1. Hey Guest! If you're more than just a WildStar fan and want to keep up on the latest MMO news, reviews and opinion pieces then I'd like to suggest you visit our sister site MMO Central

Will Wildstar Stay p2p? or will it go f2p eventually?

Discussion in 'WildStar General' started by Chaddicus22, Mar 1, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Jinzouningen

    Jinzouningen Cupcake

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2013
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    8
    In direct response to the OP . Just my opinion and after ..uh something that happened last weekend i believe it will pull a Rift or better yet a swtor. I cant knock Rift. Its pretty high quality and very dynamic but just couldnt hold on to requiring a sub. Swtor was (still my opinion) DOA and as much as i wanted it to be more it just wasnt / isnt.
    I'll also add that i dont comment on games that i havent spent time playing. I dont google or watch videos and make a judgment. Its always after actual gameplay. Rift i played for a good while and my char. is over 50. Swtor i played early access and hung around till max level at that time, then dropped it like it was hot. Saying that should explain why i made a comment about WS..unfortunately.
    WS will no doubt have its players just like swtor still has but i wont be one of em that much i can now guarantee.
  2. Kataryna

    Kataryna Super Cupcake

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2013
    Likes Received:
    1,876
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Arkansas
    you do know that NDA is lifted? for everyone? Gone the way of Crate? So your comments seem to tilt towards you having beta and can thus say anything and everything you want ;)
  3. Drokk

    Drokk Cupcake-About-Town

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2013
    Likes Received:
    181
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Location:
    Urth
    Comparing WildStar to TOR is comparing apples to an unpolished turd, crawling with flies, lying in garbage, having been dipped in puke, with the psychological trauma and emotional baggage of being forced to play TOR.
  4. calebrus

    calebrus Cupcake-About-Town

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2014
    Likes Received:
    57
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    In a van down by the river
    I always notify them that I'm doing so.
    That way people that are following the conversation (troll included) understand why I am no longer responding. So they don't think that I'm finished with the thread or have somehow been 'defeated" in the debate, but that I'm simply not going to debate with that individual any longer.... on any topic.
    I do understand your line of thinking, I just disagree with it.
  5. InTheEnd

    InTheEnd New Cupcake

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2014
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    It's amusing reading some of the posts by trolls who seem to only come here to get a rise out of people. One in particular has stated his opinion that the combat, las, amps, gameplay, and other aspects of the game are dumbed down and not exciting. My initial response is to ask him if he has played any of the beta or seen any extensive gameplay footage. Coming from games like WoW and swtor I find the gameplay and combat of W* to be a refreshing change from the "norm"

    With that said there is no way to say with any certainty if the game stays p2p or f2p. The game is launching with a good amount of end game content in my opinion. The devs have also stated they want to release more content on a fairly decent timetable. I think this is a good step in keeping ppl interested and willing to keep on subbing
  6. Felion

    Felion Cupcake-About-Town

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2013
    Likes Received:
    77
    Trophy Points:
    28

    Good point, I'll do that next time... This time though already gotten into the mess so...


    Noted, I just want to finish off my argument with better/calm wording... Sorry! I have real trouble stop typing and now I have this huge reply that takes hours, I'll bleed if I don't put it out there...



    I feel I should explain what I mean, you asked for a detailed breakdown anyways. I'm not upset right now (was a bit in the last post, obviously) so I'm just speaking as objectively as I can: your previous posts had too many big claims too quick without backup, which is why I didn't detail my reply to each right away. Anyways, I'll tackle three particular points, feel free to correct me if those are not what you meant in your posts: 1) you feel that you have the freedom to express anything you'd like due to basic principles of "freedom of speech" 2) You feel that this freedom of yours is protected and that others should not criticize you on your actual opinion and 3) You feel that the game is in a general sense bad due to areas such as combat. Let’s tackle those points one by one.

    1 a). F = MA only holds true in conceptual simplified world, such simplifications are the original assumptions, i.e. the IF statement. If you see F = MA and start demanding everything in the world to behave like that, it's a logical flaw, as you're using the conclusion to defy the premise. An example: If A then B is a logical statement. You can't apply B to ANYTHING outside of A and you especially cannot use B to demand A. That would be circular logic my friend. The reason that I'm explaining this to you is because you're using one single high level definition of “public communication” to justify your detailed behaviour and at the same time condemning others for their detailed behavior using the same statement. Do you have a voice and a freedom of speech? Yes. Does it justify everything you say however you say it? No, because what you say can easily interferes with other rules and/or the general assumption that the rules are based upon, due to the level differences in theory and application. This is why we have mods, and jurisdiction systems, to APPLY the high-level rules to a detailed level, because they are two different categories and cannot be directly applied without assumptions. What you were doing is akin to taking F = MA and blaming the earth for not fully functioning according to it due to friction/distribution/etc. As I've mentioned above, it is a logical flaw --- hence why I say, you're wrong. Your opinion is not wrong, it cannot be as it is subjective, but your logic is wrong because it is contradictory to itself.

