Originally posted by cheyane What do you exactly hope to achieve when you obviously have so little regard for our intellect.
To plant the seed of knowledge.
If the other poster drops the emotional-charged comments and can explain through superior logic or evidence why I'm wrong, that's the ideal situation (because I'll have learned something.)
The next-most ideal situation would be that the poster realizes they don't have logic or evidence showing I'm wrong, and accepts that what I've said is the truth.
After that, the next-most is for the poster to put up the typical bravado post to save face on the internet, but the seed of knowledge is planted in them and they eventually realize privately that what I've described is the truth of it.
And worst of all would be for the poster to completely ignore logic and reason and only hang onto their emotion-based ideas which have no basis in truth. To remain ignorant is a sad tragedy.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Waking you up to the FACT that f2p game are a scam maybe? If you can't figure that one out on your own, why would I have any kind of respect for your suppsosed intellect?
They are pretty much all online casinos with flashing lights where kids can spend their parents money... often behind their back even.
I'm sorry but if your intellect thinks that is healthy gaming and that it should continue to exist in its current form, I have no respect what so ever toward you or any one who thinks that is ok.
Its an industry of mind tricks to fool the Young and foolish ( or the stupid ) into parting with their money, giving very little in return.
Its cheap game 1, followed by cheap game 2 and 3 and ad infinitum. There's no quality in them!
If your time isn't something you value, if being taken for a fool doesn't bother you, then have fun with your degenarate gaming... I'll pass.
There's nothing personnal here, I'm a misantrope. I just have the ability to spot non sense and crap. The f2p industy and its supporter are full of it. Just pointing that out cuz I'm personnally sick of it.
F2P can have its place I guess, with simple no brainer games on your smart phone to waste 5 min here and there, like candy crush & other like it. They are free cuz they cost almost nothing to make and can get back their investment simply by tagging adds with it.
I don't even know why I'm typing all this anyways... I'm sure its a waste of my time and why I usually keep it short on these boards.
/sigh
More veiled insults and still not a single point addressed. Just more emotion-charged outrage which ignores the fact that F2P giants like TF2, LoL, and World of Tanks/Warships are extremely high-quality games focused on fun, and their success is built upon that quality.
It's very strange to hear your outrage of F2P and then to hear you say "its place" is games like Candy Crush, rather than the higher-quality games that exist. Do you only want cheap Candy Crush F2P games because it makes it easier to be outraged at the business model? Are TF2, LoL, and WoT/W inconvenient truths to you?
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
All garbage games with little sustenance. They are fun for what a week? Than you realize how shallow they are and how toxic the community around those game is and you move on and never look back.
As if your personal preferences of games applies to everyone else.
You do know that there are people who play WoT & LoL for years, and even pro players, right? And who cares about the community .... if people do, these games would not be so popular.
All garbage games with little sustenance. They are fun for what a week? Than you realize how shallow they are and how toxic the community around those game is and you move on and never look back.
Lets me guess you wont agree to that and you'll say they are Financial succes so they must ne good games... Heard it all before. ty
Moving on. No point in replying to this anymore...
No, I would start with the logical reason you're wrong in claiming those games are shallow, by explaining how game depth is a measure of how difficult a game is to master, and then pointing out you could spend years of time intensely practicing any of those games and still not master them. So clearly they're not shallow.
The financial success is a result of many things including depth and quality, but is not necessarily an indication of depth by itself (plenty of financially successful games aren't as deep, like MMORPGs, and plenty of the deepest games aren't very financially successful at all because extreme depth isn't always fun; fun is subjective, whereas depth is more of an objective measure of how difficult a game is to master.)
It'd still be great if you started addressing these logical well-thought-out points with logic of your own, rather than simply lashing out with an emotional opinion.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Far too many players are becoming false friends in trying to reconcile our interest to disappointing games located amidst the decline of a disappointing genre. The fact of the matter is that if we need to try to find why a game is fun and great, it is not: we have only succeeded in deceiving ourselves.
Why do you blame the player for being unsatisfied? You lambaste the player as if it is his snobbish fault for not being able to enjoy what has been presented to him, when, in fact, it is not that he narrow-mindedly dismisses everything with an elitist haughtiness, refusing to partake in the obvious fun so evidently around him, but that he is literally incapable of enjoying what is there; nor is this some sort of lesson in outgrowing an infectious nostalgia that is crippling his ability to partake normally in what everyone else is enjoying--these are not the case.
