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

[Duuude007]

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

[Abriael]

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.

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.

[Chardrizard]

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.

[fusional]

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

[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.

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

[Abriael]

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.

[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.

[Abriael]

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.

[Abriael]

I edited my correction before you replied.

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