    1 b). In details, let’s talk about why “freedom of speech” taken to a certain level on the forum becomes a violation of other high level or higher level rules. You’ve talked about the definition of communication, let’s start from there. Any meaningful communication must be based on objective common grounds, starting from the basic assumption of compassion/subjective similarity between individuals. Even argument styles that involve argument for argument’s sake (such as that of Plato’s) requires a common agreement to clarify and objectify statements, else it is not a communication, but either propaganda and/or aggression with one-sided benefits only, be it the security achieved by a sense of domination (winning) or specific benefits in many cases of propaganda. Hence in order to communicate in a meaningful fashion, there have to be common grounds. In our societies, these common grounds are often assumed due to frequent occurrences, these are the basic premises that you cannot ignore when you apply the final conclusion. We assume general and similar understanding of a certain language, in other words when I say “you are wonderful” you don’t take that to be a bad thing. We assume of course subjective similarity, or in other words others have conscious experiences that are in its essence identical to our own. And on this forum specifically, we assume a general interest in this game and/or its community, that’s why it’s a fan site. But according to your own statements you do not have any interest in this game, AND judging from your tone you have very minimal respect for other people who do enjoy the game. Worst of all, you seem to not put too much thought into objective arguments, which violate the very essence of communication all by itself. Tell me if I’m wrong, but if these two observations indeed reflect your psych, then logically your mentality does not satisfy the basic assumptions of this forum and hence asking you to leave is the logical answer that benefits both us and you. Mostly us.

    1 c). Further details, because I do not like to criticize without a reasonable solution to the problem. Often people start their communication by establishing common grounds, or at least show that they’re mindful of possible assumptions that they do not know about. These are reflected in opening sentences such as “I think…” and “In general…”. Then as the conversation goes on, we replace and insert new/old assumptions and after enough iterations, we think we have a good idea what to assume, thus getting rid of the “I think”. This is the most efficient mechanism if you want your statements to be as precise and accurate as possible given limited knowledge on objective data. Objective data only becomes objective data through the same process, by trial-and-error and a weighted summation of individual occurrences, so if you DO have access and knowledge of the objective data you wouldn’t need to re-state your awareness of assumptions simply because you’ve already done so in the inquiry of such data. You think tones and ways of saying things is not important? That’s like saying the if statement is not important in a logical structure --- language is ultimately logic, it is organization of thoughts, of concepts, and this is why we have drama over things such as your tone.

    2 a). Let's let the first point go, assume that you can indeed take “freedom of speech” and apply them while ignoring all other interlaced details. I have to re-state that “Freedom of speech” or its variant cannot be taken to justify specific details and instances such as your use of word and your attitude --- just as “freedom of anything” in any social context is limited by “without harming others”; how much disagreement/pain/trouble is needed to constitute “harm” is then a specific parameter determined by the majority within a specific situation. If you have taken the freedom of speech to be an “end all” guideline though, this same guideline would have to apply to everyone else according to the definition of “communication” that I’ve talked about in 1 b). Your freedom of speech only guarantees your ability to speak, in other words others cannot stop you from saying things. You already have that. If you re-read my first post, when I was a little upset I still said “please have some self-respect and go away”, as my only means to stop you is to attempt to reach you on a common ground of self-respect, I cannot force you to stop even if I wanted to, short of going to your house and cutting your internet wires which is of course, illegal. But your freedom of speech does not remotely guarantee that your opinion will not be criticized by others, and since in your definition freedom of speech is the ONLY rule that applies, which led to you ignoring basic human interactive rules such as politeness and basic communication rules such as objectivity along with awareness of assumptions, that means according to your own platform and your own interpretation, others do not need to abide to those rules when they communicate either. So, the criticism that you receive can be as arrogant and as blatant as you’ve said things yourself, and you have no ground to object to this. If you do, as you have done, then you have just violated logic YET AGAIN. Hence again, you’re wrong, not because of your opinions, but because you’ve contradicted yourself.

    2 b). Even in the most liberal of countries, you don’t see people going on TV saying outrageous things. Because the audience are also free to blast their heads off with insults if they do not like what they hear. When you say nasty things about something that someone likes without establishing a common ground first, that is in essence cutting off possible communication/reconciliation and present yourself as completely hostile without redeeming quality. If you make me feel bad but you’re speaking from objective data, I can grab onto that common objective data and find it beneficial. If you make me feel bad but you’re at least well-intentioned, I can grab onto that well-intention and find it heartwarming. If you just blast away with arrogant words without presenting anything for me to relate to, all you’re doing is creating trouble without giving me any useful information, in which case the natural reaction is of course, to get rid of you, as you’re a hazard in my life. This isn’t going to change, this is human nature, this is the nature of any organism on earth in fact, it may even extend to fundamental rules of the universe. Even kindergarten kids know that you don’t say things that will make a lot of people uncomfortable without consequences, why is it such a surprise to you that it happens here.

