Has Star Citizen become 'pay-to-win'?

jdeart · 5ヶ月前

The much bigger risk is that it will become "grind-to-play".

Rather than balancing the progression speed in the persistent universe around what is most fun for the players, they might feel inclined to balance the progression around the value of some of the ships they have sold.

This would mean that progressing to better, more interesting ships will take an extraordinary amount of time and people that did not spend hundreds of dollars to get a more advanced ship right away might be stuck grinding terribly boring, repetitive tasks for hundreds of hours until they have the means to buy a more fun and interesting ship.

Even without any pre-launch ship sales balancing the progression is a very difficult task. But having large parts of the core audience heavily invested in progression will make the task all the more difficult. Erring on the side of caution by not pissing of the core fans and making progression ridiculously grindy to essentially increase the value of pre-launch ship purchases will be much more likely and could seriously hurt the game.

Smugasaurus · 5ヶ月前

I personally don't think it's pay to win, the idea being that every ship has a place in the universe, and that more expensive is not necessarily better.

I understand your worries, but I really see Star Citizen as an experiment as well. All those crowdfunded indie games out there are great, but what if a crowdfunded game had the resources that a COD or GTA has, what happens then? We'll get to see that with Star Citizen.

ReLirium · 5ヶ月前

your first statement is pretty much correct.

By the time the Persistant Universe rolls around Ships will be balanced for what you buy in-game (weapons, armor, scanners, etc), not out.

They'll be taken off the website store, but you can still purchase a limited amount of in-game money per month.

From what I've seen the community their is pretty accepting of this (as am I), and if something isn't satisfactory, the community will voice it. if there is one thing CIG does right is listen.

RscMrF · 5ヶ月前

So after reading the comments here is what I see. There are the people who are incredibly skeptical about how a game can have this pre launch model and not expect a grind fest or p2w at launch and after and there are the people who genuinely believe that this game is different from anything we have seen.

Those are the two extremes, and they both have valid points, the people who have faith in the game are probably more informed but also more invested, where the people who are skeptical are basing their opinions off of what they have seen with other games and other crowdfunded projects.

We can only wait and see really, until the game is actually released there are only a few people who know what will actually happen.

SendoTarget · 5ヶ月前

This is almost a weekly discussion of the same deal btw.

You've been able to pledge for the ships since the beginning and since that beginning it's been stated that you can earn these ships ingame with ingame-credits and most of them in a reasonable time.

The plan is to handle this with a rock-paper-scissors approach. Bigger ships like Corvettes or similar require a lot of people or NPC to maintain. They need credits to upkeep systems, credits to pay the crew etc. Since you actually need to operate these ships and not just click to make something happen on the bigger ships.

For those bigger ships the paper for their rock is bomber-class ships with anticapital-torpedoes and for those bombers there are fighter-class ships etc etc. What's more important is how you outfit your ship for the task.

I have pledged for the game quite a bit. I have never expected to gain any advantage over a person that buys the game at 60 dollars. I pledged because I want this game to be made. It's also something that's been stated from the beginning.

I'm more interested in the fighter-portion of the game as escort rather than capital-ships, traders, bombers etc. Those do not fit my playstyle at all.

kalnaren · 5ヶ月前

Some points:

