surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
![Interview: Sean 'Day[9]' Plott & the StarCraft II scene photo](http://www.destructoid.com/ul/234000-d1-t.jpg)
Sorry killias, not everyone enjoys the blizzard balance rollercoaster that they force into their games, so you can put your judgemental little eyes away now.
Blizzard, how about you make your game cheaper, through sales or otherwise? Maybe then I would consider investing money into it. It is unacceptable to keep a price tag of $60 two years after release, let alone $20 for the original game. That, combined with the fact that they even *thought* of restricting game-changing content for free players makes this project astoundingly stupid. If they want to have any future in eSports then they will have to stop being greedy shits, simple enough.
And I don't mean they need to have a future in eSports, but that's clearly what they want with free-to-play.
Um, how ISN'T it free now? You buy the game and that's all you ever have to pay. I don't get it. If you are going by the price of the game, then nothing is free to play unless its given away and those games usually suck. See: TF2.
Rammstein I'm sorry but that is the worst comment I've read on Destructoid. Go do some research man. You are lost.
@Rammstein: F2P is a game that you don't pay for; hence the FREE. Apart from the fact that TF2 is a great game, you have Planetside 2, Blacklight Retribution, Gotham City Impostors, Tribes: Ascend, AoC. There are plenty of great F2P games.
F2P definitely wouldn't work, but I could see them giving some of the multi-player features for free and leaving enough to entice those who like it enough to shell out money for the campaign and the rest of the multi-player experience.
Actually, opening custom games to free players would be nice, especially with Blizzard DOTA on the way. It's pretty much the only way to get a sizable audience with that at this point, anyway. Of course, that may be giving too much. I'm not sure how you'd incentivize players to buy the full game if they only wanted to play Blizzard's DOTA.
Actually, opening custom games to free players would be nice, especially with Blizzard DOTA on the way. It's pretty much the only way to get a sizable audience with that at this point, anyway. Of course, that may be giving too much. I'm not sure how you'd incentivize players to buy the full game if they only wanted to play Blizzard's DOTA.
@tekbunny: I dominated the fuck outta that shit. That's why it god old and boring in the first 2 months. Then they added hats and all that queer wannabe-RPG shit and the new garbage is nowhere near the same game I got bored of years ago. umad that your favorite game ever sucks? ;)
@Sean Payne: YouMustBeNewHere.png if THAT's the worst comment you;'ve seen on Destructoid, especially on the front page where a lot of magic happens in the comments section.
@Skribble: I don't doubt there are good ones(Ghost Recon Online, Hawken, Smite, to name a few) but the exceptions only serve to prove the rule, I'm afraid.
@RiotControl: Did you mean VALVe's DOTA?
@Sean Payne: YouMustBeNewHere.png if THAT's the worst comment you;'ve seen on Destructoid, especially on the front page where a lot of magic happens in the comments section.
@Skribble: I don't doubt there are good ones(Ghost Recon Online, Hawken, Smite, to name a few) but the exceptions only serve to prove the rule, I'm afraid.
@RiotControl: Did you mean VALVe's DOTA?
Not pleased. I went and tolerated the wonderful online situation, but this means Blizzard will lose my support.
SC2 has such a horrible single player campaign ("No! This vision... STOP!?!?!" and other gems of shit writing) that I wouldn't mind seeing SC2 go F2P. This way I can play the HotS unit without paying for the flusterfuck story.
@rammstein
For some reason i don't believe that you really, "dominated the fuck outta that shit" on tf2 and then got bored of it. Videogame players don't just get bored of a game that they are good at.
and as far as, "exceptions only serve to prove the rules" goes, most new f2p games are out to break those rules.
and seans right. your comment is pretty dumb. namely the "how ISN'T this free?" followed right by "you buy the game" parts. extra dumb points for the emphasis on "isn't".
For some reason i don't believe that you really, "dominated the fuck outta that shit" on tf2 and then got bored of it. Videogame players don't just get bored of a game that they are good at.
and as far as, "exceptions only serve to prove the rules" goes, most new f2p games are out to break those rules.
and seans right. your comment is pretty dumb. namely the "how ISN'T this free?" followed right by "you buy the game" parts. extra dumb points for the emphasis on "isn't".
@Ardent Snow: Gotcha. Wasn't sure which one he meant.
@torkegamer: Slight exaggeration aside, I was good at the game because I'm a hardcore TFC veteran, another reason why I disliked the bastardization of my beloved franchise.
And yes, you're right that the new crop of F2P games are trying harder than ever to break the stereotype.
And it was only "dumb" because of his (and yours) misunderstanding of what I meant. Take Guild Wars 2 for example. That game is called "F2P" because it doesn't require a monthly fee. Different levels and types of "F2P" does not make me or my comment "dumb."
Gentlemen.
@torkegamer: Slight exaggeration aside, I was good at the game because I'm a hardcore TFC veteran, another reason why I disliked the bastardization of my beloved franchise.
And yes, you're right that the new crop of F2P games are trying harder than ever to break the stereotype.
And it was only "dumb" because of his (and yours) misunderstanding of what I meant. Take Guild Wars 2 for example. That game is called "F2P" because it doesn't require a monthly fee. Different levels and types of "F2P" does not make me or my comment "dumb."
Gentlemen.
