In the first case, it's shape perception triggering ancestral fears. In the second, it's usually (horrible) past personal experiences related to the same species.
Actually, they live pretty decently with what other Brits would consider "too low" of a wage. Yes, that means no plasma 50" TVs, no going out to the pub every day and no expensive trips to exotic tourist destinations, but apart from that, they can definitely rent a two-room flat alone and afford normal food just like everyone else.
Sadly, world doesn't work that way. Welcome to Real Life.
Point is: if someone else can live where you live and work for less money, doing something you wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole (pun not intended) for the same wage, well then, it's not really their fault, is it?
It all boils down to UK natives whining that "it's hard" and refusing to do it unless they're paid extra. Then, some Romanians, Poles, Bulgarians come in, get the same jobs for 70% of the initial wage the UK natives were whining about and work harder and are happier with 0% insanity. This, in turn, fuels more whining from the UK natives who yell that "foreigners got our jobs, boooo!!!"
Meanwhile, the world spins round and the Universe doesn't give a flying fuck.
It's not about the user base respecting you, it's about you respecting your own work. I ventured to assume that since he was coding voluntarily, this would have been a passion-project. you don't just drop it without warning, really.
Having a kid doesn't stop you from posting a message saying "not gonna do this anymore". Also kids don't happen suddenly. You got nine months to prepare.
Death; Family tragedy of some sort;...Can't think of anything else which would mandate sudden interruptions of this kind. I mean, even if you wake up one day and just say "screw this, not doing it anymore", at least you should leave a message out of respect for your own work, if not the user base.
You can buy them on the auction house from other players.
...Who bought them for cash. That's the idea. The game forces "the player" (you or someone else, doesn't matter) to spend cash on cash-only stuff. Shortly put: there are items which can NOT be bought without spending cash. there is no way to produce them in the game without paying real money.
"Pay to have sooner" equals "pay to win" if it involves items which have an advantage. Period. Getting a "premium" item which is similar to a basic item, but generates more credits, for example, is not "pay-to-win". However, getting a "premium" item with cash and which gets a +20% accuracy boost is pay-to-win. It does not matter whether you could also get it in a month for free.
I propose an exercise: Players A and B start the game at the same time. player A pays no cash, player B buys such-and-such items with cash. none play the game at all, but go straight for an 1-v-1 duel. Assuming player skills are equal, does player B gear (bought with cash) give him an advantage over player A? If yes, pay-to-win. If no, my deepest apologies.
In terms of "pay-to-win" or lack of it thereof, World of tanks got it right. Maybe you have cash but don't want the endless credits grind, so you buy a premium tank which is slightly worse than any "regular" tank of the same tier and type, but prints credits. That's fine. Also getting extra XP by means of a "premium" account is fine too, because the game is built in such a way that faster progression doesn't confer an advantage.
lastly: I played PS2 for two weeks. I didn't leave because pay-to-win, but other reasons: rubberbanding, solo play was awfully boring, you could roam for ages with nothing to do.
Yeah, if you know what you're doing. A newcomer tries stuff out and WILL mess up. At least, give them the option to reset their FIRST character, and even in a limited way, e.g "only if below level 30" or something.
So you post a bunch of stuff about each game, then a disclaimer that it could all be inaccurate and you think that's OK?
Yes, because my personal opinion is personal, subjective and might not be the same as yours. I respect your opinion, now you go ahead and respect mine.
I'm from Romania. Here, we have "thick cheeks". We don't give a shit about anything, nor do we feel offended like sissies every time someone uses a strong word. You could swear at me all day long and I would not cease smiling:)
OK, Pay2own, whatever. "Here, take this locked coffer. open only with cash for shit rewards and an infinitesimal chance to get an exclusive mount". "You wanna upgrade your sidekick? Cash only please!" "You wanna upgrade your profession assets? Sash only please!"
EVE Online: Pros: player-driven game, space!, huge selection of ships, skills, development paths. Cons: subscription-driven, scammers galore, some RMT, mandating long gaming sessions, a destroyed ship is a lost ship, steep learning curve.
World of Tanks: Pros: Free-to-Play, one of the cheapest premium costs around, tanks!, PvP-only. Cons: filled to the brim with retard players.
World of Warplanes: Pros: Free-to-Play, airplanes!, PvP-only. Cons: fledgling game, retard players galore, gay game mechanics (literally: get behind the enemy player so you can fuck him up)
War Thunder: World of Tanks and World of Warplanes combined, same pros and cons apply.
Mech Warrior Online: Pros: mechs! Cons: pretty much everything else...
LOTRO: screw it, it's discussed.
