Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Free 2 Play

13567

Comments

  • DogblasterDogblaster PraguePosts: 491Member

    Yes and there are thousands of players who quit wow for that reason. Because these company care more about running viable business and pleasing everyone. So they dump down all the the content, make it as much casual friendly as possible. etc

     

    I think i speak for more players than myself when i say I dont want FF XIV: ARR to be anything like wow or rift.

  • BenediktBenedikt PraguePosts: 1,406Member Uncommon

    i have to say that i am already really sick of the "we want to play mmorpg for free" crowd.

    if the game isnt worth to you 15$ a month then there is something really wrong with you if you are playing it/want to play it, because there are THOUSANDS of activities out there that are worh 15+$ a month.

  • cybertruckercybertrucker Pensacola, FLPosts: 1,119Member
    Originally posted by Treabhair
    Originally posted by Dogblaster
    Originally posted by Treabhair

    I do appreciate the humorous attitude you take, even if you don't really agree with me at all.

    Anyways, to answer your question,

    En Masse, Cryptic, PWE, Midway, and Arena Net are all real world companies making real money. So how would it work in the real world? Well I guess it would work buy making a product free to play and charging for extras, except with the trend in most f2p, the people playing for free would be the ones being catered too. At least my idea gives priority to the subscribers.

     

    I guess we'll have to wait and see what sort of success or failure FFXIV:ARR is before any consideration to change is given a thought. Though if they don't do as well as they planned and are forced to try a different revenue model or scrap the title altogether, what concern is it of mine if they go the way of the casual f2p?

    I am pretty sure this game will be sucessfull, It doesnt matter if they reach 500k or 5M sub. All what matters is what goals company and director/producer Naoki Yoshida are aiming to.

     

    I hope this game with this big potential, really dedicated developer team working on it with hearths and souls (they are Japanese afterall) will never turn just into ''cash cow'' where pleasing ''everyone'', in other words no one matters.

     

    What concern is it of mine that you dont have money to play the game or time? I DONT CARE :) more loot for me

    All that matters is that they make money. Square Enix is in financial trouble and they can't afford to cater to a game and it's players if it's bleeding money instead of making it.

    I don't doubt that the game will find success in Japan with this model, but if it doesn't find the same success here, SE could very well go the way of SEGA, and simply pull the plug on international support rather than lose more money trying to cater to outside players. That or casual f2p mode it.

     

    Also, it may be a surprise to you, but not everyone who plays f2p games are poor and don't have money or time. As I said before, I simply don't like playing with the thought that I'm spending money to waste my time lingering in the back of my mind. Also, if FFXI and some of the posters here are anything to go by, p2p attracts elitists / I'm better than other people mentalities.

    When you are watching cable TVor sat.. Do you sit there and think you wasting your money paying for entertainment? How. About when going to the movies? Or maybe a concert? Or play?

    Elitist? If not liking people who  like to mooch off others makes me an elitist then sign me up. I know in real life I work my butt off  own my own business and still struggle from time to time with bills and things that come up. It sickens me to see people standing in line for handouts while doing nothing but complaining about the limitations the free stuff comes with, and why they are entitled to more.

    this real life entitlement mentality has spilled over into the MMORPG comminity like a flood. With people coming up with every reason or excuse they can think of on why or how they should be able play for free. Then they come crying and complaining about the limitations they have imposed on them compared to the paying elitists. So ya if being a fan of extreme limitations on a LIMITED trial and keeping the game P2P  means I'm an elitist well then I'm Elitist and proud of it.

  • DihoruDihoru ConstantaPosts: 2,731Member
    Originally posted by cybertrucker
    Originally posted by Treabhair
    Originally posted by Dogblaster
    Originally posted by Treabhair

    I do appreciate the humorous attitude you take, even if you don't really agree with me at all.

    Anyways, to answer your question,

    En Masse, Cryptic, PWE, Midway, and Arena Net are all real world companies making real money. So how would it work in the real world? Well I guess it would work buy making a product free to play and charging for extras, except with the trend in most f2p, the people playing for free would be the ones being catered too. At least my idea gives priority to the subscribers.

     

    I guess we'll have to wait and see what sort of success or failure FFXIV:ARR is before any consideration to change is given a thought. Though if they don't do as well as they planned and are forced to try a different revenue model or scrap the title altogether, what concern is it of mine if they go the way of the casual f2p?

