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!

[Column] Marvel Heroes: F2P Isn't a Charity

BillMurphyBillMurphy Managing EditorBerea, OHPosts: 2,367MMORPG.COM Staff Uncommon

For some, it seems the notion of developers wanting to make any money on Free-to-Play games is a ludicrous idea. In this week's column, we discuss the fact that F2P games, while free, aren't a actually a charity.

The point in all this is that it takes money to actually create and support these games, especially for a smaller studio like Gazillion. None of this sort of complaining is unique to Marvel Heroes, of course, but it just continues to grind my gears that there are some players that don’t seem to understand that while these games are free – they are still a product and a business. Yes, they want to make money off of you. This isn’t a secret, nor is it insidious.

Read more of Michael Bitton's F2P Isn't a Charity.

image

«134567

Comments

  • gaeanprayergaeanprayer Somewhere Out There, PAPosts: 2,320Member Uncommon

    Missing the point, Michael. $30 on two games that you get the entirety of, or $12 for just one character that's one part of the game. That's the complaint. By the time you spend the money to get the hero you like and the massive amounts of storage you need, you're set back quite a bit of money. If the hero you like is $20, let alone if you'd like more than one hero (because MMOs where you play as only one character forever are rare), you're set back even more. Before long you've spent 2-3 times as much as you'd have spent just dropping $60 on a normal game and getting less for your buck as well.

     

    That is the complaint. Not what it is up front, but what it becomes overall. Not what it is now, but what is bodes for the future. These are things people are concerned about, even if they aren't articulating it quite properly.

    I personally am enjoying the game but I won't be spending money beyond what I have already (on a starter pack to get Jean, one of my favorites) because of those prices. Were they more reasonable, I'd have dropped $100 or more getting my favs and some costumes, but because of what they're asking, I don't feel like I'm getting a good value for my money. That's my personal opinion, and as its my money I am very much entitled to deciding where it goes, if nothing else.

    "Forums aren't for intelligent discussion; they're for blow-hards with unwavering opinions."

  • Dreamo84Dreamo84 Niagara Falls, NYPosts: 3,437Member Uncommon

    Can't agree with this article more. With no up front cost this game is a huge value. And one thing people have to remember, is being a free game the majority of players won't ever spend a dime. Unfortunately, that does mean the minority has to pay for the majority.

    We do get sexy costumes and heroes for trouble though.

    image
  • NephaeriusNephaerius Baltimore, MDPosts: 1,539Member Uncommon

    Since 2009 I have easily spent over $200 on LoL.  Not of my own money, but mostly gift cards I got for holidays.  I only buy champs on sale and had bought the bundles from back in the day (81 champs currently).  I don't regret it in the least, however, that's a lot of damn money on one game either way.

    If you want everything in LoL, in my experience you wind up having to pony up cash at some point.  I've been playing again daily since November (2 hrs a day maybe on avg) and all my IP winds up going to runes.  I am just about to finish getting the last few that are useful.  The amount of runes you need if you play more than one role is outrageous.

    Bringing it back to Marvel Heroes - sure it's just $12 that's not so much money, but as another poster suggested you're basically only purchasing a piece of the game rather than an entire game at that price.  For that matter, if you think about it you're really only purchasing a game piece (like a Knight from chess or a 40k miniature) and the total cost that all comes out to when it's said and done is frequently more than just buying a game flatout and calling it a day.

    *Please note I'm not knocking the model at all.  I regret none of the money I've spent on LoL.  I'm just pointing out in the long run it might wind up costing a lot more than simply buying a game.

    Steam: Neph

  • PurutzilPurutzil East Stroudsburg, PAPosts: 2,924Member Uncommon

    The issue is more so what is offered as far as an advantage and the amount MORE you spend then say a traditional MMO.

    Unfortunately, in a lot of cases the gameplay experience itself SUFFERS for the sake of trying to nickle and dime the user, dragging down the 'fun' by making things vastly more grindy. 

    Personally, I feel if you are going to 'force' players to buy stuff (which honestly I don't mind if its done in a reasonable manor) it should be for the sake of either giving access permanently or through subscription. It tends to be the most 'fair' and isn't about raking in far more cash from the user. Otherwise, keep it to cosmetics, ideally with prices that aren't ridiculous for the sake of getting more buyers and possibly ones willing to switch up styles. 

