Candy Crush is not an indication of what older MMORPG players will pay. This site however offers one a good indication of what older players like me are willing to spend on. Almost any thread on lootboxes or any MRT has been discussed here and the people who frequent this site and who form that older demographic has indicated their unwillingness to buy those things.
I bought stash tabs and a couple of outfits in Path of Exile because I was convinced the game deserved my support. Ordinarily I don't buy anything aside from a sub in many MMORPGs.
Even my old lady friends who has never even seen an MMORPG play candy crush. My husband plays it because he has a phone but he does not spend any money on it. He watches the ads.
Candy Crush is played by people on the toilet seat and isn't what I hope MMORPGs that the OP wants is aimed at.
It's always awkward when we make assumptions on what kind of gamer someone is based on their preferred game.
Believe it or not, Candy Crush took it to a competitive level in the UK last year.
Remember kids mobile games are the future look at konami them cancelling silent hill and focusing on mobile games on the side while pachinko machines being their main source of their income did wonders for them you to can degrade to trash like them and I'm talking to you game developers
โคX Trash X โค
Developers aren't the ones making monetization decisions and whether or not to cancel games. Just an FYI if you're new to how the world works.
Does it "have to" work that way?
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
I don't really know that designing for an older audience is a winning strategy from a developer's perspective. They tend to look at numbers, and demographics always has a larger young population than its elderly counterpart. So, there will always be more money to be had from the younger population. It doesn't matter what the mindset who has; there's simply more of them.
hmmm "maybe."
While Cheyne has a point regarding us older players being less inclined to buy loot boxes and use cash shops, we do have more money than younger people. for the most part.
How many times have you seen someone on this site say "I'd be willing to pay more than $15 per month for a great game."
I know I would and could do that.
All they'd have to do was make a great game and figure out a way where older players don't feel like they are being fleeced.
Also to another point, not every older player has "family" etc etc. I live in a city and am surrounded by adults who don't have families but do have disposable income. Heck, even I have disposable income and no family.
though clearly not as much disposable income as many of these people.
I'd certainly would pay more a game that was more fun for me than anything on NetFlix, YouTube, Hulu, or help me put down the books I enjoy reading. I don't see that happening
Many older people that used to play games may fit the description above, but there is a point kids move out and you retire.
PS: The flaw in the of the question is the assumption "all of us older gamers" want the same thing. We didn't agree back in the day and still don't
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
The "success" all developers are chasing these days is mediated through "influencers" and their followers who are hyperactive on "social media." It's all about Twitch, YT and Twitter. It's all about generating and maintaining buzz.
Hell you even had Ashes of Creation admit recently that influencer availability on June 1st (TBC Classic's launch) was a reason for their Alpha 1 postponement,
Whoever the demographic is that streams and follows streamers, that's who is targeted and I don't see that changing any time soon.
I don't think that is universally true, especially when it comes to games meant to appeal to older players who would not so easily influenced by social media personalities.
Ashes of Creation just postponed their June test period because they think Influencers will be playing other games. AoC is certainly marketed towards a more mature crowd. MMORPGs in general are an older demographic. The under 35 demographic isn't interested in MMORPGs as they are other genres.
Considering that WoW is one of the few games that can even attract attention from mainstream media when they do virtually anything, all the moreso with gaming focused media, it was likely a wise decision to wait for a more opportune time.
The under 35 demographic isn't the focus of this discussion, so whatever.
I can't imagine a project manager walking into a room of devs and saying "OK I want you guys to make a multiplayer game that focuses on older players"..........
King and Zynga would like a word with you.
I'm pretty sure all ANY company EVER said was let's make money.
I can't imagine a project manager walking into a room of devs and saying "OK I want you guys to make a multiplayer game that focuses on older players"..........
King and Zynga would like a word with you.
I'm pretty sure all ANY company EVER said was let's make money.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worldsโข
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I can't imagine a project manager walking into a room of devs and saying "OK I want you guys to make a multiplayer game that focuses on older players"..........
