P2W whine thread.

you are comparing apples to oranges.

you dont buy coh1 expecting to get coh2 for free.

cars are not used to race each other everyday. on the highway to place on a ladder.

Fair point, I'll amend my metaphor: It's like buying a car and then going back to the dealer 3 months later and expect to get a free trailer hook.
Unless, you were promised something, I don't see how you can reasonably expect to receive it and simply assuming what was agreed upon based on what you want is not reasonable.

Fair point, I'll amend my metaphor: It's like buying a car and then going back to the dealer 3 months later and expect to get a free trailer hook.
Unless, you were promised something, I don't see how you can reasonably expect to receive it and simply assuming what was agreed upon based on what you want is not reasonable.

Its like buying the delux model of a car (that is second hand whilst the dealer is pretending it is new) while paying for it as new, and then 3 months down the line you realise that you have a tape player and not a cd / mp3 player installed, and your "leather" seats are actualy pleather

Fair point, I'll amend my metaphor: It's like buying a car and then going back to the dealer 3 months later and expect to get a free trailer hook.
Unless, you were promised something, I don't see how you can reasonably expect to receive it and simply assuming what was agreed upon based on what you want is not reasonable.

its like buying a GT car, as a performance fanatic, just to find out that the extra content was just a toilet paper holder, a baby carriage and extra cup holders, but wait there is more, if you had bought the normal car and bought the extra pieces (turbo, brakes suspension) by separate you get a better car than the GT car, harder better faster stronger. who told you GT means Grand Tourer? they just told you a gt carrr it did not say it would comply with the definition of grand tourer. because GT means Extra cup holders! and a nice smell! and a faceplate!!

its like buying a GT car, as a performance fanatic, just to find out that the extra content was just a toilet paper holder, a baby carriage and extra cup holders, but wait there is more, if you had bought the normal car and bought the extra pieces (turbo, brakes suspension) by separate you get a better car than the GT car, harder better faster stronger. who told you GT means Grand Tourer? they just told you a gt carrr it did not say it would comply with the definition of grand tourer. because GT means Extra cup holders! and a nice smell! and a faceplate!!

Best Analogy ever!

And what compels you to buy all this?

True you don't have to buy it all, but that doesn't justify the outrageous price tag. Even if the new commanders were perfectly balanced its still an advantage to have a more versatile selection. The CoH2+DLC total 3 months after release is about $180 (not including faceplates). The BF3+Expansion total over the full 2 year span was only $120. This isn't just slightly overpriced, its borderline highway robbery. Don't pretend like that is acceptable, there is nothing wrong with holding them to some reasonable standards.

Note: I'm going to try my best to give my analysis about the situation. Fell free to flame me.

I understand Relic's POV, players should pay more money for new "contents", and I am sorta ok with it for this following reason. I saw this coming a long time ago when EA started pulling this crap and no one complained until it was too late, therefore, it is partially gamer's fault.

Battlefield 4 franchise for example has the balls to tell you straight up, BEFORE THE GAME IS RELEASED, that there's going to be $50 DLC package associate with the original game. And that is ok, for BF4 to do so. Why? Because it is a FPS game and for the following reasons:
(1) BF4 DLCs involves new maps which indirectly divides player into different groups. One of the group will be people who does not pay for DLC denote group A. If other people who bought the DLCs and are just happening to be playing with group A on a server with original maps only, then no one has ANY competitive advantage.
(2) BF4 DLCs involves new guns which are side grades anyway. so it doesn't really make much a difference in game play.
(3) BF4 has a large enough player base to be divided that way

Now, COH2 is a unique game even when compared with other RTS game such as Starcraft. Why? because owning portions of the map gives player DIRECT advantage on economy, where as starcraft owning larger portion of the map gives you more vision only, and OPPORTUNITY to have a better economy if players choose to invest in it. What does this all mean? It means COH2 is a more COMPLEX game to balance in a sense because what happens in a game later is directly tied to what early game, in contrast starcraft allows strategies such as 1 base play in the beginning and have equal footing with enemy during late game if played correctly. This IMPLIES that COH2 CANNOT afford to introduce new contents that shift early territory control pattern so rapidly and expect game to be still in balance. It is not going to happen. Any changes like above would throw the entire game out of whack. Especially when new elements are only accessible to an exclusive group.

