Originally posted by bunnyhopper

Originally posted by Eir_S

Originally posted by Vesavius

Originally posted by Eir_S

Nah, I'll stick to games that are worth the money to ME, and Darkfall: UW doesn't look like it's going to be.

 

Then it most probably would not be worth your actual time either, even if it was 100% free forever right?

I mean, who on Earth would spend their precious leisure time in a game they don't actually like enough to drop a neglible amount of money on?

Well no, I won't play a game just because it's free... I have to enjoy it.  I'm weird like that.  Like I said, the pricing has little to do with my interest, but like I always maintain, I won't know until I give it a go (free trial, etc.)  I've been surprised before.

Did you get a free trial for GW2 outside of beta bug bashes?

There was no free trial for GW2, I bought it because I was interested in it.  Since I'm on the fence about DF:UW, I don't want to risk wasting the initial $$$.  When I say "price" in the previous post I'm referring to the $15 sub, which I'll pay if the game is good enough.  I don't want to feel forced to keep paying monthly simply because I plunked down a chunk of cash without a trial but was ultimately disappointed... that happened to my friends with SWTOR.

Originally posted by Eir_S

Originally posted by bunnyhopper

Originally posted by Eir_S

Originally posted by Vesavius

Originally posted by Eir_S

Nah, I'll stick to games that are worth the money to ME, and Darkfall: UW doesn't look like it's going to be.

 

Then it most probably would not be worth your actual time either, even if it was 100% free forever right?

I mean, who on Earth would spend their precious leisure time in a game they don't actually like enough to drop a neglible amount of money on?

Well no, I won't play a game just because it's free... I have to enjoy it.  I'm weird like that.  Like I said, the pricing has little to do with my interest, but like I always maintain, I won't know until I give it a go (free trial, etc.)  I've been surprised before.

Did you get a free trial for GW2 outside of beta bug bashes?

There was no free trial for GW2, I bought it because I was interested in it.  Since I'm on the fence about DF:UW, I don't want to risk wasting the initial $$$.  When I say "price" in the previous post I'm referring to the $15 sub, which I'll pay if the game is good enough.  I don't want to feel forced to keep paying monthly simply because I plunked down a chunk of cash without a trial but was ultimately disappointed... that happened to my friends with SWTOR.

Really? They felt 'forced'? By who? It's an interesting feeling to have a month after starting a game that dosen't ask for a sub for a clear month after purchase.

Are you saying that they felt obliged to keep playing it after that free month because they had paid a box price? That they kept throwing money on the pile in order to play a game they weren't enjoying just to feel like they got value out of the box cost? 

Not having a go, just interested in exploring the mindset of those that somehow feel obligated in this way... I never have and have walked away from a fair few MMOs before I ever came close to paying a sub, while still feeling I got value from the purchase. I have never felt obligated to pay more if I wasn't having fun.

I do get the need for a robust trial in these games though.

Originally posted by Caldrin

Originally posted by Asm0deus

Originally posted by Zyzra

Originally posted by Pivotelite

Damn .50C per day sure is a lot to ask for hours of entertainment per day eh...

 

I'd rather go get a large pizza and eat that in a few hours for $15 than play 100-200 hours worth of a video game.

WOW!!  Darkfall only costs HALF A CENT per day?  That's dirt cheap!!!

Haha not when many games now cost 0.00 cents a day to play !!!

But most f2p games are crap. and if they are good you usually end up spending more in their cash shops anyway..

 

For me sub is the way forward, hopefulyl we will see the end of shit f2p games nad cash shops soon..

That's pretty much subjective, everything is "crap" tp someone and the same item will be "good" or "fun" to someone else.  The same way someone will argue buying a mount in a cash shop is p2w while someone else will say it is not for x reason.

What isn't subjective is that there are more and more people that will not pay a sub for w/e reasons.

Originally posted by Thebozz
I don't know the reasons for everyone that has a problem with sub MMOs, but for me personally I have moved away from them because the sub tends to lock you into playing that one game.  If I am spending money on something I want to get my monies worth.  So I tend to feel I should be playing that game even if I feel like playing something else or I am wasting my money. 

We are talking around £2.50 a week.

Can I ask... what other games do you actually play? Single player ones?

Or are you one of those guys that claim to play 4 MMORPGs at once? Y'know... the ones that make up the super transient super casual (in each game) player base that damage community building and whine for everything to be achievable in 30 min chunks and everyone to be equal no matter how much time they invest?

Can I ask how what's the minimum time that you feel you would need to play a MMORPG in a week to feel that you have gotten your £2.50 worth? An hour? Two? Ten?

How many hours a week do you usually play your chosen MMO(s)?

Sorry for the questions, but I like to try and understand the mindset behind the statements of preference we see.

