[rambus]

No idea why i did this ....

it started with this:

Quote

I agree with you. Making it completely F2P would mean minimal support. However, I know some MMOs that are F2P offer "premium" content or what-not which they make a lot off of.

lead to the replay of:

What?, on 09 November 2010 - 05:55 PM, said:

As long as there's competition in that F2P space, and there is, they can't get away with saying something like that. People can move onto other F2P games if they're better, I think there's more F2P MMOs now than subscription MMOs too so it'd be even more competition for them to deal with. Anyway, as it is right now XIV is the most half assed game I've ever seen shipped out, so I'm thinking no matter which payment method they choose there's nowhere to go but up.

I'd say this has a very real chance of happening, whether or not that's before or after PS3 retail I'm not sure, if he's getting hassled about it right now. As with everything it all depends on the implementation, it's not hard to please me so maybe if they do it right I might play the game someday, but considering how awful it is now I'd sooner see pigs fly probably.

so why mato didn't just answer "what?" in saying "i think you are wrong that SE has to support the game well in F2"P. What responded (im rewording it though) "with F2P can work if they do it right, and if they do it right I might play again."

mato then had to go on a tanget in claiming stuff like "what?" is trying to say to please" what?" ( him/her?) it would please the majorty, mato claimed what was doing a stawman ( actally its the other way around though I do not know if that is on purpose or from misunderstanding) what made it CLEAR that what was not aguring that , that mato had no proof on what can please "what?" will also please the majority ( matos stawman if you ask me)

"What?" then kept trying to explain what is really going on and it kept going over mato's head. What was only asking for the original , real argument from mato and he would not state it. I think it was the amount of support SE needs in F2P but i am not sure.

mato then kept nitpicking statements out of context that lead to "what?"s huge post, remember part of understanding English is the GENERAL idea, not twisting individual statements for your own argument.

main reason i did this because i wanted to show BaliCupid had not read what is going on and I wanted to show him to being an idiot ( yes i hate him for trolling me)

(ok i lied I guess i know why i posted this):

BaliCupid, on 11 November 2010 - 05:37 PM, said:

beating on a disabled person? he owned you and you went off on a nerd rage and made a complete doofus out of yourself. i'm pretty sure others agree.

maybe after reading my post you can see why you are wrong.

Avarghaladion, on 11 November 2010 - 06:46 PM, said:

After laying eyes on that behemoth post I was curious and decided to pop it into word... In size 12 Times New Roman font and standard 1.15 spacing, the post is 7 full pages long, totaling 3823 words... In essay format that would be 13 fricken pages... If that was like.. a guide or a walkthrough or something I guess that'd make sense but just... what the fuck?!

Spoiler

That's some wacky shit Needs more pictures! Hell that beats my biggest ragegasm by like... double.

P.S. Someone please tell me how you make something a spoiler drop down. Thx.

same thing, do you even understand why what did that? mato took shit out of context, like i said part of English is the whole idea, not individual statements that you can twist around to soot your needs.

This post has been edited by rambus: 11 November 2010 - 08:06 PM

[MattelotLeviathan]

Holy crap, rambus, I forgot about that thread. I agree with Cupid, why would you embarrass yourself like that by linking it?

Quote

remember part of understanding English is the GENERAL idea

Whow boy, that has to be the hugest piece of irony i've read in a long time. Rambus, your long history of having no clue what you're talking about just got confirmed further here. Do you purposely try to embarrass yourself or do you seriously believe the things you say? That's a 100% serious question.

Actually, let me ask in rambus language so maybe you'll understand the question better and not evade like you normally do.

Yor lhong histry ov havin know clew wut ur talk'n abowt jist got cinfermed ferthar. Do u perpisly try 2 embaris urself or do u sereisly baleve teh thgz u say22??

This post has been edited by MattelotLeviathan: 12 November 2010 - 03:27 AM

[BaliCupid]

rambus, on 11 November 2010 - 06:54 PM, said:

amazing , the next 3 posts that made pointless/offtopic arguments here are from people that had made pointless arguments/troll posts with me in the past.


not worth my time to explain things since they would just keep arguing.

that's kinda funny considering what you jumped into the thread and said. your long history of speaking before you think is awesome.

[Velhart]

Corrderio, on 11 November 2010 - 07:13 PM, said:

[spoiler]Insert what you want here[/spoiler]

Love how simple things can be today....let me try something...

[cupcake]I want a cupcake![/cupcake]


...

....

......


Dammit!

[phunk]

Can someone summarize this thread in a single post, I don't feel like reading through it.

[Typo 5]

phunk, on 12 November 2010 - 08:30 AM, said:

Can someone summarize this thread in a single post, I don't feel like reading through it.

Corrdy hates everything, Rambus is funnytaru, What? is chubby-chubs and things are stuff~

[What?]

He still can't answer my one and only question and I've already explained why a F2P model doesn't automatically = flaws being never fixed. He thinks my "argument" was me saying:

Quote

As with everything it all depends on the implementation, it's not hard to please me so maybe if they do it right I might play the game someday, but considering how awful it is now I'd sooner see pigs fly probably.

