SE Please implement a Chonoscroll/PLEX system in FFXIV: ARR

How is that different from people having problems with spending real money on subs?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hart

No, I've stated the reason why it isn't fair. Just because you don't want to acknowledge it, doesn't mean it isn't there.

Listen closely. NOT EVERYONE HAS THE EXTRA MONEY TO SPEND ON A SCROLL. That means they are at a DISADVANTAGE. In other words, IT IS NOT FAIR

---

The problem with that argument is that that "extra money to spend on a scroll" gets them absolutely nothing that you, me, they or anyone else can't buy with gil earned in game.

They have no advantage whatsoever. They still spent time to acquire that money. It didn't grow from trees. The market normally balances out in a way that the time spent farming gil and acquiring the money that can be converted in it are pretty much equivalent.

Ergo there's no unfairness. There's a reason why "pay to win" is applied only to games in which paying provides you with in-game advantages that you can't get in any other way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hart

No, I've stated the reason why it isn't fair. Just because you don't want to acknowledge it, doesn't mean it isn't there.

Listen closely. NOT EVERYONE HAS THE EXTRA MONEY TO SPEND ON A SCROLL. That means they are at a DISADVANTAGE. In other words, IT IS NOT FAIR

This is not the same thing as not having enough time to play the game, because...

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Abriael

You make a point, but you don't bring any argument in its favor.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Abriael

You continue not to offer any actual argument.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Abriael

You are aware that you're making out statistics out of nothing right?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Abriael

Evidence please.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Abriael

You continue to chant that it's unfair, but you still didn't bring a single solid argument on why.

---

Hart definitely has a point here. You have a clear tendency to discount points as they are challenging your own, and acting as if they never existed when you substitute your own. What was that Strawman definition again?

Regardless...

All things being equal, the simplest method tends to be the best method.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duuude007

Hart definitely has a point here. You have a clear tendency to discount points as they are challenging your own, and acting as if they never existed when you substitute your own. What was that Strawman definition again?

---

Nope, I discount points that don't challenge my own at all, but are expressed and repeated like they would.

IE: "It's unfair!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duuude007

All things being equal, the simplest method tends to be the best method.

---

There's no simple method to combat RMT, and no simple method to keep subs up.

This is just a method to help both of those situations, proven effective in other games.

A rep needs to nuke this thread i doubt SE will adopt this system and dude STFU already you ain't convincing anyone

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warlock

A rep needs to nuke this thread i doubt SE will adopt this system and dude STFU already you ain't convincing anyone

---

Because you say so?

I'm afraid the reps aren't here to serve you and remove arguments that you don't like and can't counter.

No change in subs is the best change in subs. I entirely agree with Warlock on this.

Find a working method to deal better with RMT, just dont introduce a change to subs in the process. There are other ways. Umbral era has proven it.

I don't personally care if this was implemented, it does gives people incentives to play so they do not need to shell out real cash to play and people with not enough times will be able to somewhat catch up in terms of equipment without spending all their time farming stuff when they gets to play, instead they can just enjoy the contents and hunt the rare equips.

Abriael has valid points, how does this makes things unfair in this game? If we are looking at v1.0 perspective, it doesn't makes things unfair because alot of best gears aren't buy-able (few slots perhaps), terrible players will stay terrible, people don't suddenly become good players by having the best gears ingame.

The only one hurting from this from my PoV is terrible players and doesn't have the cash, they will ends up with no one inviting them, having a very gimp equips, and they are probably the one in forums saying skills > gears while wearing full AF on BLM saying stat doesn't matter.

The system the OP suggests eliminates the middle man in real money trading (RMT) and instead of paying the RMT to buy gil, you buy a 30day sub and sell it for gil, and I think that its a pretty nifty idea.

Those efficient at making gil can play the game for free by paying for subs with gil instead of real money if they choose to do so and those that fall on hard times/lose their credit cards/young people with a lot of time and no income can still play the game.

Only downside I can think of is what if RMTs sold gil cheap enough that people would buy the gil from them then turn around and buy subs from the AH with that gil and end up paying less than the official cost to play the game.

I already conceded buying gear with IRL money can be a valid addition, so long that it is purely cosmetic in nature and no resources are drained from more important content.

It must fully fund itself, and subs can fund the content that really matters, with maybe a small bonus stipend from any profit this cosmetic armor purchasing system somehow dreams up.

This is a compromise. If they arent willing to go halfway and test this, they certainly wont go all the way into the system you are asserting we must use.