    I have no problem fronting some cash towards a game I enjoy so long as I'm not being 'forced' to get anywhere. I honestly never minded DDO (and how you could even earn 'cash' for the game) and its style and I'm sure theres plenty of ways to improve on it, focusing more on cosmetics and giving a fuller experience without having to limit as much stuff.

     
    Don't get the wrong impression F2P isn't netting companies a lot money, more then even sub has. Theres a reason why DDO after going F2P practically 'boomed' making so much more cash, something many other games following in its tracks have had the same result with. While proportionately 'less' of the population is 'paying' for it, theres far more people as well so you can have a lot more contributing, often spending far more then what P2P had earned the game.
  • TorvalTorval Oregon CountryPosts: 7,214Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Fendel84M

    Can't agree with this article more. With no up front cost this game is a huge value. And one thing people have to remember, is being a free game the majority of players won't ever spend a dime. Unfortunately, that does mean the minority has to pay for the majority.

    We do get sexy costumes and heroes for trouble though.

    As payment models evolve I think developers/pubs will start to figure out how to market to the majority.  Right now I think they often overprice to get a feel for what they can get away with.  Over time I think that marketing things cheaper to more players will become more attractive to them.  They can still offer some high priced stuff to those with lots of cash, but they will offer more reasonably priced items to the majority.

    If the game is fairly open then I don't mind paying $12 for a character (slot/class/etc).  I don't have to pay that all the time.  If I want to buy another later on down the road I will.

  • AbimorAbimor phoenix, AZPosts: 329Member Uncommon
    So it is $12 to buy a new character or dose the price depend on the hero/
  • TorvalTorval Oregon CountryPosts: 7,214Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Nephaerius

    Since 2009 I have easily spent over $200 on LoL.  Not of my own money, but mostly gift cards I got for holidays.  I only buy champs on sale and had bought the bundles from back in the day (81 champs currently).  I don't regret it in the least, however, that's a lot of damn money on one game either way.

    If you want everything in LoL, in my experience you wind up having to pony up cash at some point.  I've been playing again daily since November (2 hrs a day maybe on avg) and all my IP winds up going to runes.  I am just about to finish getting the last few that are useful.  The amount of runes you need if you play more than one role is outrageous.

    Bringing it back to Marvel Heroes - sure it's just $12 that's not so much money, but as another poster suggested you're basically only purchasing a piece of the game rather than an entire game at that price.  For that matter, if you think about it you're really only purchasing a game piece (like a Knight from chess or a 40k miniature) and the total cost that all comes out to when it's said and done is frequently more than just buying a game flatout and calling it a day.

    *Please note I'm not knocking the model at all.  I regret none of the money I've spent on LoL.  I'm just pointing out in the long run it might wind up costing a lot more than simply buying a game.

    Just to put it in perspective if LoL had a subscription fee and you played since 2009 you would have paid approximately $800 plus any other cash shop items, xpacs/box fees, and the like all of which most every P2P game has in one form or another.  Paying $200 over approximately 4.5 years (since 2009) really isn't that much for one game.  The great thing about the LoL model is that you get to keep whatever you paid for without having to pay more to access that.

  • NephaeriusNephaerius Baltimore, MDPosts: 1,539Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Torvaldr
    Originally posted by Nephaerius

    Since 2009 I have easily spent over $200 on LoL.  Not of my own money, but mostly gift cards I got for holidays.  I only buy champs on sale and had bought the bundles from back in the day (81 champs currently).  I don't regret it in the least, however, that's a lot of damn money on one game either way.

    If you want everything in LoL, in my experience you wind up having to pony up cash at some point.  I've been playing again daily since November (2 hrs a day maybe on avg) and all my IP winds up going to runes.  I am just about to finish getting the last few that are useful.  The amount of runes you need if you play more than one role is outrageous.

    Bringing it back to Marvel Heroes - sure it's just $12 that's not so much money, but as another poster suggested you're basically only purchasing a piece of the game rather than an entire game at that price.  For that matter, if you think about it you're really only purchasing a game piece (like a Knight from chess or a 40k miniature) and the total cost that all comes out to when it's said and done is frequently more than just buying a game flatout and calling it a day.

    *Please note I'm not knocking the model at all.  I regret none of the money I've spent on LoL.  I'm just pointing out in the long run it might wind up costing a lot more than simply buying a game.

