Originally posted by lafaiel I love seeing all the MMO freeloaders cry like this though, its fun.
Who's the true freeloader? When I play a f2p game like DDO, I might spend $6-$8 for a new module to play for a weekend, then not play again for a month. Is that freeloading?
Or this: A hardcore raider plays 40-60 hours a week raiding paying $15 a month, whilst a casual player who might play 10 hrs a week also pays $15 a month. This is the equivalent of MMO welfare, where the MMO casuals (vast majority of MMO population) subsidizes the 40-60 hr a week raider. The freeloader here is clearly the hardcore player.
This is not to say one game is better than the other, but take a game like WoW for instance, at least PVE wise, there is an insane amount more to do at max level than in GW2(GW2 is still very high quality, dont get me wrong)....now, you may not like what WoW offers, but there is no denying that it does offer more endgame content than any other themepark game by a large margin.
False argument.
Using an example of a game that has been out for many years against one that hasn't been.
Take the amount of content from WoW 1 year after release and compare it to GW2...GW2 has had almost as much updated content as a full expansion...for free...and already offers far more PvP content than WoW did at the one year mark along with a never ending dungeon via the fractals.
Im talking about endgame content....raids from Burning Crusade do not constitute endgame content, so please stop using the "10 year old game" argument......im referring specifically to content developed for level 90 max level charecters, you know, endgame content...MoP, where all of the current endgame content im referring to was released, came out a month apart from GW2...so ya...
And why are you comparing GW2 to WoW from 10 years ago (forgetting the fact that your example is highly debatable)? If you are going to compare something, compare game x with game y in 2013, not game x from 2013 vs game y from 2005 (and you said I used a false argument? lol)....my entire point is comparing current content available to corrent content availabe, not theoretical differences from 10 years ago...if the endgame content is there to keep you coming back, people will clearly pay a subscription
Originally posted by lafaiel I love seeing all the MMO freeloaders cry like this though, its fun.
Who's the true freeloader? When I play a f2p game like DDO, I might spend $6-$8 for a new module to play for a weekend, then not play again for a month. Is that freeloading?
Or this: A hardcore raider plays 40-60 hours a week raiding paying $15 a month, whilst a casual player who might play 10 hrs a week also pays $15 a month. This is the equivalent of MMO welfare, where the MMO casuals (vast majority of MMO population) subsidizes the 40-60 hr a week raider. The freeloader here is clearly the hardcore player.
Wait
What?
How do you.........Oh wow, I don't even know where to begin on this one.
This is not to say one game is better than the other, but take a game like WoW for instance, at least PVE wise, there is an insane amount more to do at max level than in GW2(GW2 is still very high quality, dont get me wrong)....now, you may not like what WoW offers, but there is no denying that it does offer more endgame content than any other themepark game by a large margin.
False argument.
Using an example of a game that has been out for many years against one that hasn't been.
Take the amount of content from WoW 1 year after release and compare it to GW2...GW2 has had almost as much updated content as a full expansion...for free...and already offers far more PvP content than WoW did at the one year mark along with a never ending dungeon via the fractals.
Im talking about endgame content....raids from Burning Crusade do not constitute endgame content, so please stop using the "10 year old game" argument......im referring specifically to content developed for level 90 max level charecters, you know, endgame content...MoP, where all of the current endgame content im referring to was released, came out a month apart from GW2...so ya...
And why are you comparing GW2 to WoW from 10 years ago (forgetting the fact that your example is highly debatable)? If you are going to compare something, compare game x with game y in 2013, not game x from 2013 vs game y from 2005 (and you said I used a false argument? lol)....my entire point is comparing current content available to corrent content availabe, not theoretical differences from 10 years ago...if the endgame content is there to keep you coming back, people will clearly pay a subscription
Im sorry, but that is a perfectly valid argument that WoW is ten years old, and your attempt to invalidate it is fallacious at best. With every expansion for World of Warcraft, the end level cap was increased by 10 levels. Now, see if you can follow that logic and realize why your argument is a fallacy. World of Warcraft has had 10 years to develop content for its game and we are not just talking expansions, what about the numerous updates that occur between expansions that add more stuff to their game, you are ignoring them as well. Now, if you are going to continue to use logical fallacies in support of your case, at least use the BIG logical fallacies like the No True Scotsman or something.
Originally posted by lafaiel I love seeing all the MMO freeloaders cry like this though, its fun.