King and Zynga would like a word with you.
I'm pretty sure all ANY company EVER said was let's make money.
For profit companies are for profit.
Nice meme although personally I would have gone with this one:
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiotsโ
โ Umberto Eco
โMicrotransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?โ โ CD PROJEKT RED
I can't imagine a project manager walking into a room of devs and saying "OK I want you guys to make a multiplayer game that focuses on older players"..........
King and Zynga would like a word with you.
I'm pretty sure all ANY company EVER said was let's make money.
For profit companies are for profit.
Of the available options to date it has proven to be the most effective and efficient. Until something better comes along it's as good as it gets.
as a gen x.. i have aged past FPS twitch games, I play more tactical stuff (Phoenix Point, Mutant year zero) as well as mmo's from time to time .. (Wow mostly) Tho i do dabble in world of tanks and warships, less tanks these days and more ships though. Also a fan of diablo-esque stuff too.
I prefer slower paced, especially stuff I can walk away from just because.. for a few minutes at a time.
Have absolutely no use for mobile games, though i might play something while stuck in a waiting room or whatever... having a pc and console at home I generally don't see the point...
I can't imagine a project manager walking into a room of devs and saying "OK I want you guys to make a multiplayer game that focuses on older players"..........
King and Zynga would like a word with you.
I'm pretty sure all ANY company EVER said was let's make money.
For profit companies are for profit.
True, but there is between profit and PROFIT!!!!111!!!11!!!That fourth or fifth "mansion" or luxury automobile is overboard, in my opinion.
For me it is a balance between "customer service" and "maximizing profits." With "globalization", consumers have lost power to dictate. If any singular area or group wants a better choice, they no longer have the power to dictate. The company will keep making profits from other areas and peoples who are willing to pay. Why do gaming companies keep shoveling out cheap trash? Because enough people keep supporting the games.
As to Kyleran's "Greed is good" meme, I answer with "The love of money is the root of all evil." Greed IS good, but like all else in life, best when practiced in moderation
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
It seems like the conversation is focused a bit to much on play time. That is not age dependent. (though I guess retired people might have more play time in general?...but that's not the age range being talked about specifically)
Imo the discussion should lean towards attention span and entitlement.
Do players of varying age ranges tend to feel differently about having to "wait for a turn" to have access to content? How long are they willing to wait?
I'm guessing, based on personal experience, there is a separation there that is generational.
We have to speak very generally because of course there are outliers at any age range depending on the individual.
@Torval I was referring to specific content...a named mob, a piece of loot, a quest etc.
But there is a conversation to be had about larger content implementations like expansions as well.
I wasn't making any specific statements about what would be considered reasonable. Just that, in my experience, what is considered reasonable likely varies by generation.
It's similar to how a participation trophy or desiring instant gratification is often referenced as generational. That has been my experience, and it is very evident in recent games.
Granted, I'm talking about gamers...not candy crush players like was referenced by someone else earlier. I don't believe the general "non-gaming public" who plays candy crush was who the OP was referring to when he started the discussion. That turns it into a whole other thing that I don't have experience (or the desire) to comment on.
I can't imagine a project manager walking into a room of devs and saying "OK I want you guys to make a multiplayer game that focuses on older players"..........
King and Zynga would like a word with you.
I'm pretty sure all ANY company EVER said was let's make money.
For profit companies are for profit.
True, but there is between profit and PROFIT!!!!111!!!11!!!That fourth or fifth "mansion" or luxury automobile is overboard, in my opinion.
For me it is a balance between "customer service" and "maximizing profits." With "globalization", consumers have lost power to dictate. If any singular area or group wants a better choice, they no longer have the power to dictate. The company will keep making profits from other areas and peoples who are willing to pay. Why do gaming companies keep shoveling out cheap trash? Because enough people keep supporting the games.