    2 c). Now, you may say that “mature adults don’t feel bad over someone’s opinion” --- I’m not surprised that you’re saying that, a lot of people are. A lot of people who use this as a general statement, which is arguably true because it is a simplified version of a bigger statement and assuming particular situations it certainly holds. The bigger statement is, mature adults don’t feel AS BAD over someone’s opinion because 1) they can cope with it after the incident with previously developed system that analyzes the consequences of their action as well as finding methods to relieve their trouble and 2) they do not emphasize as much on particular incidents due to extensive experience and the inevitable higher level extraction that prevents too much “tunnel-visioning”. If ANY of these IF statements is violated, the original short statement does not hold. i.e. If you don’t give the person any reason to relieve their trouble, if the person isn’t prepared for your outrageous actions hence cannot quickly cope with it, if the person cares about a certain topic a lot, or that even if not AS MUCH, the discomfort was too big to begin with. Again, stop using a general conclusion to defy the premises. Also, given the argument at hand, the ONLY results that you need is whether if people are upset or not. If they are, it doesn’t matter whether if it’s over a cheesecake, they just are, and you have to deal with it. Look what “let them eat cake” got Marie Antoinette.

    3 a). Now let’s get to the final point. You think the game is “bad”, and you seemed to think that you’ve provided enough reasons, and that you’re right in that regard. Let’s start with right versus wrong: Only objective conclusions can be classified as either right or wrong, and right versus wrong is and is only a function of a weighted general consensus. Since it is a weighted general consensus, if your point is not sufficiently agreed upon by others, it cannot be classified as “right”, hence cannot be used as a premise to further development. The most efficient method of achieving agreement is to break down your statement into smaller arguments that share a common ground with those you’re communicating with: this can be done either through logic, or through data, as these two aspects are fundamental to communication and hence is by default the common ground of every communicating individual. Sometimes you don’t need to go so deep, you can start from places of common assumptions. In this case, OBVIOUSLY your opinion is met with a lot of disagreement, it is now up to you to explain them in further details in the attempt to find the common ground. Let’s take your statement that “combat is piss poor” since you’ve already commented on it. You’re saying that this thread isn’t about it and that’s why you just threw it in --- No, if you do this in Academia (or any official document for any company write up) you’ll be slapped silly. If you don’t have room to backup your statement, you don’t put it in. If this statement is under debate, you put “arguably” in front of it. Or you put “I think” in front of it to demonstrate your awareness of the issue at hand. Otherwise it cuts off communication right there, others who don’t agree with you have absolutely no means to understand further. Let’s move on: you said, and I quote “I feel that it's massively restrictive, not very well designed or fun to use, has a very low skill cap and, thus, doesn't lend itself well to exciting/challenging PvE or PvP”. You’ve put “I think” in front of this, that is good, it means you’re at least vaguely aware that it is under debate. In this case you cannot use this as a premise and reason to a definitive argument: “Because (probably) A, then (probably) B” is the right format, you were instead saying “Because (probably) A, then B”. But having the “I think” is already a lot better than your previous threads, in which you showed no sign of awareness of different opinions than your own, which arguably is a very small portion of public opinion on the forum. Why do I have a problem with that? Please again refer back to point 1 and point 2. That is why I was upset with your previous post but is able to speak more calmly during this one.