Who's the true freeloader? When I play a f2p game like DDO, I might spend $6-$8 for a new module to play for a weekend, then not play again for a month. Is that freeloading?
Or this: A hardcore raider plays 40-60 hours a week raiding paying $15 a month, whilst a casual player who might play 10 hrs a week also pays $15 a month. This is the equivalent of MMO welfare, where the MMO casuals (vast majority of MMO population) subsidizes the 40-60 hr a week raider. The freeloader here is clearly the hardcore player.
Wait
What?
How do you.........Oh wow, I don't even know where to begin on this one.
Yes, we are pointing out the irony, stupidity and childishness of calling us 'freeloaders', or are those concepts too subtle for you?
This is not to say one game is better than the other, but take a game like WoW for instance, at least PVE wise, there is an insane amount more to do at max level than in GW2(GW2 is still very high quality, dont get me wrong)....now, you may not like what WoW offers, but there is no denying that it does offer more endgame content than any other themepark game by a large margin.
False argument.
Using an example of a game that has been out for many years against one that hasn't been.
Take the amount of content from WoW 1 year after release and compare it to GW2...GW2 has had almost as much updated content as a full expansion...for free...and already offers far more PvP content than WoW did at the one year mark along with a never ending dungeon via the fractals.
Im talking about endgame content....raids from Burning Crusade do not constitute endgame content, so please stop using the "10 year old game" argument......im referring specifically to content developed for level 90 max level charecters, you know, endgame content...MoP, where all of the current endgame content im referring to was released, came out a month apart from GW2...so ya...
And why are you comparing GW2 to WoW from 10 years ago (forgetting the fact that your example is highly debatable)? If you are going to compare something, compare game x with game y in 2013, not game x from 2013 vs game y from 2005 (and you said I used a false argument? lol)....my entire point is comparing current content available to corrent content availabe, not theoretical differences from 10 years ago...if the endgame content is there to keep you coming back, people will clearly pay a subscription
Im sorry, but that is a perfectly valid argument that WoW is ten years old, and your attempt to invalidate it is fallacious at best. With every expansion for World of Warcraft, the end level cap was increased by 10 levels. Now, see if you can follow that logic and realize why your argument is a fallacy. World of Warcraft has had 10 years to develop content for its game and we are not just talking expansions, what about the numerous updates that occur between expansions that add more stuff to their game, you are ignoring them as well. Now, if you are going to continue to use logical fallacies in support of your case, at least use the BIG logical fallacies like the No True Scotsman or something.
One thing that Wrath of the Lich King proved was that the only content that was relevant was the current expansion. Deathknights were not given the option, but rather forced to bypass everything in Vanilla WoW. They leveled to 68 in Outland and headed right into the new content. So Vanilla was 100% obsolete and BC was used as a leveling stepping stone to get to Northrend. Also, all that 10 year old content was removed and replaced by Cata a few years back anyway. So, saying WoW has 10 years head start is kinda ridiculous.
Originally posted by lafaiel I love seeing all the MMO freeloaders cry like this though, its fun.
Who's the true freeloader? When I play a f2p game like DDO, I might spend $6-$8 for a new module to play for a weekend, then not play again for a month. Is that freeloading?
Or this: A hardcore raider plays 40-60 hours a week raiding paying $15 a month, whilst a casual player who might play 10 hrs a week also pays $15 a month. This is the equivalent of MMO welfare, where the MMO casuals (vast majority of MMO population) subsidizes the 40-60 hr a week raider. The freeloader here is clearly the hardcore player.
Wait
What?
How do you.........Oh wow, I don't even know where to begin on this one.
Yes, we are pointing out the irony, stupidity and childishness of calling us 'freeloaders', or are those concepts too subtle for you?
If we used this logic, we can look at a lazy college student looking at barely passing his courses wandering aimlessly while openly denying himself the opportunities afforded him by his tuition all the while looking at the Med students who are busting their asses off, pointing at them and calling them freeloaders.
This is not to say one game is better than the other, but take a game like WoW for instance, at least PVE wise, there is an insane amount more to do at max level than in GW2(GW2 is still very high quality, dont get me wrong)....now, you may not like what WoW offers, but there is no denying that it does offer more endgame content than any other themepark game by a large margin.
False argument.
Using an example of a game that has been out for many years against one that hasn't been.
