open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked Dust 514's "cover charge" revealed {eurogamer}
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6

Author Topic

Khamelean
Posted - 2011.07.13 06:31:00 - [121]
 

Originally by: Nikayte Askiras
LMAO!!!! You will be hard pressed to find someone to pay $60 for some old, out dated engine's piece of sh*t, and now you have to pay a $20 dollar cover charge to get in!?! LOL...$80 in total to play some Unreal engine 3 game.

This game is going to fail so hard, and I'm going to laugh when CCP starts looking like Greece's debt problem.


First of all, where did you pull the $60 from? The only initial cost for the game is the $10-$20 cover charge.

As for using an old engine. Portal 2 sold pretty damn well, it uses the source engine which is getting close to a decade old now. Gears of war 3 uses the unreal engine, I doubt it will have the troubles your predicting.

Steve Thomas
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2011.07.13 07:25:00 - [122]
 

Bestbuy has a habit of tossing up whatever price and ship date they feel like for a game just to try to catch some initial preorders. hell they even pulled the ship date back to an earlyer date on games they list for the same reason so many times its not funny.

Aina O'Sinnor
Posted - 2011.07.13 08:15:00 - [123]
 

Will there be monocles in Dust? Hell, you'll have to put in some more cover charges to afford one...

Dare you CCP to sell monocles cheaper to Dust players than to us!

Gurgeh Murat
Minmatar
Blue Republic
Posted - 2011.07.13 11:14:00 - [124]
 

Originally by: Khamelean


The problem with solution is that it negates one of primary purposes of aurum, which is a plex sink. It's designed to slowly drain excess plex out of the market. It was not designed as a cash grab. There are much better ways do that, had it been there goal.


Y'see, I would probably have phrased that thought as "I think the problem with that solution is that it would negate what seems to be one of the primary purposes of aurum, which is as plex sink"

Then again, Im not a dev alt who came up with the idea so I guess I would have to word it differently. Otherwise my words sound like a determined, established fact. If you know this to be true khamelean, please do post a link to said source.

If you cannot source this statement you are either

A) Dev alt

B) A fountain of self assured fail spouting your conjecture and opinion as established fact.

I eagerly await your response sir.

Vice Admiral Spreadsheet
Caldari
Posted - 2011.07.13 11:28:00 - [125]
 

Edited by: Vice Admiral Spreadsheet on 13/07/2011 11:28:48
It's fairly common knowledge that one major function of Aurum isto act as a PLEX sink.
There's a good explanation on the second last post of this thread: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1529713

By acting as a PLEX sink, CCP get more profit Smile

Mr Kidd
Posted - 2011.07.13 11:49:00 - [126]
 

I like this quote...er....maybe like is too strong a word:

Quote:
Despite the payment, CCP insists gamers are getting Dust 514, which ties into PC-exclusive MMO Eve Online, for free.


This speaks volumes to the extent CCP is willing to delude itself and anyone who is listening & willing to drink their kool-aid. Lets see, you'll pay a "cover" charge to play the game...nope, not free. And then you'll need to invest some more currency to buy all those fanciful in game gadgets so you're not relegated to "ammo runner"...nope, not free.

You know, CCP, there's a reason many of us prefer subscriptions over "free" gameplay. It's because we understand that services cost the service provider to provide them and they're trying to make a profit. Everyone with a brain knows what F2P means. It the equivalent of having you stick a straw into our corroded artery and bleeding us dry.

Samir Duran Xadi
Posted - 2011.07.13 12:01:00 - [127]
 

Originally by: Khamelean
Originally by: Nikayte Askiras
LMAO!!!! You will be hard pressed to find someone to pay $60 for some old, out dated engine's piece of sh*t, and now you have to pay a $20 dollar cover charge to get in!?! LOL...$80 in total to play some Unreal engine 3 game.

This game is going to fail so hard, and I'm going to laugh when CCP starts looking like Greece's debt problem.


First of all, where did you pull the $60 from? The only initial cost for the game is the $10-$20 cover charge.

As for using an old engine. Portal 2 sold pretty damn well, it uses the source engine which is getting close to a decade old now. Gears of war 3 uses the unreal engine, I doubt it will have the troubles your predicting.