This being said, there will be a F2P RTS game out by EA called Command and Conquer (Generals). Now we don't know how the business model is going to shape out and how the commanders will be balanced. But one thing is different for sure. Even if they introduce some commanders that is more "OP" than others it would still not be as a big deal as coh2:
(1) In game currency. Those commanders can be bought with C&C in game currency so it doesn't really provide a hard-locked exclusivity to competitive advantages
(2) Different game play (Territory control). Like starcraft, C&C is based on COLLECTING resources and BUILDING economy by DIRECTLY INVESTING in them. So minor "OP"-ness in certain commanders would not have as big of an impact on game play, in contrast of coh2.

So what's the main points of all these:
(1) COH2 is a unique game that cannot introduce new content rapidly like BF franchise does.
(2) COH2 cannot introduce any noticeable competitive advantages and is only exclusive to certain groups of people. because there is no in game currency and this is RTS game so all players should be on somewhat of an equal footing.
(3) Even slightest changes made in COH2 would hugely affect game outcome so serious thoughts need to be put in before all deployments and changes.

This is wrote in a short period of time so please excuse the grammar errors and presentation methods.

Best Analogy ever!

You're all wrong with this car analogy. Coh2 is like going into a blind date all hyped up because a friend said the girl was just like some super model (coh1) and then realizing it's not actually a super model, in actuality it's a bunch of guys who are bad at coh developing a game/scheme to make money from a CHEAP (emphasis added because it's more than just cheap, it's awful) knockoff of coh.

Note: I'm going to try my best to give my analysis about the situation. Fell free to flame me.

I understand Relic's POV, players should pay more money for new "contents", and I am sorta ok with it for this following reason. I saw this coming a long time ago when EA started pulling this crap and no one complained until it was too late, therefore, it is partially gamer's fault.

Battlefield 4 franchise for example has the balls to tell you straight up, BEFORE THE GAME IS RELEASED, that there's going to be $50 DLC package associate with the original game. And that is ok, for BF4 to do so. Why? Because it is a FPS game and for the following reasons:
(1) BF4 DLCs involves new maps which indirectly divides player into different groups. One of the group will be people who does not pay for DLC denote group A. If other people who bought the DLCs and are just happening to be playing with group A on a server with original maps only, then no one has ANY competitive advantage.
(2) BF4 DLCs involves new guns which are side grades anyway. so it doesn't really make much a difference in game play.
(3) BF4 has a large enough player base to be divided that way

Now, COH2 is a unique game even when compared with other RTS game such as Starcraft. Why? because owning portions of the map gives player DIRECT advantage on economy, where as starcraft owning larger portion of the map gives you more vision only, and OPPORTUNITY to have a better economy if players choose to invest in it. What does this all mean? It means COH2 is a more COMPLEX game to balance in a sense because what happens in a game later is directly tied to what early game, in contrast starcraft allows strategies such as 1 base play in the beginning and have equal footing with enemy during late game if played correctly. This IMPLIES that COH2 CANNOT afford to introduce new contents that shift early territory control pattern so rapidly and expect game to be still in balance. It is not going to happen. Any changes like above would throw the entire game out of whack. Especially when new elements are only accessible to an exclusive group.

This being said, there will be a F2P RTS game out by EA called Command and Conquer (Generals). Now we don't know how the business model is going to shape out and how the commanders will be balanced. But one thing is different for sure. Even if they introduce some commanders that is more "OP" than others it would still not be as a big deal as coh2:
(1) In game currency. Those commanders can be bought with C&C in game currency so it doesn't really provide a hard-locked exclusivity to competitive advantages
(2) Different game play (Territory control). Like starcraft, C&C is based on COLLECTING resources and BUILDING economy by DIRECTLY INVESTING in them. So minor "OP"-ness in certain commanders would not have as big of an impact on game play, in contrast of coh2.

