WadeTheScrapper

Proof The Market System Is Broken

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, SzinNapalm said:

you guys are morons the game is still in beta.  play and pay or whatever at your own risk of fun or just dont play it best not having your whinning **** as part of the community anyways...

Do you know what a beta is? It is where they test the game and want feedback about stuff that is broken, bugged or needs to be changed etc. Beta is not meant to be "hey i get to play before everyone else" only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SzinNapalm said:

you guys are morons the game is still in beta.  play and pay or whatever at your own risk of fun or just dont play it best not having your whinning **** as part of the community anyways...

How about you actually add something to the discussion other than insulting players of the game? Hmm?

Beta isn't a catchall term for 'the game is fine, all will be fixed', it is the developers responsibility to see the game is fixed up, and our job to report issues in the game.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

market system is flawed but whats worse is the XP grind its taking way to long to rank up 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/3/2017 at 9:41 AM, MissaLeJambon said:

Well we are all beta testers.

We are currently trying to improve this game together as it is an Open BETA.

So I wonder if you guys thinks it the final fully upgraded version of the game, but I can assure you it is not.

So the market won't die easily, content will be added gradually, bugs will be fixed, etc, etc...

These issue aren't OBT issues. The economy has been in its shoddy, and anemic state since I started playing, which is at least a year ago during CBT. I have to give the developer credit for the weekend bonus: the economy was in dire need of fresh coins. That being said, they shouldn't weekend bonus this problem away. Something as simple as a daily mission that gives you 15 coins would help the stabilize the economy better. (I think the answer should be vastly better then this personally) Enough to give players something to work with.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The simple solution to all of this is to make it possible to make credits in the game by doing certain missions/tasks. Not pay for it in real life money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/23/2017 at 5:17 PM, Aetrion said:

I don't agree that we're seeing a price drop because the market is over-saturated. A huge number of players in the game are still trying to get their first purple weapon, the yellows are still in the thousands of coin, the orange weapons are not even for sale or listed at literally 60,000 coins. When we hit true saturation people are going to start fusing weapons too, that's going to take a ton of them out of circulation. Another thing to keep in mind is that a lot of items won't be traded again once a player owns them, which effectively removes them from the market. Like, the mere existence of something like "use shotguns" as a daily for example ensures that even players who don't run shotguns on their main build will eventually want to own a set of purple ones. Leviathans also take a ton of weapons out of circulation which aren't used for anything other than arming a Levi. If they add new items and factions they will also always wipe out a lot of existing items. 

I don't think we've even remotely hit the point where you can talk about too many items in the game, because for the vast majority of people there are dozens of items they want that they can't afford right now. If we did hit a point where the game was so completely choke full of items that everyone just has everything I wouldn't advocate for implementing "risk", but simply implement a cleanup event like in the old Ultima Online days where you can get some kind of reward like a choice of awesome decorations for getting rid of a bunch of stuff.

They could also take the fusion system further to a point where fusing two fused items yields an item with two bonuses and so on, making it theoretically possible to create an weapon that's fused a half dozen times. Wouldn't be game breaking, especially if the power score keeps step, but you immediately eliminate a ton of items. 3 for the first fusion, then 9, 27, 81, 243, 729...  I think that would cure the problem pretty well for long term players.

the bonuses are small and it would add even further customization,   i would love to see multiple fusions

concerning the power score though...i just had to laugh   make it increase with fusion,  make it decrease it doesn't matter with the current state of matchmaking

 

and as nog said,   a gameplay mechanic to produce coins is needed....maybe im just drawing a blank but i cant think of any f2p's that have a strict IRL only economy.   it basically comes off as a threat,  they have no interest in f2p.  if nobody buys nobody plays ...period    (i get that this wont happen, and if the game wasnt making money they would have to pull the plug regardless of how the economy was set up but feels like it shouldnt even be possible)

 

Edited by A2Six

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/17/2017 at 7:53 AM, WadeTheScrapper said:

 

so this is 100% pay to win the only time a game is not pay to win is when it is only cosmetics you can purchas with real money that way it is people who can and want to support the game... in a 1v1 I would love to see someone with the best common parts beat soemone using the blue or high items... lol it will never happen   so very sad to see this happen to such an awesome game right out the of the gate like this ....  I am level 10 and I have been matched against guided missels... like WTF ???  match making sytem is designed to force people to get these hard to get parts if they want to win anything...  examples of not pay to win games with markets are Path of Exile and Rocket League.