    I am pretty sure this game will be sucessfull, It doesnt matter if they reach 500k or 5M sub. All what matters is what goals company and director/producer Naoki Yoshida are aiming to.

     

    I hope this game with this big potential, really dedicated developer team working on it with hearths and souls (they are Japanese afterall) will never turn just into ''cash cow'' where pleasing ''everyone'', in other words no one matters.

     

    What concern is it of mine that you dont have money to play the game or time? I DONT CARE :) more loot for me

    All that matters is that they make money. Square Enix is in financial trouble and they can't afford to cater to a game and it's players if it's bleeding money instead of making it.

    I don't doubt that the game will find success in Japan with this model, but if it doesn't find the same success here, SE could very well go the way of SEGA, and simply pull the plug on international support rather than lose more money trying to cater to outside players. That or casual f2p mode it.

     

    Also, it may be a surprise to you, but not everyone who plays f2p games are poor and don't have money or time. As I said before, I simply don't like playing with the thought that I'm spending money to waste my time lingering in the back of my mind. Also, if FFXI and some of the posters here are anything to go by, p2p attracts elitists / I'm better than other people mentalities.

    When you are watching cable TVor sat.. Do you sit there and think you wasting your money paying for entertainment? How. About when going to the movies? Or maybe a concert? Or play?

    Elitist? If not liking people who  like to mooch off others makes me an elitist then sign me up. I know in real life I work my butt off  own my own business and still struggle from time to time with bills and things that come up. It sickens me to see people standing in line for handouts while doing nothing but complaining about the limitations the free stuff comes with, and why they are entitled to more.

    this real life entitlement mentality has spilled over into the MMORPG comminity like a flood. With people coming up with every reason or excuse they can think of on why or how they should be able play for free. Then they come crying and complaining about the limitations they have imposed on them compared to the paying elitists. So ya if being a fan of extreme limitations on a LIMITED trial and keeping the game P2P  means I'm an elitist well then I'm Elitist and proud of it.

    Neah, that'd just insult elitsts because those guys at least have some education behind their opinions.

    A good F2P system beats the traditional (non-cash shop ) P2P system hands down, people can plug their ears with their fingers and start chanting their entitled mantras all they want ( I PAY 15$ !! I HAVE A RIGHT TO AN OPINION! YOU DO NOT YOU MOOCHING BEGGING PIECE OF.... you get the idea) at the end of the day a game worth its salt can have F2P, limitations on F2Ps and a way for F2Ps to get full status through work and trading with those who want services in-game in exchange ( want to build a castle but lack the funds to do so? sell a few game time cards to people for in-game gold legally and everyone wins, need help building that castle? get players you know won't shaft you to work for you on the castle in exchange for you paying their game time for lets say the duration of the castle's construction, maybe actual real world weeks and if they do a good job you give em a little tip,etc,etc, all of this perfectly possible in non-theme park games , hell even in Sandparks or user content creation enabled Themeparks).

     

    ARR sounds like a good game but if this thread evidences one thing is that it will tank due to its poor community, shame really I kinda like Square Enix when they're not making quicktime event movie games.

    image
  • DoogiehowserDoogiehowser ParisPosts: 1,873Member
    Originally posted by Dogblaster

    Yes and there are thousands of players who quit wow for that reason. Because these company care more about running viable business and pleasing everyone. So they dump down all the the content, make it as much casual friendly as possible. etc

     

    I think i speak for more players than myself when i say I dont want FF XIV: ARR to be anything like wow or rift.

    And yet WOW has millions of players playing a lot more than that left.  So there a big hole in your theory. FFXIV has already been dumbed down and is redesigned to be more in line with traditional MMOS. The only reason original version tanked was because it was not like WOW, RIFT and other MMOS.

    In the end it is business. If they have large enough playerbase to supprt them they won't go F2P.

    "The problem is that the hardcore folks always want the same thing: 'We want exactly what you gave us before, but it has to be completely different.'
    -Jesse Schell

    "Online gamers are the most ludicrously entitled beings since Caligula made his horse a senator, and at least the horse never said anything stupid."
    -Luke McKinney

    image

  • MakidianMakidian Liverpool, NYPosts: 207Member Uncommon
    Not to be mean but if you can't spend 15 bucks a month then your doing something wrong irl
  • Cod_EyeCod_Eye jarrowPosts: 1,016Member
    Originally posted by Makidian
    Not to be mean but if you can't spend 15 bucks a month then your doing something wrong irl

    Rather silly statement to make.

