Good thing it’s way easier to blacklist players who buy into it. Just find the putz on an eyesore mount.
Cant wait for the ‘booster KOS’ addon to include cash shop mount players.
That would require that it is the same people making both arguments at the same time
Also dont like it dont buy it is fundamentally different from dont like it dont use it.
How exactly do you guys know this mount isn’t purchased for gold? This may be blizzard adding a gold sink to take money out of the economy. This is a strategy they learned with later expansions to help level the playing field. It is a solution to the ‘ultra rich player problem’ even if it doesn’t completely solve it.
1 Like
imo anything post vanilla is retail. flying/dailies/multiple raid sizes/time gated rep grinds and lots of other things started in tbc. tbc in my mind is retail lite.
Which is exactly the first question I posed in this thread.
Pretty weak argument. A mount doesn’t affect gameplay or help you kill bosses faster, it’s purely cosmetic.
Yes, I totally see the logical progression of that argument.
Not.
Wdym, its pay to win. Instead of buying mounts with gold you can just spend ur $$$$$$$ on a mount to skip over another part of the game.
No, it’s not. This is what you said:
Most of the people replyiing to you are saying that this is a nonsensical comparison. Apples and oranges, cosmetic and game-impacting. In other words, the question itself doesn’t make sense because it’s comparing un-related things.
With respect, Velenno, I think YOU are the one not fully grasping the this point.
But I’m not trying to compare a mount to drums. If I was in this thread saying mounts and drums were the same thing you would have a point. But I’m not. I’m not insinuating they’re the same.
What I’m trying to get at is this.
If there is something you want in the game, some addition, some change, whatever. If you look at the people who don’t want it in the game and just dismiss them with “Hey man whatever let me have this. Why are you trying to tell me what I can or can’t have. Just let me play the game the way I want to. If you don’t like these things don’t use them yourself.” But then when the shoe is on the other foot and there is something that others may want in the game (I am positive I could find some #nochanges zealots that want un nerfed drums in the game for example) that you personally don’t and they say “Hey man whatever let me have this. Why are you trying to tell me what I can or can’t have. Just let me play the game the way I want to. If you don’t like these things don’t use them yourself” and you just then reject it, that is hypocritical.
It is basically saying you should be able to tell other people what they can and can’t have, but that others shouldn’t be able to say the same thing to you. It is a self centered stance to have.
There are better arguments people can make that aren’t hypocritical like this. I even gave examples of some up above.
Counter point: Its a forum I putz around on my tablet.
I am not trying to pen a masters thesis, especially now that my tablet is older and the screen doesnt work as well.
But you did:
For the (third?) time: You believe there should be a consistent answer to these questions. I (and others) have pointed out that is wrong because the question, itself, is nonsensical.
In any case, be well, have fun in game. I’m ducking out. If I can’t reach you after three tries I’m probably not gonna get there.
It’s unfortunate that you resort to ad hominem in a side-handed dig at people who support #NoChanges.
Personally, I would prefer un-nerfed drums as #NoChanges are the best changes, imo. I didn’t create posts on each of my alts to complain on the forums about it, and I didn’t state that I was done with the game nor that I would quit.
Likewise, I wouldn’t be an advocate of store mounts or indeed achievement, or other sort of mounts added to TBC Classic.
Do I like #SomeChanges? No, not really. Will I quit because we get #SomeChanges and not #NoChanges? No, probably not.
As fun as it is to watch, I know it can be bothersome as well. In case you’re curious a gentlemen associated with IQ science has a theory related to this. He posits, based on old anecdotes about farmers, that IQ has a lot to do with willingness to engage in abstract thought. Did a TED talk on it.
1 Like
Huh? What dig? What ad hominem?
I even quoted it for you.
Ah. Didn’t intend “zealot” to be an insult or attack. Just a description. If you have a lot of “zeal” for something you’re really into it, you feel really strongly about it. That is all. Never said that as a bad thing.
a word can be interpreted multiple ways. i knew how you intended that to be taken. i also know that that wasn’t how any of them were going to take it. XD
It’s implied, by definition.
And there you go.