EPTPay to Play? - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Mannerheim
766 Posts
| ||
|
s4life
Peru1519 Posts
| ||
ChApFoU
France2983 Posts
On May 21 2007 18:39 semioldguy wrote: Actually paying to play might increase my chances of playing, it means less immature people most likely. Most people who complain about these relatively small monthly fees are the people without jobs and people I generally don't like anyway. okay, maybe not increase, but it wouldn't stop me. And there is always LAN. Yeah because in WoW you have a lot less immature ppl, and how about ppl who can't find a job or teenagers from poor families ? what a bunch of bastards, complaining for getting ripped off 15 bucks a month to play 6 games a week.... Do us a favor, get the fuck out -__-; | ||
Excalibur_Z
United States12240 Posts
You guys are looking at this the wrong way. There are two different kinds of pay-to-play. There's a monthly subscription like WoW, then there's an unlimited subscription for a one-time fee, like Kali. I noticed this the day Starcraft II's website came up. Nowhere does it mention Battle.net is free in the press release. Nor in the FAQ. At first I was concerned that it would be pay-to-play, but now that doesn't seem to be a problem. I'm 100% convinced this will be the new plan for Battle.net: - Out of the box, the game will cost about $50-60. For this, you get the single player campaign, the ability to play against the AI, the map editor, and LAN/Hamachi play. This is already what most games offer. - For an extra $10-20, you can register an SC2 Battle.net account. This is for several reasons: - This is primarily to deter hackers and pirates. If you are caught hacking in the new system (it's going to happen, the best they can do to fight it is proactive moderation) you are banned, and must pay again for a new account. - As for pirates, generating CD-Keys is something that can be done for any game. Having to register an account is something that can't be circumvented. Repeat or grievous offenders may also have their CD-Key banned, forcing them to buy a new game. I see this as less realistic though. - The new Battle.net will have additional features. Presumably this will include active hack scanning, a routed peer-to-peer system such as the one War3 uses, a tournament system a la War3, continuous ladders such as War3, possibly with the added benefit of cross-Ladder season-final tournaments. Another, less likely scenario is that Battle.net will actually be split between general multiplayer and competitive multiplayer. This would mean that serious Ladder players would pay a registration fee and would gain access to Ladder-exclusive events and games. I don't see this happening though since that would deter novice players from attempting the Ladder and improving their skill. In any case, it's not reasonable to ask for a monthly subscription for an RTS game. It's not feasible for the consumer or the developer. It's not going to happen, so relax. | ||
|
FirstBorn
Romania3955 Posts
| ||
|
CruiseR
Poland4014 Posts
| ||
|
Zironic
Sweden341 Posts
On May 23 2007 12:28 Excalibur_Z wrote: Copy-pasted from the other thread since this is the one linked from the sticky: You guys are looking at this the wrong way. There are two different kinds of pay-to-play. There's a monthly subscription like WoW, then there's an unlimited subscription for a one-time fee, like Kali. I noticed this the day Starcraft II's website came up. Nowhere does it mention Battle.net is free in the press release. Nor in the FAQ. At first I was concerned that it would be pay-to-play, but now that doesn't seem to be a problem. I'm 100% convinced this will be the new plan for Battle.net: - Out of the box, the game will cost about $50-60. For this, you get the single player campaign, the ability to play against the AI, the map editor, and LAN/Hamachi play. This is already what most games offer. - For an extra $10-20, you can register an SC2 Battle.net account. This is for several reasons: - This is primarily to deter hackers and pirates. If you are caught hacking in the new system (it's going to happen, the best they can do to fight it is proactive moderation) you are banned, and must pay again for a new account. - As for pirates, generating CD-Keys is something that can be done for any game. Having to register an account is something that can't be circumvented. Repeat or grievous offenders may also have their CD-Key banned, forcing them to buy a new game. I see this as less realistic though. - The new Battle.net will have additional features. Presumably this will include active hack scanning, a routed peer-to-peer system such as the one War3 uses, a tournament system a la War3, continuous ladders such as War3, possibly with the added benefit of cross-Ladder season-final tournaments. Another, less likely scenario is that Battle.net will actually be split between general multiplayer and competitive multiplayer. This would mean that serious Ladder players would pay a registration fee and would gain access to Ladder-exclusive events and games. I don't see this happening though since that would deter novice players from attempting the Ladder and improving their skill. In any case, it's not reasonable to ask for a monthly subscription for an RTS game. It's not feasible for the consumer or the developer. It's not going to happen, so relax. Ehh, everything you mention Warcraft 3 already has for free.... | ||