The game is alpha. Not beta, not almost released, alpha. It's nowhere near complete. You can not ignore that fact when discussing balance issues with the game. We don't even have proper armour implementation yet, the PIPE system isn't complete, etc.
Ships are not on a linear, hierarchical progression system. This seems to be a point a lot of gamers can't wrap their head around. Gamers seem to be programmed to think more expensive = automatically better. I can't say I blame people for that.. MMOs are typically all about "+gear" and "+levels". Here's the thing: that doesn't exist in SC. Ships are role based. Some ships are better in certain roles than others. The Hornet is the top-dog dogfighter, but can't do jack shit else. It doesn't even have a jump drive to jump between systems. The Constellation is a big, expensive ship -and requires four people to properly crew and fight effectively. Otherwise all you have is a very expensive freighter -and the Freelancer, which is a cheaper ship, can do that job better. Because ships aren't on a linear scale, it's perfectly possible to play a the game with a "lower end" ship. For example, I play almost exclusively with my 325 despite the fact I have two other ships that are generally considered "better" dogfighters. FOTM bug issues aside, none of the other ships are so much better than I feel I'm outclassed in any way, shape, or form.
We have only two game modes right now. Those two game modes are dogfighting and racing. If the ship you have isn't expressly designed for one of those two roles, it's going to underperform compared to a ship that is. For a specific example -a Freelancer is more expensive than a 300i... the 300i can dogfight a hell of a lot better. But it can't haul cargo worth a shit compared to the Freelancer. So how is the 300i or Freelancer P2W?.
Arena Commander is designed to be a "simulator" within the game. It's not the persistent universe. This is important because:
None of the external balancing factors are in the game yet, mainly because they'll only effect the PU. No ship maintenance, no ship upkeep or refueling, no repair, no rearm, etc. That Galdius doesn't look so hot when you actually have to pay [in UEC] for the 8 missiles you expend every single dogfight. That Super Hornet doesn't look so hot when it costs you half your mission's commission to repair those bullet holes you got in it. That Constellation doesn't look so hot now that you have to pay the other 3 crew members (NPC or human) as well.
All of the ships currently in the game are "lower" end ships. Chris Roberts said if he had to rate all the equipment and ships in the pledge store on a scale of 1-10 for what they have planned, he'd rate them a "2".
Bug and balance issues lead to P2W accusations, but they're because of BUGS. Right now "missile commander" reigns supreme.. so the top dogfighting ships are ones that carry a lot of missiles. This is because of bugs with countermeasures and tracking arcs/angles for CM missiles. Earlier we had a different ship as the "top dog" ship because network code issues caused it to not take damage when moving at high speed. We also went through a phase where the most powerful gun in the game had a very high ROF -this meant that 4x or 6x gimbal ships reigned supreme. I should point out that every ship I'm talking about here had widely different pledge levels. So trying to judge P2W based on that is, in a word, ridiculous.

TL;DR: You're judging the game based on a fraction of what's actually going to be in the complete game. IMO it's completely unreasonable, but to each their own.

If anyone has P2W concerns about SC, I simply recommend waiting until it's released.

"But you'll be able to buy credits when the game is released! That makes it P2W!"

A bit of back-of-the-envelop math here, based on things CIG has said over the last year or so: For a basic 300i, it would take you two months to buy enough UEC for real dollars to buy that ship. You should be able to make enough money in game in less than 20 hours of gameplay for it. If one want's to consider that P2W.. ok... but at that point I think that's the kind of person who would make the argument that pay-for cosmetic changes are "P2W" because SpaceCamo makes your ship slightly harder to see in a dogfight.

They nerf the advantages to make the game more balanced and stop it from being 'pay-to-win'. But that will seriously piss off the people who have paid thousands of dollars.

Actually, it won't. The "advantages" right now are largely because of bugs and because proper balancing hasn't been done, and if you actually look at the discussions on /r/starcitizen and the RSI forums, the majority of backers realize and understand this.

I had an exchange on Reddit with Ben Lesnick from CIG. He told me that their focus for balancing is 100% on the persistent universe, and that's one reason why Arena Commander can appear unbalanced at times [bugs aside].

We don't have the PU build stream yet. They started integrating that with the 1.0 and 1.1.0 patches. Once full multicrew goes in (2.0, should be later this year) we're going to see some significant balance changes.

They let it be and the majority of players are left in the dust by those who bought advantages.

I outlined above why that won't be the case.

As a personal aside, it's always funny to see these posts because it's obvious when they're made by people who either haven't played SC, or have spent very little time playing it. Why is it obvious? Because the the balance/P2W arguments from alpha testers revolve around a completely separate issue.