Yeah but those two games are awesome and they are made by Valve and Epic. there is absolutely no comparison between these two companies and CCP.

Gurgeh Murat
Minmatar
Blue Republic
Posted - 2011.07.13 12:01:00 - [128]
 

I aggree it makes sense, especially given akita's analysis of projected plex stockpiles from last available ccp data and the troublesome way that it may be turning up on CCP's balance sheet. My point was the manner/tone of khamelean's statement.

Stating a theory, no matter how well thought out or supported, as established fact would seem a touch presumptive would it not? The quote I posted above was exactly that, it was presented as a statement, not a supposition. It presented itself as knowing implicitly the strategy behind ccp's nex store.

And its true of all his posts, check his posting history.

So I believe my theory still stands. Without a link to a CCP source, Khamelean is either a devalt or a pompous fu(k stating theory as fact.

If its the former then god help us all :(

Fernacasso Atoll
Posted - 2011.07.13 12:52:00 - [129]
 

This is the most ridiculous line of reasoning I've ever seen. It's so ridiculous that I actually felt the need to log and respond.

Originally by: Khamelean
The pricing in the next store was a brilliant decision, although it was poorly communicated.

I just wanted to point out that though declaring you a devalt would hold no real meaning since nothing can be proven, your statement that the only fault with the otherwise perfect decision was the inability to properly tell the unwashed masses(You said community, but the statement certainly had that tone) how great this REALLY was, it either leads one to believe you are the person(or affiliated with the person) who came with the idea, or, simply that you have some kind of insanely arrogant belief that anyone who doesn't automatically agree with you only does so because they haven't yet learned the true brilliance that is you. Either way, it's a very confrontational statement that will only be overlooked by the dumbest of readers.

Quote:
I agree that if they had made the prices much lower at impulse buy level they would have made much more money. But the also would have driven the demand for plex up to ridiculous extremes, which would have in turn inflated the price.


Ah yes, this old bit. Let me start by saying that I'm very sorry but despite your best efforts I have not seen the light. No, I'm afraid I still believe that somehow plex will not extend what is a reasonable cost relative to 20 bucks, you know, due to people saying "I'd have to make x isk in game just to sub/buy a monocle/boots? F this." For some reason, I believe that people won't be willing to pay an infinite amount of isk for plex, and that, at this point, with buyers dwindling, the people selling the plex will inevitably either have to lower the price or at least keep it the same.

Quote:

If the isk price of plex goes up, the value of the entire eve economy goes down. If CCP had done as you suggested, they would have made lots more money on the NEX store, but then cause the eve economy to crash, destroying the rest of the game.


I know when you wrote this you probably thought you had a really good line of reasoning going, but the simple reality is that the eveconomy has no value. It's not a commodity, it's not a service, it's not an investment, it's just plain old data, and I'm not saying this like "lol, pixelz" literally, the whole economy is data. In order for something to have "value", it must be exchangeable for other goods or currency. The eveconomy has no such exchange-ability because it's worthless. Sure, you buy plex, for the isk, but plex does not convert back. It doesn't gain value or lose value, it's stagnant, because it's a service, not an investment, not even a commodity. Let me illustrate my point, if I'm a child and I buy a clump of dirt from someone for 15 bucks, then go to my friends and say "I'll give you this clump of dirt for oh say.....20 ants" And they agree because the amount of effort it takes to collect those ants is equal to the value of the dirt in their minds, it doesn't mean the ants suddenly magically have a real life market value of 15 bucks to 20 ants just because I was actually willing to spend 15 bucks for them. Quite simply, isk has no value, it has internal value to us as players and we dictate whether we feel the 15 bucks is worth it or if the loss of isk is worth the saving of 15 bucks. IF plex suddenly gets a new common use, it may go for more on the isk market but that doesn't mean that the game is destroyed because suddenly it was more difficult to buy plex. Plex isn't THAT important.

Quote:

Now if only they had of communicated this better to the players...


If only. Then maybe people would accept that the bogeyman would come kill their imaginary investments if they didn't spend 70 bucks on a terrible looking monocle.