    Just to put it in perspective if LoL had a subscription fee and you played since 2009 you would have paid approximately $800 plus any other cash shop items, xpacs/box fees, and the like all of which most every P2P game has in one form or another.  Paying $200 over approximately 4.5 years (since 2009) really isn't that much for one game.  The great thing about the LoL model is that you get to keep whatever you paid for without having to pay more to access that.

     

     I completely agree with you, which is why I'm satisfied with how my money was spent there, and if LoL in fact had a sub I would not be playing.  However, I don't think Bill's comparison of purchasing 2 single player titles on Steam for $30 on a bored day is exactly a fair comparison to a microtransaction purchase. 

    The purchaser gets the whole games for $30 and on the other hand only a piece of the game from a microtransaction.  Those 2 different experiences are going to leave a different taste in people's mouths and I can respect how some might take issue with paying $200 or more for a game over time rather than simply an upfront box purchase.  Even if I might not entirely agree with that sentiment.

    Steam: Neph

  • KohleKohle NorCal, CAPosts: 7Member

    Heroes can range anywhere from $6 to $20. You can't try out any of them in any way before you buy them and they've already changed up quite a few of them so a lot of people bought one liking them, then they got changed and hated it. Some even had full abilities removed.

    It's one thing to buy a game which includes a chunk of stuff, it's another to buy everything a la carte and then have them screwed with to the point where you don't want to play them anymore and feel like you threw away your cash.

    Inventory is pretty poor with crafting items not stacking and the cost to buy tabs is too high. Costumes are priced more than heroes in some cases. It's just so obvious that they're charging way too much.

    I've spent a lot of money on f2p games like LoL, TOR, lotro, PoE and others.... this game won't get a dime from me at this point. Maybe later when they realize it's better to get 100 sales at $5 vs 25 sales at $10, for example.

    [edit] What's the deal with this site not separating paragraphs as I wrote them with a space between them? Someone needs to fix that...

     
  • JerYnkFanJerYnkFan Kenilworth, NJPosts: 339Member Uncommon
    Good article.  I wonder if the "freeloaders" (for lack of a better term)  while being the minority are just  the most vocal.  I have no problem dropping some money on game or just subbing if I am enjoying myself enough.  To me the best part of F2P is that I can jump into a game and see if it grabs my interest before dropping 15 bucks a month or whatever on it.  I recently did this with TOR.  Some people lose sight of that there are employees to play, infrastructure to pay for, etc.
     
  • DamonVileDamonVile Vancouver, BCPosts: 4,818Member

    I wont agree with people who are outraged that the game costs anything but I do agree that they are over charging for many of the heroes.

    I bought the $60 founder pack and got my 4 heroes + the 2 free ones from valentines day. I also have a bunch of G's to spend.....but that doesn't mean I'm ok with a hero that costs $20.

    My impression of the game was you were going to end up with lots of heroes all built to do the tasks they were best at. Not play your one hero to make them uber lvl with raid gear. So when you look at the costs of just one hero it's the value I have an issue with.

    I'd happily drop more money into the game $5-6 at a time buying a new hero here and there. I'm not going to dump $20 down each time I want one though.

    So no it's not a charity but it's not offering a very good value right now either.

  • AstropuyoAstropuyo Stock, CAPosts: 1,797Member

    This has turned into more or less a f2p debate.

     

    The poster who stated about Insidious tactics is 100% correct.

     

    The thing is they know the game is not good, it's very much a quick capital push because marvel is so very popular with the masses these days.

     

    So they know technically if they charged up front they would have to deal with this little darling.

     

    Consumer backlash. Because Heroes as a whole game doesn't seem to be panning out too well. It looks garbage for the IP, it's game play is just plain pathetic (Ultimate Alliance seems to do so much better .. guys that's sad) and at the end of the day whether or not MMORPG wants to admit it or not this site has become something of a joke when it comes to articles and things like this kinda make me go "Bill really?".

     

    No one is asking for charity we just want a game that does an ip right and is playable without being sneakily drained (Because you will need to buy something sometime.) Give it to us straight and we won't mind too much.As of this time I can say this.

     

    Whatever, this game is  not making waves for anything except exploiting our childhood and then  cramming 12 dollar figurines down our throats, you know rather than just make it buy to play and do it right.

     

    Edited: Added a word that I missed. Because you know...how you people are.