    3 b). Now, down to even more details, let me tell you what I’m looking for when I say “support”. You said “massively restrictive” --- how so? How do you define “restrictive game play” and how do you quantify it for a meaningful comparison? Do you refer to the limited area of the action set? And if so, what reasons do you have to say that a limited action set will result in a “more restrictive game play”? Let me give you an example: the easiest way (and most subjective but still objective enough), is to just show me a survey, or at least tell me that you’ve asked a lot of friends on their thoughts, then it is at least reasonable data. The more rigorous way is or course to prove it at a lower level, you can statistically find out the average number of skills that a typical player uses for the average duration of a fight (as well as the variance to cover the high end players) in an mmo and SUGGEST that 8 skill slots are not enough (it’s not a proof as it is still an estimation), or you can compare between an mmo with LAS and one without, and observe the frequency of changes in action of players in these two mmos (which still doesn’t constitute a proof due to too many other variables are not being accounted for and not being controlled, but it is a reasonable start), or you can start with the CD/cast time/duration/precede and successor probability to other skills of each spell and calculate the permutations and probability spread of various actions for a given duration between a LAS game and a game without LAS --- This will be a proof, but the results may not hit exactly the statement you want to make, as you’d then have to relate the probability spread with freedom of decision. I ask you to provide these proofs because I cannot agree with your original statement of “combat being restrictive” from both personal experience AND observation of others who play the game. As for LAS, I’ve worked on game theory before, these things are difficult and you simply can’t say “more buttons to push = more variation”, I have every reason to demand more details from you if a communication is to happen around that argument. But let’s not go there, in fact there are still 2-3 layers of explanations that you need to do before we even get to the stats/math level. In typical conversations, people would have found a common ground way before reaching this point. But since you just said something like “combat being restrictive”, my only possible answer is “uhh, no.” Since you sounded arrogant saying that, on top of me having no way of communicating, I also have to assume that you don’t even MEAN to communicate. As pointed out in 1, I have to then assume that you’re saying things purely out of aggression and/or personal interest at the expense of others and of course, I’d get upset.

    Now relate back to the original post topic, because you haven't been able to establish that "the game is bad" due to reasons I've pointed out above, your argument that "this game will go free to play in 2 years due to it being bad" doesn't stand. But even more than that though, let's suppose the game is bad, is there a necessary connection between a game being good/bad (needs to clarify definition here btw) and going free to play? Furthermore, is this the ONLY factor that will influence whether if the game will go free to play? If not, how would you confirm that this is the major factor that will be more important than other factors such as company decisions? How do you tell that the trend you sees in current mmos is correlated with any one of these factors independently?

    I'm being picky, we don't have to go into that much stats/math obviously. But I'm also not just being unreasonable when I say, it's not necessarily correlated to the game's quality and that going free to play or not might be something worth looking into from a profit point of view. Anyways, I shall /type.

    As the mod has pointed out the argument shouldn’t go on any longer, I'm probably already pushing it with this reply, so this will be my last reply to you on this topic, explaining what I said and what I meant, hopefully in a slightly friendlier atmosphere. If you still don’t see my point, I really don’t feel like typing this long of a post again so I’ll just take the advice of turning my back. But if you have questions such as the basis of my philosophical assertions, I can point you to the relevant fields and/or books and/or arguments that you can take a look at and confirm my points, such as theories of communication and logic construct.
  7. Noa

    Noa Cupcake

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2013
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Location:
    Phoenix, Arizona
    Well.. that was.. I know people look at three to four paragraphs and say 'wall of text' but yeah...that's.. a WALL of text.

    Anyways! It really depends on how good the game is and/or public interest in said game. It could wind up like various p2p mmo's that came before it and end up going f2p just to break even. I have no clue and cannot say how well this game will be, nor what exactly their in game payment methods are. All I know, is that if they try to dick over their customers in one way or another, they'll probably end up going f2p.
  8. azmundai

    azmundai Well-Known Cupcake

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2013
    Likes Received:
    323
    Trophy Points:
    63
  9. Felion

    Felion Cupcake-About-Town

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2013
    Likes Received:
    77
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Yes of course, I agree with this observation definitely. But it's really common sense: Less time, higher status, less explaining necessary. If A then B doesn't equal to if B then A though, it's not like if you write short emails you'll automatically be more successful, it's the other way around. And it really only applies to real-life single-target message exchanges where social status/position is a direct gating, since you can make reasonable assumptions of what the recipient can or cannot understand. The emails that I send to my students are never longer than a few lines --- Because I don't really have to justify myself, I just need to go straight to the point with minimum proof, and I have a good idea of what each of my students may or may not understand. That works only because my real life experience in the field has been extensively verified AND I'm addressing my students directly and individually. I do agree however, in the very essence any argument can condense into no more than a few line of logic structure. But those gets misunderstood very easily due to how high leveled and inclusive they are.

    On the internet, I can't just say "look at my resume, I'm experienced in this so I'm likely right so just agree with me". And given the format of internet communication, that SHOULD be the case. In the context of the internet, assumptions need to be built upon from ground zero instead of the layers of gating that are aimed to certify these assumptions in real life, and that has benefits as well as draw backs.

    Another point is that, emails are tailored to a specific recipient, where articles and forum posts are targeting ultimately the public. You can assume the mentality of your single recipient but you can't assume what the public may or may not understand because it'll be a distribution. You'd make a guess upon accessing your audience, but other than that you just need to put a lot more explanations in to cover as much range as possible without losing the other end of the spectrum. Just look at the article you've quoted: it talks about how emails could be concise and efficient, yet itself is a several page long article. Because it is an article, not an email. It addresses potentially anyone who reads it, not just a particular person who's interest/mentality you already can guess at. Forum posts are hybrids between emails and articles in these regards, for me personally, I treat them more as articles. If I'd want to talk to someone specifically, I'd whisper instead.