What we have before us is a stagnant and dead genre that only disappoints. I promise you this much: that if the truly innovative game were released, the community would delightfully devour it and you would not be present on this forum, but playing that game. That is the precise nature of the crowd: it is stunningly capable of identifying what is good and what is not, and the crowd is increasingly deeming this genre to be kaput.
However, trying to justify that these failure-games are good only continues to support a decrepit industry that ought to collapse. As long as the idiotic consumer continues to blind himself to facts, and tries to convince himself that he is having a fun time by tricks of the mind, he is only running in the wrong direction, helping nothing. Have the courage to say, "these games are not satisfying to me and my expectations are not being met!" This is about more than innocently participating in some idle pleasure, for many people the MMORPG was a significant aspect of their reality, and they are quite lost without it. Those clamoring for virtual worlds are not doing so out of some longing for niche gameplay features, but because they wish to be in a real living community that can supply the experience that the contemporary world cannot supply--and that, friends, is something the MMO does not supply. As if trying to conform to the expectation of those who view the genre as just another game, we have been given games, not worlds, and thus the object which entices a significant population of MMO players is gone, removed.
Well I'm not one to pretend that what we have is sufficient! I echo my demand that I and thousands of others have already ushered forth: I demand a living, breathing virtual world and not these arcadesque combat simulators.
What we need is a revolution in the MMO genre, that great game that will break the mold and make these games fun and viable again. The taste of the audience has become complex and sophisticated. It's time for something new.
Hey Demogorgon, it is not worth it. As the developers of what this thread and you oppose, they will not see "facts and logic."
...
You will undoubtedly hear about WOW as an example of a "good mmorpg" (yeah, that cartoony lobby game that could be played like an mmorpg, I suppose).
Love dat.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Far too many players are becoming false friends in trying to reconcile our interest to disappointing games located amidst the decline of a disappointing genre. The fact of the matter is that if we need to try to find why a game is fun and great, it is not: we have only succeeded in deceiving ourselves.
Why do you blame the player for being unsatisfied? You lambaste the player as if it is his snobbish fault for not being able to enjoy what has been presented to him, when, in fact, it is not that he narrow-mindedly dismisses everything with an elitist haughtiness, refusing to partake in the obvious fun so evidently around him, but that he is literally incapable of enjoying what is there; nor is this some sort of lesson in outgrowing an infectious nostalgia that is crippling his ability to partake normally in what everyone else is enjoying--these are not the case.
What we have before us is a stagnant and dead genre that only disappoints. I promise you this much: that if the truly innovative game were released, the community would delightfully devour it and you would not be present on this forum, but playing that game. That is the precise nature of the crowd: it is stunningly capable of identifying what is good and what is not, and the crowd is increasingly deeming this genre to be kaput.
However, trying to justify that these failure-games are good only continues to support a decrepit industry that ought to collapse. As long as the idiotic consumer continues to blind himself to facts, and tries to convince himself that he is having a fun time by tricks of the mind, he is only running in the wrong direction, helping nothing. Have the courage to say, "these games are not satisfying to me and my expectations are not being met!" This is about more than innocently participating in some idle pleasure, for many people the MMORPG was a significant aspect of their reality, and they are quite lost without it. Those clamoring for virtual worlds are not doing so out of some longing for niche gameplay features, but because they wish to be in a real living community that can supply the experience that the contemporary world cannot supply--and that, friends, is something the MMO does not supply. As if trying to conform to the expectation of those who view the genre as just another game, we have been given games, not worlds, and thus the object which entices a significant population of MMO players is gone, removed.
Well I'm not one to pretend that what we have is sufficient! I echo my demand that I and thousands of others have already ushered forth: I demand a living, breathing virtual world and not these arcadesque combat simulators.
What we need is a revolution in the MMO genre, that great game that will break the mold and make these games fun and viable again. The taste of the audience has become complex and sophisticated. It's time for something new.
