[Video] Star Citizen is pay to win?
- Thread starter Montoya
- Start date
It totally is pay to win. The only time it's not pay to win is when the only thing you can buy is the standard game. Any time you can buy items for the game that impact how you play and/or allows you to bypass time investment. But the question is not if its pay to win but if paying beyond the standard game entrance fee is the only real way to truly acquire the same items. Lots of free to play games exploit this tactic with the promise that you can acquire any of the end game items but the possibility of getting them would require 10 years of playing the game non-stop. It's the same tactic we see with loot boxes in games like Battlefront 2. The line that Star Citizen will have to toe would be to make sure the ship ingame investment is high enough to give the working towards and earning the ship's merit without being so costly as to make those who bought into the concept the only ones with said ship.
As for the push on roadmap items, I do not get the feeling that its the fault of staggered development more the reprioritizing of SQ42 items over PU. We also know that John said that the ship teams have been shrunk in size as it was proving to be too wasteful. And lately, we are seeing limited end-user impact due to a lot of refactoring like the redoing of all of the current planets for Planet Tech V4, the resking of UI elements out of flash and reworking of old ship models to take advantage of new metrics.
As for the push on roadmap items, I do not get the feeling that its the fault of staggered development more the reprioritizing of SQ42 items over PU. We also know that John said that the ship teams have been shrunk in size as it was proving to be too wasteful. And lately, we are seeing limited end-user impact due to a lot of refactoring like the redoing of all of the current planets for Planet Tech V4, the resking of UI elements out of flash and reworking of old ship models to take advantage of new metrics.
Last edited:
DontTouchMyHoHos
Space Marshal
I paid to get access to the game and i'm winning over the people who didnt pay to have the game. Get on my level scrubs
It is a p2w-live service game.
You can buy anything with real money, and after launch even if you are limited to buying UEC, that will still get you any item you want (with a few exceptions like very rare alien ships and such probably). It's already live service with all the patches, because if you wanna keep up with the cool guys, you gotta open that wallet and buy the new fancy ready to fly ships. Otherwise u be a square! Hah!
I don't mind any of that, now that I can rent ships. It does take some time to get the money for a prospector or similar, but it's not an eternity.
And I won't mind any of it upon release, as long as it won't outright stop me from "winning" the game my way. In simple terms, unless PVP punks with thick wallets interfere in my mostly PVE orinted andventure in a way that I can't overcome ever without paying for it, I don't care.
You can buy anything with real money, and after launch even if you are limited to buying UEC, that will still get you any item you want (with a few exceptions like very rare alien ships and such probably). It's already live service with all the patches, because if you wanna keep up with the cool guys, you gotta open that wallet and buy the new fancy ready to fly ships. Otherwise u be a square! Hah!
I don't mind any of that, now that I can rent ships. It does take some time to get the money for a prospector or similar, but it's not an eternity.
And I won't mind any of it upon release, as long as it won't outright stop me from "winning" the game my way. In simple terms, unless PVP punks with thick wallets interfere in my mostly PVE orinted andventure in a way that I can't overcome ever without paying for it, I don't care.
how do we define 'win' in a sandbox game?
just asking...
edit: OK, having slept on it, I have a tentative answer
[WALL o' TEXT]
'winning' is going to require territorial control, which is going to require capital ships
but individual ownership of capital ships makes no sense
they will be expensive to operate, and they don't make you money directly - they just make it possible to take or defend the territory where you can make money
operating cap ships will be the role of Organisations
we will pay taxes to fund our capital ships and be required to spend a part of our game time manning them for the common good
the rest of our time we will be free to exploit the territory we control
I predict individuals that own cap ships now will sell them off to their Orgs once they realise what a money sink they are
Orgs formed by players who sign up after the game goes live will be able to acquire cap ships fairly quickly by pooling their resources.
so Orgs that start out with cap ships will only have a temporary advantage
and the PU is vast
it's not going to be 'pay to win', it's going to be 'join an Org (the larger the better) to win'
[/WALL o' TEXT]
just asking...