And his reply or "flaw" to my argument was saying SE isn't out to please me, but the majority. Which I agree with, they should please the majority and I never asked them to please me. But, considering he doesn't know what my prefered F2P model is, by saying that SE isn't out to please me and they need to please the majority, he's therefore saying a F2P model cannot please the majority. My prefered model could be anything, it could be 100% exactly what SE needs to do to gain the majority of users and keep them happy, but he doesn't realise this and has said my prefered method cannot please the majority without knowing anything about what it is. So naturally what I did was jump ahead to the next logical argument or point he could have made, which was that a F2P model in it's entirety, no matter what the implementation, could not please the majority, based on that one comment. I asked him in my first reply if that is what his comment meant, and it was so completely over his head he thought I pulled out a strawman, even though it's simply a logical progression of thought based on his comment.

Everything after that is me asking him for the fifth time now to explain what that one comment meant, what his argument could possibly be (but he has none and I have called him on it constantly), why he's even here, while also explaining at large why F2P doesn't automatically mean the game will continue to have flaws (he says because there's fanboys, companies don't need or should even want to gain more users or money by fixing flaws, no other elaboration done). And in some attempt to make me look like I don't know what's going on, has accused me of not being able to read or understand anything he's said, when it's obviously the other way around. Then I realised he's a joke account as he's tried to turn the entire situation against him as if it was on me the whole time. Saying that I "raged" when he pointed out my "flaw" (where is that again? Can't tell me still?) when all I did was ask him a very simple question he's obviously completely incapable of answering. Going on to then try and insult and make it seem like he's "won" anything.

It's like he's senile. He has no idea what's going on around him and has done nothing but spew nonsense from the very first post he made. But why continue this? He's just content with trying to insult people instead of make any type of logical argument. He's yet to make one. Let it die, he's embarrassed himself plenty. The first post was embarrassing enough, obviously detailing that he had no argument or point at all, he just wanted to disagree because he's mad butthurt and all he's done is try to make me seem like an idiot when he still hasn't answered the one question I asked yet, obviously because he's so intelligent and I'm not.

[What?]

13 pages? Guys that's not rage, I get pure joy from detailing at large why someone is the retarded moron they are, especially if they challenge me not even barely understanding the situation around them. Except my wall of text (he started it first remember) actually makes some sense and shows I can acurately understand the situation and reply to it, instead of spewing nonsense and accusing the other person of pulling out strawmans and acting the devil's advocate, when they are nowhere to be found in my replies.

That's all he's done, accuse me of using strawmans, playing devil's advocate and not understanding or being able to read, when anyone who can read the thread (you can exclude the wall, it's not that important, just fun for me) can see he's spouting nonsense and has done nothing else except try his darn hardest to "win" in the eyes of everyone else. But not through inteilligent debate or even making a lick of sense, but throwing out words and insults when they're not applicabe in the slightest. No argument, no points, other than try to convince me that a company doesn't need or should want to gain more money, just because there's fanboys and they shouldn't try to expand past them. Can't argue with that, guys. He's obviously won.

This post has been edited by What?: 12 November 2010 - 10:51 AM

[Wildstriker]

What?, on 12 November 2010 - 10:30 AM, said:

He still can't answer my one and only question and I've already explained why a F2P model doesn't automatically = flaws being never fixed. He thinks my "argument" was me saying:



And his reply or "flaw" to my argument was saying SE isn't out to please me, but the majority. Which I agree with, they should please the majority and I never asked them to please me. But, considering he doesn't know what my prefered F2P model is, by saying that SE isn't out to please me and they need to please the majority, he's therefore saying a F2P model cannot please the majority. My prefered model could be anything, it could be 100% exactly what SE needs to do to gain the majority of users and keep them happy, but he doesn't realise this and has said my prefered method cannot please the majority without knowing anything about what it is. So naturally what I did was jump ahead to the next logical argument or point he could have made, which was that a F2P model in it's entirety, no matter what the implementation, could not please the majority, based on that one comment. I asked him in my first reply if that is what his comment meant, and it was so completely over his head he thought I pulled out a strawman, even though it's simply a logical progression of thought based on his comment.

Technically speaking that's not the logical conclusion of what he said, although his arguments are still baseless. Consider some set representing all F2P models and some X that is your specific model and Y is the property of pleasing the majority. All he is saying that there is some Model X in the set of F2P models that does not please the majority (Y). You cannot derive, "therefore no model exists such that it possesses Y".

Was he baseless and begging the question in assuming your model wouldn't please the majority? Yes, but you did erect a straw man nonetheless (that's what she said).