  • BenediktBenedikt PraguePosts: 1,406Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Cod_Eye
    Originally posted by Makidian
    Not to be mean but if you can't spend 15 bucks a month then your doing something wrong irl

    Rather silly statement to make.

    ok, how about changing that statement a bit:

    if you can't spend 15 bucks a month and you still want to play mmorpgs, then your doing something wrong irl

  • Cod_EyeCod_Eye jarrowPosts: 1,016Member
    Originally posted by Dihoru
    Originally posted by cybertrucker
    Originally posted by Treabhair
    Originally posted by Dogblaster
    Originally posted by Treabhair

     

     

     

     

    ARR sounds like a good game but if this thread evidences one thing is that it will tank due to its poor community, shame really I kinda like Square Enix when they're not making quicktime event movie games.

    This thread does not represent the community of ARR, ARR has no community yet as it has not been released.  This thread is represented by the MMORPG.com community, fortunately we are all not representetive of most of those that replied in this thread.

  • DogblasterDogblaster PraguePosts: 491Member

    And yet WOW has millions of players playing a lot more than that left.  So there a big hole in your theory. FFXIV has already been dumbed down and is redesigned to be more in line with traditional MMOS. The only reason original version tanked was because it was not like WOW, RIFT and other MMOS.

    In the end it is business. If they have large enough playerbase to supprt them they won't go F2P.

    And yet you fail to understand this...

    It doesnt matter if wow have 1000 bilion subs.. Those who left are now looking for something else than wow is, thats why the left. Soo .. let players who love wow keep playing wow or wow copies mkay??

     

    Btw ARR didnt copy wow, rift, gw. It just took some of its good features, applyed it to the arr world..

    but as you said .. lets just hope ARR will be sucess and thats all what matters right? :)

  • PWN_FACEPWN_FACE SeoulPosts: 670Member
    Short and simple for me. I play both sub-based and f2p games. The f2p games I like, I wind up subbing to and buying stuff in the cs. I'm going to quit that habit and stay with my sub only games because the f2p games wind up costing me a lot more.
  • cybertruckercybertrucker Pensacola, FLPosts: 1,119Member
    Originally posted by PWN_FACE
    Short and simple for me. I play both sub-based and f2p games. The f2p games I like, I wind up subbing to and buying stuff in the cs. I'm going to quit that habit and stay with my sub only games because the f2p games wind up costing me a lot more.

    See the problem with the F2P community do not lie with the people with this mentality but rather the majority of them. That look to mooch and freeload, then cry and complain about the limitations that are set forth  for people who don't subscribe. And how they should have the same access to the game with their free account. Usually they will turn their arguments to well  I would spend money on costumes or mounts in a cash shop, that don't actually effect gameplay.

    Let's be real. If people are willing to spend real money on virtual vanity items. Why in hell do they have a problem with spending real money on having total access to the game? 

  • Cod_EyeCod_Eye jarrowPosts: 1,016Member
    Originally posted by cybertrucker
    Originally posted by PWN_FACE
    Short and simple for me. I play both sub-based and f2p games. The f2p games I like, I wind up subbing to and buying stuff in the cs. I'm going to quit that habit and stay with my sub only games because the f2p games wind up costing me a lot more.

    See the problem with the F2P community do not lie with the people with this mentality but rather the majority of them. That look to mooch and freeload, then cry and complain about the limitations that are set forth  for people who don't subscribe. And how they should have the same access to the game with their free account. Usually they will turn their arguments to well  I would spend money on costumes or mounts in a cash shop, that don't actually effect gameplay.

    Let's be real. If people are willing to spend real money on virtual vanity items. Why in hell do they have a problem with spending real money on having total access to the game? 

    That has always boggled me and is a very valid argument.

  • KanethKaneth Posts: 1,930Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Cod_Eye
    Originally posted by cybertrucker
    Originally posted by PWN_FACE
    Short and simple for me. I play both sub-based and f2p games. The f2p games I like, I wind up subbing to and buying stuff in the cs. I'm going to quit that habit and stay with my sub only games because the f2p games wind up costing me a lot more.