Destructioadabsurdum · 5ヶ月前

You're thinking that people buy these ships to get an advantage from day 1 of the launch of Star Citizen, but that simply isn't true. Yes, there is a vocal minority that thinks it's entitled to something because they spent 300 dolars on a spaceship, but the thruth is, and it has been asserted a million times by now by all the devs and the community as a whole, that with these 300 dollars that you just spent, you're doing basically 1 thing only -> funding a game that you'd like to see become a reality.

Take for example this ship: https://robertsspaceindustries.com/pledge/ships/rsi-constellation/Constellation-Aquila#buying-options

Chris Roberts has said that it would require 60 hours of gameplay time to get this ship in game. So the dude that spent 390 dollars has about 60 hours of gameplay advantage at start, which is minimal in the long term. The ship cash shop is going out of business when the game launches.

The famed 5k dollar ship - https://robertsspaceindustries.com/pledge/ships/aegis-javelin/Javelin-Class-Destroyer. The Javelin.

If you scroll down to the spec pages you'll see that it has 0 weapons installed. So you won't be able to use it for combat AT ALL from launch. You'll have to grind for outfitting it for at least a week (I'm speculating).

Of course, people that funded the game are entitled to something special - like having a gaming experience much different of that of other people (because they start with a completely different starter ship), but they're not going to magically "WIN" Star Citizen, because they bought some ships. Also, you can't even fly the bigger ships solo, you'll have to hire player to help you out (unless you want to play like a lone wolf and hire NPC's, but let's face it - where's the fun in that ?)

Now let's talk the rather untouched by everyone theme about alliances and player fleets in SC. I personally think that because there will be big ships from the beggining of the game, it would be a fucking blast to play the game the first month or so. Imagine every corp/fleet/alliance frantically trying to get hold of any existing asset in the game with every ship they have, with no idea of what a Javelin is actually capable in large-scale fights.

In conclusion: If you take the time to read the articles in the site (that's where all my sources come from, but I'm not inclined to search for each and every article, since there is a search option in the site), you'll understand why the "pay-to-win" argument is not only flawed, it's basically void of any meaning.

Swissgiant · 5ヶ月前

ehh I'd say no, as someone who dropped 30$ on it and can only fly my little shit can aurrora or whatever its called I've thrashed some people in far more "expensive" ships in arena. I think after about a month.... probably of play people will probably have the same ships as the early adopters.

SparkyRailgun · 5ヶ月前

The naivety surrounding Star Citizen is frankly astounding. If EA or Activision was running this racket you would be able to hear the outcry from Olympus Mons, but because the devs said 'hey screw publishers!' they have garnered a huge following.

What people tend to forget is that Chris Roberts has a history of under-delivering on his games. The publishers are a convenient excuse for him to dodge liability, for sure. Not to mention that while Star Citizen might be self published, it certainly has investors. When it comes down to it, a big part of a publishing company is the* investment*.

LudwigVan666 · 5ヶ月前

It's the age old problem of players only concerned with 'end game' rather than enjoying the actual journey. Someone is always going to have an advantage over you, be it money or time available to play. Get over it and just enjoy the game. Quit being concerned about 'winning'.

NiteWraith · 5ヶ月前

My biggest worry when it comes to the Persistent Universe in SC is the economy. People having access to the massive trade ships from the start is going to be a massive boon to them compared to those just starting out in an Aurora. They'll have more space to haul things and will be able to buy UEC to give themselves some money to begin trading in larger quantities faster, and gain a pretty big leg up over those who didn't start with a decent trade ship.

I suppose it's possible CIG could make these ships expensive enough to fly/maintain to offset that advantage, but I don't see that happening. How pissed would you be if you spent hundreds of dollars on a digital spaceship and couldn't fly it immediately?

