Support us on Patreon
PayPal
Well this is pretty interesting news for players of Albion Online. The closed beta which you can buy into has been extended, and it won't be free to play after release now.
Speaking in a forum post the founder basically said they will extend the closed beta to 1st August 2016, and the game will be pay to play after release instead of free to play.
The founder also said it won't have a monthly fee, it will be a buy once to play deal (you know, like normal games). This is great to see as I dislike free to play models, but I do wonder how they will stay alive if people don't have to keep paying, these sorts of games are expensive to run.
They have a lot planned for the game, and I think extending the closed beta period was highly needed considering the amount of work they want to do that will change the general feel of the gameplay.
They are still planning to wipe the game at the end of the closed beta, and probably at least once during it, so don't go buying into it if you want to keep your progression. I think it's already a pretty decent game, especially since it's in my eyes our only good only RPG type of game.
I do love it, but my issue is how much they are trying to implement, and it doesn't seem like a lot of time to do it. They just don't seem to have a really clear plan, as it keeps changing, and it's slightly worrying. Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
0 Likes
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
Well, considering the current situation of GW2 (thank you for the explanations), I won't keep my faith in a linux port :-( (but, after knowing that the expansion meant no more dungeons, not sure if I'll miss it at all...)
Let's see if Albion becomes a decent MMORPG, and how they make money, but, the game has something (mostly the art) I still don't like.
Let's see if Albion becomes a decent MMORPG, and how they make money, but, the game has something (mostly the art) I still don't like.
0 Likes
This is good news. In my unprofessional opinion, the game needs some significant changes and improvements if it's going to be the kind of game the designers are hoping for.
As far as I can tell, they want something that is at least in part a fantasy counterpart of EVE Online. I can see many design decisions in the game that are inspired by EVE Online (and playing Albion briefly helped me appreciate just how well EVE Online has been made in the years since its release). But by allowing f2p, they introduce a difficulty when it comes to advancement. An EVE style game gives a benefit to having more than one character. But if it's f2p, then what stops you from creating multiple characters? In EVE, it's the subscription cost. In a f2p, there's no such restriction. So what is Albion's solution? Grind to advance -- you must invest *your* time.
And the problem with grinding to advance, besides the fact that it's incredibly tedious and boring, is that it damages the in-game economy, because people are doing a whole bunch of activities they would not otherwise be doing if they didn't need it for advancement. Want to make and sell swords for a living? Too bad, every other crafter in the game is already doing that to level their crafting skill, and the market is flooded, so they're selling at a loss. The crafting process itself has value, so that the end product is worth less than the materials that went into it.
This is just one example. The moment there's some kind of grind involved to advance, this leaves the potential that there's someone out there doing something that reduces the economic value for the people who want to do it as their role in the world. Trying to farm mobs for gold? Someone else is already there killing them to level his sword.
My understanding is that they want to make changes to solve all these kinds of problems, and solutions to these problems are needed if they want to have a vibrant player-driven economy, and a game that's not going to be a tedious grind fest.
There's other poor choices they've made, like fast travel. This is another choice that damages the player driven economy. The article mentions removing fast travel to lower security areas, and introducing naked travel (just like jump clones in EVE). These changes are designed to increase trade opportunities. Good, necessary changes to make this the game they want.
The longer beta period is needed.
As far as I can tell, they want something that is at least in part a fantasy counterpart of EVE Online. I can see many design decisions in the game that are inspired by EVE Online (and playing Albion briefly helped me appreciate just how well EVE Online has been made in the years since its release). But by allowing f2p, they introduce a difficulty when it comes to advancement. An EVE style game gives a benefit to having more than one character. But if it's f2p, then what stops you from creating multiple characters? In EVE, it's the subscription cost. In a f2p, there's no such restriction. So what is Albion's solution? Grind to advance -- you must invest *your* time.
And the problem with grinding to advance, besides the fact that it's incredibly tedious and boring, is that it damages the in-game economy, because people are doing a whole bunch of activities they would not otherwise be doing if they didn't need it for advancement. Want to make and sell swords for a living? Too bad, every other crafter in the game is already doing that to level their crafting skill, and the market is flooded, so they're selling at a loss. The crafting process itself has value, so that the end product is worth less than the materials that went into it.
This is just one example. The moment there's some kind of grind involved to advance, this leaves the potential that there's someone out there doing something that reduces the economic value for the people who want to do it as their role in the world. Trying to farm mobs for gold? Someone else is already there killing them to level his sword.
My understanding is that they want to make changes to solve all these kinds of problems, and solutions to these problems are needed if they want to have a vibrant player-driven economy, and a game that's not going to be a tedious grind fest.
There's other poor choices they've made, like fast travel. This is another choice that damages the player driven economy. The article mentions removing fast travel to lower security areas, and introducing naked travel (just like jump clones in EVE). These changes are designed to increase trade opportunities. Good, necessary changes to make this the game they want.
The longer beta period is needed.
0 Likes
See more from me