 

 

As far as getting a rare item every 14 hours is false

 

 

the whole game is unbalanced anyways 5,000 power score vs 2,500 power score who is going to win? lol one person with 5,000 powerscore will take out an entire team of 2,500 that is the same as a go kart beating a drag racer it will never happen lol unless Hellen Keller is driving the drag racer lol

 

There is a solution to this and it will take off very well make and in game currency you get for team man ship in battles and sell custom skins and character pictures ... If you look at both rocket league and path of exile you will see these models work and it is 100% cosmetics.

Path of Exile I would say has the best model but you could also add the chest type model Rocket League has also where people buy keys for chests but people can also sell the chests and make keys or items... the items being cosmetics... people who love what they make will invest in what they love...  Path of Exile they sell cosmetic skins for their Items and also sell supporter pack every 2 or 3 months...  It helps keep the game fresh and new..

Don't get me wrong I love the game but I have knowledge in market systems and I have saw what works and what does not work... I predict the way the current model is the only people left in 2 years max, (possible maybe even 5 years but I do doubt that), is the supporters vs the pay to winners unless the market crashes first... if it crashes nicely then the buy and sell will be 0.01. If it crashes the way pay to winners crash it.. the sell will be 0.01 and the buy will be vastly more... They create their own market by each injecting 1,000s of dollars into the game and they basically share that money between them sucking items up for next to nothing having the best stuff and winning all the fights... I do not want to see that happen...

 

This was originally posted on steam here : http://steamcommunity.com/app/386180/discussions/0/2333276539599431168/?tscn=1497690215

 

Also please fix the power score match making.  What people are doing now is if a clan member  is on both sides but they lready hae it planed they one side will win the other wil lose. or will just self destruct leaving and they are the high power score for that team leaving it unbalanced...

he spoke the truth here, its getting more true by the day....but I think there model is get in ****/pillage/plunder our wallets get out make a new shinney game and do it again..what a shame for such a fine game...to bad great game, prices on the rare things out of sight, chips are harder than bird poop to get, and scrap comes so slow...if it was made where you could interject $2-3 a week and stay current that would not be so bad, but $70 for the new stuff, ya right...now its principle keeping from interjecting cash..I will not be ...with out loven 1st...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do you make the market better, make products more obtainable? Right now, the market for new gear priced out of the range for the normal gamer or the “average” gamer.

If you made it, possible to spend $2-3 rw coin to get 2 of the new guns or cabin you would get a larger influx of real world cash.

Microtransactions... they were once considered as a great way to extend a game's replay value beyond the initial purchase. Gamers were excited about extra content and additional multiplayer accessories. However, Crossout is taking this concept and turning it into pure evil.  

A survey conducted recently included responses from 8,893 people, including 2,470 people who actually spent money on microtransactions and/or DLC. The survey was conducted online from August 19 to September 2.

BIG news guys…

68 percent believe the pay-to-win aspect of microtransactions within gaming is unfortunate, and stopped playing…

However, although "some" found microtransaction prices to be "reasonable," more than half said they would be more incentivized to buy if prices were lower. That would be the 68% guys.. 48 percent felt the content was not worth the extra expense, Half of non-DLC purchasers stated the DLC was not worth the money……

 

Again as an older gamer, and ex-CIO, MBA and psychologist . I am not willing to dump $50-60 every month into a game to keep up with the weapons, and kit needed to stay competitive in the game. If you want the new laser cannon, you need to spend $40 real world dollars.  No dice, if it was $2.99 I would be all over it so would about 10x time more gamers. If I could get custom kits for all of my gums for like $1 each in real world, all over it in a heartbeat. Make it worth it to make small investments in the game to keep long-term players. Your $40-70 players will fade away once the shiny is off and the next new game comes out. Control the market, get the prices lower, you just need to keep being blown up repeatedly to farm resources to sell and then buy; I refuse to spend that much RW cash. Again, if it was $2-3 I would at least once a week.

p.s.

Have you read the reviews?