Srefanius · 5ヶ月前

It's not even really a game to "compete" when it comes to the PU at the beginning. Newcomers will make their way up as in every other game, especially as there will be a lot of PVE content in the core systems. You can always take some missions for starters to begin, like in every other MMO. Yes others get a head start, but I don't really see the problem. The game will be filled with more than 90% NPCs anyways. As of right now the game isn't even p2w btw because you can earn REC quite easily and buy all the ships and gear for rent in Arena Commander to play with them.

PenguinScientist · 5ヶ月前

It should also be known that the devs just recently added an in-game currency system so you can rent ships, weapons, and equipment without having to spend actual money doing so.

Racecarlock · 5ヶ月前

It hasn't become anything. The game, so far, hasn't been played by anyone outside of testers yet. Oh sure, you have the arena commander and the FPS modules that you got to test, but star citizen, as a whole, still has yet to be played.

People are basically spending money on a game that might exist at some point. Maybe. So, you get what you get. It's your money.

People also say "You can't criticize this game, it's in alpha!". Well, people have bought it. They've paid for it. They can't crtiicize something they've bought? Even if it is just a "Rental" digital copyright bollocks type game. It's true they're essentially paying to get into an opera rehearsal and then criticizing it, but the point of a rehearsal is to find what's wrong and fix it. So too, is the point of early access. The criticism is the point. At least it should be. If we're paying for it, we get to criticize it. It's only fair. Do people put their games on early access wanting nothing but absolute praise? If so, they need to come back down from cloud cuckoo land.

Hell, isn't the point of an alpha and even a beta to find bugs and issues in the first place? If not, what is it for? A big blowjob from internet strangers?

mcloud313 · 5ヶ月前

As someone who has spent quite a bit of money on this game and is a pretty rabid follower of Star Citizen I would say that yes it is pay-to-win. But only in the instance of a 1 on 1 ship dogfight, which is a very limited scope of what you can do within the game. I think people aren't understanding the thought that is going to have to go into a lot of their actions within the game. When the M50 first came out people were complaining that it was a much better dog fighter than the Hornet line and that didn't make sense. What they didn't consider I think is that an M50 would be a good dog fighter but only in the limited scope of Arena Commander (Arena mode). If you were a merchant and were hiring an escort you wouldn't want to hire an M50 fighter you would want to hire a Vanguard fighter, something which can take a beating and has a very long fuel range.

It's these kinds of things that are going to effect every "win" scenario. I think people are fooling themselves though if they say all the ships will be balanced. I have a super hornet and I've already spent probably close to another hundred dollars outfitting it with the best weapons, a new turret, and direct impact shields. I would hope that an aurora at this point would not even be able to threaten me.

Another thing we need to take a look at though is this game is getting so immersive that what is really winning in it? If you don't have the money to shell out for the best ship I don't think its going to be that big of a deal, there are plenty of other people who are shelling out that much money on those giant ships and they need people to play with them. I have a retaliator and I only know two other people who plan to play the game but I need a crew of six to operate that ship at its full capacity. I am counting on making friends with people who just bought a base package and giving them a cut of my profits if they will man stations on board my ship for me. One I'll be making friends and two I'll need to do this to operate that ship. For every person that spends $300+ on a ship you are going to have 3-5 other people who can be on that ship.

I know there are also people who don't plan to engage in combat at all, there is going to be a safe space where you can just engage in trade/play sports/gamble/mine/do social things. I am very confident that if you enjoy simulation type games this game is going to be so immersive that just doing normal routine things in the far future is going to be fun. That is at least my opinion on the pay-to-win argument to the game.

K3llo · 5ヶ月前

As some one who is very much into the SC community I must say the danger is there. Right now the game is in Alpha and there is definitely a large amount of p2w happening in the multiplayer.

In terms of the PTU any one who bought high tier ships will have a distinct advantage day one but theoretically it will be no different from jumping into an MMO a couple of weeks after launch. There will be a ton of players who have nothing but the starter ships and an elite with all the high end mining and dog fighting ships but that isn't all that different from any other multiplayer game with a progression system.

