Iol, again trying to use technicalities to defend blizzard.
Let me ask you a question then, because based on how you respond to this will determin if you would ever agree that blizzard has ever chosen design decisions based on anti consumer mindest.
Do you think blizzard adds systems(out of game like cash shops, or gameplay loops) designed to manipulate people. And do you consider that anti consumer?
Taking prices(and patent trolling) out of it compltely, they are still incredibly manipulative and anti consumer. But based on your current train of thought, unless its overt it isnt ant consumer.
They’re not ripping off Final Fanservice. Squeemix doesn’t own the rights to the concept of an endless rogue-like. It doesn’t own the rights to an envisioning of the afterlife and it doesn’t own the concept of a faction.
Blizzard is no more , this is now Activision wearing Blizzard corpse . The best you can do is don’t pre-order and wait to see after the lunch . Fair to say they can’t be trusted .
Never played Legend of Mana, but watching a gameplay video it looks a more similar to Chrono Trigger than Secret of Mana, and I would consider Chrono Trigger a JRPG. The difference is that you enter/leave combat. In Secret of Mana combat happened fluidly on the world map. I consider Secret of Mana an ARPG, possibly the first? Hah, nevermind. What am I thinking. Zelda, yeah, Zelda. duh
Of course good/bad is opinion, but I think this is the general community consensus. If the pattern holds, then hopefully Shadowlands will be better than BFA.
My hope is that they learn something from the success of Classic and bring back some of that feel to the modern game.
Gameplay loops are not anti-consumer no.
Cash shops are questionable and really boils down to what is in them.
Purely cosmetic, not anti-consumer.
Something that actually changes gameplay (think Battlefront 2) is anti-consumer.
So it really depends on the effect it has on the game itself. Does it effect gameplay, then yes, if purely cosmetic then no. Blizzards store is purely cosmetic really. No content related to the core of the game is hidden behind the shop. All story is in game. All raids are in game. Everything else would be considered an optional accessory.
Destiny removing content from their game and selling it as an expansion is anti-consumer as they are trying to sell you actual content.
So there is a difference. It isn’t all black and white like people keep trying to frame it.
As for whether they have systems in place that keep people playing, sure, but again, that isn’t anti-consumer at all. I know people get all bent out of shape on this point, but this exact argument has been tried and failed on numerous occasions across America. Hell a senator tried introducing a bill to stop exactly this and failed.
The argument being proposed by using the definition of the term alone, not you know, actual examples and cases, that argument essentially makes any business practice at all anti-consumer because every business focuses more on its well being than its customers or their doors wouldn’t be open.
A business focusing on profits is not in and of itself anti-consumer. Period. This goes from the AAA gaming industries down to the farmer who sells his crops outside of his home, they’re all in business to make money and to provide a service.
I will continue to be highly suspicious of SL until TFing/corruption is confirmed gone, Covenants are confirmed to not be a big deal to grind and classes have more than just a few abilities poorly reimplemented.
Holinka saying no changes were planned is super worrying for classes. They are among the worst aspects of BFA.
Seeing as the opposite of Anti-consumerism is consumerism…
Your both right depending on what definition you go by. Yes there are 2. One is concept and the other lawful.
Consumerism, according to its textbook definition, is the human desire to own and obtain products and goods in excess of one’s basic needs. Basic needs typically refer to having sufficient food, clothing and shelter.
Another less commonly discussed definition of consumerism involves buyers knowing their rights in seeking protection from being unfairly treated or being taken advantage of by merchants.
This is the best decryption I have found, as I have found 2 different sets of language on the definition you’re arguing over.
Or you can keep arguing… either way I am no getting involved anymore then I just did.
If it’s anything like BfA, both the patch where the leveling changes are rolled out and the prepatch itself will light the servers on fire for awhile, but the launch itself will be relatively sedate.
Of course, the forums will continue to be a grade-A hozen dook-slinging fight no matter what happens, so I don’t see as it really matters.