Jumpman 23
Posted - 2011.07.13 12:56:00 - [130]
 

Originally by: Twilight Runner
Edited by: Twilight Runner on 11/07/2011 15:08:44
Linky to eurogamer article


10$-20$.

but you don't have to pay for the game itself.

Khanoteau Starbanger
Posted - 2011.07.13 13:12:00 - [131]
 

Originally by: Astorian Darkstar
"Kinda interested in what this entails. With their recent security troubles and ongoing legal issues due to those troubles, pretty sure I don't want my EVE account info anywhere near Sony's network.


I'm not trying to be insulting but IMO it's kinda naieve to think CCP or any other Game Developer/Publisher has a network that is any more secure than Sony's. A quick search on Google will show you Sony is not the only Gaming/Entertainment Company to have had a major security breach recently.

Not long after SOE's breach these Companies were hacked....
Eidos
Codemasters
Epic
Bethesda

All these companies claim no credit card info was stolen, but all of them had some kind of their users personal data stolen.

The place I work is a good example, they spend insane amounts of money on security, it's constantly being updated and changed, the password policy is pain, the LAN is so locked down it's a pain to get work done sometimes. Our network has allot of interactivity with DOD sites and has to follow certain DOD security protocols. I always thought it was one of the most secure networks I've seen in the private sector. Yet PinkSlip pretty much brought our Global Network to it's knees, it was two years ago and we are still not fully recovered.


Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.07.13 14:19:00 - [132]
 

Originally by: Khamelean
The pricing in the next store was a brilliant decision, although it was poorly communicated.
So what was the goal of said pricing, pray tell?
Quote:
But the also would have driven the demand for plex up to ridiculous extremes, which would have in turn inflated the price.
…which would have made people get more PLEX to sell on the market, so the price would have deflated the price.
Quote:
If the isk price of plex goes up, the value of the entire eve economy goes down.
Riiiight… How would it do that? Especially considering that it's almost entirely economy-neutral. All PLEX does is redistribute ISK. An increase in PLEX price would at most mean that the number of accounts goes down as people can no longer afford to maintain them using PLEX bought off of the market.

It has nothing to do with the market value — it has to do with player accounts.
Quote:
They chose wisely.

Now if only they had of communicated this better to the players...
No, the problem was that they didn't communicate the purpose of the NeX. The choices you present are not relevant to that purpose so there would be no point in communicating that because it would just be another smoke screen. Making money is not the goal, and the economy wouldn't be harmed regardless.

The purpose of the NeX is to remove PLEX from the economy and reduce liability in CCP's books. They want to achieve this purpose without losing accounts (which failed for a number of related and unrelated reasons). Thus they want to bleed PLEX rather than flush them. The pricing was and remains stupid, because they could achieve the same goal with more sensible pricing structure. The communication was also completely idiotic (as always, with CCP, since they are genetically incapable of communicating properly), and thus one of the primary reasons for the strategy was lost, making the choice pricing even more stupid and redundant.

Khamelean
Posted - 2011.07.13 14:36:00 - [133]
 

Originally by: Fernacasso Atoll

I know when you wrote this you probably thought you had a really good line of reasoning going, but the simple reality is that the eveconomy has no value. It's not a commodity, it's not a service, it's not an investment, it's just plain old data, and I'm not saying this like "lol, pixelz" literally, the whole economy is data. In order for something to have "value", it must be exchangeable for other goods or currency. The eveconomy has no such exchange-ability because it's worthless. Sure, you buy plex, for the isk, but plex does not convert back. It doesn't gain value or lose value, it's stagnant, because it's a service, not an investment, not even a commodity. Let me illustrate my point, if I'm a child and I buy a clump of dirt from someone for 15 bucks, then go to my friends and say "I'll give you this clump of dirt for oh say.....20 ants" And they agree because the amount of effort it takes to collect those ants is equal to the value of the dirt in their minds, it doesn't mean the ants suddenly magically have a real life market value of 15 bucks to 20 ants just because I was actually willing to spend 15 bucks for them. Quite simply, isk has no value, it has internal value to us as players and we dictate whether we feel the 15 bucks is worth it or if the loss of isk is worth the saving of 15 bucks. IF plex suddenly gets a new common use, it may go for more on the isk market but that doesn't mean that the game is destroyed because suddenly it was more difficult to buy plex. Plex isn't THAT important.