It is also worth noting that once the game goes live you won't be able to buy ships via real money. The ship pledges are not designed to give you thousands of dollars worth of an advantage. They are designed to fund the games development. A 200 dollar ship might be better then a 100 dollar ship but not necessarily 100 bucks better, And player skill plays a significant factor.

I think the community has a tendency to ignore the fact that Star Citizen has a poor reputation in the larger gaming world. Any mention that the game could be pay to win is greeted with statements like "can't win an alpha bro" which completely misses the point.

All that being said there is a lot SC does right. I love the way the game feels, I love the way all the ships fly totally different from one another, and I love the general atmosphere of the game. I would say that even if the Multiplayer side of the game has problems the single player expericne should be outstanding. It's going to feature over 50 missions with branching paths which is a significant part of the game to say the least.

magmasafe · 5ヶ月前

It was for a long while but you can now earn REC from playing in the alpha. This allows you to get ships or weapons you haven't paid real money for. It's still being balanced but they're getting better with it. It's initial release gave out crazy amounts of points then in the last patch they nerfed it too heavily. So, yeah ,it's a process.

flappers87 · 5ヶ月前

It was pay to win from the very start.

They tried adding in this rental system, but even with that they locked out the best ships for real money only. (Dunno if this has changed or not, I don't keep up to date with the latest info on the game).

For a player to go in from the start, you go into a race, you'll be placed against someone who has the best racing ship. There's no skill involved here.

The same for arena. Even with a decent ship, someone could come along in their ultimate money-only ship and completely destroy the game.

Whether or not this changes is one thing, but what we do know is that although at release you won't be able to buy ships directly, you will be able to buy in game credits for money (in before "daily caps") which in turn can buy you ships.

Even with daily caps, you are still effectively paying for the better ships with real money.

For a game that will be launched with a retail cost, this to me is unacceptable.

If a company like EA or Ubisoft followed this method of transactions (not microtransactions, because these prices are far from 'micro') then there would be a massive shitstorm surrounding it.

But for whatever reason, this company gets a free pass.

For a game that's in alpha, if they really wanted player feedback on balance, they should not hide ships behind paywalls.

vsTerminus · 5ヶ月前

/u/jdeart is definitely the most correct in this thread when it comes to concerns about the final product, and you can already see this trend in the alpha.

Even now after Arena Commander has been out for 11 months (June 4th, 2014 was the release) it spend the first 9 of those being textbook Pay to Win where ships and guns could only be acquired by cash. The last two months have been more of a "Freemium" style grind for rental equipment that disappears in 7 (non-consecutive) days if you don't keep grinding for the renewal fee.

Under current income rates it would take you 16 hours to unlock the best possible ship and weapons (Super Hornet with 6x Omnisky VI cannons), and then it will expire in 7 days of play unless you have enough credits to renew it. Remember that this is the average rate, and income is tied to performance in game and position on the leaderboards, so those people who paid for their ships will have an easy time claiming the lion's share of credits in each match while the $45 Aurora owners struggle to bring in 150 credits per match.

Right now Star Citizen has:

A grindy rental system for temporary ships and guns (with no matchmaking and income is tied to performance)
A subscription you can sign up for that grants you bonus credits every month
A cash shop where you can buy permanent guns
A second cash shop where you can buy permanent ships

Suffice it to say, even though they may stop selling ships as they have promised, it will not be easy to unlock them unless you are regularly purchasing credits with cash.

CIG has demonstrated on many occasions already that they don't have a problem hampering the experience, locking away content behind paywalls, and adding loopholes to make sure that people get a competitive advantage when they spend money on ships.