As to Kyleran's "Greed is good" meme, I answer with "The love of money is the root of all evil." Greed IS good, but like all else in life, best when practiced in moderation
No, there is no between. For profit companies only strive for one... the maximum. What is done with that profit doesn't change the goal of acquiring the most possible.
Globalization does not yet exist to the extent you suggest, Differences between markets remain. Legislative environments vary. Costs will inevitably increase the further afield a company ventures, which may ultimately compromise profits.
Consumers can still influence markets as the markets are not yet a homogeneous whole. Besides, why settle for profits elsewhere when you can have those and domestic profits both. No profit left behind!
Greed by definition is desire for accumulation to excess. Such is of course bad, as is anything taken to excess.
That sounds simple enough. There is only one little thing that negates that from being definitive. What is excessive is entirely a matter of opinion, and any expressed over it will have no more weight than others brought forth. It's kind of pointless to discuss as it will ultimately end with opinions vary.
I can say that without the pursuit of profits, in some cases perhaps excessively so, I would not be alive today.
There would have been no treatments or medications available to counter the onset of an autoimmune disorder that helped preserve some quality of life for a few years without profiteering. The supporting technology that kept me alive after a surgical complication until I regained consciousness weeks later were only there due to profiteering. The medications that stave off rejection of my kidney transplant, once again preserving some quality of life... profiteering.
Any amount of greed that was bundled with all that... I can live with.
I can't imagine a project manager walking into a room of devs and saying "OK I want you guys to make a multiplayer game that focuses on older players"..........
King and Zynga would like a word with you.
I'm pretty sure all ANY company EVER said was let's make money.
For profit companies are for profit.
True, but there is between profit and PROFIT!!!!111!!!11!!!That fourth or fifth "mansion" or luxury automobile is overboard, in my opinion.
For me it is a balance between "customer service" and "maximizing profits." With "globalization", consumers have lost power to dictate. If any singular area or group wants a better choice, they no longer have the power to dictate. The company will keep making profits from other areas and peoples who are willing to pay. Why do gaming companies keep shoveling out cheap trash? Because enough people keep supporting the games.
As to Kyleran's "Greed is good" meme, I answer with "The love of money is the root of all evil." Greed IS good, but like all else in life, best when practiced in moderation
No, there is no between. For profit companies only strive for one... the maximum. What is done with that profit doesn't change the goal of acquiring the most possible.
Globalization does not yet exist to the extent you suggest, Differences between markets remain. Legislative environments vary. Costs will inevitably increase the further afield a company ventures, which may ultimately compromise profits.
Consumers can still influence markets as the markets are not yet a homogeneous whole. Besides, why settle for profits elsewhere when you can have those and domestic profits both. No profit left behind!
Greed by definition is desire for accumulation to excess. Such is of course bad, as is anything taken to excess.
That sounds simple enough. There is only one little thing that negates that from being definitive. What is excessive is entirely a matter of opinion, and any expressed over it will have no more weight than others brought forth. It's kind of pointless to discuss as it will ultimately end with opinions vary.
I can say that without the pursuit of profits, in some cases perhaps excessively so, I would not be alive today.
There would have been no treatments or medications available to counter the onset of an autoimmune disorder that helped preserve some quality of life for a few years without profiteering. The supporting technology that kept me alive after a surgical complication until I regained consciousness weeks later were only there due to profiteering. The medications that stave off rejection of my kidney transplant, once again preserving some quality of life... profiteering.
Any amount of greed that was bundled with all that... I can live with.
Much of what you point out is quite true.
Let's look at "greed", though. Did "greed" enable your medicine? What "profit" spurred that advancement? Or was there another "motivator" that produced your cure?
Does "greed" apply to human advancements? Does "greed" apply to humanitarian discoveries? Or is it "greed" that has scientists and researchers looking first to "What can I charge for this?" The research may be spurred by a desire to improve life, but then "greed" enters the picture to help decide what to charge.