|
KodoU-
United States129 Posts
it just says on the SC box Compete free over battle.net. not compete on the free battle.net switching those words can change the entire meaning of it. personally i wont play sc2 if its p2p. 1st im broke. 2nd i have shitty internet so it wouldnt be worth it. 3rd its a retarded idea. and hey. i posted the exact same thread 4 days or so ago. pay more attention next time rather than just randomly posting, check to see if anybody else has already posted about it instead of wasting tl.nets space. and infact if someone did already post it, you can get all the answers you could possibly need from the other one, or if you just wanna argue, re open it. Thankz-- | ||
|
Servolisk
United States5241 Posts
On May 21 2007 18:37 GrandInquisitor wrote: huge ultralisk cock. I'm pretty sure Zerg don't have reproductive organs, except perhaps the asexual drone. Thanks for the image! :p | ||
|
jtan
Sweden5891 Posts
btw, In the roundtable-interview someone asked if there was going to be a fee and blizzard was like "we'll see" I'd probably pay another 20$ for a life-long battle.net account though. | ||
semioldguy
United States7488 Posts
On May 21 2007 23:47 ChApFoU wrote: Yeah because in WoW you have a lot less immature ppl, and how about ppl who can't find a job or teenagers from poor families ? what a bunch of bastards, complaining for getting ripped off 15 bucks a month to play 6 games a week.... Do us a favor, get the fuck out -__-; Hey, I don't play WoW, back when I did play MMOs quite a few years ago it wasn't rampant with immature people. Apparently that's not true anymore. I was a teen from a poor family. I've even had to live on the street before. And you can always find a job if you are out there looking hard enough. At sixteen I had found a job and was making more than either of my parents and helped them with bills, and food and such. Even if you're poor, you can still learn to manage a little money each month to have fun or for the ones you care about to have fun. Additionally, from my experience, the ones complaining aren't the ones who make little money, they are the lazy people who can afford it but don't like the idea of having to pay. I don't have a problem with people who make little or no money, I have a problem with the attitude that usually comes with those people who publicly complain about it. When your dirt poor, you complain among those you live with about money issues, but you don't bring those complaints to other people. So why don't you shut the fuck up until you learn a little more about what you're trying to defend. edit: it's a very embarassing thing for a teen to be a part of a poor family so why would they want to bring attention to themselves for being poor by complaining about it? | ||
|
Zelniq
United States7166 Posts
They just say 'that is undecided at this time' for business reasons, they know they will not do it. It's an RTS and Blizzard is the least likely company to do something like this | ||
|
Element)LoGiC
Canada1143 Posts
I think overall, the community would be much better. Not monthly though | ||
|
Mannerheim
766 Posts
| ||
|
Zironic
Sweden341 Posts
On May 23 2007 13:32 Element)LoGiC wrote: I really like Excal's thoughts. I would pay a lot of money to not encounter hackers, abusers, or anything else that could get an account banned on battle.net. I think overall, the community would be much better. Not monthly though But that is already implemented for free in Warcraft 3. It wouldn't make sense to start charging for something that is already given out for free, would just upset customers. If they want to charge money they would need to add alot more features to battle.net that would be worth the price. One thing that could make sense is if they add a monthly fee to the ladder and pay out cash prices to the top 100 players. | ||
|
Kaolla
China2999 Posts
On May 23 2007 13:41 Zironic wrote: But that is already implemented for free in Warcraft 3. It wouldn't make sense to start charging for something that is already given out for free, would just upset customers. If they want to charge money they would need to add alot more features to battle.net that would be worth the price. One thing that could make sense is if they add a monthly fee to the ladder and pay out cash prices to the top 100 players. not really all newbs would stay away and remember for every good player there's many newbs -.- | ||
|
Zironic
Sweden341 Posts
On May 23 2007 13:44 Kaolla wrote: not really all newbs would stay away and remember for every good player there's many newbs -.- There would ofcourse have to be a seperate free ladder. The cash ladder would be something for the pros and those that think they are pros :=) | ||
|
boghat
United States2109 Posts
| ||
|
HiddenTalent
United States246 Posts
| ||
|
TheSchwA
United States248 Posts
| ||
| ||
