was a direct response to any negative effects of bad monetization being fully mitigated by personal restraint. But when you isolate and reinterpret you can make anything sound silly.

Using the same rhetoric for a computer game is brilliant, I must admit...

You clearly haven't played anything made by Nexon. They'll gladly show you the degree to which their willing to degrade their free experience to prey upon those with less restraint. Eve echoes started as a decent concept but got ridiculous.

Uphold your ideals, that is admirable... and tolerate others doing what they wish?

Lost me here, where was there any intolerance? Or are you suggesting that commenting about P2W and related concepts and how others buying in creates perverse incentives infringes upon other individuals desire to part with their money?

Edit: ... and, of course, this is just a video game, nobody has to support the game / developer if they consider their actions to be anti-consumer, they just walk.

Apparently people are expected to have no feelings about the gaming landscape chasing trends they don't like? Or express them? What are you trying to get at here?

Edit: I guess what I'm asking is: What is so extreme or severe about statements on perverse incentives and the voting power of spenders vs non-spenders that the effects on video games get disqualified from discussion?

Edit 2:

I get it, you don't like Frontier deciding to charge for new product access, (or even ships?) for whatever reason, as I'm certain that reason is valid for you.

On a side note regarding this, I'm very interested in pricing and the full range of these ships to see how they walk the line of being worthwhile to new players in what they give, being cheap enough to not be offputting to that same group, and ensuring none are so powerful that they do create complaints of significant skips in a process often criticized as grindy.

 

[Mrc_NorthEast]

Some would say there has been grind for years in Elite. But no Pay 2 Win, yet. After the new ships arrive we can see just how much 'grind' if any they save players from.

On a side note. I am hearing on 5/1 and after that Elite Partners get access to a play test area with the new ships. So for those interesting I assume YT and Twitch reviews may show up shortly thereafter, assuming FDev has not embargoed the info.

I will still wait to see the exact launch specs on 5/7 and the reviews of it. But I will be watching YT an Twitch for any early info starting on 5/1.

 

[Rory12]

It would be great to add economy features like in X4, but what I really want is to get rid of the nausea in VR while collecting raw materials.
I tried to mine in asteroid fields, but only garbage comes out, there are no top raw materials.

 

[Rat Catcher]

disqualified from discussion?

Obviously it isn't disqualified from discussion, as it will continue, ad infinitum, until another topic inflames feelings once again, when it will become less urgent and compelling a discssion.

You clearly haven't played anything made by Nexon. They'll gladly show you the degree to which their willing to degrade their free experience to prey upon those with less restraint. Eve echoes started as a decent concept but got ridiculous.

No, I don't believe I ever have - although I gave Farmville on facebook £9.99 around 15 years ago, so I could gift my (then) partner with something she wanted on her farms.
I am not in the habit of buying things I don't consider give value according to my own expectations, which is quite amusing when sales staff in a store etc. attempt to 'sell' me something I am not interested in, rather than the product I am.
I do understand that others may choose otherwise, but that is their decision.

Apparently people are expected to have no feelings about the gaming landscape chasing trends they don't like?

They can have any feelings they like, it is unlikely to change things if decisions have been made, is it?

 

[Rat Catcher]

I tried to mine in asteroid fields, but only garbage comes out, there are no top raw materials.

I recall another post, some years ago, suggesting that better quality materials could be got from asteroid belts, I can't verify if it is factual though.
(or perhaps that is what you were referring to in the first place, belts & fields appear to be interchangeable descriptions)

 

[heathenlamb]

This is the first I'm hearing about a serious rebalancing of the engineering grind. Haven't FD been talking about this for years? But they now have a monetary incentive to "make engineering easier" by adding a Pay2Win option to skip it.

So ? ... I'd pay to skip it. Engineering is tedious beyond measure. My play time is limited.

 

[Vedmo]

which is quite amusing when sales staff in a store etc. attempt to 'sell' me something I am not interested in, rather than the product I am

A couple of weeks ago I was cellphone shopping and after deciding on something the salesman said while they were getting it ready he’d like to go over some other products. I listened to his whole pitch about cases, home hotspot, second phone on same plan, tablets, some car service connection thing, and on and on then politely refused it all. Time passed and I asked him if my phone was ready, he started trying to sell me all the stuff again instead of checking, to which I cut him off and told him I’m only interested in the phone. He went and got the phone then tried to sell me all the other stuff again while checking out, to which I told him never mind, I don’t want any of it now before leaving buying nothing. That’s pretty much where I’m at with Fdev now too.

 

[House0fDerp]

No, I don't believe I ever have - although I gave Farmville on facebook £9.99 around 15 years ago, so I could gift my (then) partner with something she wanted on her farms.
I am not in the habit of buying things I don't consider give value according to my own expectations, which is quite amusing when sales staff in a store etc. attempt to 'sell' me something I am not interested in, rather than the product I am.
I do understand that others may choose otherwise, but that is their decision.

Part of the more general discussion around pay to win is creating value by degrading the game. And while you may not bite at the store, the game itself is still worse for trying to create or maintain that incentive.

Did FDev design unlocks with this intent? Probably not all things considered, but the fact that they have brought up changes to engineering evidences that do see some room to improve there. And the fact that they think they can sell ships built to purpose suggests that they see that as having value for skipping a non-trivial task (otherwise who is this for?). So what I'm asking here is, are we not already dipping our toes in the water?

As far as whether feedback has an effect, we never know how that's going to go until we give it.