An overwhelming number of them state this is a ‘PAY TO WIN GAME” how long do you think it will stay busy if this keeps up…

https://steamcommunity.com/app/386180/reviews/

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, redneck_fgf said:

How do you make the market better, make products more obtainable? Right now, the market for new gear priced out of the range for the normal gamer or the “average” gamer.

If you made it, possible to spend $2-3 rw coin to get 2 of the new guns or cabin you would get a larger influx of real world cash.

Microtransactions... they were once considered as a great way to extend a game's replay value beyond the initial purchase. Gamers were excited about extra content and additional multiplayer accessories. However, Crossout is taking this concept and turning it into pure evil.  

A survey conducted recently included responses from 8,893 people, including 2,470 people who actually spent money on microtransactions and/or DLC. The survey was conducted online from August 19 to September 2.

BIG news guys…

68 percent believe the pay-to-win aspect of microtransactions within gaming is unfortunate, and stopped playing…

However, although "some" found microtransaction prices to be "reasonable," more than half said they would be more incentivized to buy if prices were lower. That would be the 68% guys.. 48 percent felt the content was not worth the extra expense, Half of non-DLC purchasers stated the DLC was not worth the money……

 

Again as an older gamer, and ex-CIO, MBA and psychologist . I am not willing to dump $50-60 every month into a game to keep up with the weapons, and kit needed to stay competitive in the game. If you want the new laser cannon, you need to spend $40 real world dollars.  No dice, if it was $2.99 I would be all over it so would about 10x time more gamers. If I could get custom kits for all of my gums for like $1 each in real world, all over it in a heartbeat. Make it worth it to make small investments in the game to keep long-term players. Your $40-70 players will fade away once the shiny is off and the next new game comes out. Control the market, get the prices lower, you just need to keep being blown up repeatedly to farm resources to sell and then buy; I refuse to spend that much RW cash. Again, if it was $2-3 I would at least once a week.

p.s.

Have you read the reviews?

An overwhelming number of them state this is a ‘PAY TO WIN GAME” how long do you think it will stay busy if this keeps up…

https://steamcommunity.com/app/386180/reviews/

 

Regards

You'd think with all that you'd be smart enough to figure out "paying to win" doesn't exist. Grinding can get you anything in the game, paying would cost hundreds of dollars. None of the packs offer a serious advantage. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, ROACHOR said:

You'd think with all that you'd be smart enough to figure out "paying to win" doesn't exist. Grinding can get you anything in the game, paying would cost hundreds of dollars. None of the packs offer a serious advantage. 

Ok, lets buy lets say lots of coins...Buy a reaper, a combine harvester, new telsa, cabin...and the list goes on.....but none of these "offer a serious advantage. " True "Grinding can get you anything in the game," but then there is the time involved. If I was not retired I would probably only spend 2-3 hours a week in game..do the math how long at that level would "anything in the game" take ?? lets be real for the average player who can only spend 2-3 hours a week in game and wants to WIN and needs to WIN..you shell out cash. I am sure you are "smart enough to figure out" that some one who just started and has all high end stuff is "paying to win" or just maybe the crate they get every 2 hours at the start of every day is fill with 30000 coins ???? Or maybe they Grind in there sleep ???

Ok let’s look at the numbers:

47 percent of gamers are between 18 and 49 years old.  The average guy who plays games is 35.

Normally they work 40-50 hours a week, have at least a few responsibility's and maybe a family.  " Grinding can get you anything in the game" would take this person weeks to work up to simple level items. There is not enough time in one week to do it. Also you normally want to win every once in a while, hey why not. With the current state of the game that is not likely.

So to look another part of your statement , "paying would cost hundreds of dollars. None of the packs offer a serious advantage.". well look at this a $99.99 pack of coins and the new mod at $79.99 lots of players new to the game got these. Not to begrudge the game makers, good on them, but this is also a duel edged sword. While you make lots of money quick...the long run you kill the game. Lots have down loaded the game played 2-3 hours, had fun got repeatedly seal clubbed, left the game. If it was possible to invest $2-5 real world coin to make them competitive a lot more would buy in. "Although "some" found microtransaction prices to be "reasonable," more than half said they would be more incentivized to buy if prices were lower." according to a study conducted this year on on-line gaming.

