|
If that's the best you can do, it's a pretty good sign we deliver what we advertise.
None of which answers the question that has been dodged: In this thread, you claim that in a free game "most things are only available to those willing to spend inordinate amounts of time" (*). Given that you claim a can-pay-for-perks (**)model "gives a player more options" (*) and that "consumers want it, and thus it is worth providing to them" (***), why fight a label that accurately describes the financial model underlying the game? Shouldn't you be lobbying for such a label?
Either that, or someone's talking out of both sides of their mouth.
(*): The_logos, (for both)
(**): Probably more accurate than just "pay-for-perks", since you can choose not to if you are willing to accept a slower rate of development relative to those who do.
(***): The_logos,
|