edit: OK, having slept on it, I have a tentative answer
[WALL o' TEXT]
'winning' is going to require territorial control, which is going to require capital ships
but individual ownership of capital ships makes no sense
they will be expensive to operate, and they don't make you money directly - they just make it possible to take or defend the territory where you can make money
operating cap ships will be the role of Organisations
we will pay taxes to fund our capital ships and be required to spend a part of our game time manning them for the common good
the rest of our time we will be free to exploit the territory we control
I predict individuals that own cap ships now will sell them off to their Orgs once they realise what a money sink they are
Orgs formed by players who sign up after the game goes live will be able to acquire cap ships fairly quickly by pooling their resources.
so Orgs that start out with cap ships will only have a temporary advantage
and the PU is vast
it's not going to be 'pay to win', it's going to be 'join an Org (the larger the better) to win'
[/WALL o' TEXT]
Last edited:
I don't know about you guys but I backed to the point the gave me a top-hat and I'm still a looser.
As for the video, I am sorry Glorious Leader all i am getting is this:
I will try again later.
As for the video, I am sorry Glorious Leader all i am getting is this:
I will try again later.
Win WHAT?????????
P2HF = Pay to Have FUN.
P2HF = Pay to Have FUN.
Its a matter of how you define pay2win
pay2win for me is:
if a game is designed to give p(l)ayers a serious advantage over other players, which they can't reach or compensate by playing the game actively. Also games which are designed to prevent you from playing actively without paying aka some mobile games. (The worst kind)
Star citizen:
Are we a getting a serious advantage for buying a spaceship? - somehow yes. While the biggest and most expensive one isn't always the best, people who spend more are advanteged.
Can active players compensate for people spending money on the game? - i would say yes to a certain degree. (Most people probably are not able to start with an aurora and end with a Caterpillar) (At the current state of the game)
Is the game designed to prevent you from playing activily? - again somehow yes and smomehow no
So in summary i would say SC currently is an edge case for p2w for my definition.
pay2win for me is:
if a game is designed to give p(l)ayers a serious advantage over other players, which they can't reach or compensate by playing the game actively. Also games which are designed to prevent you from playing actively without paying aka some mobile games. (The worst kind)
Star citizen:
Are we a getting a serious advantage for buying a spaceship? - somehow yes. While the biggest and most expensive one isn't always the best, people who spend more are advanteged.
Can active players compensate for people spending money on the game? - i would say yes to a certain degree. (Most people probably are not able to start with an aurora and end with a Caterpillar) (At the current state of the game)
Is the game designed to prevent you from playing activily? - again somehow yes and smomehow no
So in summary i would say SC currently is an edge case for p2w for my definition.
Great video as always!
For me, a 'win' implies crossing a finish line or besting a clear competitor. In Star Citizen, where win conditions are undefined, Pay-to-Win seems more of an eye-of-the-beholder thing. Can there be a winner if players perceive different finish lines? For example, if i'm a miner, I might not dogfight. But then again, I'm there to mine, so I don't care about competing with a Javelin. Does the Javelin then 'win'? Not at all if it sucks at my game, mining. Given that, I don't consider Star Citizen Pay-to-Win so much as it is Pay-for-Options (easier access to different roles) or, at worst, Pay-for-Power (my Avenger is too pew pew? Buy a Javelin!). And in Star Citizen, I'm not sure that Pay-for-Power is necessarily Pay-to-Win, especially if larger ships advantages are balanced with more complex crewing issues, slower gunnery, less maneuverability, etc. that may not always be ideal when competing with smaller ships on their turf. I still believe smaller ships will have their fair role to play in Star Citizen.