Take the amount of content from WoW 1 year after release and compare it to GW2...GW2 has had almost as much updated content as a full expansion...for free...and already offers far more PvP content than WoW did at the one year mark along with a never ending dungeon via the fractals.
Im talking about endgame content....raids from Burning Crusade do not constitute endgame content, so please stop using the "10 year old game" argument......im referring specifically to content developed for level 90 max level charecters, you know, endgame content...MoP, where all of the current endgame content im referring to was released, came out a month apart from GW2...so ya...
And why are you comparing GW2 to WoW from 10 years ago (forgetting the fact that your example is highly debatable)? If you are going to compare something, compare game x with game y in 2013, not game x from 2013 vs game y from 2005 (and you said I used a false argument? lol)....my entire point is comparing current content available to corrent content availabe, not theoretical differences from 10 years ago...if the endgame content is there to keep you coming back, people will clearly pay a subscription
Im sorry, but that is a perfectly valid argument that WoW is ten years old, and your attempt to invalidate it is fallacious at best. With every expansion for World of Warcraft, the end level cap was increased by 10 levels. Now, see if you can follow that logic and realize why your argument is a fallacy. World of Warcraft has had 10 years to develop content for its game and we are not just talking expansions, what about the numerous updates that occur between expansions that add more stuff to their game, you are ignoring them as well. Now, if you are going to continue to use logical fallacies in support of your case, at least use the BIG logical fallacies like the No True Scotsman or something.
One thing that Wrath of the Lich King proved was that the only content that was relevant was the current expansion. Deathknights were not given the option, but rather forced to bypass everything in Vanilla WoW. They leveled to 68 in Outland and headed right into the new content. So Vanilla was 100% obsolete and BC was used as a leveling stepping stone to get to Northrend. Also, all that 10 year old content was removed and replaced by Cata a few years back anyway. So, saying WoW has 10 years head start is kinda ridiculous.
How long has WoW been up and running? Answer: 10 years.
How long of a head starts does that give WoW content wise? Answer: 10 years.
This is not to say one game is better than the other, but take a game like WoW for instance, at least PVE wise, there is an insane amount more to do at max level than in GW2(GW2 is still very high quality, dont get me wrong)....now, you may not like what WoW offers, but there is no denying that it does offer more endgame content than any other themepark game by a large margin.
False argument.
Using an example of a game that has been out for many years against one that hasn't been.
Take the amount of content from WoW 1 year after release and compare it to GW2...GW2 has had almost as much updated content as a full expansion...for free...and already offers far more PvP content than WoW did at the one year mark along with a never ending dungeon via the fractals.
Im talking about endgame content....raids from Burning Crusade do not constitute endgame content, so please stop using the "10 year old game" argument......im referring specifically to content developed for level 90 max level charecters, you know, endgame content...MoP, where all of the current endgame content im referring to was released, came out a month apart from GW2...so ya...
And why are you comparing GW2 to WoW from 10 years ago (forgetting the fact that your example is highly debatable)? If you are going to compare something, compare game x with game y in 2013, not game x from 2013 vs game y from 2005 (and you said I used a false argument? lol)....my entire point is comparing current content available to corrent content availabe, not theoretical differences from 10 years ago...if the endgame content is there to keep you coming back, people will clearly pay a subscription
Im sorry, but that is a perfectly valid argument that WoW is ten years old, and your attempt to invalidate it is fallacious at best. With every expansion for World of Warcraft, the end level cap was increased by 10 levels. Now, see if you can follow that logic and realize why your argument is a fallacy. World of Warcraft has had 10 years to develop content for its game and we are not just talking expansions, what about the numerous updates that occur between expansions that add more stuff to their game, you are ignoring them as well. Now, if you are going to continue to use logical fallacies in support of your case, at least use the BIG logical fallacies like the No True Scotsman or something.
One thing that Wrath of the Lich King proved was that the only content that was relevant was the current expansion. Deathknights were not given the option, but rather forced to bypass everything in Vanilla WoW. They leveled to 68 in Outland and headed right into the new content. So Vanilla was 100% obsolete and BC was used as a leveling stepping stone to get to Northrend. Also, all that 10 year old content was removed and replaced by Cata a few years back anyway. So, saying WoW has 10 years head start is kinda ridiculous.
How long has WoW been up and running? Answer: 10 years.
How long of a head starts does that give WoW content wise? Answer: 10 years.
Logic, do you comprehend it?
CATA
12/7/2010
So, in December that "10 year old content" will turn 3.