    See the problem with the F2P community do not lie with the people with this mentality but rather the majority of them. That look to mooch and freeload, then cry and complain about the limitations that are set forth  for people who don't subscribe. And how they should have the same access to the game with their free account. Usually they will turn their arguments to well  I would spend money on costumes or mounts in a cash shop, that don't actually effect gameplay.

    Let's be real. If people are willing to spend real money on virtual vanity items. Why in hell do they have a problem with spending real money on having total access to the game? 

    That has always boggled me and is a very valid argument.

    Freedom of choice is the answer. When a game is B2P or F2P, you can choose to then spend additional funds on vanity items (to support the game/developers). You can also choose to not play the game and not feel like you're wasting money due to not logging in. Taking a break from the game, for whatever reason, also boils down to a simple choice of not logging in. You also have the option of not spending another dime on the game after initial purchase for B2P, or at all in F2P. You have more personal control over how your money is allocated towards support for the game.

    If you want a more real world example. The difference between playing a sub and B2P/F2P can be fairly dramatic in the minds of people. Let's say you're an accountant and are in your busy season. You may only be able to log into the game of your choice a few hours a month. Even though you can easily afford the $15 for access, it feels like wasted money since you're not able to play as much. So, you cancel your sub for the month or two that you're extremely busy. During that period you can't play at all. However, in the same situation for a non-sub game, well it doesn't matter. You can log in whenever you can and not feel like you're money is wasted.

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Posts: 5,486Member Uncommon
    I cant bring myself to pay money for a game that failed 3 years ago. Trials never let you play long enough to know if the game is good. So unless they change how they will make money on this game, I will pass.


    =-D Only on a forum can optimism be called bad and pessimism the good thing =-D Welcome to the internet and forums. 


  • dave6660dave6660 New York, NYPosts: 2,543Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Dihoru
    Originally posted by Dogblaster
    Originally posted by Treabhair

    No, it's inherently a good thing a game could do.  It's just not been done successfuly.

    I think theres a much better chance of success if rather than trying to please everyone with one option, multiple options are made available for everyone.

    Every smart and experienced company owner / manager / marketer know that segmentations and they SHOULDNT EVER try to satisfy every customer.

     

    If you try to cater to every possible segment on the market, you are doomed to fail. Thats how it is and wont ever change.

     

    Just think for a moment and you can clearly see that EVERY product is always aimed for certain people/segment.

    Everyone eats at kfc at one point in their lives, even vegans... your arguments are as shoddy as your grammar and your passion for keeping out "undesirables" is almost... well to be honest bordering on damn nazism and while I can't stand most of the people you likely can't either what I can't stand the most is entitled people telling everyone else how it is... when it isn't even close to the truth. If ARR was worth its salt it would have revamped itself in such a way that it could allow F2P and allow you to "welcome" the people you like so much with all the jackbooty love your heart desires.

    The Godwin monster has been summoned.  Prepare for battle.

    Also, do you have any proof that *everyone* has eaten at KFC?

    “There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own.”
    -- Herman Melville

  • DoogiehowserDoogiehowser ParisPosts: 1,873Member
    Originally posted by Dogblaster

    And yet WOW has millions of players playing a lot more than that left.  So there a big hole in your theory. FFXIV has already been dumbed down and is redesigned to be more in line with traditional MMOS. The only reason original version tanked was because it was not like WOW, RIFT and other MMOS.

    In the end it is business. If they have large enough playerbase to supprt them they won't go F2P.

    And yet you fail to understand this...

    It doesnt matter if wow have 1000 bilion subs.. Those who left are now looking for something else than wow is, thats why the left. Soo .. let players who love wow keep playing wow or wow copies mkay??

     

    Btw ARR didnt copy wow, rift, gw. It just took some of its good features, applyed it to the arr world..

    but as you said .. lets just hope ARR will be sucess and thats all what matters right? :)

    DUh!!! I never said it copied WOW or RIFT. I said it has been redesigned to be more in line with traditional MMO playstyle. Where do you think WOW and Rift got its features from?

    And you are the one who brought how many players left or stayed in WOW. I mentioned these two MMOS as an example that if players support the game, P2P model is still viable but as it stands right now there are only handful of MMOS which can survive on this model..

    Now whether REBORN will be able to stay afloat as P2P or will fail and take route of other F2P model. That is something only time will tell because i don't have crystal ball to tell the future.

