I've noticed that there has been a lot of posting on the Hellgate forums about the addition of Elite and Hardcore modes splitting the player base. I'm trying to figure out how likely this is to be a problem in our community. We probably aren't going to have so many players out of the gate that we can afford to split our character base up if we want multiplayer action amongst the group of us, without resorting to just tagging along with AB or something similar.
<snip -- relevant bit being Elite is a 'mode'>
Hardcore
Hardcore mode takes away the various resurrection options. For the gamer that wants the ultimate test, try playing an Elite Hardcore character!
Note that both Elite and Hardcore are 'modes' and that it seems to be a kind of character that one can create rather than something that one can toggle on and off. (Going purely on the above description.)
Thus, I'm assuming that the way this is going to work is like open vs. ladder vs. hardcore in D2. The difference from D2 being, of course, that not everyone may be able to access 'ladder' or 'hardcore' due to their being subscription-only. Can anyone confirm whether this is correct? I get the impression some folks are worried about subscribers not being able to game with non-subscribers at all, which would be a serious concern.
In D2, most of us seem to play primarily ladder characters or hardcore characters, or some of each. I don't recall many games being open games. In HGL, things might be different if a certain percentage of the community can only access open games. If most people are willing to subscribe, is the group going to naturally evolve to primarily elite and hardcore games, once we've all gotten our feet wet in the normal 'kiddie-pool?' If most people are not willing to subscribe, will those of us who are feel a bit held back or find other subscribers to game with? Will our adoption of variants be enough to keep the group together in normal mode even as we look for additional challenge, or will people want to play elite variants and hardcore variants as well? What about access to elite-only zones and other content, how likely is this to matter with respect to splintering of our player base? Will it be as divisive as some folks missing out on certain x-packs was in GW? Maybe FSS will eventually throw us a bone and allow folks to pay a one-time fee to get Elite and Hardcore access, without having to subscribe? How likely is that?
Lots of questions. Since the answers will potentially impact our ability to game together, this might be worth thinking about and discussing earlier rather than later. I think our community can work with most people subscribing, or most people not subscribing. It might cause problems if we go half-and-half.
Personally, I am a bit torn. I don't like the heavily limited character slots in free play, but I can deal with it. I really don't like the divisive restrictions on play modes that makes it harder for communities to stay together when some subscribe and others don't. I also don't like the idea of a $10 monthly fee for a game I expect to play over the long term. I've played D2 for years and years, and subscription costs could really mount up over that period of time... but that might be setting the bar a bit high. I played GW from ~Jun 2005 to ~Jan 2007, or about 1.5 years. That'd be about the cost of a Founder's Subscription... assuming I 'need' to have a subscription in order to game with the folks I want to game with, at the challenge level we want to be gaming at. On the other hand, shelling out $200 (box+subscription) up front for an unproven game sticks a bit in the craw as well. Paying $10 for a single month's subscription every so often (or, if offered, buying bundled 'old elite' content) is an elegant solution to the content problem, but does little to address the split player-base problem.
So, I guess we as a group should consider, are most of us likely to subscribe, and want to play Elite / Hardcore games, or will we mostly be content with open play only until such time as FSS decides to open up Elite mode and Hardcore to non-subscribers, as a purchasable option or otherwise?
Quote:Elite Mode
<snip -- relevant bit being Elite is a 'mode'>
Hardcore
Hardcore mode takes away the various resurrection options. For the gamer that wants the ultimate test, try playing an Elite Hardcore character!
Note that both Elite and Hardcore are 'modes' and that it seems to be a kind of character that one can create rather than something that one can toggle on and off. (Going purely on the above description.)
Thus, I'm assuming that the way this is going to work is like open vs. ladder vs. hardcore in D2. The difference from D2 being, of course, that not everyone may be able to access 'ladder' or 'hardcore' due to their being subscription-only. Can anyone confirm whether this is correct? I get the impression some folks are worried about subscribers not being able to game with non-subscribers at all, which would be a serious concern.
In D2, most of us seem to play primarily ladder characters or hardcore characters, or some of each. I don't recall many games being open games. In HGL, things might be different if a certain percentage of the community can only access open games. If most people are willing to subscribe, is the group going to naturally evolve to primarily elite and hardcore games, once we've all gotten our feet wet in the normal 'kiddie-pool?' If most people are not willing to subscribe, will those of us who are feel a bit held back or find other subscribers to game with? Will our adoption of variants be enough to keep the group together in normal mode even as we look for additional challenge, or will people want to play elite variants and hardcore variants as well? What about access to elite-only zones and other content, how likely is this to matter with respect to splintering of our player base? Will it be as divisive as some folks missing out on certain x-packs was in GW? Maybe FSS will eventually throw us a bone and allow folks to pay a one-time fee to get Elite and Hardcore access, without having to subscribe? How likely is that?
Lots of questions. Since the answers will potentially impact our ability to game together, this might be worth thinking about and discussing earlier rather than later. I think our community can work with most people subscribing, or most people not subscribing. It might cause problems if we go half-and-half.
Personally, I am a bit torn. I don't like the heavily limited character slots in free play, but I can deal with it. I really don't like the divisive restrictions on play modes that makes it harder for communities to stay together when some subscribe and others don't. I also don't like the idea of a $10 monthly fee for a game I expect to play over the long term. I've played D2 for years and years, and subscription costs could really mount up over that period of time... but that might be setting the bar a bit high. I played GW from ~Jun 2005 to ~Jan 2007, or about 1.5 years. That'd be about the cost of a Founder's Subscription... assuming I 'need' to have a subscription in order to game with the folks I want to game with, at the challenge level we want to be gaming at. On the other hand, shelling out $200 (box+subscription) up front for an unproven game sticks a bit in the craw as well. Paying $10 for a single month's subscription every so often (or, if offered, buying bundled 'old elite' content) is an elegant solution to the content problem, but does little to address the split player-base problem.
So, I guess we as a group should consider, are most of us likely to subscribe, and want to play Elite / Hardcore games, or will we mostly be content with open play only until such time as FSS decides to open up Elite mode and Hardcore to non-subscribers, as a purchasable option or otherwise?