So what's the main points of all these:
(1) COH2 is a unique game that cannot introduce new content rapidly like BF franchise does.
(2) COH2 cannot introduce any noticeable competitive advantages and is only exclusive to certain groups of people. because there is no in game currency and this is RTS game so all players should be on somewhat of an equal footing.
(3) Even slightest changes made in COH2 would hugely affect game outcome so serious thoughts need to be put in before all deployments and changes.

This is wrote in a short period of time so please excuse the grammar errors and presentation methods.

+1

@McFly i was just going to comment how you can´t compare a DLC model of an FPS with a RTS.

+1 to you sir.

The damage has already been dealt. Now how we fix this or continue here?

-Will releasing FREE commanders implementing this new abilities solve "somehow" the issue?

Basically, the same situation we had before this 4 new commanders.

For me, its not the fact that new content are released, but that its done, and prioritised, at a point where the game seems nowehere near finished. Its bad enough that they made a commander system thats inferior to vCOH in order to milk the fans, but the fact that they push out this content already, rather than finnishing the product they sold at full price, is really shocking.

Now I realise that this probably isnt a desition made by the Relic staff themselves, but something pushed on to them from SEGA, but lately ive been feeling like they are taking PR advices from Microsoft. They just keep going from sinkhole to sinkhole without fixing the last one.

It's not pay for win but pay for diversity. It's a fair price for new units so stop crying.

Using commanders to add new units and features are pretty innovative and much more flexible than just buying a big expansion like SC:Heart of the swarm. HOTS only had a couple of new units for each race. If you only play multiplayer with one race its alot of money for just a few new units. Compare this to COH2 and the new units are pretty cheap and relic are not forcing anyone to pay for Case blue + ALL new multiplayer units like HOTS. Without these new commanders we would have to wait over a year for new units with one big expansion. With new commanders we might see some new units and/or features every 6 months or so.
It's pay for diversity since players can only use 3 commanders in a game. Yes, if we could use all commanders simultaneously that would be unfair.

I think purchasable content after release is fine. It keeps the game alive and gets money to the developers. Look at BF3 premium, it kept the game alive till today. However Relic is just bombarding us with new content, not having fixed the already existing content. In addition i feel that if you offer someting like a collectors edition for 30 bucks! it should grant you acces to all the content. It should be something like Battlefields premium. Relics strategy does not feel very clever imo, upsetting many community members.
3 suggestions:
1. define coh2 as a single player OR multiplayer game and concentrate developing time on one of them
2. rethink commander layouts. Maybe they should consider 3-5 customizable commanders with different abilities instead of 20 commanders with shared abalities.
3. quality over quantidy content and less rip-off just get everybody to pruchase collectors edition and give them all the content 30 euro is a lot. fix existing stuff and then slowly add new stuff

Note: I'm going to try my best to give my analysis about the situation.

...

+1

Someone sticky this post.

It's not pay for win but pay for diversity. It's a fair price for new units so stop crying.

Using commanders to add new units and features are pretty innovative and much more flexible than just buying a big expansion like SC:Heart of the swarm. HOTS only had a couple of new units for each race. If you only play multiplayer with one race its alot of money for just a few new units. Compare this to COH2 and the new units are pretty cheap and relic are not forcing anyone to pay for Case blue + ALL new multiplayer units like HOTS. Without these new commanders we would have to wait over a year for new units with one big expansion. With new commanders we might see some new units and/or features every 6 months or so.
It's pay for diversity since players can only use 3 commanders in a game. Yes, if we could use all commanders simultaneously that would be unfair.

Do people fundamentally object to having a few paid commanders with new ideas and abilities... mostly not actually that much (noone gave a toss with TOV, for instance). Do people object to the pricing, handling, timing, balancing, lack of a bundled purchase, treatment of the Command Edition people? I think that's really more the problem.

Pingtoft is totally my hero.

First of all, he replies within a day on the slowest forum on GR to sort out my company of heroes tech problems whenever I had them back in the day.

Then he posts as a bastion of reason and enlightenment in the most bias thread filled with rage monsters I have ever seen.