Hey I could go on and on, used to compose 20 page answers to silly responses in the real world, but if you look at the REAL numbers for the average person, read the form and look at the study's conducted over the last few years on microtransaction prices and the effects they have lone term on on-line gaming. I could give you some real good psychological reasons people need to win at video games if you have the time..But a good start to understanding the full depth of the problem start with Richard Ryan and Edward Deci’s Self Determination Theory or even better read Nick Yee .. He is studying the framework for studying motivations that compels us to play. But I will sum up their study's for ya,, they all found that we look for " the enjoyment and relaxation gained from gaming, having no constraints in games like in one may have in real life, the artistry of the game, and the interactivity and competitiveness of a game. "    

Thats all I have time for today, but if you would like to delve deeper in the subject and look at the study's and do the math on "Grinding time vs. real time"  in a persons life I am sure we could.....     

Regards

   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, redneck_fgf said:

Ok, lets buy lets say lots of coins...Buy a reaper, a combine harvester, new telsa, cabin...and the list goes on.....but none of these "offer a serious advantage. " True "Grinding can get you anything in the game," but then there is the time involved. If I was not retired I would probably only spend 2-3 hours a week in game..do the math how long at that level would "anything in the game" take ?? lets be real for the average player who can only spend 2-3 hours a week in game and wants to WIN and needs to WIN..you shell out cash. I am sure you are "smart enough to figure out" that some one who just started and has all high end stuff is "paying to win" or just maybe the crate they get every 2 hours at the start of every day is fill with 30000 coins ???? Or maybe they Grind in there sleep ???

Ok let’s look at the numbers:

47 percent of gamers are between 18 and 49 years old.  The average guy who plays games is 35.

Normally they work 40-50 hours a week, have at least a few responsibility's and maybe a family.  " Grinding can get you anything in the game" would take this person weeks to work up to simple level items. There is not enough time in one week to do it. Also you normally want to win every once in a while, hey why not. With the current state of the game that is not likely.

So to look another part of your statement , "paying would cost hundreds of dollars. None of the packs offer a serious advantage.". well look at this a $99.99 pack of coins and the new mod at $79.99 lots of players new to the game got these. Not to begrudge the game makers, good on them, but this is also a duel edged sword. While you make lots of money quick...the long run you kill the game. Lots have down loaded the game played 2-3 hours, had fun got repeatedly seal clubbed, left the game. If it was possible to invest $2-5 real world coin to make them competitive a lot more would buy in. "Although "some" found microtransaction prices to be "reasonable," more than half said they would be more incentivized to buy if prices were lower." according to a study conducted this year on on-line gaming.

Hey I could go on and on, used to compose 20 page answers to silly responses in the real world, but if you look at the REAL numbers for the average person, read the form and look at the study's conducted over the last few years on microtransaction prices and the effects they have lone term on on-line gaming. I could give you some real good psychological reasons people need to win at video games if you have the time..But a good start to understanding the full depth of the problem start with Richard Ryan and Edward Deci’s Self Determination Theory or even better read Nick Yee .. He is studying the framework for studying motivations that compels us to play. But I will sum up their study's for ya,, they all found that we look for " the enjoyment and relaxation gained from gaming, having no constraints in games like in one may have in real life, the artistry of the game, and the interactivity and competitiveness of a game. "    

Thats all I have time for today, but if you would like to delve deeper in the subject and look at the study's and do the math on "Grinding time vs. real time"  in a persons life I am sure we could.....     

Regards

   

You see time played as a cost, I see it as the product. The goal is killing players and capping points, current shotgun meta is blues that can be earned in a day. End game grinders with fused legendaries didn't buy those with money, they earned them. They also spent almost 40k earned coins for a CHANCE at a tiny bonus. That isn't efficient or a game changer. Each tier has a smaller power gap then the one that precedes it. 

If you are a millionaire who is too lazy to play the game so you pay to reach an endgame with no goals left, go for it. You still won't have the experience or skill to even recognize how bad the high tier weapons are.

Edited by ROACHOR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" You see time played as a cost, I see it as the product. " a product "cost" time/ time in the real world is in short supply for the normal person. " End game grinders with fused legendaries didn't buy those with money, they earned them. " again investment of time.

We overall as gamers spend lots of cash on games....Read how much youth between 16-20 spend on on-line content a year..it is mind blowing...again you may Grind, many dont care if they spend $90-100 on a game . read the reports, the longevity of microtransaction prices and see the long tearm effect on gaming, and look at the numbers of "grinders" vs. average players.