To everyone who is going to counter me with, "CIG Promised _____" or "CIG said ____ will be different in the final game", talk is cheap. They've said one thing and done another many times already, so don't be surprised when it happens again. If you take all of CIG's promises and just put them aside for a moment and look at what they have done, it doesn't paint a pretty picture.

5ヶ月前

[removed]

Tumbler · 5ヶ月前

I mean when it is eventually released how will people compete with those who paid hundreds of dollars to get in-game advantages like ships, credits etc

... The same way they do when they join an mmo that has been out for a year or two? There will always be a veteran class of players that has more time and money invested in a game when new players join. The only thing this changes for SC is that the upper level of play will be filled out sooner. (assuming higher cost ships are in fact upper level play)

You join swtor today you're going to be way behind players that have been playing for years. You join eve online you'll also be hopelessly behind the long term players... But it's still fun because they built a game with a lot of things to do. You'll be able to travel around and have a good time in a Mustang or an aurora

MrLizardQueen · 5ヶ月前

There actually has to be a game before you can win (I say as I drown in down votes). Which is worse? The fact that they are selling ships that are 1000+ dollars or that they are sold out?

Kairah · 5ヶ月前

Hasn't it always been? I was never led to believe that more expensive ships wouldn't be more powerful. There was, however, always the assurance that you could earn those same ships in-game. My personal definition of "pay-to-win" is simply that there things that you can buy with real money that convey an advantage that regular players can never attain. If you can get anything that a big spender can get just by grinding it out, then no problem. Otherwise games like League of Legends would be "pay-to-win" because people can spend money to get champions that not everybody has access to.

The_Katzenjammer · 5ヶ月前

yeah i am not hyped about this game anymore. Why can't it just be a fun space sim with fast progression.. i just don't get it. Fuck trying to be EVE second coming.

cipahs · 5ヶ月前

Let's see.

Join private server.
Fly whatever I want.
?????????
Profit

DaEvilPenguin · 5ヶ月前

I'm concerned that people have spent hundreds of dollars on multicrew ships when they have no idea how they will operate with a singular pilot.

Ghost4000 · 5ヶ月前

I think so yes. This is why I've restrained myself from getting hyped about this game. I know people who think it will be the most amazing game ever, but all I see is an incredibly expensive barely complete game. I look forward to altering my opinion though as more modules for the game are completed.

Dooddoo · 5ヶ月前

What i have understood talking to people who donated alot of dollars is that this is the way they want it to be balanced. Not everyone should be able to have the biggest ship, and they WANT the big ships to cost ALOT so few people can afford them. So it will be balanced according to your wallet.

They think it is the best way to keep kids away.

Chvz144 · 5ヶ月前

As someone who knows little about space sims and Star Citizen, how is the game progressing? I remember hearing some pretty bold claims about how advanced it would be and its obviously received a lot of backing, does it look like it will deliver?

Chrystolis · 5ヶ月前

As an early backer of Star Citizen, this is one of the main aspects of the game that worries me.

I'll preface this by saying that I've learned a lot from my early Kickstarter backings, and am very aware that what you think you see may not be what you get. That said, I had hopes going in that the modes in this with a more space sim progression would allow you to work your way through ship and part upgrades in a pretty standard fashion.

Looking at it now, I see all these ships that cost hundreds of dollars to purchase, and think of the people who bought them. How much of a slap in the face would it be to someone who spent $300 on a ship if I was able to earn that ship in a week of playing the game? On the flip side, how long should I, as a paying owner of the full retail game, be expected to work to obtain such ships, and how much of the ship progression do the ships that you can purchase now account for? If the majority of ships are purchasable via large amounts of real cash and will take a painstakingly long time to acquire via in-game means, that would tread awfully close to oft maligned free-to-play monetization tactics. Considering the game isn't going to be free-to-play, such a setup would make it really hard to lure in new players who just want to buy the base game and play from there.

I fear they've already gone way, way too far down that hole for things to pan out in the way I originally hoped they would, but at this point I'm just hoping the game still has fun progression for those of us not willing to shell out additional cash for the game.