All that is required for something to have value is for someone to want it.

Khamelean
Posted - 2011.07.13 14:46:00 - [134]
 

Originally by: Gurgeh Murat
Originally by: Khamelean


The problem with solution is that it negates one of primary purposes of aurum, which is a plex sink. It's designed to slowly drain excess plex out of the market. It was not designed as a cash grab. There are much better ways do that, had it been there goal.


Y'see, I would probably have phrased that thought as "I think the problem with that solution is that it would negate what seems to be one of the primary purposes of aurum, which is as plex sink"

Then again, Im not a dev alt who came up with the idea so I guess I would have to word it differently. Otherwise my words sound like a determined, established fact. If you know this to be true khamelean, please do post a link to said source.

If you cannot source this statement you are either

A) Dev alt

B) A fountain of self assured fail spouting your conjecture and opinion as established fact.

I eagerly await your response sir.


Much of spoken and wirtten english talks of people thoughts and opinions without the use of "in my opinon" or "I think". These very forums are full of people talking about their personal opinion that use wording that imply fact. I don't see you demanding response from them, or for from the rest of the history of english literature? But just because everyone else is doing it is not much of an excuse for poor behaviour i guess, so let me explain my chosen wording further.

Where I use wording that would imply fact, it is because i have seen enough evidence to convince me that it is. If I talk in terms of opinion, then i refer to an idea that probably requires further justification.

If that does not satisfy you, then feel free to pre-pend the words "In my opinion" before each and all of my posts.

Khamelean
Posted - 2011.07.13 14:53:00 - [135]
 

Originally by: Tippia
which would have made people get more PLEX to sell on the market, so the price would have deflated the price.



That's true, but it would have definitely caused fluctuations. The eve economy is a delicate boat, CCP doesn't want to rock it to hard.


Quote:
If you're concerned at this point that this will in some way impact PLEX prices then we're ahead of you there. We'll be monitoring the PLEX market extremely closely and making sure certain equilibrium is maintained in pricing. We have various tools to ensure that, but the most important one is keeping Aurum as a separate currency with set conversion from PLEX.

Quote:
Important note here. This is about learning. We need to learn about this stuff. We are just dipping our toes into the water here, seeing how this all works while being careful not to mess up the economy. So far, we've been successful at protecting the EVE economy. PLEX prices on the ISK market are currently unaffected.


Cashcow Golden Goose
Posted - 2011.07.13 14:58:00 - [136]
 

Originally by: Khamelean
Originally by: Gurgeh Murat
Originally by: Khamelean


The problem with solution is that it negates one of primary purposes of aurum, which is a plex sink. It's designed to slowly drain excess plex out of the market. It was not designed as a cash grab. There are much better ways do that, had it been there goal.


Y'see, I would probably have phrased that thought as "I think the problem with that solution is that it would negate what seems to be one of the primary purposes of aurum, which is as plex sink"

Then again, Im not a dev alt who came up with the idea so I guess I would have to word it differently. Otherwise my words sound like a determined, established fact. If you know this to be true khamelean, please do post a link to said source.

If you cannot source this statement you are either

A) Dev alt

B) A fountain of self assured fail spouting your conjecture and opinion as established fact.

I eagerly await your response sir.


Much of spoken and wirtten english talks of people thoughts and opinions without the use of "in my opinon" or "I think". These very forums are full of people talking about their personal opinion that use wording that imply fact. I don't see you demanding response from them, or for from the rest of the history of english literature? But just because everyone else is doing it is not much of an excuse for poor behaviour i guess, so let me explain my chosen wording further.

Where I use wording that would imply fact, it is because i have seen enough evidence to convince me that it is. If I talk in terms of opinion, then i refer to an idea that probably requires further justification.

If that does not satisfy you, then feel free to pre-pend the words "In my opinion" before each and all of my posts.



Are you a Dev alt?

Are you CCP Zinfandel?