    Having said that, long posts don't really work given current expectations of things, I know that very well. In this case, I've given a shorter answer first, then been specifically asked to state my points in more details so... :)
  10. azmundai

    azmundai Well-Known Cupcake

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2013
    Likes Received:
    323
    Trophy Points:
    63
    cool, just keep in mind, Carbine employees probably don't have time to read all of that, and at least personally speaking, id rather they read it than some anonymous internet guy who probably wont change their mind anyway :).
  11. Felion

    Felion Cupcake-About-Town

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2013
    Likes Received:
    77
    Trophy Points:
    28

    Good point, to a certain degree I can't deny part of a long post is provoked response. It's always better to aim for the right audience in any public display, I've previously tried to always contain the length within one mouse scroll but you know. Sometimes it deviates due to reasons I do not want to repeat.
  12. Jinzouningen

    Jinzouningen Cupcake

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2013
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Thus, unfortunately why i compared it to Tor. Even though i forced myself to suffer 50 lvls of Tor i could only manage 10 levels on each faction of WS. 2 diff classes and paths. Always just my opinion. Was not fun. Ive played a grind game for years. The game had no quests but i enjoyed playing it. This game has quests..was a grind..did not enjoy it.

    Combat is pretty much just looking at the ground. OK so what maybe its more fun pvp. i dunno i gave up so called pvp when ultima online turned traitor.

    After all the anticipation and waiting i actually hated how i felt about the game after playing it. I had to make myself stay logged on. Dom side ..imo. was more enjoyable the first 4 or 5 levels than the exile side.

    I brush bugs, imcomplete <REDACTED>, lack of optimization aside in a beta and just report everything i see but honestly it wasnt any of that that ran me away. Well the crystals that wouldnt stop flashing on an early Exiles areas gave me crazy eye strain and i had to log out but aside from that..I Just was not feeling it as they say. The game will have its players no doubt about that. I mean swtor is still around !! so yeah.
  13. Miatog

    Miatog Cupcake-About-Town

    Joined:
    May 24, 2013
    Likes Received:
    95
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Most games in this modern environment I expect to go B2P or F2P. The upcoming ESO is one of them, I don't see it lasting as P2P based on my beta play and the complete lack of raids. WoW can hold as a sub game because they started when that was the norm and they have such a huge base that there's no need for them to change. Anything now though has to deal with the fact that there's a very large range of options out there. GW2, Rift, TSW just to name the ones off the top of my head.

    Wildstar is the first game in years I've felt has a fighting chance at holding at P2P. If the 40 man raids goes over better than I expect, that will be a huge plus for them. Selling game time safely if a huge plus in their favor. I'm convinced it's one of the reasons EVE holds out, given the number of people I know who don't spend a dime on it past buying it.

    One of the biggest things that gives me hope for Wildstar is also one of the things that gives it a fighting chance at holding at P2P. The fact that it has a dev team with lots of experience working on successful MMOs in the past. This means they came to the game with a very strong understanding of what people do and don't like.
  14. PlayerOne

    PlayerOne Cupcake-About-Town

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2013
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    28
    While I commend you on the time and effort you spent on your post, it saddens me that it's been a waste since you completely, utterly and totally misunderstand me and seemingly everything I have said in every post I have made.

    I post my opinions, generally in threads that specifically ask for the opinions of people who use these forums. When questioned or confronted I defend my opinions and explain why I have them. That is pretty much it.

    And that's all great and stuff but where you fall down is you that you take your copy/paste logic and only apply it to whichever side of the argument is convenient to you.

    It also seems that you are in favour of a system where, while there are already clear boundaries set out and enforced by the people in charge (in this case the owners and moderators of this forum), it's OK for some users to set out and enforce their own. I disagree.

    Here you trip over your own assumptions, hit the floor face first and come up shining a toothless grin at me.

    Surely my very presence here would make it obvious that I do, in fact, have "a general interest" in this game. But, you assume, presumably, because you bought into the negativity surrounding me, that I don't. Incorrect.

    You also assume that I have "very minimal respect for other people who do enjoy the game". That is also incorrect. My lack of respect is reserved for people who jump on my case for me having an opinion that differs from theirs.

    You'd be correct to assume what you do if I had made a post/posts that ridiculed people for liking this game. I don't believe I have done that. If I have it would have only been in retaliation of a similar act. What has happened though is I have been ridiculed for criticizing areas of it. But that's fine with you, right? That's fair in a world where it's acceptable for you to only be prepared to apply your "logic" to your favoured side of the argument.


