The Elephant In the Room

That's probably because you're bad at reading what someone actually writes.


I'm not arguing that they're not upgrades. I'm stating that they're not necessary upgrades to be competitive with the exception of weapons for the ESF. Which makes the outrage over the pricing scheme irrelevant as anything other than whining over the price of a purely optional method of saving time.

Compared to the current steam sale the prices are surely... interesting.

For comparison purposes 1 weapon = 1000 Certs = 10 Euros.
With that in mind let's look at some nice AA titles:

Dishonored: 2.5 weapons
Torchlight II: 1 weapon
Arkham City: 0.75 weapons
Civ 5: 1 weapon
Civ 5 G&K: 0.75 weapons
Deus Ex HR: 0.5 weapons

But to be fair, those are sale prices. Maybe we should do the calculations with 1000 certs = 5 Euros instead, assuming a 2x SC sale? However that doesn't make it look much better, you're still looking at 2-3 weapons for the price of an AAA game.

For arbitrary values of competitive I suppose? Not values of competitive I've heard anyone use, but sure I'll take your word for it that you find it fun and engaging to fight people that posses those weapons without having access to them yourself.

The OP is dead on. And people wonder why I play a LA 90% of the time or an Engineer, because the two weapons cross over I am getting more bang for my Cert.

Yes, but for the price of 2 guns you can't get a *FULL* AAA game that's 3+ months old that is Planetside 2, and you're likely not going to get anywhere near the playtime out of that game as you will out of that gun. Your argument is disingenuous at best, just like virtually every argument that complains about subscription pricing or cash shop pricing in MMOs.

Really the only time I've ever seen a rational, justified cash shop pricing argument in an MMO is in the ones where using the cash shop is actually required to progress, and those games thankfully die early because it's a terrible model. This game doesn't follow that model.

Semantics is always the refuge of last resort for incoherent, poorly constructed arguments. The simple fact is that in every case except the ESF, you are capable of contributing to a battle in a meaningful fashion the moment you start playing, other than the learning curve of the game itself. That simple fact renders any argument about the cash shop prices moot on every level except for stinginess.

You agree that I'm correct about vehicle weapons, then try to claim victory regardless? You're making no sense Flarestar.

Basically you're trying to argue that it's fine that non-payers at this point in time have no access to effective Anti-Air weapons, Air to Air weapons or Air-to-Ground weapons because the game can be played without those things.

Sure you can argue that, but arguing that the afterburner is competitive with Air to Air Missiles or Rocketpods, or that the Shredder is competitive with the Dalton/Zephyr or single-burster MAX is competetive with dual burster max is just laughable.

It doesn't matter if it's plantside 2 or not, I can still play planetside 2, I just won't give them any of my money. This is less about the grind required to get items and more about the fact that the cash shop has insane prices for weapons that are supposed to be sidegrades. It also doesn't help that even after I theoretically spend 7$ I need to spend 2-3 days of playing to get the gun up to the point where it's stronger/as strong as my old one.


I don't mind buying stuff in f2p games, I bought tons of stuff in dota 2 and lol because each of those offer me something unique, the ps2 store has issues in that 90% of the weapons are either completely identical in everything but a few numbers or they're the other 10% that are mandatory (such as rocketpods, aa weapons, max weapons etc.). Now add the fact that the weapons are really expensive and you have an extremely poorly done cash shop.

I have to re-buy the same scope if i change CLASS....?!? Same server, i change class, and i have to re-buy the damn scope... Its unbelievable.

I dont mind paying for stuff, but as a 40 year old man i dont take lightly getting obviously ripped off.
Your not getting a dime from me.

Atleast the scopes are really cheap, it's one of the few things where you don't get ripped off at the cert costs. I'd really enjoy the cert system a lot more if there was a lot more attachments and the like to be bought in the 30-100 cert range.

This wouldnt happen unless there was a box price, much like GW2 to recoup the costs of production.