In my opinion, "greed" is a simple monetary motivator. Trying to apply the term to humanitarian advancements seems kind of disingenuous to me. I could be wrong.
"Greed"is the factor that spurs the impetus to "make or create better or faster or cheaper for profit." Ever notice that "healthy food" is always more expensive than "bad food?" The answer is greed, NOT humanitarian i nature.
PS: I'm glad you recovered and hopefully keep doing well
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Let's look at "greed", though. Did "greed" enable your medicine? What "profit" spurred that advancement? Or was there another "motivator" that produced your cure?
Does "greed" apply to human advancements? Does "greed" apply to humanitarian discoveries? Or is it "greed" that has scientists and researchers looking first to "What can I charge for this?" The research may be spurred by a desire to improve life, but then "greed" enters the picture to help decide what to charge.
In my opinion, "greed" is a simple monetary motivator. Trying to apply the term to humanitarian advancements seems kind of disingenuous to me. I could be wrong.
"Greed"is the factor that spurs the impetus to "make or create better or faster or cheaper for profit." Ever notice that "healthy food" is always more expensive than "bad food?" The answer is greed, NOT humanitarian i nature.
PS: I'm glad you recovered and hopefully keep doing well
Well, many people contend pharmaceutical companies are greedy. They do have some pretty high-priced medications on offer, at least until generics can be put out.
But, that such is greedy is simply opinion. It is incontestably profit motivated, and that will be the central motivation of the company itself. There will almost certainly be additional motivations in some, likely along the line you suggest. Regardless, if it were not for the eventual profit these people could produce they wouldn't be there.
For the humanitarian aspect, that can play a huge role early on. For Dr. Willem Kolf, the inventor of the kidney dialysis machine, it was an entirely humanitarian effort. He chose not to patent his invention which he could have profited from greatly. However, the dialysis machines used on me were made and sold for profit.
The greater cost for healthy food isn't entirely about greed. It can be more costly to produce, due to a greater chance of spoilage and what not Supply and demand play a factor too, with less generally on sale and those wanting such willing to pay a premium for what they consider better. All that considered, I have no doubt producers squeeze out as much additional profit as they can from each little bit of it. As they should.
After all, do we not do the same. Many strive for the highest salary they can earn. Many squeeze out as much value as they can from every dollar. Many wish to build or buy the most powerful computer they can afford. Greed may not be humanitarian, but it is human and present in all of us to some degree over something.
__________
Thanks for your kindness. I'm mostly recovered. That medial mishap had some nonrecoverable elements to it. My transplant is getting a bit long in the tooth too, and it will be back on dialysis when that goes, which I'm getting a bit long in the tooth for.
Eh, in the meantime I'm still kicking, so good enough.
"I prefer it the oldschool way, you buy the game, you got the game. Thats
it. All content included, nothing cut short and sold back to you as a
"DLC" or "expansion pack"."
OK lets take an old school game i played....Everquest....You had to buy the original game, probably $20-40 depending on when and where you got it......Then you HAD to pay $15 a month to sub or you didnt play.....Then you had to buy the expansions as they have rolled out (At least 20 now and probably more than that at $20-40 a pop)....I left in 2005 after 5 years of playing.....i probably spent $1500 for everything on that game......You had zero options back then...
"I prefer it the oldschool way, you buy the game, you got the game. Thats
it. All content included, nothing cut short and sold back to you as a
"DLC" or "expansion pack"."
OK lets take an old school game i played....Everquest....You had to buy the original game, probably $20-40 depending on when and where you got it......Then you HAD to pay $15 a month to sub or you didnt play.....Then you had to buy the expansions as they have rolled out (At least 20 now and probably more than that at $20-40 a pop)....I left in 2005 after 5 years of playing.....i probably spent $1500 for everything on that game......You had zero options back then...
I'll take that to having to purchase 10 lootboxes to have a chance at getting an upgrade I cannot get anywhere else in the game. I open all ten I am out 100 bucks with nothing to show for it.