Sorry for the misspellings and grammar, no longer have a secretary to proof and correct my horded writing.

forgot to include in above

References:

 ( ya I need a Life)

Yee, Nick. “Motivations for Play in Online Games.” CyberPsychology & Behavior 9.6 (2006): 772-75. Web. 17 Oct. 2016.

 

Ryan, R.M., and Deci, E.L. “Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation,Social Development, and Well-Being.” American Psychologist 55.1 (2000): 68-78. Web. 17 Oct. 2016.

 

Wu, Jiming, Li, Pengtao, and Rao, Shashank. “Why they enjoy virtual game worlds? An empirical investigation.” Journal of Electronic Commerce Research 9.3 (2008): 219-230. Web. 17 Oct. 2016.

 

Ng, Brian D. and Wiemer-Hastings, Peter. “Addiction to the Internet and Online Gaming.” CyberPsychology & Behavior. June 2005, 8(2): 110-113. Web. 17 Oct. 2016.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The average age for this game is 30+.

You don't seem to understand that the game is entertainment, you aren't "losing" time to the game unless you don't enjoy it. Coins are a byproduct of gameplay they aren't the main goal.

You can't apply the same economic principles because it is not work, it's the antithesis of it. 

Unless you have stopped enjoying the game it isn't a job. If it feels like one find a new game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed,.. my gaming experience now is like: 

- join the game, take up position with the crowd. Everybody is melting, weapons break - i suicide and leave the game - no reward. 7 games out of 10 i suicide and leave. And don't ask me how many times i leave games before they even start just looking up the MM.

3CFcHZU.gif

Edited by N1Ml0cK
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Players drive the market. If the market is broken, it's mostly our fault.

The market in real life ain't much different i think. The slightest event, or bad news and a company can crash.

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't the 10% market tax be taking coins out of the market and be increasing their buying power? Fewer and fewer coins means that they are worth more then the increasing number of goods produced everyday. Supply and demand seems to be at work here. 

If more people purchased coins then the inverse would be true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" If more people purchased coins then the inverse would be true. "

No, the more pushed into the market with a limited supply, raises prices. The new jet/wheels that came out. Only one person could of put them on the market day 1, correct..

They put them on the market and they have been steady rising in price..limited product, more cash higher prices...Supply and demand at it's finest..

The more Coins they sell, the more pumped into the market, higher prices, cash sinks keep skimming off the top(tax) that removes coins from the market, more need to be added... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not interested in having a market that deals with 100% cosmetics and here is why.

I am primarily a PS4 player but I do play the PC version of the game every once and while. The one thing I noticed was the vast discrepancies between the prices of items available on the market. 

I believe the PS4 market spiked due to players injecting real world money into the new game (like myself who put in $100.00) in order to compete in matches.

We should see the markets between the PS4 and the PC mirror each other eventually, but in the mean time, if you plan on playing this game for an extended period of time, use the market to your advantage.

I play sparingly throughout the week using only white and and two blue items all the while creating high value/low cost to craft items about once a month and making some decent Gold Coin in the process. I have made approximately 3,000 Gold Coin this month.

Once the PS4 market hits PC levels, all this work will pay off as I will be able to purchase just about everything I want to use at a fraction of the price it was a month ago.

Edited by maxpontiac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 26.9.2017 at 9:09 PM, CptDoss said:

Players drive the market. If the market is broken, it's mostly our fault.

The market in real life ain't much different i think. The slightest event, or bad news and a company can crash.

Since when did stores start to burn 10% of their profit?

Edited by NaggNogger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, NaggNogger said:

Since when did stores start to burn 10% of their profit?