Get over it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duuude007

No change in subs is the best change in subs. I entirely agree with Warlock on this.

Find a working method to deal better with RMT, just dont introduce a change to subs in the process. There are other ways. Umbral era has proven it.

---

What did the umbral era prove? There were RMTs scurrying around the game even on the very last day when the last save was performed.

If there were better way to deal with RMT, they would have been implemented a long time ago. Without even mentioning the very sizable benefits of encouraging players to keep their sub active, and allowing players that can't afford it a further way to play the game.

Or maybe do you have in mind "better ways" to deal with those problems too?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duuude007

I already conceded it can be a valid addition, so long that it is purely cosmetic in nature and no resources are drained from more important content.

---

Purely cosmetic? I think I'm lost here.

This system doesn't require much development resources at all. It's almost all handled on the website/billing system. All the development team needs to implement is a few database queries and an icon for the item.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duuude007

I already conceded it can be a valid addition, so long that it is purely cosmetic in nature and no resources are drained from more important content.

---

How a sub system can be cosmetic? X.X I'm either lost or you posted in another topic than intended :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duuude007

I already conceded buying gear with IRL money can be a valid addition, so long that it is purely cosmetic in nature and no resources are drained from more important content.

It must fully fund itself, and subs can fund the content that really matters, with maybe a small bonus stipend from any profit this cosmetic armor purchasing system somehow dreams up.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Abriael

This system doesn't require much development resources at all. It's almost all handled on the website/billing system. All the development team needs to implement is
a few database queries and
an icon for the item.

---

and an actual item.
and 9 other variations for 5 different species and 2 genders.
and balancing stats (my position is this should be universally zero for anything purchased under your system.)

Youre right, its oh so simple.

I mean, the scarf of wondrous wit is an excellent candidate for your concept. It looks nifty, but is otherwise worthless.
I can see the appeal, but going one step further to make it useful...
Let's just say you shouldn't be holding your breath.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duuude007

and an actual item.
and 9 other variations for 5 different species and 2 genders.
and balancing stats (my position is this should be universally zero for anything purchased under your system.)

Youre right, its oh so simple.

I mean, the scarf of wondrous wit is an excellent candidate for your concept. It looks nifty, but is otherwise worthless.
I can see the appeal, but going one step further to make it useful...
Let's just say you shouldn't be holding your breath.

---

Umh no. Wait. No.

The Chronoscroll/Plex is purely an inventory item. A consumable. It doesn't have any appearance other than an icon in your inventory.

You buy it from the billing website (exactly like you werebuying crysta). It goes in your inventory. You put it for sale. Someone Buys it. It goes in his inventory. He clicks on it. A popup comes up asking if he's sure he wants to use it. He confirms. A month gets added to his account.

That's it. It's not something you wear, and I'm not sure how you jumped to that idea.

You seem to have moved to the idea of selling cosmetic items to generate additonal revenue, but that has absolutely nothing to do with this.

It addresses an entirely different kind of problem and it generates others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Abriael

That's it. It's not something you wear.

---

I see. Thanks for clarifying.

Reason still exists in this universe, huzzah!

So, if we go by this sort of logic, I can see two routes that this could be implemented:

SCENARIO 1:
The item which is worth nothing but 1 month of subs is u/u and only purchaseable by the player willing to use it, from a vendor using gil, meaning you must earn enough to maintain your sub using an in-game tax, or else use a month of stored crysta which was purchased with IRL money.

Question: does this change RMT at all? Its merely another optional gil sink.

SCENARIO 2:
The item which is worth nothing but 1 month of subs is only purchaseable by the player willing to use it, from lodestone using IRL money.

Question: Isn't this exactly what we have in place right now? You can either commit to 3+ months in a sub for a discount, or you can just purchase crysta.


Its not adding up here...lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Abriael

Because you say so?

I'm afraid the reps aren't here to serve you and remove arguments that you don't like and can't counter.

---

Dude you won't convince SE to implement this that's all you need to know >.>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duuude007

I see. Thanks for clarifying.

---

And here i thought my explanation was simple enough.

The item is purchaseable by anyone, that can then sell it in the market at the price he wants (provided that he finds a buyer). The buyer will then be able to use it to gain a month of gameplay.

It's not available from vendors, but from the billing website.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warlock

Dude you won't convince SE to implement this that's all you need to know >.>

---

Again: because you say so?

It works very well for other companies. There's no reason for them not to consider it.