  • TorvalTorval Oregon CountryPosts: 7,214Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Nephaerius
    Originally posted by Torvaldr
    Originally posted by Nephaerius

    Since 2009 I have easily spent over $200 on LoL.  Not of my own money, but mostly gift cards I got for holidays.  I only buy champs on sale and had bought the bundles from back in the day (81 champs currently).  I don't regret it in the least, however, that's a lot of damn money on one game either way.

    If you want everything in LoL, in my experience you wind up having to pony up cash at some point.  I've been playing again daily since November (2 hrs a day maybe on avg) and all my IP winds up going to runes.  I am just about to finish getting the last few that are useful.  The amount of runes you need if you play more than one role is outrageous.

    Bringing it back to Marvel Heroes - sure it's just $12 that's not so much money, but as another poster suggested you're basically only purchasing a piece of the game rather than an entire game at that price.  For that matter, if you think about it you're really only purchasing a game piece (like a Knight from chess or a 40k miniature) and the total cost that all comes out to when it's said and done is frequently more than just buying a game flatout and calling it a day.

    *Please note I'm not knocking the model at all.  I regret none of the money I've spent on LoL.  I'm just pointing out in the long run it might wind up costing a lot more than simply buying a game.

    Just to put it in perspective if LoL had a subscription fee and you played since 2009 you would have paid approximately $800 plus any other cash shop items, xpacs/box fees, and the like all of which most every P2P game has in one form or another.  Paying $200 over approximately 4.5 years (since 2009) really isn't that much for one game.  The great thing about the LoL model is that you get to keep whatever you paid for without having to pay more to access that.

     

     I completely agree with you, which is why I'm satisfied with how my money was spent there, and if LoL in fact had a sub I would not be playing.  However, I don't think Bill's comparison of purchasing 2 single player titles on Steam for $30 on a bored day is exactly a fair comparison to a microtransaction purchase. 

    The purchaser gets the whole games for $30 and on the other hand only a piece of the game from a microtransaction.  Those 2 different experiences are going to leave a different taste in people's mouths and I can respect how some might take issue with paying $200 or more for a game over time rather than simply an upfront box purchase.  Even if I might not entirely agree with that sentiment.

    Yeah, buying two $30 games isn't the same for me.  I don't use Steam, but I do buy them on GoG.com and I get the whole package DRM free for that.  Like you say, it's not the same though, at least for me.  When I buy a single player game, most often it's just a snapshot of a game.  They may add some DLC, but it's still different from an mmo or moba which sort of evolves over time.

    I'm hoping that as competition heats up and the payment models evolve we'll see more reasonable pricing.

  • Attend4455Attend4455 BirminghamPosts: 161Member

    >Free-to-Play isn’t a charity

    well don't call it free-to-play if you want it to be pay-to-play

    >appears to be a subset of MMO gamers who look at Free-to-Play games with a sense of entitlement

    maybe they are gamers that think free-to-play means free-to-play

    >You aren’t blocked from anything and there aren’t cheeky little restrictions on game features or game design that make you reliant on the cash shop.

    maybe you should look at the majority of games that do these things instead of the one that doesn't

    > The point in all this is that it takes money to actually create and support these games,
    especially for a smaller studio like Gazillion

    it's a valid point, stop calling them free-to-play perhaps?

    > I personally know people who will drop $30 in a single day on two Steam games out of sheer boredom

    more free-to-play games :)

    Personally, I don't have any problem with this game or any other F2P game, what I object to is
    calling games free to play when they are not. I play EVE and have played other games that are
    either P2P or B2P and I know exactly what I'm getting for my money.

    I sometimes make spelling and grammar errors but I don't pretend it's because I'm using a phone

  • kevjardskevjards carlislePosts: 1,463Member
    would have thought the point was that these games like marvel are not free therefore its a case of false advertising.free means it costs nothing..in all so called f2p it ends up costing you something therefore it aint free.
  • zymurgeistzymurgeist Pittsville, VAPosts: 5,212Member Uncommon
    It's not a charity but what it's supposed to be is a café plan. Why pay for the salad bar if you only want dessert? The problem is the most popular items will always cost much more under that sort of plan than the one size fits all plan. You get the $1.50 salad for free but you're going to pay $20.00 for the $5.00 dessert. Because like it or not you are subsidizing the freeloaders. Selling XP boosts for a game are a sure sign that playing your game sucks at lower and mid levels. Otherwise why would anyone pay extra to short circuit that content? Build good games and you can skip the shenanigans.

