If people do not own RS allow them to play with a slight penalty

[Zetsumei]

In order to not split the community it would be nice if when RS becomes a paid for addon that everybody would be able to play RS but with a slight handicap to stimulate people buying the thing. As if people either play the full version or play the free "demo" version.

For instance:

• Forcing people that haven't bought RS to play the game at the lowest settings.
  
• Or only allowing the people that haven't bought RS to pick the basic classes (rifle/smg).
  
• Inability to rank up & customize your RS character till you bought the game.
  
• Some spam and advertising on screen at the start of the game till you buy RS.
  
• Inability to play the single player portion of the game.

There are probably some other methods as well. But this would allow everybody access to the multi player maps. And make it possible for a single server to host both RS and HOS maps.

Aka the user base won't be splitted in ability to play the game, just limited in some functionality till they own RS.

Imagine it as if the people that do not own RS play it in a "demo" mode.

 

[Bobdog]

That might work, but I always hate feeling like the developers of the game are nickel and dime-ing me (like the Tales of Valor upsell in CoH, or the NPCs who ask for your help for a DLC quest in Dragon Age). It'd be nice to not fragment the community, but if RS is going to be retail, it should be presented as such, instead of being free and "upgradable."

 

[Zetsumei]

It depends on how you look at it. If you see it as free and upgradable then it might not feel like a retail product.

If you see it as a full retail product where you can play the demo of then you can see it as a full retail product.

The ArmA series used something like this for an add on, while its perhaps not nice to play a gimped version. It's worse to not be able to play together with your friends because you haven't paid for it.

 

[coolmu9]

I want it to be free or at least 10 to 20$

 

[Nezzer]

I'd feel like I'm being forced to buy the DLC and it just feels bad.
+25 Renegade for this evil suggestion, Zets

 

[Bobdog]

A demo is ok, but most of the stuff you suggested isn't really a demo.

For instance:

• Forcing people that haven't bought RS to play the game at the lowest settings.
  This would make RS crippleware, which is annoying.
  
• Or only allowing the people that haven't bought RS to pick the basic classes (rifle/smg).
  Crippleware.
  
• Inability to rank up & customize your RS character till you bought the game.
  With this you are nickel and dime-ing the user.
  
• Some spam and advertising on screen at the start of the game till you buy RS.
  This makes RS look like an upgradeable free to play game to the user, rather than a retail product.
  
• Inability to play the single player portion of the game.
  Since it will probably be centered on multiplayer, as HoS will be, this isn't much of a restriction.

 

[Zetsumei]

Well do you call ArmA 2: British Armed Forces cripple ware? Demo's are a limited version of a game, and it could be either limited by a time limit or length of the game or additional things.

Sure its not ideal, but being able to play with your friends is always better than being seperated from your buddies and getting a community split. Where as Territory and say Countdown cater to people that like a different style of play and therefore could be separated, RS and HOS will most likely attract the same people.

Separating a group that got the same likes and dislikes is just something I would prefer to see avoided. Especially as most old custom mappers are filling positions of the mods, maps and custom content for the base game must be provided from mostly new community contributors. At least in the beginning probably limiting the inflow of good custom content.

 

[Nezzer]

I just hope RS is not a paid DLC.

 

[coolmu9]

I just hope RS is not a paid DLC.

Me to

 

[-[SiN]-bswearer]

or......just make it cheap enough that people won't have to think twice about buying it.

$10, maybe $15 if it turns out really good

 

[sampsa]

Reading this thread confuses me. I took it granted that RS was official expansion (like Road to Rome, Secret Weapons of WWII). And expansions tend to be cheaper than the original game (since they're not stand-alone). I haven't noticed any problems with previous expansions. The community didn't divide too much.

 

[Nezzer]

The community didn't divide too much.

But RO community must not be divided at all.

 

[Redit]

It isn't an expansion tho. It's a mod. They just said that if it comes out really high quality then they will consider charging you for it, they don't know how good it will be yet, they've only just given the team the UDK.

 

[-[SiN]-bswearer]

if it ends up being good enough to charge money, then it's no longer a mod, it's an official expansion. seeing the work of many of these guys with RO and the RO mods over the past four years, i fully believe they'll produce something worthy enough to warrant charging money.

 

[WiFiDi]

doh your not suppose to be wanting to buy somthing you (%*^$&*... also seriously if its gonna be an expansion i wouldn't mind seeing 30 bucks that what they always were however i think it be better if it was free. like it was suppose to be a mod.

 

[PsYcH0_Ch!cKeN]

It isn't an expansion tho. It's a mod.

But what is an expansion exactly? It's a merely a mod with official backing. Take a look at any expansion pack ever made - they're merely an addon pack that adds additional content, a few new features and is generally made by people who aren't the original developers. The only difference between us and an actual game company is that they get paid no matter what. We on the other hand, only get paid if we make something really good. If that's not incentive enough, I don't know what is!

You are correct however, when you say that TW don't know how good it will be. Neither do we, yet. Give us a few months and we'll see. But you're wrong if you think that we've only just begun work. We have a lot more done than you might think!

 

[Zetsumei]

I think RS will be of enough quality to become DLC, which is why I have some thread about trying to make the split of the community the least as possible.

 

[sampsa]

Have you discussed with TW how they define good mod?

 

[Cpt-Praxius]

It depends on how you look at it. If you see it as free and upgradable then it might not feel like a retail product.

If you see it as a full retail product where you can play the demo of then you can see it as a full retail product.

The ArmA series used something like this for an add on, while its perhaps not nice to play a gimped version. It's worse to not be able to play together with your friends because you haven't paid for it.

Well who's fault is that?

The guy who didn't pay for it, that who's.

I remember when UT2004 first came out. I first downloaded and played the free demo, which only provided one ONS map, Torlan..... if you wanted to play anything else or use any of the additional vehicles, weapons, content..... you bought the game.

Just as it should be.

The guy whining that he can't play with his friends because he didn't dish out $20-30 for the full version game isn't much of a concern for me.

To be honest, your original proposal does seem to make sense to a degree and I could see it making sense for certain aspects/games...... but your above justifications kind of ruined it for me

 

[Flogger23m]

Forcing players to play at low settings is a bit silly.

The rest seems ok.

Though I would prefer if it was 100% free.

Free content and free mods is part of what made RO last so long.

But you're wrong if you think that we've only just begun work. We have a lot more done than you might think!

I believe some pictures and videos are required.