 

[House0fDerp]

I think I'm just getting old at this point and haven't internalized the new norm of "time saver" MTs being a good thing. I'm in my old way of thinking that if your progression system has people clamoring for a paid opt out in part or full it means your design was probably in some way lacking.

 

[Planewalker]

total collapse of all economic activity

I fail to see how that is a bad thing. Capitalism is literal "**** where you eat".

Voting with your wallet doesn't work, just like not voting is a vote for those you don't want.


In any case, it's more the exception that anyone detesting the prebuilts or ea ships are making alternative suggestions.
Considering how much was added last year despite the rough time, some statements come off as spoiled tbh.
(Edit: that applies to some statements, not yours)

I am not saying prebuilts or ea ships is the way to go; an optional supporter subscription is much more above board imo.


Heck if they are strapped enough for cash, make a fundraiser instead.

_

 

[Rat Catcher]

Part of the more general discussion around pay to win is creating value by degrading the game. And while you may not bite at the store, the game itself is still worse for trying to create or maintain that incentive.

But is making the game more accessible to "new" players (even if anyone playing for any length of time has had to "endure the grind", not something I noticed in 7 years, but I am odd in my gaming attitude and progressing slower with my junior accounts to not get disenchanted with the game, degrading the game? Or does it just appear that way as the feeling is that they should spend as many hours as others gathering mats, unlocking engineers, etc?

Did FDev design unlocks with this intent? Probably not all things considered, but the fact that they have brought up changes to engineering evidences that do see some room to improve there. And the fact that they think they can sell ships built to purpose suggests that they see that as having value for skipping a non-trivial task (otherwise who is this for?). So what I'm asking here is, are we not already dipping our toes in the water?

Isn't ED infamous for "THE GRIND!" that is used to scare away new players (and new player retention appears to support that sentiment), so reducing or removing that particular millstone, might be considered innovative enough, even more so if some are prepared to pay for pre-configured ships as a starter?

Until FD decide to sell items in their store that are impossible to fabricate in EDO (as H4.x is, essentially there for those who do not / cannot purchase EDO), in my opinion they are welcome to charge the willing for anything that exists in game, even engineered modules. Which won't be popular with some existing players, I'm sure, but the more buying and staying in the game has to be better, in the long run, for the longevity of the game.

Of course, as soon as they cross that line, I'll be off, not a 2nd thought or stop to wave goodbye, others may do as they wish, naturally.

 

[Rat Catcher]

I think I'm just getting old at this point and haven't internalized the new norm of "time saver" MTs being a good thing.

I'm certainly old, but internalised that with the release of Valve's Orange Box... (It wasn't too long before TF2 started selling goodies, which I never bought, on their store)

I'm in my old way of thinking that if your progression system has people clamoring for a paid opt out in part or full it means your design was probably in some way lacking.

ED has always been criticised for "the grind" for as long as I've been playing, possibly longer... So it probably is lacking...
ETA: Even my own 5th account is slow on progressing engineers, there are other things I'd rather get on with first, so welcome any notable change to ship / on-foot engineering if it makes it less time consuming.

 

[Markov Chaney]

We live in a world where people uphold grudges for decades and even pass them on to future generations, so it becomes centuries.

Typical Habsburg attitude, pah!

 

[House0fDerp]

But is making the game more accessible to "new" players (even if anyone playing for any length of time has had to "endure the grind", not something I noticed in 7 years, but I am odd in my gaming attitude and progressing slower with my junior accounts to not get disenchanted with the game, degrading the game? Or does it just appear that way as the feeling is that they should spend as many hours as others gathering mats, unlocking engineers, etc?

2 things, I'd say an overhaul is more for existing players who have opted out, not because they had no interest engineered ships, but because they found the process unpalatable.

That said, if your desire is the casual nature of your experience that's arguably unaffected. It's only a problem if your desire is for gathering mats to take a specific minimum timeframe and you feel compelled to use them when you get them. Engineering has no upper bound in timeframe as you can just not engage with it. It's an often repeated opt in to "complete" the process.

Isn't ED infamous for "THE GRIND!" that is used to scare away new players (and new player retention appears to support that sentiment), so reducing or removing that particular millstone, might be considered innovative enough, even more so if some are prepared to pay for pre-configured ships as a starter?

No argument there, but there is the question of whether that "improvement" should be the default experience or sold separetely.

Until FD decide to sell items in their store that are impossible to fabricate in EDO (as H4.x is, essentially there for those who do not / cannot purchase EDO), in my opinion they are welcome to charge the willing for anything that exists in game, even engineered modules. Which won't be popular with some existing players, I'm sure, but the more buying and staying in the game has to be better, in the long run, for the longevity of the game.

Largely same as before, if this is a better experience and leads to better retention, is it being limited from doing the most good by not being integrated into the game rather than a separate point of sale? Are there any who might see this and decide to not play the game who otherwise would have? Will the reduced time to peak actually lead to more long term retention than a wholesale improvement of the engineering process?

Again, maybe these are just outdated takes but easy come easy go and all. I'm not sure monetary investment will work for retention as well as mechanical investment, but the former may be more profitable compared to those of us just coasting on free arx.

 

[Markov Chaney]

A couple of comparisons everyone seems to be overlooking in their historical comparisons:
£10 in 2024 is <~ £7 in 2014, index linked;
AND the same thing has happened with staff costs;
AND interest on (and access to!) borrowing has absolutely exploded since then, to the point I'm not even going to put figures on it. If it was a game you'd say it was a game-breaking change.

So even if you took out all the other factors that make it a miracle that a game made it to the tenth birthday, just this hard financial reality alone is remarkable.