This is quite literally the best post that has been made on these forums in ~3 years, MMORPG staff included. Quite literally have been trying to say this for months, and he did it in roughly 3 paragraphs. He did it concisely and clearly. I applaud you sir. I really do.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
Those new millions of people who started playing MMOs after the sub went away have plenty in the group who tell you they had trouble coming up with 15 dollars a month. It was because you offered free and they expect free that they stay. They don't have extra money for gaming.
They are exactly the people who shouldn't be gaming. They need to be cleaning up their real lives before spending time in virtual land. Your payment model is keeping them broke and oblivious that they are in that state. You do them a disservice for those who are in poor town and you tell them things are just fine. The electric company will never give them free electricity, nor the water company. Those companies are keeping them on the "you use it - you pay for it" structure, your model lets them subvert it. Microcosm = Macrocosm.
The same way boomerang children live outside their means then run home to parents when things get tough to maintain at the level they are accustomed to having. Instead of paring down what you can have or deserve (even for entertainment) they have an expectation and feel entitled to take without giving. Just like they have and will continue to do because Too Short told them, you should be gettin' it, get it while the gettin's good. The difference is Too Short also suggested you get in school so that you can afford those things. Too $hort - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJGGzunxHmE
The free to play model suggests that if you can't afford it - someone else can. That keeps you in the role of welfare status. It's welfare gaming and it hurts more than it helps because you are constantly telling them - it's ok to take things like vacations - even when you can't afford them. Reminder, these aren't things you NEED like food and water, these are things that are extras in our society, games. You are breaking the natural instinct they should have for climbing Maslow's hierarchy by giving them something they shouldn't be able to access because their lower needs are not in check yet. You are only letting them believe they have it all together, and many don't. Unless, you think your games aren't fun enough yet and/or they all just have black hearts (the 90%) and will never pay you. If either of those were your stance, you'd already be out of the business.
Wow what an attitude. You are so selfish you think a person should not play games for entertainment because their basic needs are not met. Do you have any idea of what poverty is like ? Do you really think 15 bucks a month is going to impoverish a person. Hey newsflash if a person cannot afford food and basic needs they will not be spending time playing a game. Those people who come on the boards and claim they cannot afford a sub are lying. Don't fall for that rubbish.
Any person should be entitled to game and have entertainment and you have absolutely no right to dictate who should be playing. If there are companies catering to people who have just enough money to afford a computer to game then they should game. Your elitism is unbelievable.
You see, you count the payers as an indication of having created a fun game. Which means in turn that making "fun" games means that you cater to whaling. The more someone pays you, the more fun you think they are having. You posted it yourself. I told you that you were whaling but you claim it's not a factor. It is a factor.
And when I mentioned that up to 90% of people don't/won't pay you should take that as the signal it is - the game isn't fun. Why take it as a sign for the 10% that the game is fun but not for the other 90%. That's the silliness of all this.
It's very simple - if 10% pay you because the game is fun - 90% don't pay you because it's not fun.
That's still though that you assume everyone would pay you because they have such great hearts and they don't have other things they are spending their money on which demand to be paid, not just hint around at it.
Your target audience is actually someone who can't pay you. They are in a third world country and consider any dollars one month's pay in their country. Or they are playing so many games they can't afford to pay you too. So you will be dinged for their greed without ability to follow through. Or they don't want to pay you because they consider their car insurance more important and they are strapped for extra money. Or they don't know how to live within their means and they COULD pay you if they stopped buying smokes or gourmet coffee or eating out for lunch or driving the car they can't afford because biking is a hassle or because they don't know how to budget money.
There you are sticking your hand out for all these people saying - take me - I'm free. Then illogically you plan on talking them into paying you because you are making things fun? You can't and they won't.
Those new millions of people who started playing MMOs after the sub went away have plenty in the group who tell you they had trouble coming up with 15 dollars a month. It was because you offered free and they expect free that they stay. They don't have extra money for gaming.
They are exactly the people who shouldn't be gaming. They need to be cleaning up their real lives before spending time in virtual land. Your payment model is keeping them broke and oblivious that they are in that state. You do them a disservice for those who are in poor town and you tell them things are just fine. The electric company will never give them free electricity, nor the water company. Those companies are keeping them on the "you use it - you pay for it" structure, your model lets them subvert it. Microcosm = Macrocosm.