Path of Exile: Pros: Free-to-Play, no P2W whatsoever, huge skill tree. Cons: confusing trading system, too much crap loot, if you mess up your build you have to start over.
Firefall: Pros: Future-based, apocalyptic setting, jumpjets!, battleframes! (and a nice selection too), PvE, nice graphics, original mining method. Cons: forever beta, filled with bugs, weird mix of fluff and gloom, confused development path, durability hit on death, gets boring and repetitive very fast.
Warframe: Pros: Nice space-based lore, battleframes, interesting idea behind the game. Cons: confusing level design, in-your-face P2W, gets boring after a while.
Neverwinter: Pros: great lore, nice graphics, good game mechanics, good skill tree, consistent development, web gateway with crafting. Cons: one of the most P2W games ever!, end-game means you either do 5-man quests or nothing.
Planetside 2: Pros: huge maps, has tanks, has motorcycles of sorts, has flying vehicles, pew-pew PvP, massive PvP. Cons: P2W galore, rubberbanding massive fights, vast areas feel devoid of... well, everything.
Hawken: Pros: F2P, mechs!, PvP Cons: too complex to handle for a twitch-based game. I think game speed should have been 1/2x of what's now to warrant tactical thinking rather than just "the younger player wins by reflex skill".
==================== Some of the games I have only played very little:
Rift: horrible game mechanics. Enough said. Vindictus: too manga. Could have been great but... Tera: played the stress test limited open beta, didn't quite understand what was happening, I just didn't click with it. Ryzom: played it a bit years ago, I heard it no longer requires subscription. IIRC it was good enough for a F2P MMO, but not good enough for subscription-based.
Disclaimer: this is my personal, subjective opinion on all these games. I played them all. YMMV.
Um... You must have dog ears. Not saying you aren't right, it's just... while this product might not be for you, it certainly satisfies MY needs. YMMV:)
Slashdot Mirror
In the first case, it's shape perception triggering ancestral fears.
In the second, it's usually (horrible) past personal experiences related to the same species.
Actually, they live pretty decently with what other Brits would consider "too low" of a wage. Yes, that means no plasma 50" TVs, no going out to the pub every day and no expensive trips to exotic tourist destinations, but apart from that, they can definitely rent a two-room flat alone and afford normal food just like everyone else.
What do you mean "intended as humor"??? GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHAHAHAAAAAAHHHH!
*runs away, hands flailing*
Sadly, world doesn't work that way. Welcome to Real Life.
Point is: if someone else can live where you live and work for less money, doing something you wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole (pun not intended) for the same wage, well then, it's not really their fault, is it?
It all boils down to UK natives whining that "it's hard" and refusing to do it unless they're paid extra. Then, some Romanians, Poles, Bulgarians come in, get the same jobs for 70% of the initial wage the UK natives were whining about and work harder and are happier with 0% insanity. This, in turn, fuels more whining from the UK natives who yell that "foreigners got our jobs, boooo!!!"
Meanwhile, the world spins round and the Universe doesn't give a flying fuck.
Bullshit!
I've done jobs worse than that and I didn't go crazy! GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHAHAHAAAAAAHHHH!
*runs away, hands flailing*
It's not about the user base respecting you, it's about you respecting your own work.
I ventured to assume that since he was coding voluntarily, this would have been a passion-project. you don't just drop it without warning, really.
Having a kid doesn't stop you from posting a message saying "not gonna do this anymore".
Also kids don't happen suddenly. You got nine months to prepare.
Death; ...Can't think of anything else which would mandate sudden interruptions of this kind. I mean, even if you wake up one day and just say "screw this, not doing it anymore", at least you should leave a message out of respect for your own work, if not the user base.
Family tragedy of some sort;
You can buy them on the auction house from other players.
...Who bought them for cash.
That's the idea. The game forces "the player" (you or someone else, doesn't matter) to spend cash on cash-only stuff.
Shortly put: there are items which can NOT be bought without spending cash. there is no way to produce them in the game without paying real money.
"Pay to have sooner" equals "pay to win" if it involves items which have an advantage. Period.
Getting a "premium" item which is similar to a basic item, but generates more credits, for example, is not "pay-to-win". However, getting a "premium" item with cash and which gets a +20% accuracy boost is pay-to-win. It does not matter whether you could also get it in a month for free.
I propose an exercise: Players A and B start the game at the same time. player A pays no cash, player B buys such-and-such items with cash. none play the game at all, but go straight for an 1-v-1 duel. Assuming player skills are equal, does player B gear (bought with cash) give him an advantage over player A?
If yes, pay-to-win. If no, my deepest apologies.
