Looks great, good luck for that. o/

P.S. : are you to shy to post your propaganda vid ?

Thank you all dev ! This is a good gesture. Much appreciated big_smile

Happy customer !

742

Awesome. That match it so well. Nice Eve references too.

Now record the lyrics on the instru FTW.

DEV Zoom wrote:

Update: patch delayed a bit, sorry about the premature warning, the guys need some more time to get it right.

Bah that's cool. It's too hot to sleep anyway.

Also, random stupid vid to stimulate your work.

DEV Gargaj wrote:

PATCH ATTEMPT AT 2AM CEST (in about an hour)

May the Syndicate be with us.

Thanks to you I'll wait another hour before going to sleep mad

Gamer base more than doubled in a few days.

All I can say is that i totally understand the situation, and wait for the server to be up to the task again, knowing that the devs are working on it. Hell ! They probably want this to work far more than any of us.

Patience fellows.

Arga wrote:

And as I posted else where, most of the community would have supported AC by buying paint jobs. But eventually devs can only live on toast and beans for so long (literally) and even a small dedicated community can't keep 10 devs on the payroll for years.

I wasn’t aware that the dev’s situation was that bad. Of course then, the whole debat doesn’t really make sense.
If there is an urgent need of funds for the dev, then a bit of RMT seems a good compromise.

I do hope with us Eve refugees, they wont need to implement more RMT. tongue

@Arga
I am aware that this game has a tiny community atm, and that the dev probably lose money. But that’s to be expected for a new game/company. What they should have in mind now is the long term. That’s why players are in too. We want to stay, make us stay ! cool

What I am saying is that a MMO game company should raise and cherish its gamers community. And RMT is clearly a bad thing if you want to have a wealthy, solid community.

Maybe we can compromise ? The new vanity features could be temporarily sold, then 3-6 months later it becomes free, for example. The RMT would act like an exclusivity right. It’s still bad, but there is the perspective that it becomes free soon.

The main point is to assure the game’s and communities’ coherence.

A 2003’s Eve vet once told me « the community IS the game itself ». I never heard a deepest statement about MMOs. A game can be awesomly good, there is always a moment when you will get bored of it. But you wont get bored of a good community. EVER.

Thanks for the clarification Van. I was just going off what I saw on Steam last night, which showed the Eve expansion for $19.99, maybe that was the MT crap that caused all the trouble?

No, its the price to "buy" an account. You have to pay for the game and the first month of sub.

I love it as well big_smile

Arga wrote:

Is it really fair to the community though, to force the entire community to pay an additional monthly fee, or to only charge a small portion of the community an OPTIONAL additional fee?

If your a P2P model, your subscriptions have to cover not only the operational costs, but the 3-5 years of game production costs; be it real money or 10-12 hours aday of sweat equity by the dev team (Not to mention a very expensive looking toaster oven).

If your looking at a game with 500,000 subs that has been out 8 years, then its about cash. When you talking about a game with 2-3000 subs, its about trying to pay the current expenses (including salary's for a dev team still actively improving the game) AND recover the production costs, since a game is likely only going to be a going concern for about 10 years.

And yet, if it’s in the game, it affect every single player. So yes, I think any additionnal feature should be considered a part of the game.
Or maybe Pvp players should only pay for the « pvp » part of the game, Indus players only pay for the « craft » part, etc…
No offense, but that way of managing thing is very « fast-food » like. Every one pay for what he can afford.

Well, i think it does no good to the community, nore to the devs.

Arga wrote:

Personally, I would rather let that starving college kid play for $10 a month and I'll pay an extra $10 a month for MT items, instead of charging everyone $15 a month.

Personnaly, I dont think that kind of game is for kids.

So yes, I would rather have a high subscription fee, and no RMT at all. In terms of game quality it’s worth it. And those who understand that will also happily pay it.
I am ready to invest in the game. I believe in it and in the devs. I know they are passionate about it.

I must warn them, though : since 10 years, I have seen a lot of MMO fail, mostly because of « futile, harmless, etc » RMT.

Once again, I dont care for the paint thing. I talk about the principle of RMT in general.

To sum up what i think about RMT :

If it’s about money : rise the subscription fee. The P2P business model is more than viable if you rely on the community.

If it’s about giving some players privileges, I thinks it’s highly harmful to the community and the fun.

Really I insist about the « community » idea, since for me, it’s all that really matter.

Understand that it's not a "oldschool" or butthurt thing. It's really about cohesion, emulation. If I understood something in my MMO experience, it's that a community is a fragile thing, but it's really worth protecting.

On another note, I think all the ideas brought by Tarantoga are pretty awesome, if they are implemented as a free feature.

As for the exploit possibilities : devs have to be careful about it, just like any other features…

Slavyn Liko wrote:

The only reason it should frustrate any of the gamers who wont pay for the optional feature, is if it became game-changing.

The human nature dont work like that. Sandbox, even more than every other type of game, is about experimenting. You want to test everything the games offer.

Slavyn Liko wrote:

What it does do, is it gives that player behind the pink/blue/green/gold/chartreuse mech a little individualism which helps to further their own immersion into the game.

And that dont help the community to bound together.

Slavyn Liko wrote:

And as I stated before, the few (maybe 20% of the perp population right now) who would pay for the vanity colors helps increase the cash-flow for the company which helps them to expand both the functionality of the client as well as upgrading servers to a more robust server.

If you think long term, that's a fail strategy. I know the modern management is all about quick cash. But really, if you seek for succefull games, there stand only the ones that made the community choice instead.

It's also in the dev's interest to avoid RMT completly. Especially since the game is a sandbox.