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.07.13 15:01:00 - [137]
 

Originally by: Khamelean
That's true, but it would have definitely caused fluctuations. The eve economy is a delicate boat, CCP doesn't want to rock it to hard.
Actually, it's not. It has long since proven to be large enough to be insanely resilient to even large changes. This was best shown during the first Unholy Rage, when the market's reaction to 6,000 bots being removed was… to just adapt, almost instantly. "Fluctuations" isn't nearly enough to worry.

…and again, since the whole point is to rather drastically adjust the PLEX market, fluctuations are unavoidable, and if they had actually communicated the point of the NeX being a PLEX sink, rather than an actual MT store, people would have adjusted their expectations and behaviour to make any such fluctuations completely insignificant. It would also have let them fulfil the secondary purpose of not losing accounts in the process.

Fernacasso Atoll
Posted - 2011.07.13 16:39:00 - [138]
 

Originally by: Khamelean


All that is required for something to have value is for someone to want it.


What kind of response is that? Not only did you ignore 75% of my post, your answer neither addressed what you were quoting(unless you somehow have come to the conclusion that my example did lead to an exchange rate of 15 dollars to 20 ant), nor did it address the overall topic. Plex prices(in isk) change all the time; plex has little economic impact on game play for two reasons(I can think of at the time):

1. Plex prices will always balance to be realistically achievable by in game play. This is because only non-plex sellers will buy them(at least at the time). There would be little point in a plex buyer selling his plex only to buy plex again in order to buy the vanity items. Same with subscription time. Unless they're buying their plex for less than they sold it for, which would have no real effect on the economy beyond the average hiccups, it would be a waste of time and effort.

2. Plex is not important to gameplay, pure and simple. Plex could disappear tomorrow, and besides a few irate players who just lost their source of income, little effect would be seen long term. The earlier statement about plex being a tool to redistribute isk is absolutely correct. Further, that means it has no real value even in game. All you are basically doing is agreeing to pay the other person subscription(or buy him boots) in exchange for some isk(which doesn't have any value again, to clarify). It has no impact on anything beyond that.

I'm just amazed at how far you'll go to justify the action. I'm not in any way upset about the Nex store (I couldn't care less), and I think CCP as a whole has done pretty good as a company, but this whole Nex store, in pricing and in application, was just plainly a mistake. You and no one else has offered a rational reason to denounce this conclusion. It wouldn't seem unreasonable for you to just admit that they can make a mistake, would it? Or are they infallible? Or is that they are fallible, and this isn't a case of them being fallible, but you just can't figure out why, because that's what I get from your post.

Anyways, as per CCP's being cautious around the price of plex, I have only one thing to say to that: Stop being hypocritical. If you want to regulate the market of Eve then fine go ahead and do it, but don't pretend you're basing a system off of free market when you're so chicken**** scared that some fancy boots will plummet the market into chaos that you literally feel the need to have the "market revaluation" button at your beck and call ready to be hit any second. You clearly have serious doubts in free market economics(which is fine, more qualified people than you guys do too), but if you're gonna be like that, you should probably change your slogan to "Eve is open-ended sandbox ran by the players until we feel that the direction the players are taking it is a bit too uneasy for us at which point we'll manipulate it to make us comfortable again. I mean, really, less open-ended games than Eve have free market systems, it's not really a selling point, but if it's something you're truly afraid of then maybe a sandbox isn't for you. Maybe a nice shooter(dustlol) would be more your pace, then you can set up what weapons the character has and when, and you can even make sure that the player doesn't go back to the previous room and grab those extra grenades cause it may make the boss too easy. Simple fact is simple, if you really have concerns about potential market impact of something, don't introduce it. Problem solved. Don't tiptoe around it as though you REALLY NEED TO PUT IT IN, but you just don't know if everything would balance out.

There, I've had my fill on CCP. I really like Eve as concept and I hope the CCP shares similar feelings for that concept as what was presented within the statement "player run sandbox".

Mister Smithington
Posted - 2011.07.13 16:46:00 - [139]
 

Originally by: Khamelean
Originally by: Mister Smithington
I have said that CCP has made very stupid decisions recently.