Of course you paid for those things but have you forgotten all the hours you spent playing and the fun you had. What was that worth in cash? You all talk like you spent that money and got nothing in return.
Making a game especially for older gamers just won't happen. In addition to the fact that we are a smaller market segment, what young developer really understands what older people want? Do we trust this kind of gaming decisions to these young whippersnappers? Get off my lawn! Where's my check? I'm cold.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
"I prefer it the oldschool way, you buy the game, you got the game. Thats
it. All content included, nothing cut short and sold back to you as a
"DLC" or "expansion pack"."
OK lets take an old school game i played....Everquest....You had to buy the original game, probably $20-40 depending on when and where you got it......Then you HAD to pay $15 a month to sub or you didnt play.....Then you had to buy the expansions as they have rolled out (At least 20 now and probably more than that at $20-40 a pop)....I left in 2005 after 5 years of playing.....i probably spent $1500 for everything on that game......You had zero options back then...
I'll take that to having to purchase 10 lootboxes to have a chance at getting an upgrade I cannot get anywhere else in the game. I open all ten I am out 100 bucks with nothing to show for it.
Of course you paid for those things but have you forgotten all the hours you spent playing and the fun you had. What was that worth in cash? You all talk like you spent that money and got nothing in return.
Now, you know, this really depends on the game.
Personally, I also started MMO's with EQ. So not only did I have the joy of paying 15 a month, I also had to directly compete with other players for primary camp points, sometimes 12 hour spawn cycles, where I could be KSed, or if I was in a group, the other person could Ninja Loot. Equally so, I could also KS and Ninja Loot others, depending on the level of rampant asshole I wanted to be, and again, I am paying every single month purely for the ability to engage in and deal with this kind of asshattery.
As for the enjoyment of a game, truth be told, if I am not enjoying a game, I am not going to run to the store and buy tons of shit, I am going to walk away, just like back in the day if I was not enjoying the MMO, I walked away.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
Doesn't that just kinda translate to "More reboots/remakes plz"?
I mean, wouldn't mind if they made a GOOD reboot/remake.
"The bones of man. The brittle remnants of cosmic torment that once made him wonder if matter was Lucifer upward groping back to his God. And yet now, he knew better."
๐๐ซ - ๐๐ฟ
steam: hatchet130 psn: LordMikeBedlam Battlenet: glasgowgrin#1831
Comments
Does it "have to" work that way?
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
Considering that WoW is one of the few games that can even attract attention from mainstream media when they do virtually anything, all the moreso with gaming focused media, it was likely a wise decision to wait for a more opportune time.
The under 35 demographic isn't the focus of this discussion, so whatever.
For profit companies are for profit.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worldsโข
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
โMicrotransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?โ
โ CD PROJEKT RED
Of the available options to date it has proven to be the most effective and efficient. Until something better comes along it's as good as it gets.
Tho i do dabble in world of tanks and warships, less tanks these days and more ships though. Also a fan of diablo-esque stuff too.
I prefer slower paced, especially stuff I can walk away from just because.. for a few minutes at a time.
Have absolutely no use for mobile games, though i might play something while stuck in a waiting room or whatever... having a pc and console at home I generally don't see the point...
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
(though I guess retired people might have more play time in general?...but that's not the age range being talked about specifically)
Imo the discussion should lean towards attention span and entitlement.
Do players of varying age ranges tend to feel differently about having to "wait for a turn" to have access to content? How long are they willing to wait?
I'm guessing, based on personal experience, there is a separation there that is generational.
We have to speak very generally because of course there are outliers at any age range depending on the individual.
I was referring to specific content...a named mob, a piece of loot, a quest etc.
But there is a conversation to be had about larger content implementations like expansions as well.
I wasn't making any specific statements about what would be considered reasonable. Just that, in my experience, what is considered reasonable likely varies by generation.
It's similar to how a participation trophy or desiring instant gratification is often referenced as generational. That has been my experience, and it is very evident in recent games.