    But just to indulge your abusrd views that people who left WOW are looking for something like reborn, i heard similar nonsense back when FFXIV released. Sadly there were not enough of WOW exile to support the game back then . If what you are saying is true i wonder why firts version tanked so bad.

    "The problem is that the hardcore folks always want the same thing: 'We want exactly what you gave us before, but it has to be completely different.'
    -Jesse Schell

    "Online gamers are the most ludicrously entitled beings since Caligula made his horse a senator, and at least the horse never said anything stupid."
    -Luke McKinney

    image

  • DihoruDihoru ConstantaPosts: 2,731Member
    Originally posted by dave6660
    Originally posted by Dihoru
    Originally posted by Dogblaster
    Originally posted by Treabhair

    No, it's inherently a good thing a game could do.  It's just not been done successfuly.

    I think theres a much better chance of success if rather than trying to please everyone with one option, multiple options are made available for everyone.

    Every smart and experienced company owner / manager / marketer know that segmentations and they SHOULDNT EVER try to satisfy every customer.

     

    If you try to cater to every possible segment on the market, you are doomed to fail. Thats how it is and wont ever change.

     

    Just think for a moment and you can clearly see that EVERY product is always aimed for certain people/segment.

    Everyone eats at kfc at one point in their lives, even vegans... your arguments are as shoddy as your grammar and your passion for keeping out "undesirables" is almost... well to be honest bordering on damn nazism and while I can't stand most of the people you likely can't either what I can't stand the most is entitled people telling everyone else how it is... when it isn't even close to the truth. If ARR was worth its salt it would have revamped itself in such a way that it could allow F2P and allow you to "welcome" the people you like so much with all the jackbooty love your heart desires.

    The Godwin monster has been summoned.  Prepare for battle.

    Also, do you have any proof that *everyone* has eaten at KFC?

    Do you or Dogblaster have any proof "If you try to cater to every possible segment on the market, you are doomed to fail. Thats how it is and wont ever change." ? Until such a time as proof positive of that statement has been given (not proof as in a few cases, undeniable proof of factual validity in a majority of cases) the burden of proof isn't on me ^^ I merely stated something view as truth in my own opinion though I will rephrase to better state that truth: Everyone with financial means and access to a KFC has at one point eaten something purchased from there (be it a full meal or just some fries or used some sauce from there).

    image
  • birdycephonbirdycephon Salt Lake City, UTPosts: 1,314Member
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle

    I cant bring myself to pay money for a game that failed 3 years ago. Trials never let you play long enough to know if the game is good. So unless they change how they will make money on this game, I will pass.

    Understandable, however it can hardly be even considered the same game. It doesnt even use the same engine. 

  • dave6660dave6660 New York, NYPosts: 2,543Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Dihoru
    Originally posted by dave6660
    Originally posted by Dihoru
    Originally posted by Dogblaster
    Originally posted by Treabhair

    No, it's inherently a good thing a game could do.  It's just not been done successfuly.

    I think theres a much better chance of success if rather than trying to please everyone with one option, multiple options are made available for everyone.

    Every smart and experienced company owner / manager / marketer know that segmentations and they SHOULDNT EVER try to satisfy every customer.

     

    If you try to cater to every possible segment on the market, you are doomed to fail. Thats how it is and wont ever change.

     

    Just think for a moment and you can clearly see that EVERY product is always aimed for certain people/segment.

    Everyone eats at kfc at one point in their lives, even vegans... your arguments are as shoddy as your grammar and your passion for keeping out "undesirables" is almost... well to be honest bordering on damn nazism and while I can't stand most of the people you likely can't either what I can't stand the most is entitled people telling everyone else how it is... when it isn't even close to the truth. If ARR was worth its salt it would have revamped itself in such a way that it could allow F2P and allow you to "welcome" the people you like so much with all the jackbooty love your heart desires.

    The Godwin monster has been summoned.  Prepare for battle.

    Also, do you have any proof that *everyone* has eaten at KFC?

    Do you or Dogblaster have any proof "If you try to cater to every possible segment on the market, you are doomed to fail. Thats how it is and wont ever change." ? Until such a time as proof positive of that statement has been given (not proof as in a few cases, undeniable proof of factual validity in a majority of cases) the burden of proof isn't on me ^^ I merely stated something view as truth in my own opinion though I will rephrase to better state that truth: Everyone with financial means and access to a KFC has at one point eaten something purchased from there (be it a full meal or just some fries or used some sauce from there).

