[Keroko]

Originally Posted by creb

This argument is a red herring. And a classic one at that. It completely ignores that the entire reason they went F2P was because they were too crappy to keep subscriptions. When you're too crappy to make money with a subscription, it's hardly a feat to make more money via a cashshop and F2P business model, since making some money is better than making no money. Do I really have to explain why, then, comments about how they now make X times more money are so empty? So, sure, the F2P model 'saved' those games, but that in itself doesn't serve as a logical basis for the game actually being any good.

That's actually exactly what I said. It shows that the F2P model is not insta-fail, and definitely not the reason for a game to fail, which is the argument most micro-transaction opponents use. I never said the games themselves were good because of it (indeed I rather said the opposite) just that the F2P model is not the reason for the game's failure, but did aid in saving some games from complete death.

Originally Posted by creb

Not to get totally off topic, but I hate when people presume everyone hated the Mass Effect 3 ending. I loved it. Though I agree that it's stupid they're releasing DLC to change the ending, but for completely different reasons than you do, I bet. From mine, it's hard to respect a company without the artistic integrity to stand by the story they envisioned, and this among a million other things over the last few years have slowly eroded my once rock-solid faith in Bioware.

Bah, I never bought the artistic integrity argument. Every media, from paintings to books to movies to comics, has reworked their works in response to their customers. Games neither are, nor should be, any different.

I can hardly accept this is the ending they envisioned. What they envisioned, and shared with us, was an ending that was shaped by your actions across all three games. This ending was not, which makes it hard for me to accept it was what they envisioned at all.

Originally Posted by Kizoku Keenan

Likewise I was disappointed by the ending but wasn't to annoyed about as most people got. Its best to sticks by your guns especially when you are a critically acclaimed gaming studio, they are just rubbing people the wrong way further by now changing the ending and charging people for it its almost like they are saying "Screw you guys for not liking our ending here have another one for a billion bucks"

Actually, the epilogue DLC is free.

Originally Posted by creb

You're completely missing the point. What I'm saying is there's absolutely no difference between people competing against each other in pvp compared to people competing against each other in the game of who has the most outfits/pets/etc. The driving force, at the root of all of this, regardless of 'power' or 'cosmetics' is the same: to one up the Joneses, to use a cliche. More peer-reviewed studies than I could possibly reference have proven beyond a doubt that the typical person is driven by that basic motivation.

Which is why I continue to say that the entire basis for claiming there's a difference between buying power and cosmetics is based on a fallacy that pretends they aren't one and the same at a basic level.

To take a quick page from the post above mine, he's absolutely right that the basic premise of an MMO is put time into something, get something back. That doesn't just apply to your +10 Greatsword of Epeen. It applies to your Pet of Silly Squacking Noises as well. When you're able to buy a Pet of Silly Squacking Noises and bypass the time investment, there's absolutely no reason why that's somehow ok, while the same people moralize that it's not ok to sell +10 Greatswords of Epeen in the cash shop.

Players will want them, yes. But there are two very important differences. The first one is that a cosmetic hat won't affect the gameplay of the players who aren't interested in said hat. The double-damage one will. This is something that is not even remotely subjective, the respawn button will sharply remind you of how the other player has better stuff every single time.

The second is that cosmetic gear is... well... subjective as hell. While an armor that gives +300 strength and +250 stamina is clearly better than the one that gives +100 strength and +75 stamina. No ifs and buts. But is the purple hat with a feather better than the blue beret? That totally depends on the person in question.

There is far less "one upping" in cosmetic items simply because it is subjective as hell. Someone in free gear obtainable through quests might consider himself to be better looking than someone who's walking around in a fifty dollar outfit.

Are there similarities? A bit. The drive to collect is still there. Are they the same? No, not by a long shot.