    I disagree. I think we have drama here because a) certain people love to feel part of a group/club/tribe and united, especially when they perceive that the odds are overwhelmingly in their favour, against a common enemy. And b) because, when it isn't scary, people love to argue.

    And again, you apply your "logic" to only your side of the argument.

    What you completely fail to understand is that I am fine with my opinions being questioned, talked about, disagreed with or disliked. I welcome discussion. I always have. You assume I just want my opinions to be accepted by everyone. I don't. I don't want to have anything to do with people that weak or dull.

    You mistake my willingness to defend my opinions as an attempt to force them on others. Incorrect. All I try to do is back up the reason why I have my opinion and discuss why the person I am talking to has theirs and why I don't agree with it.

    But again, it seems you want a one way street. You seem to want me to either conform or go away. Why would I?

    Why do you find my opinions so outrageous?

    Why do you assume that on a forum such as this two people with opposing opinions finding common ground is the goal?

    Why do you assume that I am surprised when people get mad because of what I say? I know it's going to happen, but I don't see that as a reason not to say what I think. I am not setting out to offend anyone. I am just stating my opinion. If people get upset by me saying that I think this game will be a Free-to-Play game in around 2 years after it launches then I feel the problem is with them and not me. I also feel that the majority of the world's population would agree with me on that.

    It feels to me that you are in favour of people just coming here, reading a bit, getting a feel for what is the general opinion of this game and going with it. That makes me wonder what you think the point of a discussion forum is and what kind of sheep you are/wish everyone would be.

    It seems you want to live in a world where everyone "pussyfoots" around not saying what they think for fear of upsetting someone. That world doesn't exist.

    I stand by my opinion. And that opinion is that if someone is offended by something I have said about a game they don't own (this is the first post I have made since pre-order was opened) or didn't play a significant part in creating then the problem is most definitely with them. And if they did play a significant part in creating this game then part of the pay cheque they receive each month is there to cover any discomfort negative opinions bring them.

    If that is my opinion then I can't be wrong.

    I have explained the reasons behind every one of my opinions. I have never made a post that says "THIS GAME IS BAD" and nothing more. I have given opinions, both positive and negative on parts of the game (usually in the appropriate threads) and criticized areas of the game I feel aren't done well enough or are conceptually flawed.

    I feel like you are offended that I wouldn't go over those reasons for the umpteenth especially for you. I think you got upset because I suggested that if you were interested enough in knowing what fueled my opinion(s) you looked up my previous posts and read for yourself.

    My posts are just forum posts on a small, fan run forum for a small, as yet unreleased, game. They are not official documents. No one in their right mind would think they are or that I am claiming they are. Criticizing such forum posts because they don't measure up to the standards applied to official documents makes you look desperate and pathetic.

    Firstly, that isn't a rule. You just made it up to help your argument. Secondly, good luck with commenting on and reporting every single post made here (and on the WHOLE INTERNET why not) where the poster doesn't back up their statement. Thirdly, my statements are all backed up, you are just too lazy and/or arrogant to read the posts where I back up what I have said.


    You'd have saved yourself a whole lot of time, effort and heartache if you'd have understood and used one of the most common general assumptions (which you are so fond of) used on the internet. That is that everything people post on a forum or comments section is just their opinion unless it is stated otherwise.

    I have also discussed this with people on this forum. You just couldn't be bothered to look I guess.

    1. My thoughts on this are all in my post history. All you have to do is look (if they aren't there your problem is with a moderator and/or the spam reporting community, not me).

    2. It is just an opinion/prediction on a small internet forum and, thus, does not require meaningful data to back it up. Feel free to disagree.

    I could do that. Or, so could you. Neither of us will. I'll just continue sitting here feeling like WildStar has a restrictive combat system and being of the opinion that many of the game's potential customers will feel the same and that one of the reasons the game won't do so well because of it and you'll do whatever it is you do.

    It's like you have an imaginary dart board in your mind and each segment contains an assumption you could make. You shut your eyes, throw a dart....and hit your imaginary cat.

    I say I feel that WildStar's combat system is restrictive because that is what I feel and that offends you or upsets you to the point where you feel it's OK to tell me that in order to earn the right to express that opinion I should have done some sort of detailed study. That's actually hilarious.

    I don't. You've made the mistake of thinking I/the whole world uses the same scrambled logic you do.

    The creator of this thread asked if I/anyone thought this game would stay Pay-to-Play or go Free-to-Play eventually. He/she then stated that a lot of people didn't think it would stay Pay-to-Play and asked for my/everyone's thoughts on that.

    I gave my thoughts and added a prediction that it would be Free-to-Play in around 2 years. I still think that. There are no rules or social conventions that state I must give my reasons for thinking that. However, I did. From my point of view there isn't very much excitement surrounding this game. And then, when questioned/confronted I gave the reasons why I don't think there is much excitement surrounding this game. The piss poor combat system was one of those reasons.