The same way boomerang children live outside their means then run home to parents when things get tough to maintain at the level they are accustomed to having. Instead of paring down what you can have or deserve (even for entertainment) they have an expectation and feel entitled to take without giving. Just like they have and will continue to do because Too Short told them, you should be gettin' it, get it while the gettin's good. The difference is Too Short also suggested you get in school so that you can afford those things. Too $hort - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJGGzunxHmE
The free to play model suggests that if you can't afford it - someone else can. That keeps you in the role of welfare status. It's welfare gaming and it hurts more than it helps because you are constantly telling them - it's ok to take things like vacations - even when you can't afford them. Reminder, these aren't things you NEED like food and water, these are things that are extras in our society, games. You are breaking the natural instinct they should have for climbing Maslow's hierarchy by giving them something they shouldn't be able to access because their lower needs are not in check yet. You are only letting them believe they have it all together, and many don't. Unless, you think your games aren't fun enough yet and/or they all just have black hearts (the 90%) and will never pay you. If either of those were your stance, you'd already be out of the business.
So what's the solution to how you survive - all fitting for the niche model I suggest repeatedly. And that plays right into fun so you don't give up making fun games, just find your niche because you know that whaling isn't a niche at this point. It's the standard. The question though... do you want to be needed because you are free... or for other reasons. How's that free thing working out for Linux. The only reason it hasn't impacted these games is because people are willing to pay for things others can't have, either to beat them or to show off or because of an illness in their brain - further exacerbating the social structure issues I keep seeing crop up and the capitalist gone bad concept. From a good movie - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrPU5_lBWX4
I still say, it only takes 10% of your audience to leave for the model to crumble and you should consider that quicksand as a developer especially since the model has grown, not decreased in participants - the more games that come, the more your 10% is spread out. The conversion rates still aren't there. I'd say gamification of forums got better conversion rates than how this model is performing over time and even that went out as a fad.
You start out okay, and sort of understand things, and then you nosedive into this idea that because 90% of players aren't paying, every single one of those non-payers isn't having fun. Very illogical. The rest of your post goes on to explain why that's not true.
Just because fun is a prerequisite for paying doesn't mean that all non-payers aren't having fun. If they come back daily, they're having fun.
Your idea that poor people "shouldn't be gaming", and should be out "cleaning their lives up" is something I'd disagree with. They deserve games as much as anyone. In fact games have a lot to teach regarding determinism and decision-making (the underlying reason we have a compulsion to play is learning, after all. (Koster, 2003)) A studio I interviewed at had made a game specifically to help kids in low-income neighborhoods understand the consequences to their actions when it came to teen pregnancy. Denying this demographic an enjoyable part of life (gaming) that might actually teach them something won't magically change their environment or their situation, but it's a lot better than many of the other activities they would actually engage in.
Does your attitude stop at games, or do you also believe poor people shouldn't have access to radio stations (free audio entertainment in the same way F2P games are free interactive entertainment.) Do you seriously want to eliminate every potential enjoyment from their lives as a way of "helping" them?
You say all it takes is 10% to leave for the business model to crumble. You're still saying that. 10 years from now, you'll still be saying that. Or perhaps you'll have learned how the model works by then; even stubborn people eventually realize when they're wrong. And while the specifics of the model will probably have changed a lot in 10 years, the core of F2P (zero barrier to entry -- a "free to play" game) will remain.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Free games are welfare - keep giving them out and claim they help anyone change their situation - see how much welfare did for us.
Wait what?
Free games are what devs use trying to find the whales. It is erroneous to assume free games are offered (remember it is a free market .. no govt forces anyone to provide free games) as a charity. They are there simply because attracting some whales is a better business model that trying to using a sub-only model which severely reduces your player base.
Free games are welfare - keep giving them out and claim they help anyone change their situation - see how much welfare did for us.
Wait what?
Free games are what devs use trying to find the whales. It is erroneous to assume free games are offered (remember it is a free market .. no govt forces anyone to provide free games) as a charity. They are there simply because attracting some whales is a better business model that trying to using a sub-only model which severely reduces your player base.
You should probably go back and actually read the conversation before simply jumping on one statement.
Why would anyone read that wall of text. If I wanted to read a novel right now I would. This is a message board if he can't convey his thoughts in a paragraph or two I'm out. I don't want to waste my time reading his bullshit. I'm sure thats how many people feel.