This is not to say one game is better than the other, but take a game like WoW for instance, at least PVE wise, there is an insane amount more to do at max level than in GW2(GW2 is still very high quality, dont get me wrong)....now, you may not like what WoW offers, but there is no denying that it does offer more endgame content than any other themepark game by a large margin.
False argument.
Using an example of a game that has been out for many years against one that hasn't been.
Take the amount of content from WoW 1 year after release and compare it to GW2...GW2 has had almost as much updated content as a full expansion...for free...and already offers far more PvP content than WoW did at the one year mark along with a never ending dungeon via the fractals.
Im talking about endgame content....raids from Burning Crusade do not constitute endgame content, so please stop using the "10 year old game" argument......im referring specifically to content developed for level 90 max level charecters, you know, endgame content...MoP, where all of the current endgame content im referring to was released, came out a month apart from GW2...so ya...
And why are you comparing GW2 to WoW from 10 years ago (forgetting the fact that your example is highly debatable)? If you are going to compare something, compare game x with game y in 2013, not game x from 2013 vs game y from 2005 (and you said I used a false argument? lol)....my entire point is comparing current content available to corrent content availabe, not theoretical differences from 10 years ago...if the endgame content is there to keep you coming back, people will clearly pay a subscription
Im sorry, but that is a perfectly valid argument that WoW is ten years old, and your attempt to invalidate it is fallacious at best. With every expansion for World of Warcraft, the end level cap was increased by 10 levels. Now, see if you can follow that logic and realize why your argument is a fallacy. World of Warcraft has had 10 years to develop content for its game and we are not just talking expansions, what about the numerous updates that occur between expansions that add more stuff to their game, you are ignoring them as well. Now, if you are going to continue to use logical fallacies in support of your case, at least use the BIG logical fallacies like the No True Scotsman or something.
What part of ENDGAME CONTENT is not clear here? All of the raids, dungons, heroic dungons, challenge dungons, scenerios, heroic scenerios, map, daily quests etc were all developed for Mists of Pandaria....what the hell does "increase level by 10" have to do with anything? If you are implying that GW2 has less endgame content because they had to spend more time developing the content for lvls 1-80, then that would be legit if not for the fact that GW2 was in development for at least 3 years longer than Mists of Pandaria......and even so...lets pretend that WoW being 10 years old (even though all of the endgame content is brand new) was the cause of the discrepancy, who cares why GW2 is lacking endgame content compared to WoW...the fact remains that it is (whuch was my initial point, not sure why u are hell bent on turing this into a back and fourth with reasons why).....which basically proves my point, in that if the game has endgame content keeping players coming back at max level, then it can survive as a P2P game...
And by the way....if you attempting to throw "facts" at me, you might as well get them correct...WoW has had 4 expansions thus far, only 2 of which increased the level cap by 10...
This is not to say one game is better than the other, but take a game like WoW for instance, at least PVE wise, there is an insane amount more to do at max level than in GW2(GW2 is still very high quality, dont get me wrong)....now, you may not like what WoW offers, but there is no denying that it does offer more endgame content than any other themepark game by a large margin.
False argument.
Using an example of a game that has been out for many years against one that hasn't been.
Take the amount of content from WoW 1 year after release and compare it to GW2...GW2 has had almost as much updated content as a full expansion...for free...and already offers far more PvP content than WoW did at the one year mark along with a never ending dungeon via the fractals.
Im talking about endgame content....raids from Burning Crusade do not constitute endgame content, so please stop using the "10 year old game" argument......im referring specifically to content developed for level 90 max level charecters, you know, endgame content...MoP, where all of the current endgame content im referring to was released, came out a month apart from GW2...so ya...
And why are you comparing GW2 to WoW from 10 years ago (forgetting the fact that your example is highly debatable)? If you are going to compare something, compare game x with game y in 2013, not game x from 2013 vs game y from 2005 (and you said I used a false argument? lol)....my entire point is comparing current content available to corrent content availabe, not theoretical differences from 10 years ago...if the endgame content is there to keep you coming back, people will clearly pay a subscription
Im sorry, but that is a perfectly valid argument that WoW is ten years old, and your attempt to invalidate it is fallacious at best. With every expansion for World of Warcraft, the end level cap was increased by 10 levels. Now, see if you can follow that logic and realize why your argument is a fallacy. World of Warcraft has had 10 years to develop content for its game and we are not just talking expansions, what about the numerous updates that occur between expansions that add more stuff to their game, you are ignoring them as well. Now, if you are going to continue to use logical fallacies in support of your case, at least use the BIG logical fallacies like the No True Scotsman or something.
