But the "Steam Chart Users Club" insist there are less than 4,000 players in the game, so that idea couldn't possibly float...100,000 players buying it at £20
(Sorry Ian, not enough coffee yet
But the "Steam Chart Users Club" insist there are less than 4,000 players in the game, so that idea couldn't possibly float...100,000 players buying it at £20
The "promise" (maybe it was just "currently we have no plans") not to introduce a way to buy advantages with real cash is an "holy" agreement between FDEV and the early community. I am pretty sure there is an archived discussion somewhere in the DDF. It was used countless times in discussions ("well at least it's not pay2win" etc).Well everyone is criticising but im still waiting for anyone to come up with an alternative to help their cash flow
O7
Such as? I racked my brains with little to no result, and I didn’t really see any viable suggestions on the forum, although I could certainly have missed some.
Doesn’t mean I like what the’re doing by the way.
I'm sorry, but your statement is utter rubbish. Even your link to the explanation of PTW shows there is no PTW."Pay to Win: In computer games, involving or relating to the practice of paying to get weapons, abilities, etc., that gives you an advantage over players that do not spend money."
![]()
pay-to-win
1. in computer games, involving or relating to the practice of paying to get…dictionary.cambridge.org
Buying ships, upgrades, and timed exclusives for real money does give an advantage over players that do not spend, and therefore absolutely is pay2win. It's ridiculous to pretend otherwise. Is it pay2win is not even a question, it is, so, the real questions are: "Can I live with this level of Pay2Win in the game?", and "What level of Pay2Win is too much for me, personally, to accept?"...
We are all about to find out it seems.
Such as? I racked my brains with little to no result, and I didn’t really see any viable suggestions on the forum, although I could certainly have missed some.
Doesn’t mean I like what the’re doing by the way.
That's a subset of P2W and people are splitting hairs over this.The purchase of pre built ships should really be called Pay-to-skip-ahead-a-little.
Just wondering:even though buying a copy of EDO would cost around the same as a single ship and give access to all 4
I really like the suggestions in @Weps post and would pay small amounts Arx for those I liked and wanted.I really don't know how many times i need to post this and it really doesn't take much thought either:
Python Mk II & Updates To The Gamestore
nah, it looks that it's a large and is far behind the cockpit, between the two large on the sides, maybe slightly behind them Besides hardpoints, I was just wondering how they'd balance internals to give her more speed, agility and so on, as imho only an FdL-Python hybrid would make a PM2...forums.frontier.co.uk
Some people seem to enjoy the many bottom-tiring experiences that is the grind within the game. However, I wonder if there are many players who enjoy all aspects.... if it's pay to skip then why is the build up to having a decent ship so bad you have to skip it.
... the prebuilts aren't for our enjoyment they're for FDev to make money off our suffering due to the game being bad in other parts. There's nuance to it but it helps to put it as bluntly as possible.
TrueJust wondering:
I tried getting to spire site when they came out - obviously cannot land on EDH4.0.
Yes, but be prepared for a rough ride at firstQ) IF I buy Ody today, can I immediately go to said spire site today and descend to the site and bomb and collect using limpets? without needing to go on feet?
Up to G3 suits can be bought from the store (there used to be a thread with details of what & where) Weapons the same, either may come with engineering (up to 2 additions, which may, or may not, be wanted by the player) for an escalating credits cost.Or are there long tutorials/learning curves/grind for suits/etc, in which case I cannot go for a few weeks playing only an hour or 2 a day.
Such as? I racked my brains with little to no result, and I didn’t really see any viable suggestions on the forum, although I could certainly have missed some.
Doesn’t mean I like what the’re doing by the way.
My question is: If the previous strategy has been so successful, why might they consider offering mediocre ship builds and early access to a new ship for Arx (which, for anyone playing for a year or more could be sitting in their bank anyway) along with cosmetics?My question is this: Why do you think this strategy won't work anymore?
Perhaps the bean counters advised them it would fail? If only the same wisdom could have been shown at the launch of EDO, and the release delayed until it had a little bit of optimisation work completed. Maybe, just maybe, then FD wouldn't have had to write off the development cost from their profits?including giving players an expansion for free that they'd originally planned to sell.
That's a subset of P2W and people are splitting hairs over this.
If you want to say it's pay-to-skip that's fine and pay to win what, then fine.
If there's nothing to win then why would anyone buy it in the first place, if it's pay to skip then why is the build up to having a decent ship so bad you have to skip it.
They've said they're still "looking into" making changes to engineering in the same post, but their first conclusion, the immediate action to take in response to the whole engineering feedback thread was that they need to add pre-builts? Yes this is rhetorical, the prebuilts aren't for our enjoyment they're for FDev to make money off our suffering due to the game being bad in other parts. There's nuance to it but it helps to put it as bluntly as possible.
Mr. Occam to the rescue. Of course it was the bean counters.Perhaps the bean counters advised them
My question is: If the previous strategy has been so successful, why might they consider offering mediocre ship builds and early access to a new ship for Arx (which, for anyone playing for a year or more could be sitting in their bank anyway) along with cosmetics?
Perhaps, just perhaps, they have listened to the suggestions in the past where forum members bewailed the fact that something they wanted should be purchasable with Arx?
Perhaps the bean counters advised them it would fail? If only the same wisdom could have been shown at the launch of EDO, and the release delayed until it had a little bit of optimisation work completed. Maybe, just maybe, then FD wouldn't have had to write off the development cost from their profits?
Where does trust come into it? (sorry, I'm a cynic in some things, I wouldn't trust a business to give me the current time of day if I didn't pay them for it)They've broken the public trust, and I don't understand why anyone would think that taking yet another step down the path towards predatory monitzation would make them even more worthy of trust.
Or by any other means they perceive may be profitable, surely? (as long as it is legal)Business raise capital for operations using one of four methods:
The cost of cosmetics for carriers kinda already does that. -more cosmetic options and the ability to furnish the bridge/office would go a long way imo.Wasn't Fleet Carriers originally listed as a paid expansion? Frontier could have sold access to that feature.
But the fuss would have been about the LEPers missing out or not, the Pay to Whatever fuss is mostly about the prebuilt ships.Yep, the buzz around the January announcement of new ships coming soon would probably have had a different tone if it had continued "for ARX, unless you're happy to wait a few months longer".