    What seems to upset you is that I didn't go into enough detail for you and that I don't care enough to do so even when you ask me to/rage at me.

    Thank you for the offer but after seeing the warped perception of reality and sense of entitlement those fields, books and arguments have given you I feel I may be well advised to steer clear.
  15. Iamkeene

    Iamkeene New Cupcake

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2014
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    3
    I have no interest in f2play games, and if Wildstar goes that route, then I'll leave it and hope for the next mmo to be as fun as wow/wildstar were in the beginning.
  16. Drokk

    Drokk Cupcake-About-Town

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2013
    Likes Received:
    181
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Location:
    Urth
    I'm of the same opinion, but unfortunately the genre is trending towards f2p. This mmo might be the last to hold a sub (ESO will be f2p pretty quick, and Blizzard says their next mmo won't have a sub). So if this game goes f2p I'm probably done with the mmo genre.
  17. SevenFD

    SevenFD New Cupcake

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2014
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    goddamn that was a massive wall of text. holy <REDACTED> lol

    i think this game will last much longer than ESO will has a p2p game. im going to try the open beta to see whats up, but right now i think the WoW expansion is going to demolish the playerbase since everybody will of course go back to that game. for alot of the MMO gamers these days, WoW is their first. mine was anarchy online, and still to this day i will go back and play it because of nostalgia or whatever. not to mention i love being a victim of or causing mob pain trains of death lol. so yeah, once that draenor game comes out, bunch of folks will flock to it and leave this game in the dust. im more than sure it'll have its niche audience though
  18. Felion

    Felion Cupcake-About-Town

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2013
    Likes Received:
    77
    Trophy Points:
    28
    It's been such a while, why would you bring this up again...

    I said assumptions, I kept saying "assuming", see that's the point. Nothing to argue about there. If I'm wrong about you caring for others on the forum and caring about the game, then I'm glad, honestly. See what I did there? Win win situation, and it's not a trick. Out of the two answers, I really would much prefer you to say "your assumption is wrong", it's like accusing your spouse of cheating, the answer you want to hear is "no I didn't".

    As for why I got upset in the first reply, I've already explained. In short, I thought you were aggressive and mean and self-righteous. I explained why too, it's pretty reasonable to assume that given what you've typed in those two posts. I couldn't do anything about you being aggressive or mean except just telling you to go away (which I did). But self-righteous, I can deal with by providing arguments against it. So after finding out that you're aggressive but not completely mean (evidenced by you replying, which shows you still care and that's good), I decided to target the self-righteousness and the aggressive part of things by writing a very long post. You then replied in this most recent post that you do not think that you're either aggressive or self-righteous, well. Like I said, if you tell me so, I'll believe it, that's all I was fishing for.

    I've got no problem with an "entitled elitist" title you give me, I better hope that people think of me as that! That's kinda what I've been working for all my life, to be entitled to say things based on my experience and knowledge. To be one of the elite in the area of my interest through hard work and talents. See the problem was never with elitists/entitlement, it's with the negative attitude that sometimes come with it, the refusal to communicate, the jerkiness. And these problems don't always apply to elitists and they definitely do not ONLY apply to elitists.

    Now you keep saying "warped logic", I think what you mean is "wrong assumptions". See, when I was saying "logic" I simply meant logic, A + B = C kind of logic. I wasn't calling you stupid, relax. Categorical mistake, circular logic, these are all specific types of logic error that occur commonly in arguments, I was simply pointing that out. If you think I did any of those things, you can call me out in one line. I don't think it'll take you even 5 seconds to type it out. GIVEN my assumptions, is my conclusion reasonable? If yes then it's not a logic problem. This assumption can be wrong of course, it's merely an "IF" statement, and if the assumption is wrong then naturally the conclusion doesn't follow. But that's not a logic problem, it's just a null argument. You were right in your counter points, that I made lots of assumptions (I made sure to state them clearly so you can deny them directly), and you've clarified that you do not fit into these assumptions --- That's good, it's good communication, and it achieves what I've wanted to find out --- whether if you're a jerk or not. You say you aren't, which is good enough for me: because even if you still act jerkishly, the fact that you care about not being a jerk is a lot better than the worst alternative already.

