Again, I will not answer any more questions that you pose until you tell me what the difference is between RaF instant levels and a paid service where you simply pick a character and grant a level.
- - - Updated - - -
If you're gonna pull that logic, then what about the gear you get by auto-leveling a character to 80? Aren't you buying the gear, too?
Why are you against the gear, Jaylock?
Hey, remember when I dropped my keys and you thought the phone was ringing?
And honestly even if this service existed, I'd hope people know better than to throw away their money at it. You might as well ask for a class change service if leveling truthfully is that painful to you.
You're just like the people that complained about the mounts at level 40. Well i had to work my way there and i got glorious rippling thighs becuase i had to run till 40. So get out of here chicken leg with your unfit level 20 mount havin self. Earn your place!
Don't put words into my mouth. If you want to debate with people, try doing it with something actually said and not what you imagined they said.
When you say you wouldn't want to pay even more money in order to have less content, you are completely putting yourself in context as if it was a real service that would hurt your ability or desire to do said content. And your logic doesnt make sense, the content would still be there, you just would not be required to do that content if you didnt want to (in my example of a paid service to skip levels).
I'm not arguing with you that you are not interested in such a service. I get that. But please don't infer that a service like this would paying to "have less content."
But yeah we've told Blizzard that 85-90 is painful and they don't seem to have any intention to alleviate this pain currently. I think they did reduce the exp requirement at least, but it's still a painful grind.
Maybe put a limitation on the service.. you could only do a max of 5 levels every 3 months or so?
How would that change the dynamic?
In a hypothetical scenario, if a person pays money to, say, skip Outland, they are paying additional money to do less gaming (as that would be 10 less levels of leveling, and minus however many zones that level range takes now). Verses not paying, and doing Outland, and experiencing a larger amount of content. Obviously Outland would still be there and one could still do it, but if one wanted to do it, then one would not pay to use the feature. Which is the point I am making. I would be one of those people who would not pay to use the feature because I think it is counter intuitive to why I chose to play this game. Therefore I am not interested it, as previously expressed.
This is my opinion. You might have a different opinion, but part of the thing about opinions is they are subjective and therefore not really up to debate. Last I checked, it doesn't have to be "required" or "forced" or "harmful to my well being" -- as you claim I am implying despite explicitly stating I'm not -- in order to hold that opinion. There are a lot of things in this world I am not interested in, and I am fully capable of expressing that they are "not for me" without being obliged to try them first.
Since you seem completely unwilling to respond to what I am actually saying and instead want to argue with some imaginary person saying "no, don't force me to pay money to skip levels" I'm going to bow out of this debate and suggest that if you want to debate that point, you should find someone who is actually saying that and not someone who is simply expressing their interest level on a feature that you asked about people's interest level on.
Would you be in favour of paying an extra $10 to not have to wait in the line to see the movie you really want to see? You don't have to do it, it's just an option, if you want it