What he suggested is a Chronoscroll that is tradeable among players, Player A buys scroll from lodestone with $$$ puts it on wards, Player B buys the Chronoscroll from wards with gil and he doesnt need to pay for his subs anymore with $$$ as long as he keeps purchasing the scroll.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Abriael

Most people that quit MMORPGs are players that have already reached the endgame

---

historically untrue. the largest proportion of players to quit any/every MMO are the most casual players who usually never reach or participate in endgame. (and by 'endgame' i don't mean just hitting max level)

otherwise, i don't think this is a bad suggestion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Abriael

Unfair? Why would they be "unfair" exactly? Unfair for who? You make a point, but you don't bring any argument in its favor. Calling something "unfair" doesn't autimatically make it so.

Is it unfair for those that don't wanna spend money in the game? funny, since it advantages them before anyone else (they can play for free).

Is it unfair for those that pay the monthly fee normally? It gives them more people to play with and by giving more revenue to the developer, more content. IE: More entertainment for the same price.

Is it unfair for those that pay for the gil? Nah, that'd be ridiculous. So who is it unfair for?

How is it unfair? It doesn't allow anyone to get anything that anyone else in the game can't get. It simply converts time into time: IE: time spent in real life to earn the money into time spent in the game to earn girl.

As a matter of fact, it's more fair than having a large variety of items in game unaccessible to those that have less time to play.

---

Sounds like someone is (dare I say it?) too lazy to go out and farm or craft. Just because it worked in another game dosent mean it will work in this game. The current system we have is fair, if you go and craft or farm matierals you can make gil, but... if you refuse to do any of the above for any reason its just plain laziness. It sounds like to me that instead of you putting work into making your gil you would rather take the easy way out and just buy your in game currency.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maxthunder

Sounds like someone is (dare I say it?) too lazy to go out and farm or craft. Just because it worked in another game dosent mean it will work in this game. The current system we have is fair, if you go and craft or farm matierals you can make gil, but... if you refuse to do any of the above for any reason its just plain laziness. It sounds like to me that instead of you putting work into making your gil you would rather take the easy way out and just buy your in game currency.

---

Making assumptions about other players of which you know nothing won't give any solidity to your argument.

The fact that it worked in other games (That have economies that are just as fair and actually work better than the FFXIV 1.0 economy, due to way better implemented auction and commerce systems), means that it's a sound system that has solid possibilities to be implemented just as soundly in this game.

Lazyness has nothing to do with it. My concern is hampering RMT firms and, even more importantly, helping the game to retain subs easier.

In this economy, that's not a small problem.

Lets call it what it is: Crysta.

A player buys crysta from lodestone with IRL money, and sells it in the market wards for gil.

Its a feature that makes it so that players can forego paying cash and instead paying a game currency toll to keep playing.

How again does this stop RMT? It seems to me to have little to do with RMT, apart from letting them play without having to pay a sub.

Conclusion: The RMT argument seems to hold little weight as a true benefit of this change.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duuude007

Lets call it what it is: Crysta.

A player buys crysta from lodestone with IRL money, and sells it in the market wards for gil.

Its a feature that makes it so that players can forego paying cash and instead paying a game currency toll to keep playing.

How again does this stop RMT? It seems to me to have little to do with RMT, apart from letting them play without having to pay a sub.

---

That could work, even if it would be a little less intuitive (you have to buy the right number of crysta instead of buying a single item), but the effect would be pretty much equivalent, yes.

It hampers RMT because it gives player a legal outlet to convert real money into gil (it NEVER works the other way around, to be noted. you CANNOT convert chronoscrolls or PLEX back into real money) benefitting other players at the same time.

Players that want to do so, have two options:

1: purchase the plex/crhonoscroll/crysta/whateveryouwannacallit directly from Square Enix, legally and risking nothing.

2: purchase the gil from gillsellers, risking to be banned if uncovered or at the very least to see the gil removed, losing their purchase.

Most players would resort to option 1 as it's risk-free and completely guaranteed by Square Enix, removing a lot of potential customers from the gilseller market. At this point all the gilsellers can do to defend their business is to lower their prices enough to offset the risks for a sufficient amount of players. They can, but that still makes their business a lot less profitable, potentially sending many of them out of business or making them abandon the game as unprofitable for their time (it's better for them to work on games in which they don't have to cope with this sistem), as it cuts them where it hurts the most (in their wallet).

That's quite a dent in the gilselling business, with added benefits in other areas (account retention) as well.