For me, a 'win' implies crossing a finish line or besting a clear competitor. In Star Citizen, where win conditions are undefined, Pay-to-Win seems more of an eye-of-the-beholder thing. Can there be a winner if players perceive different finish lines? For example, if i'm a miner, I might not dogfight. But then again, I'm there to mine, so I don't care about competing with a Javelin. Does the Javelin then 'win'? Not at all if it sucks at my game, mining. Given that, I don't consider Star Citizen Pay-to-Win so much as it is Pay-for-Options (easier access to different roles) or, at worst, Pay-for-Power (my Avenger is too pew pew? Buy a Javelin!). And in Star Citizen, I'm not sure that Pay-for-Power is necessarily Pay-to-Win, especially if larger ships advantages are balanced with more complex crewing issues, slower gunnery, less maneuverability, etc. that may not always be ideal when competing with smaller ships on their turf. I still believe smaller ships will have their fair role to play in Star Citizen.
Last edited:
Radegast74
Space Marshal
Roadmap thoughts: based on previous experience, it is what is *NOT* on the roadmap that is just as important as what we see. I think a lot of stuff being pushed back to 4.0 likely could be due to SQ42 development and crunch-time aspects related to that.
Or...maybe not...the Road Map always seemed to be part fact,part wishful thinking EDIT: I really meant "highly optimistic and not taking into account the inevitable road bumps that cause delays", and it is clear that not everything is on the Road Map.
Or...maybe not...the Road Map always seemed to be part fact,
Last edited:
I agree with a lot of this. The only thing I am still not sure about is if we will even be able to control territory. We do know its possible to have land claims and build bases but beyond that and their limited impact, there hasn't been any indication that we would be able to control anything. While I agree that being able to control territory and thus secure capital streams and give meaning for corporate war there so far has been no mention of being able to do so. It could be that they have thought about it just have not shared it or it could be that they are still so focused on getting basic game loops online that they have not thought about the end game and how they are going to keep players engaged. The easiest would be to allow for territory control and thus allow us to create our own content by struggling against each other for dominance. The other way they could go is more a PVE experience pushing back on the Vanduul incursions. I hope its a combination of the two but who knows.
your concerns are my concerns - if PVE is prioritised over PVP combat will lose its luster as players figure out the AI algorithms behind NPCs' actions
however, I am optimistic; the sheer variety of combat ships makes me think the devs won't have time to program AI for all the possible fleet combinations
working out optimal fleets is best left for players to discover in PVP
I'm just curious to see what CIG will do to create inter-org conflicts if we can't create scarcity by cornering markets
I've been able to see the video now, an interesting pause for thought.
I can't argue with any of that the perceptions do go both ways
One thing that popped into my head while watching is that CIG, currently, allows you to mix and match your donation level to the reward ships you want via melting for credits, CCUs etc which is not a usual P2W feature...
Pay To Win in my expiriance says "Pay for this item and you will get a quantifiable amount better" and the game is designed around that being a positive advancement for the input of cash i.e. paying to win and be "better" than an opponent who hasn't paid whereas I have CCU'd plenty of times to ships I have seen others decimate with and I am a big pile of crap in to the point where I chop it in for something else...
Further to that, in SC you could take your £1,250 Idris P and melt it in to 62.5 Aurora ES's. That's not Pay To Win or even anything that could be described as being close to being a good idea, but it's an option you don't get in Pay To Win which is all about vertical progression or making that vertical progression easier...
But then the game in it's current in its current Alpha incarnation the obervations of those players in their starer ships is not wrong. Their Mustang or Aurora will not be able to carry 45,000UEC of cargo or realistically take on a Vandu'ul Swarm. I suppose that is the rub, at the moment none of us are really playing the game, it's Alpha, it's not been finishes they are still building it and it's important not to forget that. Wipes, lack of progression - it should be expected. They have not even put all the mechanics like refueling in yet.
So to wrap up my rambling... It's still too early to tell if it's going to be p2w. They have said they don't want it to be. They have said that a ships pledge value may not reflect it's worth in the final game once balancing has occurred. Some craft like the Drake Dragonfly or Tumbril RC are FAR inferior to the £20 Aurora ES which can leave the ground and travel across a star system...
If it is intentionally pay to win, it's a very strange version, but then what CIG or any other company makes something such as a crowdfunding model for and what the players actually use it for is another matter...
