Compromise: Just Charge $5 For Now. Once 2.0 is Out, Then Charge $12

[irongripz]

First off: Why is someone arguing with their own opinion trolling for you?

Second: That is a perfectly legitimate opinion, but just because the game has been free for a year, doesn't mean it still has to be. Its status hasn't been static. We've seen drastic changes and the only thing that's the same between then and now are the general maps (I'm obviously exaggerating). Bad PR is to keep telling people that this game is subpar in the eyes of the company, when clearly they don't see it as such anymore.

They already apologized for the launch, they've been working hard and it shows, and the director himself has said that, come 1.20, the game will be up to the standards he thinks the game should be for subscriptions to start rolling in.

I've made this point before and people continually just ignore it and highlight my displays of annoyance: If you honestly had never heard of this game and right now would start playing a free trial of it, starting after patch 1.20*, would you think this game is subpar? I've asked myself this question and I came up with an answer: no. It has plenty of content from most levels up to 50. Come 50, there's not much to do. But I'm talking about when 1.20 arrives. You'll have two to three months to get a class or two up to 50, maybe level up a craft and a gathering class, and suddenly, 1.21 looms in with job content, then more patches bring more endgame, etc.

It seems like a perfectly good time to start charging subscriptions, because the game is playable and has enough content throughout the levels to keep one busy.

*Note: Patch 1.20's main attractions are party search function (hopefully with party flag) and an AH-like Market Ward system.

knotice that i just signed up 2 weeks ago....

yes this new player feels its its not worth it. i have not even made it threw 30 days of free trial. try a new argument. or maybe just leave your argument on the table and stop beating a dead horse with it.

[irongripz]

Smooth launch and failed launch are not interchangeable terms. You do understand English right?

so you bait someone to jugde your opinion. they do so and you do as you have over past 50 pages, you troll them.

SE why do you keep letting these trolls, derail every topic and flame your player base?

[irongripz]

Most people playing the game now aren't playing solely because its free, they're also playing because they enjoy it in some manner. I guarantee you that at least 90% of people who quit when the subscription fee is introduced will be back when 2.0 launches. In this way Square Enix isn't 'losing' subscribers or anything of the sort, it's just people that are too cheap/poor to pay for the game until then. So they temporarily oust a few people by introducing the fee, but what they gain is a dedicated player feedback base without the trolling and the confrontation, as well as whatever revenue they can generate over this time (most of which will go into the one-time story and current game development that only people playing through to 2.0 will get to enjoy).

When 2.0 launches they will reclaim their old subscribers from original launch, free to play period players and a whole lot of new players no doubt amazed by the E3 presentation in 2012, as well as the people who play through. Charging 12.99 does not have a single negative feedback effect to it, I think it's a wise business move.

EDIT: Oh and you've probably heard this a million times but 2.0 is going ahead regardless of how many people subsribe when free to play ends. i.e. you aren't as important as you think you are.

Can you tell me how you 'guarantee' 90% will come back? please do so i would realy like to hear this one.

[Wynn]

so you bait someone to jugde your opinion. they do so and you do as you have over past 50 pages, you troll them.

SE why do you keep letting these trolls, derail every topic and flame your player base?

No, I posted and then in an attempt to counter my point they replaced one word with another. Then they proceeded to argue their point based on fail reading comprehension or deliberate misrepresentation of what I was saying. Then when I pointed it out, they tried to backpeddle... unsuccessfully.

[irongripz]

First off: Why is someone arguing with their own opinion trolling for you?

Smooth launch and failed launch are not interchangeable terms. You do understand English right?

see my point?

[Wynn]

see my point?

It is amazing to me how many people call me a troll yet my posts don't get deleted nor do I get bans like my accusers. Funny how that works. You may not like what I have to say, but that hardly makes me a troll. You can always ignore me. I promise I won't miss you.

[TheVedis]

you people need to learn what a troll is

someone in a heated debate/arguement who is not agreeing with you is not a troll

[irongripz]

No, I posted and then in an attempt to counter my point they replaced one word with another. Then they proceeded to argue their point based on fail reading comprehension or deliberate misrepresentation of what I was saying. Then when I pointed it out, they tried to backpeddle... unsuccessfully.

he understood completly what you stated. or least i did. and he responded to your ignorance, with one word "rift". You continue to derail by debating a side issue of if rift was good or not, and even bashed his english comprehention at the same time. you not only derailed but you flamed him in the same post.

I don't know of a single mmo that had a smooth launch

Not a single one

see this is bait you use it allot. Now i could continue to derail this, but ill end it here.

[Wynn]

he understood completly what you stated. or least i did. and he responded to your ignorance, with one word "rift". You continue to derail by debating a side issue of if rift was good or not, and even bashed his english comprehention at the same time. you not only derailed but you flamed him in the same post.





see this is bait you use it allot. Now i could continue to derail this, but ill end it here.

Your definition of bait is interesting to say the least.

[Starlord]

I just want to point this out real quick and thats it:

Do you guys even know " how many people comprises the forums?"

- Either argument, that's trying to come out a winner, both sides lost because of the fact that Majority of the people are in the game, not on the forums. I understand both sides of the thread and each one has a valid point. However, in the end no one wins, because of the simple fact that " a very little base of players/trolls/whatever Comprises these forums" while the rest are in the game.

The Game is where your information is at, not he forums in this situation.

Edit: and its usually the same 20-40 people, going back and forth at each other 20 for and 20 against