I wonder, do character transfers count as "cash shop" for the wow figures?
I wonder, do character transfers count as "cash shop" for the wow figures?
(Warframe) - Dragon & Typhoon-
(Neverwinter) - Trickster Rogue & Guardian Fighter -
that list gotta be faked as shit. Just looked at what crossfire actualy was. Its a terrible TERRIBLE clone of counter strike. No way in hell they earned that much legit. No way
Actually, Crossfire is a really decent CS clone, that can run on literally anything
Also the infestion and invisible gametypes are good amount of fun, try it out yourself, its F2P afterall
Time is on our side
Brutal Gladiator Enhancement Shaman *rawr*
Blizzard used to make about $1.5 billion back in WotLK/Cataclym from WoW, now it is about $800+ million.
- - - Updated - - -
Pretty sure they are counting how Asia pays for the game, it can't be 200+ million just based on micro-transactions. Same for Lineage 1.
- - - Updated - - -
People always attacked SWTOR's F2P model, but I like it the best. I don't see where this notion of F2P players having access to everything became the rule, if they don't pay they shouldn't have access to everything. I like their model of limited raids and battlegrounds unless you pay. To me personally content restriction is better than selling gear and super convenience items. Good for them that it is working well.
- - - Updated - - -
The subscription revenue model has always been the minority in gaming, especially if you look at it globally.
swtor's f2p model used to be a lot worse
it's still a piss poor model from a consumer point of view but obviously it's working out very well for BioWare/EA
people say in F2P game, you should pay for cosmetics and/or convenience, you should not be able to buy power directly.
and here you have it, hiding head slot is purely cosmetic right, but you think you shouldn't pay for it?
what should a F2P model be then?
edit: the OCD in me thanks the mod for closing the parentheses on the title.
Last edited by Vankrys; 2014-01-20 at 11:33 PM.
you are being unreasonable. there is a difference between naked character and not being able to hide helmet.
hiding helmet, color matching, display title, those are cosmetic preference. a character appearing naked is an eye sore for both subscriber and F2P alike, and that is going too far, even for EA.
Beside, i bought all those unlock off the GTN, didn't cost me a penny. Think of it as a grind feature. that's what F2P is all about right? grind for it or pay for it.
you applying logic to an extreme. that's what i found unreasonable. nevertheless you are correct in that the limit is indeed arbitrary. In my subjective opinion, leaving F2P character appear naked until the buy an unlock to display armor is a big nono, seems totally counter productif.
Hiding helmet however is totally optional. it does not "shock" me or break my immersion to see a vanguard with his helmet on. Again, that is my point of view. Hiding halmet is a cosmetic preference that is not brutally shocking or immersion breaking.
No. Not an extreme. It's the exact letter of your argument sans the arbitrary line you drew.
And hiding your helmet is an option that exists in damn near every MMO you will ever play. The only MMOs I can think of off hand that don't have it usually have completely different systems driving character appearance (City of Heroes, Champions Online, DC Universe, etc.). And I certainly can't think of any other MMOs that charge for it.
we are hijacking the thread, so i will concede, you are indeed entitle to think it's a misuse of the "buy cosmetic only" F2P mantra. i do not agree but there is value to the argument. That is just a small grief though, the unlock might cost an hour or so of dailies.