Granted, I'm talking about gamers...not candy crush players like was referenced by someone else earlier. I don't believe the general "non-gaming public" who plays candy crush was who the OP was referring to when he started the discussion. That turns it into a whole other thing that I don't have experience (or the desire) to comment on.
No, there is no between. For profit companies only strive for one... the maximum. What is done with that profit doesn't change the goal of acquiring the most possible.
Globalization does not yet exist to the extent you suggest, Differences between markets remain. Legislative environments vary. Costs will inevitably increase the further afield a company ventures, which may ultimately compromise profits.
Consumers can still influence markets as the markets are not yet a homogeneous whole. Besides, why settle for profits elsewhere when you can have those and domestic profits both. No profit left behind!
Greed by definition is desire for accumulation to excess. Such is of course bad, as is anything taken to excess.
That sounds simple enough. There is only one little thing that negates that from being definitive. What is excessive is entirely a matter of opinion, and any expressed over it will have no more weight than others brought forth. It's kind of pointless to discuss as it will ultimately end with opinions vary.
I can say that without the pursuit of profits, in some cases perhaps excessively so, I would not be alive today.
There would have been no treatments or medications available to counter the onset of an autoimmune disorder that helped preserve some quality of life for a few years without profiteering. The supporting technology that kept me alive after a surgical complication until I regained consciousness weeks later were only there due to profiteering. The medications that stave off rejection of my kidney transplant, once again preserving some quality of life... profiteering.
Any amount of greed that was bundled with all that... I can live with.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
Well, many people contend pharmaceutical companies are greedy. They do have some pretty high-priced medications on offer, at least until generics can be put out.
But, that such is greedy is simply opinion. It is incontestably profit motivated, and that will be the central motivation of the company itself. There will almost certainly be additional motivations in some, likely along the line you suggest. Regardless, if it were not for the eventual profit these people could produce they wouldn't be there.
For the humanitarian aspect, that can play a huge role early on. For Dr. Willem Kolf, the inventor of the kidney dialysis machine, it was an entirely humanitarian effort. He chose not to patent his invention which he could have profited from greatly. However, the dialysis machines used on me were made and sold for profit.
The greater cost for healthy food isn't entirely about greed. It can be more costly to produce, due to a greater chance of spoilage and what not Supply and demand play a factor too, with less generally on sale and those wanting such willing to pay a premium for what they consider better. All that considered, I have no doubt producers squeeze out as much additional profit as they can from each little bit of it. As they should.
After all, do we not do the same. Many strive for the highest salary they can earn. Many squeeze out as much value as they can from every dollar. Many wish to build or buy the most powerful computer they can afford. Greed may not be humanitarian, but it is human and present in all of us to some degree over something.
__________
Thanks for your kindness. I'm mostly recovered. That medial mishap had some nonrecoverable elements to it. My transplant is getting a bit long in the tooth too, and it will be back on dialysis when that goes, which I'm getting a bit long in the tooth for.
Eh, in the meantime I'm still kicking, so good enough.
Of course you paid for those things but have you forgotten all the hours you spent playing and the fun you had. What was that worth in cash? You all talk like you spent that money and got nothing in return.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Personally, I also started MMO's with EQ. So not only did I have the joy of paying 15 a month, I also had to directly compete with other players for primary camp points, sometimes 12 hour spawn cycles, where I could be KSed, or if I was in a group, the other person could Ninja Loot. Equally so, I could also KS and Ninja Loot others, depending on the level of rampant asshole I wanted to be, and again, I am paying every single month purely for the ability to engage in and deal with this kind of asshattery.
As for the enjoyment of a game, truth be told, if I am not enjoying a game, I am not going to run to the store and buy tons of shit, I am going to walk away, just like back in the day if I was not enjoying the MMO, I walked away.
๐๐ซ - ๐๐ฟ
steam: hatchet130 psn: LordMikeBedlam Battlenet: glasgowgrin#1831