So it creates a gil sink where people can indirectly buy gil with real money.

More power to you if you can convince SE to do this.
Personally I doubt they ever will, as it directly contradicts their EULA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duuude007

So it creates a gil sink where people can indirectly buy gil with real money.

More power to you if you can convince SE to do this.
Personally I doubt they ever will, as it directly contradicts their EULA.

---

Trying can't hurt.

ARR Will most probably have a new EULA anyway, and EULAs can be changed to suit a company's needs (it happens very often in this industry, all they have to do is to send you a mail communicating that it changed and asking you to aknowledge it again). They're not an expression of design philosopy, but just a legal artifice to keep the company's rear well protected.

I didnt read the whole thing tbh, but wouldn't this idea be hurt by the fact that legacy members and regular subscribers will have different monthly costs?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mudd

I didnt read the whole thing tbh, but wouldn't this idea be hurt by the fact that legacy members and regular subscribers will have different monthly costs?

---

It would just mean that legacy members would still have to pay the same price for the chronoscroll/PLEX item as anyone else. The Legacy promotion didn't include this after all, but just their own account.

With this system you pay for someone else's account, not for yours, so if you want to use it as a seller, you pay the normal price.

As buyers legacy subbers would still benefit from it. Just a little less than others, as they would save less money.

After all I seriously hope legacy members will be the vast minority in ARR. Because if they aren't, the game is pretty much screwed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mudd

I didnt read the whole thing tbh, but wouldn't this idea be hurt by the fact that legacy members and regular subscribers will have different monthly costs?

---

Their monthly crysta price would be cheaper than non legacy monthly crysta price.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duuude007

Yes, their crysta would be cheaper than non legacy crysta.

That in itself is an issue in fairness, heh.

---

Actually, using crysta solves the problem, as it's not the crysta that it's cheaper for them, but charging their own account simply requires less crysta.

Crysta has exactly the same price per unit whether you're a legacy subber or a normal subber.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duuude007

I edited my correction before you replied.

---

But in that case there's no fairness problem, because the equation remains the same.

Im not saying I agree, as it violates the current EULA.
Furthermore, I would not be surprised if there are other unforeseen consequences.
That said... If you can convince them, more power to you. There really isn't anything further to argue here.

If TO ever PLAYED in EvE then he MUST have seen what troubles can bring PLEX like system.
Like i've seen so many threads about ppls sell Plex in trade contracts for (rough trivia) 400 mil credits.
Ok yeah fine you buy it for 400 mil credits !BUT! here's a huge CATCH! In trade contract can be traps like:
1st step - you buy plex
2nd step - you send your money AND plex you bought back to the man who selled it.
And here can be the end - you lost money AND plex you bought.

And about gil sellers... I'll never risk life of my account by buying money from poor korean childs who have no life... I prefer spent my time in game and, !yeah!, grinding money by myself...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warlock

A rep needs to nuke this thread i doubt SE will adopt this system and dude STFU already you ain't convincing anyone

---

Actually, you are wrong, as I had never heard of this system before this thread and I'm convinced it's an excellent idea. I do think it would be better if it was done as crysta rather than a scroll, since as others have pointed out, legacy members will have a lower price to pay for a monthly subscription.

As far as traps in trading goes, FFXIV has systems in place where you shouldn't have to worry too much about being jyped of your scroll from a trading scam. Just buy your scrolls from a person's bazaar or off the auction house.

At any rate, I agree that this would put a serious dent in RMT activity. Those with extra cash have their outlet for "buying gil", so to speak, without having to resort to middlemen using hacks and shady practices that harm other players directly and indirectly. (via NM stealing/farming profitable normal mob camps 24/7, npcing tons of items or doing repeatable leves for cash that causes inflation). Those with extra gil to burn can save RL money by buying said crysta for another month of game time. SE doesn't lose any money from subscriptions, as at the worst, some wealthier individuals pay for other people's subscriptions. More likely, there would even be a minor surplus of scrolls compared to buyers, which means they make a small revenue increase.

It would also stimulate the economy by encouraging cash flow from those who are super rich and tend to horde their gil, to those who are in desperate need of gil and are going to spend it all on goods and services.