Reply from a thread titled "What would need to happen for YOU to spend money in the game."

A lot of people are saying that you would spend $60 on a new game anyways, so what's the big deal? Problem is, if that was the expectation with PS2, they should've made it a full priced vice F2P game in the first place.

Why did they make it with a flawed and questionably exploitative F2P system instead of being a full priced game? So they would have the player population a game as massive as PS2 requires.

F2P games are the 21th century plague of the gamers community anyway.

The free word is just the ultimate bait for young players that think "hey i will play a super game for nothing " when in fact it gonna cost more for a vast majority of them than a monthly fee game.

if you're mature enough and not naïve , and know that you gonna stay at least a few month on a F2P game like PS2 or WoT you know that it will cost you more than a monthly fee game to play it in good conditions and be competitive......

you guys think about the cost balance from your gamer PoV and naturally you all think that everything should be accessible at a low price because its supposed to be Free to play and accessible to everyone , but in fact in just free to PAY...

For one 40 yo player that complain about cert cost and wont pay at all because he realize that its a scam, they will get five or more 16 yo customers that will buy SC because they have been owned a few times by a 700 SC gun and dont want to get their revenge in 6 month.



F2P is a true cancer , a real regress for the gamers ,only the game publishers will get a real benefits from it ....

its simple as that F2P is the gaming company Heaven , not the player one.

I'm not arguing that at all. Again, read. I can explain it again if you like, breaking it down into very small words or something if that will help, but until you take the time to actually read the argument I'm making instead of simply making up my side of the conversation this is a pointless discussion.

Well, whatever point you're trying to make Flarestar, you're making a very poor job of demonstrating it.

Well, while I loathe micro transactions in general because most companies use them as an excuse to gauge (with PS2 they're hardly 'micro' either) I do think that there exists many examples of F2P games that benefit both the players and the companies, Valve and Riot are lauded as companies that create a lot of goodwill and profits through their F2P initiatives.

I'm really not, you're just terrible at reading comprehension. It doesn't help any that you refuse to understand that competitive != effective != equal.

So you're saying that you don't need effective weapons to be competitive? I really can't say I agree.

I don't think you understand how pricing works.

But sure, I'll be happy to develop, perform and analyze a systemic sampling of the PS2 player population. How much are you willing to pay me for the work?

If SC is overpriced, people won't buy it, SOE will realize this and lower the price. If, however, people are willing to pay it to an extent such that SOE reaches an optimal point of revenue, then the price will be lowered. SOE knows SC will be in high demand early in the game, and have also set cert points high for weapons to further encourage people to spend RL money if they wish to use these weapons in a timely fashion. Given that the gaming population is generally quite impulsive, and that this game has had a community anticipating its release for quite a while, I highly suspect a great deal of SC was purchased this weekend.

SOE is a company. The only purpose of a company is to make money. The main objective of the consumer is to obtain the product as cheaply as possible. Unfortunately these goals will never completely align. Luckily, no one is forcing you to play the game, and, if the cost of doing so is too high for you, then don't give SOE your money and instead play something else.

Complaining to SOE that the price of their products is too high is a complete waste of your time, as the reality of the situation will be reflected in the feedback they get from how much SC they actually sell.

Well, it's important to let the company know -why- you're not buying their product, simply not buying without leaving any feedback makes it too easy for them to draw the wrong conclusions. Obviously noone here expects SoE to change their business model if it's very successful for them, but if it turns out it's not successful then it is in threads like these they can find the reasons why.

You're either intentionally trolling or too stupid to be worth continuing to talk to.

If you're seriously trying to discuss this with me, go back through the thread and read my posts. It's very clear what I'm saying when you stop trying to inject your own assumptions into what I write. You'll note you're the only one here having difficulty understanding it.

What other conclusions could you possibly draw from effective!=competetive? Your posts are a mess and whatever point you're trying to make is completely lost.

The purpose of writing things on public forums is to communicate ideas, you're communicating really badly.