The NeX store is a fantastic example. If CCP wanted to make a mint, they'd price everything at impulse-buy levels and make them destructible. The CSM more or less stated in their statement that the NeX store implementation was incompetently handled.



The pricing in the next store was a brilliant decision, although it was poorly communicated. I agree that if they had made the prices much lower at impulse buy level they would have made much more money. But the also would have driven the demand for plex up to ridiculous extremes, which would have in turn inflated the price.

If the isk price of plex goes up, the value of the entire eve economy goes down. If CCP had done as you suggested, they would have made lots more money on the NEX store, but then cause the eve economy to crash, destroying the rest of the game.

They had a choice;

a) more money and a broken game

or

b) less money and a working game.

They chose wisely.

Now if only they had of communicated this better to the players...

That's a damn stupid thing to say.

Consider this. A month ago, plexes were being traded between 400 and 420 million isk per. Today they're 360, back to where they were in early spring. A year ago plexes were 275 mil per. And six months before that they were 200 mil. Through all those changes, never once did the economy come crashing to the ground.

And your assumption that the Eve economy is a delicate little butterfly is just wrong. Look at the price of Tritanium. It's doubled in six months. Unlike Plex, trit isn't a luxury item. Trit is required to build everything we have in Eve. And guess what? Economy still running strong, buddy.

Zagdul
Gallente
Clan Shadow Wolf
Fatal Ascension
Posted - 2011.07.13 16:52:00 - [140]
 

So, CCP invested millions on a FPS for PS3 that they are now going to charge a small "entry" fee to play and people are upset.

I don't get it.

Cool! I hope the game is good and successful. Enough people playing it would make EVE an interesting place and create another part of the sandbox to play in.

The only thing I hope is that SoV is not centered around DUST and that it's an optional thing to take part in. Griefing corps who don't give a s**t about Dust 514 would probably frustrate me. But if I chose to involve the Dust Universe into my EVE that it would hold just another fun aspect to having sov.


Callic Veratar
Posted - 2011.07.13 16:58:00 - [141]
 

I was always under the impression that the game would be a $60 box and was delighted to find it would be a $15 downloadable game. Is $15 too expensive for you? If so, what is wrong with you? You already play a game that's $15/mo.

Mister Smithington
Posted - 2011.07.13 17:02:00 - [142]
 

Edited by: Mister Smithington on 13/07/2011 17:48:00
Edited by: Mister Smithington on 13/07/2011 17:04:21
Originally by: Callic Veratar
I was always under the impression that the game would be a $60 box and was delighted to find it would be a $15 downloadable game. Is $15 too expensive for you? If so, what is wrong with you? You already play a game that's $15/mo.

Originally by: Mister Smithington
I would have been much happier with a normal retail $50-$60 box cost. . .

The issue is not that they're charging for it. The issue is that they're marketing it as "free," but only if you pay for it.

It implies that CCP doesn't understand the F2P micro-transaction business model, which we've had plenty of evidence of recently, to be perfectly honest.

Gurgeh Murat
Minmatar
Blue Republic
Posted - 2011.07.13 17:47:00 - [143]
 

Edited by: Gurgeh Murat on 13/07/2011 17:47:48
Originally by: Khamelean
Originally by: Gurgeh Murat
Originally by: Khamelean


The problem with solution is that it negates one of primary purposes of aurum, which is a plex sink. It's designed to slowly drain excess plex out of the market. It was not designed as a cash grab. There are much better ways do that, had it been there goal.


Y'see, I would probably have phrased that thought as "I think the problem with that solution is that it would negate what seems to be one of the primary purposes of aurum, which is as plex sink"

Then again, Im not a dev alt who came up with the idea so I guess I would have to word it differently. Otherwise my words sound like a determined, established fact. If you know this to be true khamelean, please do post a link to said source.

If you cannot source this statement you are either

A) Dev alt

B) A fountain of self assured fail spouting your conjecture and opinion as established fact.

I eagerly await your response sir.


Much of spoken and wirtten english talks of people thoughts and opinions without the use of "in my opinon" or "I think". These very forums are full of people talking about their personal opinion that use wording that imply fact. I don't see you demanding response from them, or for from the rest of the history of english literature? But just because everyone else is doing it is not much of an excuse for poor behaviour i guess, so let me explain my chosen wording further.