One thing that Wrath of the Lich King proved was that the only content that was relevant was the current expansion. Deathknights were not given the option, but rather forced to bypass everything in Vanilla WoW. They leveled to 68 in Outland and headed right into the new content. So Vanilla was 100% obsolete and BC was used as a leveling stepping stone to get to Northrend. Also, all that 10 year old content was removed and replaced by Cata a few years back anyway. So, saying WoW has 10 years head start is kinda ridiculous.
How long has WoW been up and running? Answer: 10 years.
How long of a head starts does that give WoW content wise? Answer: 10 years.
Logic, do you comprehend it?
CATA
12/7/2010
So, in December that "10 year old content" will turn 3.
LOL
Clearly, you do not comprehend logic. Just because CATA came out and added a separate end game to the vanilla end game, doesnt invalidate the fact that the vanilla end game is still there. So yeah, you clearly have no logical train of thought either. And I think the developers of WoW would disagree with your assessment on the effects of CATA.
This is not to say one game is better than the other, but take a game like WoW for instance, at least PVE wise, there is an insane amount more to do at max level than in GW2(GW2 is still very high quality, dont get me wrong)....now, you may not like what WoW offers, but there is no denying that it does offer more endgame content than any other themepark game by a large margin.
False argument.
Using an example of a game that has been out for many years against one that hasn't been.
Take the amount of content from WoW 1 year after release and compare it to GW2...GW2 has had almost as much updated content as a full expansion...for free...and already offers far more PvP content than WoW did at the one year mark along with a never ending dungeon via the fractals.
Im talking about endgame content....raids from Burning Crusade do not constitute endgame content, so please stop using the "10 year old game" argument......im referring specifically to content developed for level 90 max level charecters, you know, endgame content...MoP, where all of the current endgame content im referring to was released, came out a month apart from GW2...so ya...
And why are you comparing GW2 to WoW from 10 years ago (forgetting the fact that your example is highly debatable)? If you are going to compare something, compare game x with game y in 2013, not game x from 2013 vs game y from 2005 (and you said I used a false argument? lol)....my entire point is comparing current content available to corrent content availabe, not theoretical differences from 10 years ago...if the endgame content is there to keep you coming back, people will clearly pay a subscription
Im sorry, but that is a perfectly valid argument that WoW is ten years old, and your attempt to invalidate it is fallacious at best. With every expansion for World of Warcraft, the end level cap was increased by 10 levels. Now, see if you can follow that logic and realize why your argument is a fallacy. World of Warcraft has had 10 years to develop content for its game and we are not just talking expansions, what about the numerous updates that occur between expansions that add more stuff to their game, you are ignoring them as well. Now, if you are going to continue to use logical fallacies in support of your case, at least use the BIG logical fallacies like the No True Scotsman or something.
One thing that Wrath of the Lich King proved was that the only content that was relevant was the current expansion. Deathknights were not given the option, but rather forced to bypass everything in Vanilla WoW. They leveled to 68 in Outland and headed right into the new content. So Vanilla was 100% obsolete and BC was used as a leveling stepping stone to get to Northrend. Also, all that 10 year old content was removed and replaced by Cata a few years back anyway. So, saying WoW has 10 years head start is kinda ridiculous.
How long has WoW been up and running? Answer: 10 years.
How long of a head starts does that give WoW content wise? Answer: 10 years.
Logic, do you comprehend it?
CATA
12/7/2010
So, in December that "10 year old content" will turn 3.
LOL
Clearly, you do not comprehend logic. Just because CATA came out and added a separate end game to the vanilla end game, doesnt invalidate the fact that the vanilla end game is still there. So yeah, you clearly have no logical train of thought either. And I think the developers of WoW would disagree with your assessment on the effects of CATA.
OMG, do you realize the hole you are digging?
This is getting funnier and funnier, by all means, please do continue with your "logic"
Well, Im gonna call it quits there and leave you with my final thoughts, I have games to play, all of them free and awesome.
I will see you subsnobs in a few months when your vaunted game goes free to play...and I will laugh in your faces as you stand there in the ashes for your subscription fortress, where you had previously looked down your noses upon us 'lowly freeloaders'. Until then, ciao MOFOs, see you soon. LMAO!!