I can't argue with any of that the perceptions do go both ways
One thing that popped into my head while watching is that CIG, currently, allows you to mix and match your donation level to the reward ships you want via melting for credits, CCUs etc which is not a usual P2W feature...
Pay To Win in my expiriance says "Pay for this item and you will get a quantifiable amount better" and the game is designed around that being a positive advancement for the input of cash i.e. paying to win and be "better" than an opponent who hasn't paid whereas I have CCU'd plenty of times to ships I have seen others decimate with and I am a big pile of crap in to the point where I chop it in for something else...
Further to that, in SC you could take your £1,250 Idris P and melt it in to 62.5 Aurora ES's. That's not Pay To Win or even anything that could be described as being close to being a good idea, but it's an option you don't get in Pay To Win which is all about vertical progression or making that vertical progression easier...
But then the game in it's current in its current Alpha incarnation the obervations of those players in their starer ships is not wrong. Their Mustang or Aurora will not be able to carry 45,000UEC of cargo or realistically take on a Vandu'ul Swarm. I suppose that is the rub, at the moment none of us are really playing the game, it's Alpha, it's not been finishes they are still building it and it's important not to forget that. Wipes, lack of progression - it should be expected. They have not even put all the mechanics like refueling in yet.
So to wrap up my rambling... It's still too early to tell if it's going to be p2w. They have said they don't want it to be. They have said that a ships pledge value may not reflect it's worth in the final game once balancing has occurred. Some craft like the Drake Dragonfly or Tumbril RC are FAR inferior to the £20 Aurora ES which can leave the ground and travel across a star system...
If it is intentionally pay to win, it's a very strange version, but then what CIG or any other company makes something such as a crowdfunding model for and what the players actually use it for is another matter...
Well shit. For the third time since I started backing I'm back in concierge territory. Can I fly? Fuck no. Am I winning the verse? Nope. What I'm doing is backing a dream. So yeah, it's pay-to-decorate-a-hangar. Or pay-to-back. But pay to win? Naw man. I ain't winning shit.
You go beyond a Sabre / Hornet / MIS, your money is worthless without other people. So maybe you could say it's play to win to that point, if AC is your "winning". Sure, you can have a Javelin, but it ain't shit without people manning the turrets. Same thing with a HH, Polaris, etc etc.
I can understand people who don't get the entire concept of the dream, the crowd-fund, the backing, thinking that the game is pay to win. But even whales' fleets are useless without people to fly them, man them, etc.
@maynard is right, "winning" will be about orgs. As for more money, I think @Montoya hit the nail on the head. I'm 41. Time is more valuable than money. If I want to avoid the grind, I'll drop the extra money. But it's a sandbox - the money isn't helping me win shit.
You go beyond a Sabre / Hornet / MIS, your money is worthless without other people. So maybe you could say it's play to win to that point, if AC is your "winning". Sure, you can have a Javelin, but it ain't shit without people manning the turrets. Same thing with a HH, Polaris, etc etc.
I can understand people who don't get the entire concept of the dream, the crowd-fund, the backing, thinking that the game is pay to win. But even whales' fleets are useless without people to fly them, man them, etc.
@maynard is right, "winning" will be about orgs. As for more money, I think @Montoya hit the nail on the head. I'm 41. Time is more valuable than money. If I want to avoid the grind, I'll drop the extra money. But it's a sandbox - the money isn't helping me win shit.
Last edited:
Not pay to win IMHO, and here is why
Firstly, what defines winning in an open universe sandbox MMORPG? An RPG by definition doesnt really have an end point or a winning point, the point is the journey, or beating other people, or making yuge amouts of space cash, or whatever you want it to be. Spending more money on cool ships and guns will make you more capable in any technical aspect, like cargo room, or comgbat ability or range or whatever, but someone buying a hull E and making bazzillions shipping iron ore to hurston doesnt 'Beat' me, cause I'm off killing space pirates or whatever. Now, i will acknowledge that the alpha *In it's current form* does have massive advantage to people who've paid more, yes, If I'm in my Aurora and come up against a superhornet, unless the other pilot isn't very good, imma get smoked, likewise, if I come accross someone in a Freelancer, and I'm in my Retalliator, or i've got friends in my Hammerhead, I'll smoke them, but I feel this is addressed in point 2 ↓.