    "Strong and bitter words indicate a weak cause" ~Victor Hugo

  • YamotaYamota LondonPosts: 6,620Member

    You are "bewildered" that something called Free To Play is actually considered by people, less informed, not to actually be Free To Play?

    I think the blame squarely lies in the companies who coined the therm and using it to advertise their games. You cant both try to entice people by trying to trick them that the game is free to play but then get all worked up when people realised it really isnt.

    It is like scamming people and then getting upset when people expect what you tried to scam them for. I mean, I know F2P is a scam but not everyone will.

  • DamonVileDamonVile Vancouver, BCPosts: 4,818Member
    Originally posted by kevjards
    would have thought the point was that these games like marvel are not free therefore its a case of false advertising.free means it costs nothing..in all so called f2p it ends up costing you something therefore it aint free.

    that argument is no more valid than water isn't free because you can buy it in bottles.

    Choosing to spend money on a game doesn't mean it wasn't free to play it.

  • Shadowguy64Shadowguy64 Rohnert Park, CAPosts: 848Member
    The Price : Value ratio seems a bit out of whack...
  • AstropuyoAstropuyo Stock, CAPosts: 1,797Member
    Originally posted by Attend4455

    >Free-to-Play isn’t a charity

    well don't call it free-to-play if you want it to be pay-to-play

    >appears to be a subset of MMO gamers who look at Free-to-Play games with a sense of entitlement

    maybe they are gamers that think free-to-play means free-to-play

    >You aren’t blocked from anything and there aren’t cheeky little restrictions on game features or game design that make you reliant on the cash shop.

    maybe you should look at the majority of games that do these things instead of the one that doesn't

    > The point in all this is that it takes money to actually create and support these games,
    especially for a smaller studio like Gazillion

    it's a valid point, stop calling them free-to-play perhaps?

    > I personally know people who will drop $30 in a single day on two Steam games out of sheer boredom

    more free-to-play games :)

    Personally, I don't have any problem with this game or any other F2P game, what I object to is
    calling games free to play when they are not. I play EVE and have played other games that are
    either P2P or B2P and I know exactly what I'm getting for my money.

     

     

    This guy is 100% too.

    Why are you using the term "Free to play" ?

    Free means free. It's time we labeled these Micro Transaction MMORPG's as free to play is so beyond BS it's almost to the point where one can say "You clearly do not know the definition of the word free".

    Just saying if this site wants integrity like it used to have it's time to stop using word that pretty much was COINED here for RO (Back in it's beta days) F2P. Just saying it's time you guys stopped using Free to play. Not time for us customers to stop using that word, we're not the ones making our living on informing gamers.

     

    It's your damned jobs, there is a reason you get paid. You make advertising dollars, and for every dumb ass article you gain 1 impression and lose two future impressions, so whatever it's not my job.

     

    Free is Free. Free means free. There is no other term for free other than "Given freely" It never says fully or partially however that's your jobs to label them now. "Partially free to play" for instance.

  • YamotaYamota LondonPosts: 6,620Member
    Originally posted by DamonVile
    Originally posted by kevjards
    would have thought the point was that these games like marvel are not free therefore its a case of false advertising.free means it costs nothing..in all so called f2p it ends up costing you something therefore it aint free.

    that argument is no more valid than water isn't free because you can buy it in bottles.

    Choosing to spend money on a game doesn't mean it wasn't free to play it.

    Strawman argument. It is more like advertising bottled water as free but then charging for drinking more than a mouthful.

    And your second statement makes no sense. If you spend money on something then it is by definition not free and you always choose to, or not, spend money on a game regardless of it is F2P or not. F2P is basically like free preview of the game but you have to pay up to get the full game.

  • GrakulenGrakulen Staff Writer St. Charles, MOPosts: 460MMORPG.COM Staff Uncommon
    Lets just call them Microtransaction based or u2P.

    Also Visavius. I wrote an article talking about how I disliked Neverwinter's gamble to win economics. It was on the site two weeks ago titled the Duplication Debacle.

  • AstropuyoAstropuyo Stock, CAPosts: 1,797Member
    Originally posted by DamonVile
    Originally posted by kevjards
    would have thought the point was that these games like marvel are not free therefore its a case of false advertising.free means it costs nothing..in all so called f2p it ends up costing you something therefore it aint free.

    that argument is no more valid than water isn't free because you can buy it in bottles.