    I don't care about what you and that other poster were talking about.  The KFC line just caught my eye as I was skimming.  I'll leave "truth" to the philosophers, I'm just interested in fact.

    “There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own.”
    -- Herman Melville

  • DihoruDihoru ConstantaPosts: 2,731Member
    Originally posted by dave6660
    Originally posted by Dihoru
    Originally posted by dave6660
    Originally posted by Dihoru
    Originally posted by Dogblaster
    Originally posted by Treabhair

    No, it's inherently a good thing a game could do.  It's just not been done successfuly.

    I think theres a much better chance of success if rather than trying to please everyone with one option, multiple options are made available for everyone.

    Every smart and experienced company owner / manager / marketer know that segmentations and they SHOULDNT EVER try to satisfy every customer.

     

    If you try to cater to every possible segment on the market, you are doomed to fail. Thats how it is and wont ever change.

     

    Just think for a moment and you can clearly see that EVERY product is always aimed for certain people/segment.

    Everyone eats at kfc at one point in their lives, even vegans... your arguments are as shoddy as your grammar and your passion for keeping out "undesirables" is almost... well to be honest bordering on damn nazism and while I can't stand most of the people you likely can't either what I can't stand the most is entitled people telling everyone else how it is... when it isn't even close to the truth. If ARR was worth its salt it would have revamped itself in such a way that it could allow F2P and allow you to "welcome" the people you like so much with all the jackbooty love your heart desires.

    The Godwin monster has been summoned.  Prepare for battle.

    Also, do you have any proof that *everyone* has eaten at KFC?

    Do you or Dogblaster have any proof "If you try to cater to every possible segment on the market, you are doomed to fail. Thats how it is and wont ever change." ? Until such a time as proof positive of that statement has been given (not proof as in a few cases, undeniable proof of factual validity in a majority of cases) the burden of proof isn't on me ^^ I merely stated something view as truth in my own opinion though I will rephrase to better state that truth: Everyone with financial means and access to a KFC has at one point eaten something purchased from there (be it a full meal or just some fries or used some sauce from there).

    I don't care about what you and that other poster were talking about.  The KFC line just caught my eye as I was skimming.  I'll leave "truth" to the philosophers, I'm just interested in fact.

    Well speaking from experience no one I've met (which spreads across two countries and several large cities) has not eaten at least one item of food or garnish from KFC (it always seems to come up in conversation when talking about tastes, fast food in general I mean and then it goes towards which specific ones prefered, etc).

    image
  • DogblasterDogblaster PraguePosts: 491Member
    Originally posted by dave6660

    I don't care about what you and that other poster were talking about.  The KFC line just caught my eye as I was skimming.  I'll leave "truth" to the philosophers, I'm just interested in fact.

    KFC makes you NOT want to go poop after eating it :) Fact numero uno

    ARR is going to be awesome (for me personally) Fact numero duo

    End of discussion ^^

  • MishakaiMishakai westminster, COPosts: 105Member

    I'll never understand people who advocate for a game being free on the basis of their inability to afford $15/month.

    If you can't afford $15/month for an online game, I highly suggest you attack the problem from the standpoint that you can't afford $15, not the standpoint that what you want actually costs money.

    I'm all sorts of happy that the basement gaming generation of yesteryears is beginning to move on in life and appreciate the value of a hard earned dollar.  But lets get something clear.  Your lack of purchasing power is not justification for a company to change their pricing model.

  • birdycephonbirdycephon Salt Lake City, UTPosts: 1,314Member
    Originally posted by Mishakai

    I'll never understand people who advocate for a game being free on the basis of their inability to afford $15/month.If you can't afford $15/month for an online game, I highly suggest you attack the problem from the standpoint that you can't afford $15, not the standpoint that what you want actually costs money.I'm all sorts of happy that the basement gaming generation of yesteryears is beginning to move on in life and appreciate the value of a hard earned dollar.  But lets get something clear.  Your lack of purchasing power is not justification for a company to change their pricing model.

    Forsooth 

  • UO4everUO4ever LeicesterPosts: 38Member

     

     

    Oh to not have to worry about spending *more* money to progress..

     

    With the current dearth of good games , apart from those I've already played to death    .. Bring It On!

Sign In or Register to comment.