In terms of "pay-to-win" or lack of it thereof, World of tanks got it right. Maybe you have cash but don't want the endless credits grind, so you buy a premium tank which is slightly worse than any "regular" tank of the same tier and type, but prints credits. That's fine. Also getting extra XP by means of a "premium" account is fine too, because the game is built in such a way that faster progression doesn't confer an advantage.
lastly: I played PS2 for two weeks. I didn't leave because pay-to-win, but other reasons: rubberbanding, solo play was awfully boring, you could roam for ages with nothing to do.
Yeah, if you know what you're doing. A newcomer tries stuff out and WILL mess up. At least, give them the option to reset their FIRST character, and even in a limited way, e.g "only if below level 30" or something.
So you post a bunch of stuff about each game, then a disclaimer that it could all be inaccurate and you think that's OK?
Yes, because my personal opinion is personal, subjective and might not be the same as yours.
I respect your opinion, now you go ahead and respect mine.
Can you please let me know what's the free path to a Leadership "Hero" asset?
Have you read the disclaimer?
From a new player's perspective, they are deterrents, so-to-speak. I too like those, but most don't :)
I'm from Romania. Here, we have "thick cheeks". We don't give a shit about anything, nor do we feel offended like sissies every time someone uses a strong word. You could swear at me all day long and I would not cease smiling :)
Fair enough. I was trying to cover as many games as possible and didn't really get into detail.
OK, Pay2own, whatever.
"Here, take this locked coffer. open only with cash for shit rewards and an infinitesimal chance to get an exclusive mount".
"You wanna upgrade your sidekick? Cash only please!"
"You wanna upgrade your profession assets? Sash only please!"
Please...
Well, yeah. But I simply hate all the retarded spam in the trade hubs. It's idiotic.
Actually I dislike its implementation in those two games mentioned. I played a few simulators and I liked them.
EVE Online:
Pros: player-driven game, space!, huge selection of ships, skills, development paths.
Cons: subscription-driven, scammers galore, some RMT, mandating long gaming sessions, a destroyed ship is a lost ship, steep learning curve.
World of Tanks:
Pros: Free-to-Play, one of the cheapest premium costs around, tanks!, PvP-only.
Cons: filled to the brim with retard players.
World of Warplanes:
Pros: Free-to-Play, airplanes!, PvP-only.
Cons: fledgling game, retard players galore, gay game mechanics (literally: get behind the enemy player so you can fuck him up)
War Thunder: World of Tanks and World of Warplanes combined, same pros and cons apply.
Mech Warrior Online:
Pros: mechs!
Cons: pretty much everything else...
LOTRO: screw it, it's discussed.
Path of Exile:
Pros: Free-to-Play, no P2W whatsoever, huge skill tree.
Cons: confusing trading system, too much crap loot, if you mess up your build you have to start over.
Firefall:
Pros: Future-based, apocalyptic setting, jumpjets!, battleframes! (and a nice selection too), PvE, nice graphics, original mining method.
Cons: forever beta, filled with bugs, weird mix of fluff and gloom, confused development path, durability hit on death, gets boring and repetitive very fast.
Warframe:
Pros: Nice space-based lore, battleframes, interesting idea behind the game.
Cons: confusing level design, in-your-face P2W, gets boring after a while.
Neverwinter:
Pros: great lore, nice graphics, good game mechanics, good skill tree, consistent development, web gateway with crafting.
Cons: one of the most P2W games ever!, end-game means you either do 5-man quests or nothing.
Planetside 2:
Pros: huge maps, has tanks, has motorcycles of sorts, has flying vehicles, pew-pew PvP, massive PvP.
Cons: P2W galore, rubberbanding massive fights, vast areas feel devoid of... well, everything.
Hawken:
Pros: F2P, mechs!, PvP
Cons: too complex to handle for a twitch-based game. I think game speed should have been 1/2x of what's now to warrant tactical thinking rather than just "the younger player wins by reflex skill".
====================
Some of the games I have only played very little:
Rift: horrible game mechanics. Enough said.
Vindictus: too manga. Could have been great but...
Tera: played the stress test limited open beta, didn't quite understand what was happening, I just didn't click with it.
Ryzom: played it a bit years ago, I heard it no longer requires subscription. IIRC it was good enough for a F2P MMO, but not good enough for subscription-based.
Disclaimer: this is my personal, subjective opinion on all these games. I played them all. YMMV.
See... my ears can't tell shit for difference :)
Um... You must have dog ears. :)
Not saying you aren't right, it's just... while this product might not be for you, it certainly satisfies MY needs. YMMV
You should really upgrade that 486...