This is not to say one game is better than the other, but take a game like WoW for instance, at least PVE wise, there is an insane amount more to do at max level than in GW2(GW2 is still very high quality, dont get me wrong)....now, you may not like what WoW offers, but there is no denying that it does offer more endgame content than any other themepark game by a large margin.
False argument.
Using an example of a game that has been out for many years against one that hasn't been.
Take the amount of content from WoW 1 year after release and compare it to GW2...GW2 has had almost as much updated content as a full expansion...for free...and already offers far more PvP content than WoW did at the one year mark along with a never ending dungeon via the fractals.
Im talking about endgame content....raids from Burning Crusade do not constitute endgame content, so please stop using the "10 year old game" argument......im referring specifically to content developed for level 90 max level charecters, you know, endgame content...MoP, where all of the current endgame content im referring to was released, came out a month apart from GW2...so ya...
And why are you comparing GW2 to WoW from 10 years ago (forgetting the fact that your example is highly debatable)? If you are going to compare something, compare game x with game y in 2013, not game x from 2013 vs game y from 2005 (and you said I used a false argument? lol)....my entire point is comparing current content available to corrent content availabe, not theoretical differences from 10 years ago...if the endgame content is there to keep you coming back, people will clearly pay a subscription
Im sorry, but that is a perfectly valid argument that WoW is ten years old, and your attempt to invalidate it is fallacious at best. With every expansion for World of Warcraft, the end level cap was increased by 10 levels. Now, see if you can follow that logic and realize why your argument is a fallacy. World of Warcraft has had 10 years to develop content for its game and we are not just talking expansions, what about the numerous updates that occur between expansions that add more stuff to their game, you are ignoring them as well. Now, if you are going to continue to use logical fallacies in support of your case, at least use the BIG logical fallacies like the No True Scotsman or something.
One thing that Wrath of the Lich King proved was that the only content that was relevant was the current expansion. Deathknights were not given the option, but rather forced to bypass everything in Vanilla WoW. They leveled to 68 in Outland and headed right into the new content. So Vanilla was 100% obsolete and BC was used as a leveling stepping stone to get to Northrend. Also, all that 10 year old content was removed and replaced by Cata a few years back anyway. So, saying WoW has 10 years head start is kinda ridiculous.
How long has WoW been up and running? Answer: 10 years.
How long of a head starts does that give WoW content wise? Answer: 10 years.
Logic, do you comprehend it?
CATA
12/7/2010
So, in December that "10 year old content" will turn 3.
LOL
Clearly, you do not comprehend logic. Just because CATA came out and added a separate end game to the vanilla end game, doesnt invalidate the fact that the vanilla end game is still there. So yeah, you clearly have no logical train of thought either. And I think the developers of WoW would disagree with your assessment on the effects of CATA.
And nobody is brining up endgame for anything before the current xpac....as it stands right now, there are 33 brand spanking new raid bosses for level 90 players.....that's literally ignoring every single brand new dungon made for MoP.....when I say there is more endgame content in WoW than all other themeparks, me and everyone else are talking about brand new current stuff, not stuff from cata, or wotlk, or BC, or vanilla....bringing old content into the discussion to try and invalidate the wealth of new content the game currently has for level 90 players is quite honestly childish lol
Wow does have a ton of content it has built up over the years. Back in the day doing all that content would have been a huge time sink. Now however it is a couple weeks of content at best. A few weeks worth of interesting and engaging leveling content is not a huge hurdle for any new game to overcome.
Leveling content is great to get you interested in the game and get you invested in your character. Max level content is what keeps you there long term. This is why SWTOR had record setting sales yet failed to keep those players subscribed. They failed to provide value to their customers.
WildStar looks set to provide an engaging game experience, and it seems that they understand the value proposition. Glad to see them go the subscription route, because that means they will have the steady income to reinvest in the game.
I am really looking forward to this one, and is a game I would be willing to pay to play. It may turn F2P shortly after release or it may not, not much point in talking about that now, as what we know about the game isn't likely to impact that so much as how they follow up their release and continue to provide value to their customers.
They completely lost me when they wanted a box + sub. I could see box. I could see sub. I cant see box + sub + CS.
I'll stick with the GW2 model, but I know that there are many that say they will be happy with their sub fees. Let's just hope those people keep playing the game, cause I doubt I'll jump at it if it goes B2P after trying to be a sub!