Let me explain quickly :

--> Add a feature that allow the players to personnalize the mechs
--> all the community enjoys it freely
--> the community experiment the feature, share skins, etc...
--> the community attract other players and grows
--> more subscription for the devs

Look at the perfect sandbox example : Minecraft. No RMT whatsoever, more and more free features, HUGE community, and not even a subscription to pay !
I know the difference with a MMO such as PO, but you get my point : a sandbox needs futile features such as "personalize your skin" to live.

If you sell the option, ok there is a quick cash-flow. But the truth is : there is no gain in the long term and it frustrates the 80% gamers who wont pay for the feature.

Tarantoga wrote:

A very nice idea would be to allow people to make their own robot skins and upload it on the server for cash. They get a BPO, can sell it to other people for NIC, can share it with their corp and it depends on the artistic skills of the people to  have a great skin, not on RL-money alone.

Then again, why the RMT ? Why such an option wouldn't be implemented as part of the game, as well as other gameplay features ?

I dont get it.

GLiMPSE wrote:

I think we both see where this is going -- but I hope we can both agree that vanity items are nothing to worry about...who cares... if you feel you need a pink robot for $1 dollar... you buy a pink robot for $1 dollar....

These same concepts hold true in real life... however in real life, money can also buy power... as stated in perpetuum this will not be the case.

We both share the same views, really.

But allow me to push things a bit. In a MMO, a social game, power is not only about money or weapons. It can also be about gangs, influence, and... appearance. Like, being seen in a big battlemech just isn't the same as to be seen in a small bot huh ?

How you look is part of what's making the game exciting for many. Even those who wont admit it.

After all, everyone takes time to make his own avatar. Wouldn't it be nice if there was the same option for your mech ? If everyone could make his mech looks "unique" ? Wouldnt you use the option yourself if it was a part of the game ?

In that point of view, RMT for paint could be seen as a "cheat", because it's not as futile as it sounds.

I conceed this reasonning is extreme, but you get my point.

GLiMPSE wrote:

You don't feel equal if your bot isn't pink?

I am sure people wont. Jealousy is a comon human feeling. And it's often about the dumbest things.

That said, i dont care, really, about the RMT for the paint. I just take the example of what's happening in Eve JUST for a simple-tiny-ugly-futile-monocle.

Thamul wrote:

I believe RMT fluff items help a game.  First they allow the company to get more money.  If someone wants to pay more for something that has no effect it supports the game I'm playing without affecting me.  Second it tends to prevent cancellation.  It's more investment which makes canceling harder.

Yeah I agree. But I think a P2P MMO should have a business model that allow the company to avoid the use of RMT.

On a personnal note, I would be glad to pay more, like 15/month, if there is no RMT in game. It's my view of "supporting the game company".

Gamers equality is an important gameplay feature imho. That's what makes the great games and the great communities.

For the "monocle aristocraty" you describe to exist it requires the active participation of those without monocles.  They only way the "monocle aristocraty" can exist is if those without acknowledge it.  If you /ignore or mock them then there is no "monocle aristocraty."

My point is, RMT generates divisions inside the community. Even for the small things like a monocle.

Look at the proportion it has taken on the forum and ingame ! Of course you can ignore it, but what's the point to play a MMO if you ignore other players ?

Thamul wrote:

As long as the MT don't effect gameplay who cares.  Just don't buy it.

I have zero problems with charging real world money for fluff like mech color.

If they add MT that effect gameplay then they either need to remove the monthly fee or I'm gone.

I just think that if those vanity items were crafted by players instead, it would add to the fun of the game.

Plus, look what's happening in Eve actually : there is a "monocle aristocraty" taking form. Those whith monocles troll others etc...

You can tell it does more harm than good to the the community. sad

Just some good quotes on this subject, from the Eve forums :

Micro transactions supports a cheap fun mentality, it ruins immersion and shortens a game's life span.

What I seek in a MMO is interactions between players.

RMT is about interacting with the game company.

The more RMT there is in a game, the less interesting it get.

RMT : a way to get things other gamers can't have by exploiting the game's rules.

Cheating : a way to get things other gamers can't have by exploiting the game's rules.

If I play the "Pay-to-play" type of MMO, it's because I want for every gamers the same chances.

If it's about money, then there is no fun.

If you lack money, rise the subscription fee, but dont force RMT in the game.

That said, I do think painting those mechs would be a cool feature tongue

22

(8 replies, posted in General discussion)

Play the game as if there is no respec possibility.

If you makes mistakes (believe me, i did a lot more than yours...), tell yourself no EP is lost.

Have patience and stick with your choices.

GLiMPSE wrote:
Tag wrote:

New feature idea :
- A mini-map which indicates objectives/NPCs/agents (seems obvious to me, but didnt read anything about it in the devblog)

If I understand your request properly this is in the game -- you just have to put it on  your UI.

*noob face* big_smile

Thanks.

New feature idea :
- A mini-map which indicates objectives/NPCs/agents (seems obvious to me, but didnt read anything about it in the devblog)

25

(132 replies, posted in General discussion)

Khadia Khan wrote:

@tag you only have 3 missions until you gain enough rep to open lvl 1's (.21 rep opens) each Corp has 3-6 lvl 1 missions. At rep 1.01 you will open the lvl 2's at the outposts, and your over all rep with the conglamrate effects your indy stats.(recycling refining factory ect...) I would suggest picking one of the 3 Alpha islands as a "home" and grinding rep on them until you open a few missions up.

Thanks a lot for the answer ! I now understand why i found no mission 1+ in any of the 4-5 stations i visited.