As far as i can tell, it's an extremely well thought out system, and kudos to the original MMORPG that thought of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WHS

I make less then 30k a year income period. I can afford the sub fee but barely. I probably won't be in game grinding gil 24/7 either cause I have a job. That being said I don't fit into either model. But, I do understand what it feels like to have time to farm gil but no real money to pay a sub in game. I've seen companies reward people who play with game time in other games. Even though on the outside this seems like rmt concept it's not quite the same as the one introduced in ffxi. I found that rmt model to be so constricting on the economy I hated that game for money reasons alone. In game currency was too damn hard to make. I have no issues with this plan being implemented. It seems so different then me going to a website and buying gil. If you don't go with this model all you do is 1) lose the person who can't pay the sub fee. 2) leave all the elites to play with themselves 3) and still have a shit ton of rmt anyways maybe more cause they can do often control the gil. I've played lotro and wow and both don't seem to have any problems with rmt. Sure their gold is sold but I was able to keep my income up enough I never felt the need to buy any gold. Hell lotro even now is free and when I played it was pay monthly like wow and ffxi and this game. Now the worse rmt is turbine themselves lol. Oh well who the hell cares this won't screw a thing over and you people know it. Just stop bitching.

---

Stop arguing with them. I had no idea models like this existed till I started Tera a few months ago. I have some friends who use this method to pay for their game. They don't have much money and basically play mmo's on a month to month basis. I don't have that problem and I'm 'almost' certain that everyone against this idea have no issue with the monthly fee as well. With all the Anti RMT methods SE used that hurt the player base, this one has the least amount of negatives. I don't know if people are deluded enough into thinking that there is a perfect solution. Low income people play?(check) Rich people give SE more money (check) Those in the middle *myself included* just continue to play. It's easy to convince yourself that other people have an advantage when you're the have not. I don't see myself getting salty just because a person's parents paid for their tuition when I had to work 2 jobs to pay for mine. Boo hoo for me. It is what it is, I worked hard, I made it, I take pride. This is all I see here. If people want to spend real money for fake money, let them. RMT has the potential to ruin the economy. Why not control the RMT to limit the damage. Have people pay for other people. I was honestly looking for a valid argument as to why it shouldn't be implemented. All I see is fear of the letters "RMT".

This sounds extremely RMT-y

NOTE: This post is entirely hypothetical- I do not condone, and I am not encouraging the acts in any way- It is merely to make a point.

These numbers are also entirely not to scale. Merely to be used as an example:

Scenario 1: Buyable, tradeable Crysta

Quote:

---

Player A has plenty of Dollars, and wishes to buy gil without getting banned, aka "legitimately".

Player A discovers that Crysta, currency only used in paying for subs, can be traded freely in game.

Player A buys up enough crysta for a year worth of subscriptions, and set the price for each crysta.

Player B considers the price for a subscription to be worth his time in farming gil, so he purchases the equivalent of one year worth of subscriptions.

Player A takes that gil and purchases goods and services to improve his standing in the game.

---

Scenario 1: True RMT

Quote:

---

Player A has plenty of Dollars, and wishes to get gil just by paying cash.

Player B has a way to produce the gil, and is willing to sell it for a set price.

Player A buys up as much gil as he can afford.

Player B uses the profit to further his efforts of generating more gil and more sales.

Player A takes that gil and purchases goods and services to improve his standing in the game.

---

Both scenarios, at face value, have the potential free market appeal to them, one managed more by the present gil value of a subscription, the other by the dollar value of gil.

True RMT has an additional factor, that of encouraging gilsellers to use players and accounts by "camping" areas designed to be shared for profit. This issue, however, is largely preventable in present MMO game design, by isolating the activities between players, such as the leve system or a large selection of camps with similaly valued drops.

Apart from the above factor, very little is different between the two concepts. The above differences certainly cannot be the only reason why RMT is such a stigma, so I ask you what you think makes RMT so bad, and this so good? Please be specific.

Umm, I see one hitch which could be severely abused.... Currently, the deal with Legacy members is, we pay less and even get free character slots for our accounts. Seeing as legacy members would be paying LESS cash for the ability to sell their subscription time then little billy who pays 5 bucks more for the exact same item.
OR, a larger problem. We bled for this game and earned legacy status... and little billy can pay bobby 12 bucks to over paypal to buy sub time for him so he doesn't have to pay 15.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duuude007

Fixed.

And the reason it will not- ...nay, must not happen here.

---

You claim you fixed my post. Curious, tell me how many mmorpg titles utilize this hybrid subscription system.

Its a shame youre hung on the buried posts. It no longer holds context to this current discussion. How about you take a look at the newer stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duuude007

Its a shame youre hung on the past posts. how about you take a look at the newer stuff

---

Answer my question