This post has been edited by Wildstriker: 12 November 2010 - 11:14 AM

[rambus]

phunk, on 12 November 2010 - 08:30 AM, said:

Can someone summarize this thread in a single post, I don't feel like reading through it.

rambus, on 11 November 2010 - 07:47 PM, said:

it started with this:

Quote

I agree with you. Making it completely F2P would mean minimal support. However, I know some MMOs that are F2P offer "premium" content or what-not which they make a lot off of.

lead to the replay of:

What?, on 09 November 2010 - 05:55 PM, said:

As long as there's competition in that F2P space, and there is, they can't get away with saying something like that. People can move onto other F2P games if they're better, I think there's more F2P MMOs now than subscription MMOs too so it'd be even more competition for them to deal with. Anyway, as it is right now XIV is the most half assed game I've ever seen shipped out, so I'm thinking no matter which payment method they choose there's nowhere to go but up.

I'd say this has a very real chance of happening, whether or not that's before or after PS3 retail I'm not sure, if he's getting hassled about it right now. As with everything it all depends on the implementation, it's not hard to please me so maybe if they do it right I might play the game someday, but considering how awful it is now I'd sooner see pigs fly probably.

so why mato didn't just answer "what?" in saying "i think you are wrong that SE has to support the game well in F2"P. What responded (im rewording it though) "with F2P can work if they do it right, and if they do it right I might play again."

mato then had to go on a tanget in claiming stuff like "what?" is trying to say to please" what?" ( him/her?) it would please the majorty, mato claimed what was doing a stawman ( actally its the other way around though I do not know if that is on purpose or from misunderstanding) what made it CLEAR that what was not aguring that , that mato had no proof on what can please "what?" will also please the majority ( matos stawman if you ask me)

"What?" then kept trying to explain what is really going on and it kept going over mato's head. What was only asking for the original , real argument from mato and he would not state it. I think it was the amount of support SE needs in F2P but i am not sure.

mato then kept nitpicking statements out of context that lead to "what?"s huge post, remember part of understanding English is the GENERAL idea, not twisting individual statements for your own argument.

[What?]

But he didn't simply say there are some F2P models that don't please the majority, that is true and there would be no issue, I agree with that. He said my prefered model, having no idea what it is (meaning it could be anything within the range of a F2P model structure) won't please the majority, with absolute certainty. From that he's saying any F2P model can't please the majority of users as he's dismissed my prefered method even though it can encompass everything. Unless I'm misunderstanding you, then I'm sorry.

Also Matt, next time you want to try and "win" an argument (not through intelligent debate mind you, would never expect that from you), get a new sock puppet:
http://killingifrit....60/page__st__40

Someone nuke this thread, it's ridiculous. He's incapable of answering one single question while I've already explained in detail why his argument that a F2P model will not fix problems because of "fanboys" is completely unrealistic, especially when it comes to FFXIV. Some cases it is true, none of which he has even barely gotten close to explaining or acknowledging, even though I've already done it for him.

[MrReinhardt]

it's only ridiculous because some of you let it get that way. get it back on track at least.

[What?]

Ridiculous because all he does is shit up threads. I was on track until he waltzed in and disagreed with no argument or reasoning in sight. Disagreing is fine, disagreeing with no argument or point whatsoever is troll baiting. He can either make one comment that's on topic and add to the thread in any sort of meangingful way or leave, and I doubt the first is even capable of happening. I've said all I needed to about FFXIV going F2P, even that wall of text actually does address the points of FFXIV going F2P. It's not my fault this clown came in spewing nonsense from the very first post. A mod should ban either of us if others want to discuss this further, I don't care which of us it is. If he wants to pretend he "won" anything against me, I don't care, but he should leave if that's the case.

[Aleera]

I've noticed he has a history of doing that, What?. Anytime I'm in a thread and he joins in, he always argues with me in the same fashion, and when he gets in too deep, Bali always comes in to back him up. I've seen it happen so many times, I'm glad others are starting to pick up on it. Give it a minute and he'll come in to deny it, then say I'm unfunny or something like he usually does.


To be on topic though, I don't know if i particularly like the idea of it becoming F2P.. I know a lot of MMO's flop when they do, but like it was mentioned earlier, if it's done right it might work. And as far as it pleasing the majority, that's entirely up to the majority. SE will "attempt" to do it's best, I'm sure, but in the end I don't know how well they will do as far as pleasing the majority. The majority right now isn't very pleased as it is, so it couldn't possibly make it worse... could it? lol It just seems like making it F2P is SE's way of going for broke early on in the game.

[MrReinhardt]

I for one don't want to see this locked. It's a good discussion.

[Avarghaladion]

I was honestly hoping for a far more casual experience than FFXI offered so if F2P provided that I would welcome it. On the other hand though I don't want to lose all of the FF epicness. Its something I would have to see and try before I could really pass judgment on it. I find some f2p games rather enjoyable and others not so much so.

[Corrderio]

phunk, on 12 November 2010 - 08:30 AM, said:

Can someone summarize this thread in a single post, I don't feel like reading through it.

TLDR: Made a thread about if XIV will go F2P due to the slowly dropping playerbase, and it turned into a flame war.

Anyway, Tanaka confirmed it won't go F2P: http://www.nowgamer....c-not-going-f2p

And with that, I think this thread servered it's purpose.