    Choosing to spend money on a game doesn't mean it wasn't free to play it.

    See I hate the "F2p" model I just sub to my games.

     

    If the game has a ton of loot items (Small dragon teeth,etc) instead of "Gold" rewards on mobs. You got yourself what we call an inventory gimper (It will force you to upgrade your inventory at some time),, you have extremely high exp rates lower in levels and then it gets to the point of a job. Until you buy...boosts! Now the game is the same pace as it started.

     

    You are literally acting like the buffets at a Casino won't draw in gambling. If the mechanics are so beyond playable without boosts and inventory boosters, chances are....you have been Buffet snagged and now you are playing the slots on a gamble addiction roll, but this is totally COOL practices in business right?

     

    Wrong. Only in places like Vegas and Atlantic city do they get away with that stuff. It's the same thing damned thing.

  • MikeBMikeB MMORPG.com Community Manager Queens, NYPosts: 5,722Administrator Uncommon
    Originally posted by Purutzil

    The issue is more so what is offered as far as an advantage and the amount MORE you spend then say a traditional MMO.

    For some, this can certainly be true, but it's not with Marvel Heroes. Outside of maybe a couple of inventory tabs, there's nothing of value to buy in Marvel Heroes other than heroes and skins, and those also drop in the game. This is the studio's primary source of revenue, since they've made literally just about everything else free. In a non-F2P MMO, you would have spent $50-60 up front, and if you played for as little as three months, another 30$ in subscription fees (excluding the free first month). This puts you $80-90 in the hole already and the value only gets worse with each additional month you play. If you like the game, I'm not sure how anyone would prefer the former option to the latter, even given Gazillion's pricing structure. It's a clear cut savings.

    For that much money, or even just the standard $60 you'd normally pay for the game and free month, you could have easily picked up a bundle for Marvel Heroes giving you a stable of four additional heroes (you're given three entirely free), skins and bank tabs for each of those heroes, and literally anywhere from $30 to $55 in in-game currency to spend on whatever you want. The value with these packs was absolutely nuts. And if you didn't buy a pack? You can still pick up a decent amount of characters within that $60 budget right now. $60 would get you: three of the most expensive ($20), five of the second highest priced ($12), and it gets even better for the cheaper characters ($6-9). How is this outrageous? It's not. On top of that, consider Gazillion will be offering sales and, this bears repeating, you can also find all of this stuff in game without dropping a dime.

    All of the above is precisely why I used Marvel Heroes as an example of how ridiculous this trend of outrage has become. By all means, if a developer takes an Allods Online approach with you, give 'em hell for it. But it seems that there are some unreasonable expectations for Free-to-Play games from, perhaps a vocal minority, I don't know.  I just know that I see it quite a bit of this and it's not exclusive to Marvel Heroes by a long shot. In any case, it's a subject worth discussing, and I wanted to use my column this week to raise the issue.

    Michael "MikeB" Bitton
    Community Manager
    Twitter: @eMikeB

  • YaevinduskYaevindusk Ul''dah, CAPosts: 1,537Member Uncommon

     

    This is one of the first games whereby I went "I want this as a single player game" while playing it, and saying it again after looking at the hero prices.

     

    I'd play it like crazy on lan with my buddies.  But instead I have to pay some $20 for the most popular heroes, with there being dozens that you can buy.  Then on top of that $12 for the best looking costume for said characters.

     

    It went from me wanting to support them with a $59.99 package after trying and liking the full release to me giving my monitor a middle finger when I see they doubled the prices of packages.

     

    F2P may not be a charity, but treating your customers and potential future fans like they're just dollar signs isn't indicative of a company I want to support at all.  It may be the hard truth of business, but good businesses at least make you feel like your worth something to them.

     

    I didn't expect the $200 package to be there for release, but I assumed the one that was priced the same as a video game ($59.99) would be, and not doubled in price for the crowd who waits for a release to see if they will purchase a game.

     

    I didn't even care what package it was, I had genuine fun with the single character I picked at start and wanted to support them.  Now they'll not see a dime from me, and I'm urging my colleagues to do the same.

    When faced with strife or discontent, the true nature of a man is brought forth. It is then when we see the character of the individual. It is then we are able to tell if he is mature enough to grin and bare it, or subject his fellow man to his complaints and woes.

«134567
Sign In or Register to comment.