SUBSCRIPTION!!!! Thank you God. That'll knock 75% of the whiny bitches and griefers right out of the equation, leaving much a higher percentage of quality people than you find in most games.
TL;DR Most of the people that enjoy F2P models are exactly the type of people I could care less to encounter in a game I play. And all F2P games out right now suck major ass.
you deserve some kind of reward for the TL:DR! Seriosly, I couldnt have said it better myself!
SUBSCRIPTION!!!! Thank you God. That'll knock 75% of the whiny bitches and griefers right out of the equation, leaving much a higher percentage of quality people than you find in most games.
Good move Jeremy.
And yet the worst and whiniest commuity is for a sub game.... go figure.
And how does a sub even relate to griefers? EVE which probobly has the highest amount of it is..... oh gee golly, yet another sub game!
TL;DR Most of the people that enjoy F2P models are exactly the type of people I could care less to encounter in a game I play. And all F2P games out right now suck major ass.
you deserve some kind of reward for the TL:DR! Seriosly, I couldnt have said it better myself!
The best community I've ever had was F2P which was DDO. Whether the game is B2P, F2P, or P2P is irrelevent to the quality of people you get, asshats are rampant and in every MMO regardless of which business model they use. Just because WS went P2P has no deterrent factor of asshats playing WS.
Comments
Actually kinda happy about that... partly because I wouldn't be able to play it this year anyway.
As to the revenue model, I'm very happy with it, mainly the 'no cash shop' bit, but I guess only time will tell if it's actually worth $15 a month.
Who's the true freeloader? When I play a f2p game like DDO, I might spend $6-$8 for a new module to play for a weekend, then not play again for a month. Is that freeloading?
Or this: A hardcore raider plays 40-60 hours a week raiding paying $15 a month, whilst a casual player who might play 10 hrs a week also pays $15 a month. This is the equivalent of MMO welfare, where the MMO casuals (vast majority of MMO population) subsidizes the 40-60 hr a week raider. The freeloader here is clearly the hardcore player.
Im talking about endgame content....raids from Burning Crusade do not constitute endgame content, so please stop using the "10 year old game" argument......im referring specifically to content developed for level 90 max level charecters, you know, endgame content...MoP, where all of the current endgame content im referring to was released, came out a month apart from GW2...so ya...
And why are you comparing GW2 to WoW from 10 years ago (forgetting the fact that your example is highly debatable)? If you are going to compare something, compare game x with game y in 2013, not game x from 2013 vs game y from 2005 (and you said I used a false argument? lol)....my entire point is comparing current content available to corrent content availabe, not theoretical differences from 10 years ago...if the endgame content is there to keep you coming back, people will clearly pay a subscription
Wait
What?
How do you.........Oh wow, I don't even know where to begin on this one.
Im sorry, but that is a perfectly valid argument that WoW is ten years old, and your attempt to invalidate it is fallacious at best. With every expansion for World of Warcraft, the end level cap was increased by 10 levels. Now, see if you can follow that logic and realize why your argument is a fallacy. World of Warcraft has had 10 years to develop content for its game and we are not just talking expansions, what about the numerous updates that occur between expansions that add more stuff to their game, you are ignoring them as well. Now, if you are going to continue to use logical fallacies in support of your case, at least use the BIG logical fallacies like the No True Scotsman or something.
Yes, we are pointing out the irony, stupidity and childishness of calling us 'freeloaders', or are those concepts too subtle for you?
One thing that Wrath of the Lich King proved was that the only content that was relevant was the current expansion. Deathknights were not given the option, but rather forced to bypass everything in Vanilla WoW. They leveled to 68 in Outland and headed right into the new content. So Vanilla was 100% obsolete and BC was used as a leveling stepping stone to get to Northrend. Also, all that 10 year old content was removed and replaced by Cata a few years back anyway. So, saying WoW has 10 years head start is kinda ridiculous.
If we used this logic, we can look at a lazy college student looking at barely passing his courses wandering aimlessly while openly denying himself the opportunities afforded him by his tuition all the while looking at the Med students who are busting their asses off, pointing at them and calling them freeloaders.
Talk about denial and entitlement issues.
How long has WoW been up and running? Answer: 10 years.
How long of a head starts does that give WoW content wise? Answer: 10 years.
Logic, do you comprehend it?