    I'm not gonna go into details for all your specific counter points though, some of the things you question are not assumptions but rather arise from definition, for example two people communicating attempting to reach common ground --- Given my previously established definition for communication, this is the only possible goal, feel free to try to derive the alternatives. If people don't do that, it's not called communication, but a power play. You also don't have to feel obliged to argue against every point that I made. Some of these points are just me rambling on, I think that's pretty obvious. If I spent a paragraph writing on how the earth revolves around the sun, would you attack that point as well? Agreement aside, it's simply not relevant, as the original paragraph at best just serves as an example or illustration to a bigger point. On hind sight you could've made it simple in the very first post by saying "chill, I'm just stating my opinions, not trying to challenge the objective standard underhandedly". Alternatively, I guess I could've made it simple too by asking "Are you a jerk? If yes, go away. Do you care about the game and the community? If not, go away." That way, you provide two words as answers, our argument finished, everyone moves on.

    Again, let's drop it. I got what I wanted, you got what you wanted, let's move on.
  19. PlayerOne

    PlayerOne Cupcake-About-Town

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2013
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    28
    I don't read these forums very often. Have you made up a rule about how quickly a post must be replied to before it's off limits too?

    Is there a rule about saying "I am done with this/you" and then posting again within an hour or two of receiving a response? If not, maybe you are the guy/girl to make one (up).

    I don't think you make much sense at all to be honest with you. It's like you have these prefabricated/borrowed arguments (that I suspect you picked up on some wannabe intellectual forum, a philosophy for dummies book or something similar) and you squint your eyes see what you want to see (which usually isn't there) and shoe horn these strange arguments in at all costs.

    You talk about me appearing self righteous, you are welcome to your opinion, but that's a pretty transparent looking house you're hurling rocks from. Be careful.

    You hope so so much that you give yourself the title and then say that someone else gave it to you. I did no such thing. I, at no point ever, described you as an "entitled elitist".

    You're being ridiculous and desperate now. It's actually embarrassing to read.

    And here is what I believe to be something you've read somewhere, claimed as your own and have been desperate for an opportunity to use. Except, it doesn't fit here, does it? I never described you as an elitist or as entitled. I said you had a sense of entitlement. I meant it in the most negative way possible. You feel entitled to make demands of someone you have never met before and never earned the respect of. Like a spoilt child.

    At no point did I ever mean you were entitled. But you already know that.

    No. I mean warped logic.

    Your logic was not sound. You know that. That is about the only reason I can think of that you a) called it logic to start with and b) are claiming now that because it is logic it's indisputable. It's a pretty overused and easy to spot form of arguing. Kids use it all the time when trying to get their own way or trying to get away with something. Maybe that will be in next year's class.

    It gets worse...

    Now you think it's OK to make up a definition "communicating", one different from the definition found in any reputable dictionary and the common use of the word, claim it as a definition and base your argument around it. The goal of communication is not always to reach common ground. The goal of two people arguing/discussing something in the way we are talking about on a forum is not always (if ever) to reach common ground.

    Again, you just made this up.

    This is so ugly....

    If I thought you were raping the truth to back up a desperate argument, of course I would.

    Why should I have to? What kind of warped world do you live in where, when someone states an opinion that differs from yours, they need to justify it, preface it or apologise for it?

    I was asked, by the person who started this thread for my opinion(s) (thoughts, more accurately). I gave them. But you think, and I do not know why, I should have to pander to overreacting fans of the game by stating that what I just said was, in a thread started specifically to gather people's opinions, my opinion? The day that becomes necessary is the day I no longer wish to be part of the human race.

    You (along with others) jumped on my opinion(s) and tried to give me grief about it/them and the way they were stated. Again, you would have saved yourself a lot of time, effort and heartache if you had either accepted that I have a different opinion or tried to discuss the opinion instead of going on a nonsensical and angry rant about things you made up or stole.

    My opinions are that this game has a poor combat system, both conceptually and in the ways it is implemented and executed and that is a reason why I don't see it surviving very long as a Pay-to-Play MMO.

    As I have told you many times, my thoughts on why and how I think the combat system is flawed are in my post history (if they are not then they have been deleted by a moderator). You are more than welcome to and capable of looking them up.

    Even if the answer to question one was yes and the answer to question two was no it is not your place, now or ever, to tell me to go away. You have no power.

    I thought you dropped it before this latest post.

    And what was it you wanted? To use those arguments and that warped logic you stole in an argument?

    You picked the wrong one. They simply do not fit here. They just look silly.
  20. Azzurri

    Azzurri Podcaster

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2012
    Likes Received:
    354
    Trophy Points:
    63


    The only problem with your EVE reference is that EVE is a completely different game than WS. There is nothing like it on the market, while WildStar is a ThemePark based MMO that there are 100's of. It's like comparing apple to oranges, you just can't compare the two since their target audience is completely different.

    If I'm being honest, I think ti will go F2P or at least B2P. I don't think it does anything so awesome from other MMO's that are F2P to warrant a Sub fee.

    To me it's your basic Themepark MMO with some cool ideas, but nothing I have not played in the past 10 years for me that screams this is so amazing.
    Fishsticks likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page