In short, shorten up your post or don't post at all. As most people won't read it anyways.
It's you who claimed fun is proved by paying. You don't deserve my help. You are well aware of the environment you are creating and you try to justify it as charity for the poor. That's actually worse than anything you've uttered. I show you a person who didn't require charity. A person who is still paying off student loans and a person who can afford to play any game they want. I could even be a whale if I wanted at this point. The only reason I keep my student loans on account is to keep another form of revolving credit. I've given you solid ways to not only create an environment where your non-payers can turn into payers but more population can exist for these games now that they've had a taste for them.
I only want from people what you should want, all of us to contribute our share so that things improve. Not to sit around waiting on handouts and not to have people try to write off a handout when any other day they would show me Superdata reports that show their payments growing exponentially. Yes, I'm sure that has never ever been a factor why free to play games are made.
There is a satiation point to this madness and it will end. It's not possible for it to reign as I've mentioned so many times because the conversion rates aren't growing at the rate of game release. You can stick your head in the sand but you won't be looking me up in 10 yrs because you'll leave the business if free to play is your only interest. I'll be running a sub game by then. Not giving tidbits of knowledge to others. It will stay in my head and will aid my business. I never said what I've said today 10 years ago. Wait until I'm Pete the Repeat Parrot before you start guesstimating where my future is in 10 years.
P.S. Radio stations pay for programming with ads. They aren't free to anyone and the ones that do remove commercials are commonly a subscription service.
Planned parenthood gave out condoms for years for free but you tell me what reason there is to NOT have a child when the gov. will put you on welfare and food stamps to do it. How out of touch can you be to not know that. It's a tenet of poor life to have kids because that's when the pity party starts for you. Oh poor me, how did this happen - this child just came out of nowhere - suppose I'll sit on the couch now and turn on my game and call my weed dealer while my kid runs the streets.
Ever heard of Earned Income Credit? Guess you haven't been poor enough yet, allow me to educate you. Go ahead, look at it - it's a credit so you get that money back whether you paid in too much or not. My gawd, I had a friend who used to love tax time because it meant thousands of dollars returned to her while my dumbass without kids had to pay. Look how quickly it drops to 0 when you don't have children. http://apps.irs.gov/app/vita/content/globalmedia/earned_income_credit_table_1040i.pdf
Every poor person knows it increases for having children. And when you are indigent all your medical care for children is paid for by our govt. Have you ever been to a free clinic? Been to a state funded hospital? It's free for the indigent. Don't even worry if your kid has some expensive thing to fix, that's free too along with the over 3k it takes to deliver one of those kids. Your whole family will eat once you have a child. And you can get WIC too. That gives you cereals, milk, juice, all the things kids should have but it doesn't mandate that only the kid should eat them. Daddy and mommy get to eat whatever they want out of it. You tell me why someone WOULDN'T have a kid who is poor. Don't you know that's the purpose of Obamacare? To subsidize more people by hiking insurance rates. It's good to be poor sometimes. The govt. is tired of paying for all the indigents and want to control rates so they can get more out of the payers. It's a cash shop called the "global exchange" lol
Free games are welfare - keep giving them out and claim they help anyone change their situation - see how much welfare did for us. It only existed because ppl completely busted in '29 and it has been abused ever since. At least back then they thought they were investing in our GDP, what do your free loaders offer you. A safe environment where problems vanish? Yeah, that's out there in the real world too, it's called drugs. Those problems still exist when you put down the pipe or stop logging into the game though. You aren't helping anyone and you don't care about what I'm telling you so I'm wasting my time. It's done.
This isn't complicated:
Fun is a prerequisite of paying. <- So yes, payers do indicate fun was had.
Fun is also experienced by some non-payers. If someone returns daily but doesn't pay, they're having fun.
Everyone else isn't having fun, for some reason or another. They quit.
I don't justify making fun games as "charity for the poor". I make games because I love games and want others to experience fun too. I work on F2P games mostly because that's what the higher-ups chose. They chose it for the same reason I would choose it if I were in charge of that decision:
It's the best model for players because they get to try a game out before being asked for money. So money only changes hands after the player is equipped with enough information to make a good decision about it.