I think a lot of these posters need to spend less times on the forums, getting hyped up getting convinced by others that this or that is "OP" or "P2W", and more time in the game developing counters and good strategy.

I can't believe you people. You're seriously complaining about having to pay $12 for FOUR BRAND NEW commanders and units? They've been out for a few days and people are screaming 'P2W!!!!'. If it was seriously that bad, you would cough up $12 which is less than lunch where I live and get these 'super uber OP commanders who win every game'. But you won't because you know that aren't that 'OP' and all you're doing is complaining like a bunch of children who think you're entitled to everything for free.

How do you propose Relic and SEGA continue making their money from CoH2? You think they make games for the fun of it? Why would they continue to patch the game, keep it balanced, fix bugs, continue making new maps, new commanders and new units, if they aren't making any money from the game? That means they are literally working for FREE. You can't expect a company to continuing give you updates and new features for free. You paid for a game with a campaign and multiplayer functionality and everything else the game promised when you purchased it - you get that. You did not pay for these new commanders. You did not even pay for the new maps (which they gave for free).

I am actually more than happy to pay for these new commanders because I want relic to continue to release new commanders, new units, new maps and keep the game patched. If you continue to complain about this bullshit you will literally break down this game to the point that it becomes dead and deserted. Game developers simply cannnot continue to support a game and continue to enhance it if they are making a loss on it (people do not work for free, as I am sure the developers at Relic do not).

Game developers have previously made their money through expansions and it is a TERRIBLE idea. What ends up happening is - New expansion comes out - new factions, new maps, new campaign etc. Game balance complete fucked. Oh well, lets wait it out for a new expansion. And the cycle continues.

Do you want this to happen to CoH2? I sure as hell don't. So either scrape together the $12 you have in the ashtray in your car or shut the hell up.

No one owes you anything. Relic have already given us heaps of free shit and it's the first thing they release that requires the smallest bit of money and you can't handle it. Grow up.

I can't believe you people. You're seriously complaining about having to pay $12 for FOUR BRAND NEW commanders and units? They've been out for a few days and people are screaming 'P2W!!!!'. If it was seriously that bad, you would cough up $12 which is less than lunch where I live and get these 'super uber OP commanders who win every game'. But you won't because you know that aren't that 'OP' and all you're doing is complaining like a bunch of children who think you're entitled to everything for free.

HAHAHAHA, "THINK YOU'RE ENTITLED TO EVERYTHING FOR FREE" HAHAHA

No seriously, go fuck yourself. If this were a F2P game, then that's fine, but if I hear one more thing about "entitled to everything for free" about a game that charged $60 (even $80 at the time of THQ) for it, and then uses this model for commanders and keeping the pricing so high, well then, no, I'm not going to support this model.

I can't believe you people. You're seriously complaining about having to pay $12 for FOUR BRAND NEW commanders and units? They've been out for a few days and people are screaming 'P2W!!!!

OMG 4 NEW COMMANDERS!!!11!!!!1

You do realize that $12 is 20% the cost of the entire game? 20% of the total cost of a game with around 12 hours a campaign, a similar numbers of hours worth of ToW, however many maps we have now, and 2 factions. The amount of effort that went in to making 4 more commanders is <1% the amount of effort that went in to scripting the missions, making the maps, designing/balancing factions, programming the engine, designing the unit models, designing the UI, designing the menu, etc. Think before you speak young grasshopper.

I think we are entitled to not get ripped off. im not young and im not old. maybe nowadays with all the garbage products out there people who have been dedicated fans of a game just want a good product and fair priced dlc. ffs the input lag, actual lag in 3v3, 4v4 havent been fixed. there are no custom lobbies. there is no global chat. like fuck guys maybe we just arent going to hand out cash blindly to huge corporations that make millions. why is america so fucked with no work? the big corporations fucked everyone. so now people everywhere are starting to question the value of what they buy. times are tough for alot of people not just game developers.

like fuck guys maybe we just arent going to hand out cash blindly to huge corporations that make millions.

They seem to have "raised" the youngins well... they will gladly pay for everything without considering it's value.