When slavery was abolished. Overhead always eats your profits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the best review that explains why the market is "broken"

https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2016/09/19/crossout-review-early-access/

" the grind for improvement becomes noticeably unpleasant. And look, who’s that coming over the dusty horizon? Why, it’s Unpleasant Grind’s best friend, Microtransactions. "

" What’s worse, all the game’s systems – the market, the crafting benches, the editor – form a kind of mechanical cartel which reinforces a dull grind, only avoidable by investing a sickening sum of real money for some fake coins. While this might be forgivable in a free-to-play game like World of Tanks, it is repugnant "

" you can just buy the thing you want on the same player-run market. But you’ll need those in-game credits again. The most expensive cannon in the game currently costs 22000 credits. If you were to buy these credits from the game’s store, rather than slowly (very slowly) accumulating them through selling item after item, it would cost you $294. I haven’t even mentioned ‘fuel’ or ‘coupons’ or ‘fusion’ yet (I won’t). "

" that would benefit the player, not the microtransaction gods. I cannot emphasise enough how much of a shame this is, because the actual game buried underneath all this nightmarish grind-goop is excellent. "

I know we will get the reaction., you can get anything with the grind and earn it... but like 99% of the reviews and the largest amount of player reviews state.. " the grind for improvement becomes noticeably unpleasant." and you need to invest "investing a sickening sum of real money "

this is the real reason the market is "busted" and will never be fixed...and why 3 different MMO review sites went from "large" to " Playerbase: Medium "

Again great game mired in a sea of Microtransactions.......it could be easily changed to benefit every one , uh there's the rub..."that would benefit the player, not the microtransaction gods".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So free to play games should have no revenue stream and it's servers will run on pixie dust and the devs will work for the thrill of reading forum comments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ROACHOR said:

So free to play games should have no revenue stream and it's servers will run on pixie dust and the devs will work for the thrill of reading forum comments.

how DID i KNOW YOU WOULD CHIME IN....

No they should and can make money, if you read the statement....or read anything that has been posted, you would see that your statement is flawed.

There is a way to benefit the developers and the players....did you understand that...like so many post before,( if you read them for content and not just to answer) in fact some stated that very well , that if the game’s systems – the market, the crafting benches, and yes even the Microtransactions were made affordable for the  players that can not afford the time away from their real life (sorry that is a cost, any recreation be it gaming or golfing, even done for pure enjoyment) could invest and become more competitive they would do it. It will not work until game makes make more equability environment for all. Those who can afford the time for the grind, like it sounds you are one, are the players the developers do not like. They would rather have a player who makes small microtransactions lets say $2-3 a week to those who will grind and sell and craft. They make no money off of that player, and they need to make money, that is not in question. But those who grind and craft the higher end stuff and place it on the market and sell it for extremely high coin value, hey because they invested time to get all of the stuff needed to make it, are a part problem. But that is an problem that could also be solved  if you craft it it becomes linked to you, not able to be sold. On the developers could place high end stuff on the market, you ether grind or put in $2-3 a week to get it. Only Scrap, copper, chips and lower end stuff you get for playing could be sold.

That would solve a bucket load of problems.Again go back and reread the post all of them, they are filled with useful information, and the developers need to step forward and address the problem with the market, and the system that drives and controls the market system.

oh ya your off-color statement that ended in " Overhead always eats your profits " overhead has always been a factor, all the back to the pharaoh and the cost of the pyramids and it will always be...and they are not burning it they are making more by removing coinage off the market via tax.

Read and research the factors of gaming economics, how to make them work more effectively for the longevity of the game.

Another good bit of reading for you

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/06/3-surprising-facts-about-the-gaming-industry-and-why-you-should-start-paying-attention/

The jest of all of this is, all of the post on this subject in fact are, we do not want it for free... we want them to make money and continue to make the game better and more developed.. did you get that, we want a game that we do not have to grind 30+hours and then craft, we would rather have a game were we could invest $2-5 a week and stay competitive and have fun. I race Iracing over the last 5 years I have invested $300-500 real world dollars in it and am glad I have, I would like to have this game look at the long game, not the hit and run game...

And before you come back with "They also spent almost 40k earned coins for a CHANCE at a tiny bonus. That isn't efficient or a game changer. Each tier has a smaller power gap then the one that precedes it. If you are a millionaire who is too lazy to play the game so you pay to reach an endgame with no goals left, go for it. You still won't have the experience or skill to even recognize how bad the high tier weapons are."

The developers would rather have a person invest $2-5 a week and in your terms "be lazy" ,we call it enjoyment, then earn 40K of coins...they don't make money that way and that's were are contradicting yourself, and the statements you made previous to your last.

So what is it ??

do we let the developers make $2-5 off a person week after week or do we want players who "spent almost 40k earned coins " and put forth no real world dollars...I can tell you what one the developers would pick

 

 

Edited by redneck_fgf
changed on to no

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.