What are the three things? You just need a subscription to access content over level 20. You need to purchase the newest expansion to play the newest expansion content, but that’s standard procedure across the industry.
Throw more dots. More dots. More dots. Come on, more dots.
K, stop dots.
1 Like
They’re channeling William Shatner.
These forums I swear… The only place I know where the players would fight against getting free stuff because they somehow think it makes them better than other games.
2 Likes
They do kind of reward you if you promise to stay active for 6 months.
They used to reward us with free content patches. Haven’t seen one of those in 16 months though.
Its like the old Sports Illustrated deal. Every year they had a bonus for becoming a new subscriber but nothing for keeping your subscription going.
That’s what I call stupid and contrary business policy.
Who said anything about being thankful? Its a purchase you made. The price has been the same for 16 years for the same thing: server access. Blizzard is a vendor selling something I chose to buy. There is no “thankful” and they owe me nothing outside of what was advertised.
I was gonna say. We get those free mounts others have to buy a 6m sub for.
You also pay for 1 thing blizzard is responsible for to access a character. In fact, you can access a character for absolutely nothing.
Perhaps taper back your entitlement. I dont expect a backrub when I buy a candy bar at the store. I paid for a candy bar. I got a candy bar.
I missed mine because I quit for three months during WoD.
Edit: I did hear that there weren’t even enough statues to go around though. Not sure if this is 100% true but I could believe it.
It has to do with good business practice and customer retention, not anything owed. They gave you what you are owed with the product, as you point out. But a smart company that wants to retain customers will also give incentives and rewards for people who stay subscribed.
They do some of that with the pets and mounts you can get for buying a long-term subscription but could do more for people who stay subscribed, like they did with Diablo III.
Any company could give you more than what they do above what was owed. Im not sure outside of entitlement makes anyone believe the need to, or that a billion dollar a year organization doesnt know their numbers or what would be a good idea for retention.
The OP didnt say “hey lets get players to stay” they said “I haven’t logged in regularly, you should give me something”.
I believe the rewards for subbing for longer and longer amounts of time, this is something Ff14 does. You get some gimmicky things after so many months.
If wow did this, I dont know what they’d use as the gifts. Maybe players housing, LOL. (Sorry my bad joke is bad, I laughed though. Lol.) It would be an interesting conception but people would want “back gifts” for all the years they’ve subscribed.
No, you can access the servers without paying a cent, if you play the Free Trial.
*you are paying for server access for characters above level 20
Since you thought being pedantic changed the argument in any way
Unique transmog sets would be ideal, since, you know, that’s what FFXIV gives out for subscription rewards (though, they call it Glamour).
2 Likes
That’s not it, either. First, you can’t even level characters above 20 if you don’t have a subscription, and second, when you pay, you get a lot more than just “server access” for high level characters. You pay to play the full version of the game, aka you pay for the game.
This “server access” nonesense is used to prove how “entitled” players are when they ask for feedback, and that’s why it’s important to correct it. They didn’t even say that they were legally entitled to it in the first place.
If it weren’t for dumb arguments, posts wouldn’t stay in the top where they get noticed, so I guess they’re useful?
What point are you trying to make? No matter how many pedantic details you add, its still they got what they paid for, and are asking for more because they didnt use it. Literally nothing changes about the point being made.
You are straw manning “legally entitled to”. No one said anything about that. Everyone is in agreement they got what they paid for. We are disagreeing about whether they should get more.
I think you might’ve spoken before thinking here. Do tell how rewarding a player for having an extremely long active sub could be abused. Also I think your definition of free is off a bit.