Hellgate : London

[Thecla]

I wonder if there is going to be a PlayerX feature.

I haven't seen any plans for that, but it seems like they could easily put it in if they want to.

I read monster diff also adjust to your clvl. That's a good thing in general, but would make some testing harder.

I think that was considered at one time, but afaik the plan now if for difficulty to depend only on number of players and not clvl at all.

Future cash cow - Selling character slots, or more accounts for slots, or more slots as incentive to buy expansions. Cost for storage is about as much as the shrink wrap your game comes in.

This could be part of it, but I think there must be more to it than that. Maybe they're worried about game efficiency, or holding on to too many unsed, non-deleted characters, or something---I have no idea, but even only 12 slots for subscribers seems small so something seems to worry them.

There's got to be a timer when all items become lootable by all (like in GW). I guess theres no drop when in town either.

No idea how HG:L (or Mythos eventually) will work, but in the Mythos beta as far as I could see there was no timer at all---an item dropped for a character was only accessible to that character for ever unless it was traded.

[Zed-F]

This could be part of it, but I think there must be more to it than that. Maybe they're worried about game efficiency, or holding on to too many unsed, non-deleted characters, or something---I have no idea, but even only 12 slots for subscribers seems small so something seems to worry them.

Personally, I think they just saw how well it worked as a cash cow for GW and decided to go with the same model.

[Roland]

It also ignores the cost of paying for expansion packs to HGL. Paying $10 a month for a game I've already bought is bad enough, I won't pay $10 a month for a game I am not even playing at the moment.

Hate to burst your negative bubble, here, but you might want to look a little deeper before casting judgement. On no MMO that I have ever seen are you forced to pay for time you aren't using. I have repeatedly started and stopped playing numerous MMOs over the years, and not once did I lose anything in my downtime. Every single thing I had when I quit was waiting for me a month, a year, two years later. Things don't just magically disappear simply because you stop paying.

That's the whole beauty of a subscription model: you have the option of paying for when you want to play, and getting more content from it, or not paying when you don't want to pay, and not losing out on anything. Buy the game, play it for the free month, and then stop playing until the next big content update, if it suits your fancy. You'll be getting your money's worth out of the game and then some, with no added expense. In fact, you'll come out ahead of non-subscription games by doing it that way.

I can understand people's hesitancy towards subscription models. That's fine. Ignorance about how the model works, however, is not excusable, especially in our "Information Age". By all means, if you don't want to participate in a subscription model, don't, but don't try to swing others to your side by propogating misinformation.

I'm sorry for the tangent, it's just something that has always bothered me.

[Zed-F]

You generally have to pay for that month in advance. If, 2 days into the month, something comes up, and your ability to play or interest in playing the game goes away, that typically means you're out the $10 for that month, no? I would rather not have to guess in advance when I will and will not be interested in playing a game. And suppose I feel like playing a given game 5 days out of a given month, and not the other 25? The subscription-based model typically does not offer payment options on a per-hour-logged-in basis, AFAIK.

And suppose I want to play the game without the content update, on the basis of the fact that I haven't finished with the previously released content yet? Under the subscription model, I'm generally not allowed that option. If I've paid for a certain amount of content, I should be able to continue to use that content without having to pay a monthly fee to do so. If I want to pay for a content update, I would much rather do it on my own schedule rather than on an ongoing basis... and that's assuming expansion packs are free to subscribers, which as far as I know is not common practice.

Since my budget for games generally runs to about $200 per year, my options are to buy 3 non-subscription games, or one subscription game and the subscription for that game. Guess which model gives me more bang for my dollar, all else being equal.

In fact, you'll come out ahead of non-subscription games by doing it that way.

This does not seem credible to me, on the surface of it. Please amplify what you mean. If subscription-based games had a cheaper sticker price than standalone games, and if I were so ADHD as to want to buy a new game every month, I could perhaps see where you're coming from, but considering the total cost of ownership versus hours played and time owned, I have yet to see a subscription-based game that could compare with a non-subscription game.

[Thecla]

And suppose I want to play the game without the content update, on the basis of the fact that I haven't finished with the previously released content yet? Under the subscription model, I'm generally not allowed that option.

Well, I think one big advantage of the HG:L model is that you can continue to play the game under the non-subscription option (without the most recent content updates), and you can quit and return without charge to at least some of the characters you played before. If you want more support (more characters, more items, more content...) then you can decide to pay, but if not you don't have to.

I quit WoW, and then resubscribed, and then quit again. I won't ever resubscribe, so WoW is a closed book as far as I'm concerned. That's a real contrast with DII (or DI, or GWs) where you could pick the game up again at any time you wanted. Even if, in DII, your previous characters weren't waiting for you again, in contrast to what HG:L at least promises.

[KingOfPain]

Flagship is considering packaging up the regular content updates and selling them as expansion packs every 6-9 months. Elite players would not need to pay for these, since they'd already have the content.

If it isn't for the limited number of character slots, this (non elite) isn't a bad way to go at all - just like the GW model.

KoP

[Zed-F]

That was more-or-less what I was thinking, if the game proves to be worthwhile. We shall see.

One thing that does occur to me is that the lack of character retraining does not mesh well with the limited number of character slots. If there are multiple possible builds for the same character class, every player will eventually be unable to try new builds without deleting existing characters that have potentially had a lot of time invested in them. I expect there will be a lot of clamouring for either retraining ala GW or else unlimited characters.

[LKendter]

I noticed there now is new forum for the game. It there a reason this is still being talked about in the general forum?

[KingOfPain]

Don't mind us, it's just a little cross forum promotion to gather interest. I am sure we will get to the other sub-forums once we approved the game

KoP

[KingOfPain]

Well, the comparisons are being made because the people working on it are the same people who were working on an "unannounced" project at Blizzard north before their mass departure.

Plus they are trying to milk Diablo for all it's promotional worth. FFS mentions the name whereever convenient. By what's available on the net and game play videos, it seems it employs much of Diablo/II mechanics.

I'm tentatively optimistic, but a little concerned since I've never played a FPS (or had any desire to) in my life.

AFAIK, FPS mode is only available on one faction(2 classes), and only an option you are not forced to use.

We are in the beta. The official release is Halloween. Runs on my 6 years old machine with 512 ram

See you in game?


KoP