Where I use wording that would imply fact, it is because i have seen enough evidence to convince me that it is. If I talk in terms of opinion, then i refer to an idea that probably requires further justification.

If that does not satisfy you, then feel free to pre-pend the words "In my opinion" before each and all of my posts.



Thats a B) then? Though im still fairly sure its an A)

****tard Rolling Eyes

Zey Nadar
Gallente
Unknown Soldiers
Posted - 2011.07.13 18:26:00 - [144]
 

Edited by: Zey Nadar on 13/07/2011 18:26:53
Originally by: Jumpman 23
Originally by: Twilight Runner
Edited by: Twilight Runner on 11/07/2011 15:08:44
Linky to eurogamer article


10$-20$.

but you don't have to pay for the game itself.


Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.

Ok nvm its not too much to pay for a game, but seriously, people should stop using the word "free". Im 100% sure dust is very far from "free".

Bullyboutya
Minmatar
Taxxon Industrial Enterprises
Posted - 2011.07.13 19:16:00 - [145]
 

Originally by: Zey Nadar
Edited by: Zey Nadar on 13/07/2011 18:26:53
Originally by: Jumpman 23
Originally by: Twilight Runner
Edited by: Twilight Runner on 11/07/2011 15:08:44
Linky to eurogamer article


10$-20$.

but you don't have to pay for the game itself.


Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.

Ok nvm its not too much to pay for a game, but seriously, people should stop using the word "free". Im 100% sure dust is very far from "free".


I think we say it's free cuz console games range from $60-$120 (they ship a game out 75% complete then sell you the rest of the game via DLC) So when you see the game is free to download then all you have to pay is $10 or $20 to get started with in game ISK hell yeah THE GAME IS FREE LOLLaughing

quigibow
Posted - 2011.07.13 19:18:00 - [146]
 

i dont get it whats all the complaints about?


Marchocias
Posted - 2011.07.13 19:31:00 - [147]
 

OI!

I thought it was meant to be Eve players nuking Dust players from space, not the other way around!

Cloora
APEX Unlimited
APEX Conglomerate
Posted - 2011.07.13 20:32:00 - [148]
 

It is entertaining too see all you people RAGE over the fact that Khameleon agrees with CCPs decision.

I too agree with most of CCPs decisions.

Guess which Dev I am!

I love the guy who said it was ok that Valve and Epic use tried and tested engines for their games but CCP can't because they aren't awesome. Eff you! CCP is awesome because they make the best MMO on the planet. If a game can hook ME for 6 years it must be awesome. Good work CCP.

Spookyjay
Caldari
Animosity.
Posted - 2011.07.13 20:38:00 - [149]
 

Edited by: Spookyjay on 13/07/2011 20:39:05
Hmm so you have to pay a "cover fee" to play for the first time right?
So to play once and decide it's crap i still have to pay the "cover fee" but then i do not have to pay again for dlc if i dnt want it?

Sorry 1 more time i have to PAY to play it for the first time?

Wait whats that i have to Pay a cover fee to play red dead redemption for the first time? then i can play it for free as much as i want?
And i do not have to buy the dlc if i do not want to?


Stop being A** H***s your charging for the game and then it has dlc same as every other game non-mmo.

Nor Tzestu
Amarr
Boxwater Intelligence
Posted - 2011.07.13 20:44:00 - [150]
 

Originally by: Cloora
It is entertaining too see all you people RAGE over the fact that Khameleon agrees with CCPs decision.

I too agree with most of CCPs decisions.

Guess which Dev I am!

I love the guy who said it was ok that Valve and Epic use tried and tested engines for their games but CCP can't because they aren't awesome. Eff you! CCP is awesome because they make the best MMO on the planet. If a game can hook ME for 6 years it must be awesome. Good work CCP.


Lets not beat around the bush here shall we? Name me a LEGIT AAA grade shooter using a 10 year old engine. Please. And spare me the Gears of War crap, anyone who has played that POS knows exactly it is neither a AAA game nor good. Game was doomed as soon as it was a PS3 exclusive.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only