Sunagamaru · 5ヶ月前

I don't really count a game as pay to win unless you can't get the item unless you pay. (cosmetic items don't count)If they made the best ship in the game, but you had to pledge 1000 dollars to get it, then it would be pay to win. I mean its pretty obvious all these ships will be available in the game, so why would people be mad if someone got their ship? Plus everyone willing to buy the pledges that are a significant amount of money probably took the time to realize that a 1000$ ship is really like 200 dollar worth + 800 dollar donation.

Phuzzybear · 3ヶ月前

I grew up with Wing Commander 1, and am a huge space sim geek, I've played all of Chris Roberts' games, as well as X-Wing vs Tie Fighter (I backed Starfighter Inc, which didn't get funded too)

You name it, I've probably clocked a fair few hours on it, Descent, Freespace, Independence War, even older less popular ones (varying from great to ugh!) Space Rogue, XF5700 Mantis.

As a backer, I had high hopes for Star Citizen, but got increasingly worried and then increasingly cynical as the pledge bundles got more and more elaborate and expensive, and their scope just started getting wider and wider...and wider.

It is incredible the see the people not just spend incredible amounts on money on 3D renderings, and their gradual level of denial increase in proportion to every dollar they sink into this cash grab.

It is surreal to see these people getting super defensive of a game that hasn't even been developed yet, and that has an obvious and blatantly bloated development.

The pledge packages are out of hand. The direction of their monetization strategy is increasingly worrying. Anyone who is of firm opinion that this model is anything but pay to win is seriously deluded..

MMOs are all about time invested primarily, and skill secondarily. When you can just pay your way through the time expenditure, regardless of whether or not the ships/items are otherwise attainable in the game, you win.

Bandersaur · 5ヶ月前

There will be no pay to win.

In the words of Chris Roberts himself. "You should never be able to buy anything with real money that you can't buy in with in game credits. Once fully live SC in-game items will only be purchasable with in-game credits. There will even be some items you can ONLY earn by playing / flying missions. All you will be able to spend money on that is gameplay related would be buying some in-game credits as you don't want or don't have enough time to earn the credits you need for your contemplated purchase. We'll cap purchase of in-game credits to avoid someone unbalancing the game / economy. Here's a link to the very post.

Redmoons · 5ヶ月前

Star Citizen doesn't even exist as an actual game yet.

The chance of CIG pulling off a functioning 'sandbox mmo' that fully includes the features Roberts has promised, is essentially zero.

The brewing shitstorm on the horizon is the inevitable 'feature cull', as Roberts realizes that he (again) cannot make the game he promised.

Worry about what type of game you are going to get, and then worry about p2w.

ragir · 5ヶ月前

Ya'll need to stop complaining about the ships cost, since they are not going to be selling those after the game releases.

Think of it as prolonged kickstarter, the game is not even close to being finished, jeez.

Seklar · 5ヶ月前

As someone who has put a fair amount of money into this game (I was fairly skeptical previously). It's far too early to even be worried about advantages (if they could even really be called that) in the final game. So many systems and details are in flux at the moment that even the ships you are pledging for now are subject to heavy change.

Find a payment point you are comfortable with (even if it's zero!) and enjoy the fact that finally a company is working on something as grand as this.

stripesonfire · 5ヶ月前

i initially pledged with from the amd never settle bundle by upgrading the starter ship for $5...played it a bit to get a feel for it and loved what i saw and where it was going. i then pledged for a vanguard cause the $250 or whatever i spend was me hoping this game delivered on all the promises. i really believe that they'll deliver based on my trial.

Games

/r/Games is for informative and interesting gaming content and discussions. Please look over our rules and FAQ before posting. If you're looking for "lighter" gaming-related entertainment, try /r/gaming!

Allowed submissions

Rules

Spoilers

Promotion

Scheduled discussions

Other subreddits

調停者