It's the best model for developers because it provides strong revenue, and for me specifically as someone who wants to provide fun to a ton of players.
My latest game is more profitable than any prior game I've worked on, so your imaginary scenario where "saturation" causes the model to fail is purely a fantasy on your part. Supply will grow to whatever size demand dictates. Economics 101.
These games are not welfare. They're not sustaining people. They're entertaining them. So take your rage elsewhere -- rich and poor people will both play my games and enjoy them, and shouting curses at the sky isn't going to stop that from happening.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Free games are welfare - keep giving them out and claim they help anyone change their situation - see how much welfare did for us.
Wait what?
Free games are what devs use trying to find the whales. It is erroneous to assume free games are offered (remember it is a free market .. no govt forces anyone to provide free games) as a charity. They are there simply because attracting some whales is a better business model that trying to using a sub-only model which severely reduces your player base.
You should probably go back and actually read the conversation before simply jumping on one statement.
nah .. if you have no defense of the statement "Free games are welfare" ... then just admit it. Yes, i am jumping on one statement ... one that is just wrong.
Free games are welfare - keep giving them out and claim they help anyone change their situation - see how much welfare did for us.
Wait what?
Free games are what devs use trying to find the whales. It is erroneous to assume free games are offered (remember it is a free market .. no govt forces anyone to provide free games) as a charity. They are there simply because attracting some whales is a better business model that trying to using a sub-only model which severely reduces your player base.
You should probably go back and actually read the conversation before simply jumping on one statement.
Why would anyone read that wall of text. If I wanted to read a novel right now I would. This is a message board if he can't convey his thoughts in a paragraph or two I'm out. I don't want to waste my time reading his bullshit. I'm sure thats how many people feel.
In short, shorten up your post or don't post at all. As most people won't read it anyways.
^Totally agreed!!!
Yet we will see essay after essay here because they think they have that much to say. Then the others will post their essay rebuttal....
"This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to. Relax....."
Free games are welfare - keep giving them out and claim they help anyone change their situation - see how much welfare did for us.
Wait what?
Free games are what devs use trying to find the whales. It is erroneous to assume free games are offered (remember it is a free market .. no govt forces anyone to provide free games) as a charity. They are there simply because attracting some whales is a better business model that trying to using a sub-only model which severely reduces your player base.
You should probably go back and actually read the conversation before simply jumping on one statement.
Why would anyone read that wall of text. If I wanted to read a novel right now I would. This is a message board if he can't convey his thoughts in a paragraph or two I'm out. I don't want to waste my time reading his bullshit. I'm sure thats how many people feel.
In short, shorten up your post or don't post at all. As most people won't read it anyways.
^Totally agreed!!!
Yet we will see essay after essay here because they think they have that much to say. Then the others will post their essay rebuttal....
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Comments
To plant the seed of knowledge.
If the other poster drops the emotional-charged comments and can explain through superior logic or evidence why I'm wrong, that's the ideal situation (because I'll have learned something.)
The next-most ideal situation would be that the poster realizes they don't have logic or evidence showing I'm wrong, and accepts that what I've said is the truth.
After that, the next-most is for the poster to put up the typical bravado post to save face on the internet, but the seed of knowledge is planted in them and they eventually realize privately that what I've described is the truth of it.
And worst of all would be for the poster to completely ignore logic and reason and only hang onto their emotion-based ideas which have no basis in truth. To remain ignorant is a sad tragedy.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
More veiled insults and still not a single point addressed. Just more emotion-charged outrage which ignores the fact that F2P giants like TF2, LoL, and World of Tanks/Warships are extremely high-quality games focused on fun, and their success is built upon that quality.
It's very strange to hear your outrage of F2P and then to hear you say "its place" is games like Candy Crush, rather than the higher-quality games that exist. Do you only want cheap Candy Crush F2P games because it makes it easier to be outraged at the business model? Are TF2, LoL, and WoT/W inconvenient truths to you?
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
As if your personal preferences of games applies to everyone else.
You do know that there are people who play WoT & LoL for years, and even pro players, right? And who cares about the community .... if people do, these games would not be so popular.
No, I would start with the logical reason you're wrong in claiming those games are shallow, by explaining how game depth is a measure of how difficult a game is to master, and then pointing out you could spend years of time intensely practicing any of those games and still not master them. So clearly they're not shallow.