Secondly, its not the final game... I've spent lots on this game and have a lot of cool ships, Superhornet, Tali, Hammerhead, Hull B and more. And I love jumping in them and doing cool shit, and yes day 1 minute 1 of the final game I'll have advantages, but I might have 2 hours a day where I can play, and someone starting with a mustang will probably be able to overtake me in a week if they're a pimply teenager with nothing better to do than play 18 hours a day.
Firstly, what defines winning in an open universe sandbox MMORPG? An RPG by definition doesnt really have an end point or a winning point, the point is the journey, or beating other people, or making yuge amouts of space cash, or whatever you want it to be. Spending more money on cool ships and guns will make you more capable in any technical aspect, like cargo room, or comgbat ability or range or whatever, but someone buying a hull E and making bazzillions shipping iron ore to hurston doesnt 'Beat' me, cause I'm off killing space pirates or whatever. Now, i will acknowledge that the alpha *In it's current form* does have massive advantage to people who've paid more, yes, If I'm in my Aurora and come up against a superhornet, unless the other pilot isn't very good, imma get smoked, likewise, if I come accross someone in a Freelancer, and I'm in my Retalliator, or i've got friends in my Hammerhead, I'll smoke them, but I feel this is addressed in point 2 ↓.
Secondly, its not the final game... I've spent lots on this game and have a lot of cool ships, Superhornet, Tali, Hammerhead, Hull B and more. And I love jumping in them and doing cool shit, and yes day 1 minute 1 of the final game I'll have advantages, but I might have 2 hours a day where I can play, and someone starting with a mustang will probably be able to overtake me in a week if they're a pimply teenager with nothing better to do than play 18 hours a day.
Unfortunately, I believe it is pay to win, because we will still have that Javelin, that Idris, Kraken, Polaris, Hull E/D/C, Carrack, etc. those that come in on day 1, or those that come in with just an aurora will have to deal with the fact that they are out advantaged on day 1.
there is a way around it though, and that is to stagger the release Of the ships when it goes live.
Day 1, everyone can use their starter ships, including T2 starter ships (avenger, 300 series, Gladius, etc). in a few weeks, people can use their Cutlasses, profession starters (prospectors, vultures, etc), freelancers, etc.
month 3, everyone can use their Connies, Hull C, Herc C2, and Cats.
month 6, all large ships released
Month 9, all cap ships released.
of course, those that supported the project would be rightfully upset about it, and I have no doubt it would cause legal issues for CIG, but it would be a way for the PTW claimers to be mollified and have everyone start at the same place. I would not support this, but I am saying it cou,d be done that way.
there is a way around it though, and that is to stagger the release Of the ships when it goes live.
Day 1, everyone can use their starter ships, including T2 starter ships (avenger, 300 series, Gladius, etc). in a few weeks, people can use their Cutlasses, profession starters (prospectors, vultures, etc), freelancers, etc.
month 3, everyone can use their Connies, Hull C, Herc C2, and Cats.
month 6, all large ships released
Month 9, all cap ships released.
of course, those that supported the project would be rightfully upset about it, and I have no doubt it would cause legal issues for CIG, but it would be a way for the PTW claimers to be mollified and have everyone start at the same place. I would not support this, but I am saying it cou,d be done that way.
SoloFlyer
Grand Admiral
I don't know, that still seems to be assuming that those who would start with those ships have "won" something over the person that started with the aurora. Unless you're talking about a PvP encounter, a sandbox game like Star Citizen doesn't have winners except those who define a given value of "winning" for themselves. Its not even a zero sum game where if I am doing well that means you are not except again strictly in the PvP encounters. Maybe it's just me, I have trouble seeing the pay to win aspect of the game come release as it is currently being presented because I don't see what there is to win.