@right above me because i doubt that there is a new comment there despite the extra time that it took me to write this.
ok, not a dumb comment.
also, tf2 rules and does not suck.
ok, not a dumb comment.
also, tf2 rules and does not suck.
Perhaps if you buy the single-player campaign, you get all the units? If you don't buy SP, then you don't get all the units and have to earn them (in a multiplayer bracket of people who didn't buy it either). Once a player has earned all of the units, they will be grouped with the people who bought the game and have the units available.
BAM!
I'm looking for a job Blizz~
BAM!
I'm looking for a job Blizz~
This is such a bullshit idea. Not everything on this world has to be F2P.
I rather pay ONE time than many times but in small amounts. People are just so fucking stupid. It's the gaming version of a credit card or a loan. You never HAVE the game. You just RENT a small amount of the game.
I know people who spent 100+ euros on LoL. Is it worth it? Fuck no. Even the argument, but they add so much new heroes is bullshit.
I rather pay ONE time than many times but in small amounts. People are just so fucking stupid. It's the gaming version of a credit card or a loan. You never HAVE the game. You just RENT a small amount of the game.
I know people who spent 100+ euros on LoL. Is it worth it? Fuck no. Even the argument, but they add so much new heroes is bullshit.
AWWWW HELL NO!
At least the idiots playing it now had some interest in it. I don't need a flood of them. And if they make the multiplayer free to play, people will just pirate the single player.
At least the idiots playing it now had some interest in it. I don't need a flood of them. And if they make the multiplayer free to play, people will just pirate the single player.
F2P Real Time Strategy, where the gameplay is no longer the chess-esque premise of being equivalently matched where the winner is the superior player, but instead demonstrates the superiority of whomever pays the most.
Worst idea for this genre, unless they plan on selling different colors and skins... but everyone knows otherwise.
@Ramm - Dude, Tribes Ascend is F2P, and it's my absolutely favorite shooter in recent history. A game isn't F2P if you have to buy it - that's just subscriptionless - and a F2P game (almost always) isn't good if you pay for anything other than side-grades or aesthetics.
Worst idea for this genre, unless they plan on selling different colors and skins... but everyone knows otherwise.
@Ramm - Dude, Tribes Ascend is F2P, and it's my absolutely favorite shooter in recent history. A game isn't F2P if you have to buy it - that's just subscriptionless - and a F2P game (almost always) isn't good if you pay for anything other than side-grades or aesthetics.
Maybe we should do what Yahtzee suggested ages ago of an ala carte system: $20 for Campaign-only, $20 for standard multiplayer, $25 for custom multiplayer, and then a discounted price of $55 for the whole bundle.
Of course, that creates the problem of having the dev team build 3 SEPERATE applications that also need to work in concert if someone buys the full package.
Still, someone ought to give it a try, and Acti-Blizzard certainly has a big enough safety-net if it fails.
Of course, that creates the problem of having the dev team build 3 SEPERATE applications that also need to work in concert if someone buys the full package.
Still, someone ought to give it a try, and Acti-Blizzard certainly has a big enough safety-net if it fails.
Rammy is just mad he can't cheat in tf2 with nade spam anymore.
It's like people bitching that new niv-mizzet is shit compared to his old version. When his old version is just absolutely broken and not actually "good."
... What, there aren't any fans of magic here to make comment relevant? Okay, i'll shut up then.
It's like people bitching that new niv-mizzet is shit compared to his old version. When his old version is just absolutely broken and not actually "good."
... What, there aren't any fans of magic here to make comment relevant? Okay, i'll shut up then.
esports is getting bigger and bigger regardless if sc2 goes free to play. activison is also the publisher so the idea that it would go free to play is luls. this article is too cute, so cute that it has dimples ^^
Starcraft... with HATS!
Also you could "monetize" some kind of special leagues (or even only let f2p sit in bottom level leagues, with no way of climbing out of them without some fee), tournaments etc. Paying spectator seats for real time matches.
Though, it might be a bad move for SC that sells a lot of heavily priced boxes as it is right now. They could make a lot of money in f2p... but would it be more money than they make now?
Also you could "monetize" some kind of special leagues (or even only let f2p sit in bottom level leagues, with no way of climbing out of them without some fee), tournaments etc. Paying spectator seats for real time matches.
Though, it might be a bad move for SC that sells a lot of heavily priced boxes as it is right now. They could make a lot of money in f2p... but would it be more money than they make now?
I just find this so amusing. I was hyped about SC2 for so long, then I heard they were turning it into a trilogy. Then I heard no lan play. Then I hard about always on DRM. Then I heard about a required Blizz account. Then when it came it out every review said the single player blew, was shit story, and was basically a into/training to play on vs. people.
I decided that WOW's influence had ruined the Starcraft franchise. I decided not to purchase it. Blizzard also did this same kinda bullshit to Diablo 3. I didn't buy it either.
All that said, I'm fucking loving me some Torchlight II. I been playing the fuck outta that shit.
I decided that WOW's influence had ruined the Starcraft franchise. I decided not to purchase it. Blizzard also did this same kinda bullshit to Diablo 3. I didn't buy it either.
All that said, I'm fucking loving me some Torchlight II. I been playing the fuck outta that shit.
TLDR: The version they are giving away I don't want (pvp). The version I do want isn't worth buying (good campaign & story).
Does this mean that you'd basically be only paying for the single-player if you bought the game? I'm only paying 30 bucks, max, for that at that point.
follow