The financial success is a result of many things including depth and quality, but is not necessarily an indication of depth by itself (plenty of financially successful games aren't as deep, like MMORPGs, and plenty of the deepest games aren't very financially successful at all because extreme depth isn't always fun; fun is subjective, whereas depth is more of an objective measure of how difficult a game is to master.)
It'd still be great if you started addressing these logical well-thought-out points with logic of your own, rather than simply lashing out with an emotional opinion.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
What a delightful read. I applaud you
http://www.entropiapartners.com/?r=22415
Love dat.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
This is quite literally the best post that has been made on these forums in ~3 years, MMORPG staff included. Quite literally have been trying to say this for months, and he did it in roughly 3 paragraphs. He did it concisely and clearly. I applaud you sir. I really do.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
I'm still waiting for any logic to be presented by the OP or others.
Thus far it's empty emotion-based outrage with no basis in fact or logic. Calling emotional outrage "logic" does not make it so.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
@Greenreen. Thread won.
Such a well thought out post and it is very true.
I see it everyday in f2p games. Players stating that they can't afford to go premium or
have money to make purchases from the cash shop.
Thanks for an enjoyable/factual read.
http://www.entropiapartners.com/?r=22415
Wow what an attitude. You are so selfish you think a person should not play games for entertainment because their basic needs are not met. Do you have any idea of what poverty is like ? Do you really think 15 bucks a month is going to impoverish a person. Hey newsflash if a person cannot afford food and basic needs they will not be spending time playing a game. Those people who come on the boards and claim they cannot afford a sub are lying. Don't fall for that rubbish.
Any person should be entitled to game and have entertainment and you have absolutely no right to dictate who should be playing. If there are companies catering to people who have just enough money to afford a computer to game then they should game. Your elitism is unbelievable.
You start out okay, and sort of understand things, and then you nosedive into this idea that because 90% of players aren't paying, every single one of those non-payers isn't having fun. Very illogical. The rest of your post goes on to explain why that's not true.
Just because fun is a prerequisite for paying doesn't mean that all non-payers aren't having fun. If they come back daily, they're having fun.
Your idea that poor people "shouldn't be gaming", and should be out "cleaning their lives up" is something I'd disagree with. They deserve games as much as anyone. In fact games have a lot to teach regarding determinism and decision-making (the underlying reason we have a compulsion to play is learning, after all. (Koster, 2003)) A studio I interviewed at had made a game specifically to help kids in low-income neighborhoods understand the consequences to their actions when it came to teen pregnancy. Denying this demographic an enjoyable part of life (gaming) that might actually teach them something won't magically change their environment or their situation, but it's a lot better than many of the other activities they would actually engage in.
Does your attitude stop at games, or do you also believe poor people shouldn't have access to radio stations (free audio entertainment in the same way F2P games are free interactive entertainment.) Do you seriously want to eliminate every potential enjoyment from their lives as a way of "helping" them?
You say all it takes is 10% to leave for the business model to crumble. You're still saying that. 10 years from now, you'll still be saying that. Or perhaps you'll have learned how the model works by then; even stubborn people eventually realize when they're wrong. And while the specifics of the model will probably have changed a lot in 10 years, the core of F2P (zero barrier to entry -- a "free to play" game) will remain.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Wait what?
Free games are what devs use trying to find the whales. It is erroneous to assume free games are offered (remember it is a free market .. no govt forces anyone to provide free games) as a charity. They are there simply because attracting some whales is a better business model that trying to using a sub-only model which severely reduces your player base.
Why would anyone read that wall of text. If I wanted to read a novel right now I would. This is a message board if he can't convey his thoughts in a paragraph or two I'm out. I don't want to waste my time reading his bullshit. I'm sure thats how many people feel.
In short, shorten up your post or don't post at all. As most people won't read it anyways.
This isn't complicated:
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
nah .. if you have no defense of the statement "Free games are welfare" ... then just admit it. Yes, i am jumping on one statement ... one that is just wrong.
^Totally agreed!!!
Yet we will see essay after essay here because they think they have that much to say. Then the others will post their essay rebuttal....
"This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to. Relax....."
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre