EPTAnyway yah this is way off topic so lets stop.
Character renaming coming soon - Page 14
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
Anyway yah this is way off topic so lets stop. | ||
|
akomatic
156 Posts
| ||
|
StarStruck
25339 Posts
Technically, but this is the first time we're seeing it for a RTS. It stinks no matter how you slice it. The day of the smurfs is somewhat over. I really hope they implement something, so pro gamers don't get harassed to bits. | ||
|
Mios
United States686 Posts
one $60 expansion a year is plenty of money for blizzard to continue to support the game. if they start charging for server changes then i will really know their true motive. | ||
|
Azile
United States339 Posts
On August 17 2010 10:09 Archerofaiur wrote: Sigh if I dont have a mount and I buy it I have a mount and I can ride. Riding is a gameplay effect. What is hard about this? Anyway yah this is way off topic so lets stop. I don't know? What is so hard about it you fail to grasp a concept? Mounts are dirt cheap there are no people with no mounts. No one in the fucking game out of 12 million people went "omg thanks blizzard I can ride a mount now if I buy this star horse for $25" because everyone already has like 50 of the fucking things. Your point doesn't exist because the situation doesn't exist. | ||
|
teaCher
Canada521 Posts
On August 17 2010 02:32 Seiniyta wrote: I think charging a small fee for a name change is the best possible way to handle name changes. This makes people think twice for changing names every few days, but also doesn't lock people out who sincerely want/have to change in a relatively short period of time. Definitly if the clan tag function isn't enough (changing clans in a short amount of time). I'm personally happy that they're doing this, it works great in WoW, nothing as annoying when you have a bunch of only ingame friends (no real id) and you're away for awhile and then realize half of your friendlist has changed name and you have no fucking clue who who is anymore. Why are all you wow Kids playing sc. This is sc not wow and blizz should keep them seperate. I'm sick of all this wow related bullcrap being used in sc. It sickens me and you wow nerds need to get off my game User was warned for this post | ||
|
opticalza
New Zealand188 Posts
| ||
|
Liquorshot_852
Korea (South)72 Posts
| ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
| ||
|
fant0m
964 Posts
| ||
|
junkacc
99 Posts
| ||
|
251
United States1401 Posts
On August 17 2010 14:00 junkacc wrote: Remember people, at the end of this slippery slope is "pay to play", maybe $1/match. I'm sure Blizzard will come up with a funky reason for this like: "We've noticed alot of griefing using disconnect hacks. In order to provide a valuable service to our customers and prevent this kind of behaviour, we will implement a pay per play system". Then all the "Blizzard enablers" will jump on the bandwagon to exalt this as the greatest invention since sliced bread. No, they won't, and this is the retarded kind of logical fallacy the doomsday posters use to defend whining and crying about not being able to ladder reset and smurf at will. I love how people use a slippery slope example to defend their points, completely oblivious to the fact they just lost the argument at hand. I mean reread what you just wrote. $1 per match? Are you serious? edit: nvm I don't know why I even responded to a guy on here with the name "junkacc" | ||
|
junkacc
99 Posts
On August 17 2010 14:06 251 wrote: No, they won't, and this is the retarded kind of logical fallacy the doomsday posters use to defend whining and crying about not being able to ladder reset and smurf at will. I love how people use a slippery slope example to defend their points, completely oblivious to the fact they just lost the argument at hand. I mean reread what you just wrote. $1 per match? Are you serious? edit: nvm I don't know why I even responded to a guy on here with the name "junkacc" Oh? Is WoW not pay to play? Read my sig. Hasn't Robert Kotick said he wanted every game to be subscription based? Isn't he intoducing elements of the WoW model into the RTS genre and soon FPS genre with MW2:Black Ops? But I guess you are one of those people who refuse to see what's coming until it's staring you right in the face. Let's all stick our head in the sand and sing kumbaya | ||
|
evanthebouncy!
United States12796 Posts
On August 16 2010 20:48 Dia wrote: ahaha, i bet someone would point that out, you didnt even read it nor read a source, fucking moron, it will be fucking FREE (for the first time) shit ass, read before commenting + Show Spoiler + fuck i am sick of those ppl -,.- User was temp banned for this post. ouch, | ||
|
Broodie
Canada832 Posts
| ||
|
junkacc
99 Posts
On August 17 2010 15:21 Broodie wrote: I would rather like Clan tags to be implemented, but I guess you gotta start somewhere? You can start by paying up! | ||
|
PlosionCornu
Italy814 Posts
I believe I had this discussion with Archer in another thread. His point is that while it doesn't really influence what your character is capable of, the fact that the horse saves you 1/10/50/100g per character at each mount level *technically* is still a gameplay benefit. Even though those costs are basically negligible amounts at the levels you need them, even for a fresh character. Yeah,is a gameplay advantage for a sorry ass fella who cannot affort ,like, two hundred gold (nothing for a maxed level char in wotlk) ingame,and needs to spend 20 bucks IRL instead. It doesn't make sense really,come on,who is the masochist that would do that? You have the opportunity to get the 280% speed increase for "free" (ingame currency),but you choose to spend REAL MONEY on it? At this point I'm assuming that very few of you have actually played Wow till tbc,and I mean,it's a good thing for your health nonetheless,but it's clear that you are clueless about that game's mechanics,no offense intended. | ||
|
junkacc
99 Posts
The funny thing is even the 10 year olds that play MW is calling this bullshit but the "Blizzard Enablers" on this forum are eagerly lapping it up. | ||
|
PlosionCornu
Italy814 Posts
Oh? Is WoW not pay to play? Read my sig. Hasn't Robert Kotick said he wanted every game to be subscription based? Isn't he intoducing elements of the WoW model into the RTS genre and soon FPS genre with MW2:Black Ops? But I guess you are one of those people who refuse to see what's coming until it's staring you right in the face. Let's all stick our head in the sand and sing kumbaya Yeah that's true,Kotick said that in some rather shady way. I really don't care at this point,let the sheeps buy the MANDATORY 15bucks mappacks. I still belive that blizzard is not going to charge for gameplay affecting services anytime soon,otherwise they will lose every last remnant of popularity and fame,belive me,and they stated that they actually CARE about popularity and respect among gamers a lot of times. And,I,for the very hours of deep fun they gave me in the past,I'm going to trust them. If that sad day comes,hell,I've still my life to live,who cares about gaming? As I said before,current paid services are meant for retarded people with poor cash management,who spend their earnings on useless stuff. I mean,think about girls going shopping ,buying useless crap and the like. What you don't seem to get is that the very existence of people willing to throw away their dollars/euros is the reason for the existence of such services,THEY deserve to be capitalized on,to be ripped off. If everyone of us(in a utopian world I mean) was clearly and sincerely aware of what's the money true worth,no manager would ever imagine to throw in some paid service,it would cost him his face and his job. Just look at the real world,consumism and the like. People would buy any crap,any day,if you give em the urge to do so(commercials,subliminal messages). Think about it. By the way, AAA mmos are usually P2P because there's a whole lot of support tied to them,like paid game masters,content patches (1gb each),tech support,tons of servers to attend to and so on. Don't compare them to normal games,they are THAT different. | ||
|
Thrasymachus725
Canada527 Posts
They can't charge ridiculous amounts for things, because there is a sweet spot for EVERY product and service. 1000 People. How do you sell a game to them and get the most money out of it? If you charge 20$ for it, all 1000 will buy it You earn $20,000. If you charge 40$ for it, 920 will buy it You earn $36,800. If you charge 60$ for it, 800 will buy it You earn $48,000. If you charge 70$ for it, 680 will buy it. You earn $47,600. If you charge 100$ for it, 350 will buy it You earn $35,000. If you charge 150$ for it, 100 of them will buy it. You earn $15,000. So who is greedier? The way you people seem to figure it, the guy who charges $150 is the greediest, but even a child can see that the guy who charges $150 for the game is actually earning the least amount of money... The guy who charges 20$ for the game earns more, and everyone considers that person a saint. The person who charges 60$ earns the most money, because they found the sweet spot. That is not greed, it is mathematics, science and marketing all based on customer demand. So if you stop paying for these, then the sweet spot changes, and the prices go down. Vote with your wallet. Trust me, Blizzard knows how to do these calculations, and this is why they charge what they do for their products and services. Of course, there are other factors involved in these... They are most likely charging for name changes on the HIGH END of the scale (read: the one that earns the least money and sells to the least people). Why? Because they DO NOT WANT PEOPLE CHANGING THEIR NAMES. Note, this is not because they want to maximize profits (or they would charge less money for it), but because they want to offer a convenience to people, while minimizing the people who use it. This doesn't look like greed to me... (notice above, the one who charges such a high amount earns very little money compared to the one who charges at the sweet spot) Two other things that would affect the scale above are if Blizzard was a monopoly (it isn't) and if the product was an essential necessity of life, like food, water or electricity (it isn't). Come on people... I have never taken an economics or marketing course in my life. This just takes a little logic and common sense. | ||
| ||
