🛈 Announcement
Greetings! The For Honor forums are now archived and accessible in read-only mode, please go to the new platform to discuss the game
  1. #11
    MrBdur's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    1,425
    Originally Posted by allenhollow Go to original post
    "Premium pass" the game is almost dead and you want us to pay to get easy content ?!
    Not to be rude, but where did you get the idea that this game is almost dead? Lol
    Share this post

  2. #12
    Who is the character the hand is holding in the picture. He has a sword and shield, but doesn't look like Bp or Warlord.
    Share this post

  3. #13
    EvoX.'s Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,281
    ^It's a Knight minion (pawn).
    Share this post

  4. #14
    I may be looking too much into it, but some thing that really catches my eye is the style of the "c" in Reckoning. Every other letter has a normal lettertype, but the "C" is so offputting. Maybe it is something, maybe it isn't.. who knows

    Also, if you split it into "rec" and "koning" then the latter part, koning, means "king" in Dutch.
    Maybe 2 kings whom the heroes are going to be serving under?

    Hahaha, yeaaah looking waaay to heard into it, but hey some speculation is always fun
    Share this post

  5. #15
    Jeez Prior gets to be in the artwork not once, not twice, but three times? Where's my Conq representation???
    Share this post

  6. #16
    Tyrjo's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    2,100
    Locking emotes, executions and signatures behind a paywall is a good way to kill off your own game since they are a big part of what keep us playing. Unless the year battle pass is something like $9.99-14.99, I don't see this news as something that will be taken that well by the community. Many old school players will stop playing if they feel cash milked. How will you counteract that? Free to play? Cross-platform?
    Share this post

  7. #17
    Originally Posted by Tyrjo Go to original post
    Locking emotes, executions and signatures behind a paywall is a good way to kill off your own game since they are a big part of what keep us playing. Unless the year battle pass is something like $9.99-14.99, I don't see this news as something that will be taken that well by the community. Many old school players will stop playing if they feel cash milked. How will you counteract that? Free to play? Cross-platform?
    We already know cross play is coming. F2P should happen regardless imo.
    As far as the "what about old school players" mindset i'm not a fan. To me that's like people getting upset because a game and it's content goes on sale years later for a good deal less than someone bought as it came out. You paid to play with that stuff as it came out. You don't deserve anything extra for doing so. That's just entitlement.
    Share this post

  8. #18
    I guess since the major discussion here is about the pass i'll drop my 2 cents here as well:

    I'm not inherently against the idea of a pass even in games that are not F2P. They, like Micro dlc can absolutely be done in a way that isn't horrible to it's playerbase.
    The main people who push against these concepts as a whole based on things like "I already spent 60$ on the game" have personal issues and are looking for something outside to justify their some what irrational view. But i'm not going to get into that here.

    There are several things that could be done to make the idea of the pass more digestable for players. Such as having the exclusive items come back in some capacity after x time has passed into the main store. Allowing someone to spend a bit of extra steel to buy specific exclusive items as stand alone pieces during the run of that seasons pass (see a game called paladins.) You could allow people who didn't want to grind out the pass itself to buy all of the items in a bundle for a good chunk of steel towards the end of the pass and a few days after the pass (see a game called crash team racing.) etc.

    To close out this post I personally don't see the problem here with exclusive items inherently. We've had event gear, emotes, and executions already. And you could buy most of those things out right with steel. Those you couldn't (namely gear) you either got lucky or you didn't get it because of bad rng or you didn't play during that time. I don't see how offering potential exclusive items for money when you can already buy steel with money to buy event specific stuff is some how different and not okay.

    Both have the whole "FOMO" feel to them. And there are things that can be done to lessen this such as i've listed above. Ubi has specifically listened to us in the past when it came to steel/steel related things such as the price of trans mog. So I think they would absolutely be willing to make changes to whatever model they end up using as a pass as long as we're willing to have an open and respectful dialogue with them.

    I think the pass as a concept for this game is meant to give us more streamlined and cool/meaningful stuff while freeing up resources for the game to make bigger and better changes for the game. Such as refreshing game modes like breach and tribute, such as more map changes/map variants, such as better designed heros, such as better and more detailed reworks. Of course i'd love it if we could get 4+ heros a year where each hero is both fun to play and is viable in all levels of play. But as we've seen it doesn't seem like the devs are capable of sustaining big quality items like reworks and heros at the pace we were getting them.

    We deal with a LOT of dev burn out in the industry these days due to gamer demand and companies mismanagement/mistreatment of their staff. Even a studio as big as Bungie had to pull back on the amount of content they were delivering in order to better the quality of their product. I see Ubi as doing the same here simply because this and siege are their big ticket games right now and have been for awhile. We can only hope that by taking this path it does allow them to improve.

    Which is why i'm skeptical but willing with what we've been told.
    Share this post

  9. #19
    Originally Posted by Knight_Raime Go to original post
    I'm not inherently against the idea of a pass even in games that are not F2P. They, like Micro dlc can absolutely be done in a way that isn't horrible to it's playerbase.
    The main people who push against these concepts as a whole based on things like "I already spent 60$ on the game" have personal issues and are looking for something outside to justify their some what irrational view. But i'm not going to get into that here.
    You're funny Knight. Sometimes I think you're an alright dude, but then you try to instigate an argument with a troll like comment like this. Then you proceed to dismiss and back it up by saying " but I'm not going to get into that here."

    So what's the point of even saying this in the first place. Ever heard the saying "If you've got nothing nice to say then you shouldn't say anything at all"?

    I am against being nickel'd and dime'd especially with fake digital goods that could just end up going away if the game dies, but that doesn't mean I have any personal issues like you claim. I just don't like being ripped off. I think most people don't. Especially from a developer that makes a game which I've spent money on in the first place that released in a broken state and is still in many aspects broken.

    I don't like the games as a service model. The concept is good. Release your game and then support it through out it's life with new content. This however never works as intended because publishers force the developers to release their game when it's not ready and then the content updates turns into just fixing broken mechanics and bug fixes that the community helps with and we all had the privilege of paying for.

    So I'm curious, having said all that what personal issues do I have?
     2 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  10. #20
    Originally Posted by Baggin_ Go to original post
    You're funny Knight. Sometimes I think you're an alright dude, but then you try to instigate an argument with a troll like comment like this. Then you proceed to dismiss and back it up by saying " but I'm not going to get into that here."

    So what's the point of even saying this in the first place. Ever heard the saying "If you've got nothing nice to say then you shouldn't say anything at all"?

    I am against being nickel'd and dime'd especially with fake digital goods that could just end up going away if the game dies, but that doesn't mean I have any personal issues like you claim. I just don't like being ripped off. I think most people don't. Especially from a developer that makes a game which I've spent money on in the first place that released in a broken state and is still in many aspects broken.

    I don't like the games as a service model. The concept is good. Release your game and then support it through out it's life with new content. This however never works as intended because publishers force the developers to release their game when it's not ready and then the content updates turns into just fixing broken mechanics and bug fixes that the community helps with and we all had the privilege of paying for.

    So I'm curious, having said all that what personal issues do I have?
    I said it because I was giving my thoughts on the situation. Could I have not mentioned that at all? Sure, but it's not the focal point of my post. And you're choosing to only focus on this rather than the more easily discussable aspects of my post. I'm not responding to your question because that takes us away from the main topic. So unless you have anything to add about the rest of my post I won't be quoting you again here in this thread.

    Have a nice day.
    Share this post