CATA
12/7/2010
So, in December that "10 year old content" will turn 3.
LOL
What part of ENDGAME CONTENT is not clear here? All of the raids, dungons, heroic dungons, challenge dungons, scenerios, heroic scenerios, map, daily quests etc were all developed for Mists of Pandaria....what the hell does "increase level by 10" have to do with anything? If you are implying that GW2 has less endgame content because they had to spend more time developing the content for lvls 1-80, then that would be legit if not for the fact that GW2 was in development for at least 3 years longer than Mists of Pandaria......and even so...lets pretend that WoW being 10 years old (even though all of the endgame content is brand new) was the cause of the discrepancy, who cares why GW2 is lacking endgame content compared to WoW...the fact remains that it is (whuch was my initial point, not sure why u are hell bent on turing this into a back and fourth with reasons why).....which basically proves my point, in that if the game has endgame content keeping players coming back at max level, then it can survive as a P2P game...
And by the way....if you attempting to throw "facts" at me, you might as well get them correct...WoW has had 4 expansions thus far, only 2 of which increased the level cap by 10...
Clearly, you do not comprehend logic. Just because CATA came out and added a separate end game to the vanilla end game, doesnt invalidate the fact that the vanilla end game is still there. So yeah, you clearly have no logical train of thought either. And I think the developers of WoW would disagree with your assessment on the effects of CATA.
OMG, do you realize the hole you are digging?
This is getting funnier and funnier, by all means, please do continue with your "logic"
Vanilla WoW itself was removed and done over.
Well, Im gonna call it quits there and leave you with my final thoughts, I have games to play, all of them free and awesome.
I will see you subsnobs in a few months when your vaunted game goes free to play...and I will laugh in your faces as you stand there in the ashes for your subscription fortress, where you had previously looked down your noses upon us 'lowly freeloaders'. Until then, ciao MOFOs, see you soon. LMAO!!
And nobody is brining up endgame for anything before the current xpac....as it stands right now, there are 33 brand spanking new raid bosses for level 90 players.....that's literally ignoring every single brand new dungon made for MoP.....when I say there is more endgame content in WoW than all other themeparks, me and everyone else are talking about brand new current stuff, not stuff from cata, or wotlk, or BC, or vanilla....bringing old content into the discussion to try and invalidate the wealth of new content the game currently has for level 90 players is quite honestly childish lol
*450 posts late to the party....
Whats the big ass deal?
Wow does have a ton of content it has built up over the years. Back in the day doing all that content would have been a huge time sink. Now however it is a couple weeks of content at best. A few weeks worth of interesting and engaging leveling content is not a huge hurdle for any new game to overcome.
Leveling content is great to get you interested in the game and get you invested in your character. Max level content is what keeps you there long term. This is why SWTOR had record setting sales yet failed to keep those players subscribed. They failed to provide value to their customers.
WildStar looks set to provide an engaging game experience, and it seems that they understand the value proposition. Glad to see them go the subscription route, because that means they will have the steady income to reinvest in the game.
I am really looking forward to this one, and is a game I would be willing to pay to play. It may turn F2P shortly after release or it may not, not much point in talking about that now, as what we know about the game isn't likely to impact that so much as how they follow up their release and continue to provide value to their customers.
Bah! That's just burst my bubble. Was hoping for a good F2P model but well I pass!
Cheers
They started loosing me at "pve and pvp gear".
They completely lost me when they wanted a box + sub. I could see box. I could see sub. I cant see box + sub + CS.
I'll stick with the GW2 model, but I know that there are many that say they will be happy with their sub fees. Let's just hope those people keep playing the game, cause I doubt I'll jump at it if it goes B2P after trying to be a sub!
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.
SUBSCRIPTION!!!! Thank you God. That'll knock 75% of the whiny bitches and griefers right out of the equation, leaving much a higher percentage of quality people than you find in most games.
Good move Jeremy.
you deserve some kind of reward for the TL:DR! Seriosly, I couldnt have said it better myself!
And yet the worst and whiniest commuity is for a sub game.... go figure.
And how does a sub even relate to griefers? EVE which probobly has the highest amount of it is..... oh gee golly, yet another sub game!
The best community I've ever had was F2P which was DDO. Whether the game is B2P, F2P, or P2P is irrelevent to the quality of people you get, asshats are rampant and in every MMO regardless of which business model they use. Just because WS went P2P has no deterrent factor of asshats playing WS.