Originally posted by ice-vortex
I was basically determined to purchase Darkfall: UW, but now with the monthly fee reveal of $15, I have decided against it. An MMORPG just isn't worth almost twice the price of Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu Plus, Xbox Live, and Playstation Plus. At Darkfall's price point, I could subscribe to Gamefly or Blockbuster and have an unlimited supply of new games to play. With other sandbox games like the Repopulation, which is free to play, coming out, I just don't see a reason to subscribe to Darkfall at the price point the developer has set.

You could indeed, if that is the type of game you wish to play.

Darkfall has and always will be a niche game, most people can't cut it to be honest. They simply don't have the skill or the mindset to play the game. Darkfall is all about the PvP and it's not a game for people looking for a place to play their fiddle in an online game.

Good luck where ever you go, but I can tell you that every vet of Darkfall out there thinks the $15 per month pricetag is more worth it than any Netflix, Prime, Live, or Gamefly subscription. It is extremely rare to find a player base that supports what AV has done with Darkfall and I think that should tell you all you need to know about how spectactular Darkfall can be. 

Originally posted by Crunchy222

Originally posted by Eir_S
I'm not sure I've decided to pass on it yet, but I generally don't enjoy many P2P games these days regardless of their payment model, and Darkfall: UW just looks even less impressive than the usual.

Stick to GW2.  If you managed to stay there this long without boredom or lack of excitement this game wont be for you.  Completely different breed of game.

 

Also anyone who has to hesitate at spending $15 probably shouldnt be gaming anyway.  Time should be spent getting yourself out of poverty....which doesnt occur behind a gaming rig for hours a day.

This.

Originally posted by Hotjazz

Originally posted by stux

 Paying for some things aren't worth it to some and are to others.  Maybe I should make a post about how I feel Darkfall is worth $15/mo and we can discuss that.

I`m sure others will find different reasons on why Darkfall is worth 15$. I`m going to buy three accounts, so I think Darkfall is worth 45$ a month.

Why 3 accounts?

Originally posted by Siveria

Meh, game will prob die in 3 months or so, mostly due to the player corpse looting, I bet you if they made a server with a slightly diff ruleset, namely the no player corpse looting, it'd be the most full server they got, i got a ton of friends that would play DF:UW if the player corpse looting on any death part was removed, or if it offered a server with that rule removed. Besides, passing on darkfall UW your not missing much at all, other than the annoyed and frustration of asshats ganking you while yer fighting a monster, or griefers camping low lv area's on a high skilled char just to be a jerk. Its not that people are scared to lose items (As i understand it items were easy to replace in the orignal darkfall) But its more the fact that everytime they die they are going to have to waste time out of their playtime to run around town like a moron to replace gear, just to go back out and probally get ganked again and have to repeat the process. IMO you should only have a *chance* for stuff in inventory to be dropped, and equipped gear cannot be looted period.

I mean think about it: would you rather the game die in a few months? or would you rather it live? with the current ruleset in todays mmorpg market I doubt the game will last long. The so called "hardcore" pvp crowd is so tiny that its not enough to support a game and make it profitable. Removing one rule, will piss off a few of the so called hardcore people (however most of these hardcore people are the types who kill low lvs and run like a chicken from anyone who could fight back). But in return they will get alot more subs, alot more revenue, and the game will life a bit longer. But I'll be honest I don't expect any mmo released recently to last more than 6 months before having to go f2p or die. People are just getting tired of the subscription model, when most of the time they can find the same kind fo gameplay or even better gameplay out there somewhere for free.

You have almost every single other MMO on the market to play, and you want the ruleset changed on the one that is for people who want a UO-esque gameplay?

Some of us enjoy full loot because it makes the game intense, walking around I am always looking behind me and listening intently on the sound because you have to be ready for PvP.  You don't have to be a griefer, or "jerk" to enjoy a full loot game, you just have to be a person that wants immersion. PvP without consequences makes for a dull game.

If the niche was so tiny, why did Darkfall do well enough for the company to grow from 20 to 60 team members? The game paid off all of it debts in one year, and I am absolutely positive it will do well again.  It was never meant to be a massive game, it has a targeted niche audience.  

TLDR: You can play nearly every other game if you don't want looting.

Originally posted by ewlinitis
You've decided not to pay for a game  you have yet to try .  I suggest you pre-order and try it and if you do not like it , simply cancel.  Now is your chance since its going into beta on Monday.  If you like to pvp , i doubt  you wont like this game.  It's the most fun and suspenseful time i've had in any game.  Never seen so scared to venture out on my own in any game till DF came out.  Thats what drew me in , the felling , the excitement and the terror that no other game has made me feel.

Does cancelling mean you don't have to spend the box fee of 15/30?

Originally posted by Vesavius

Originally posted by Thebozz
I don't know the reasons for everyone that has a problem with sub MMOs, but for me personally I have moved away from them because the sub tends to lock you into playing that one game.  If I am spending money on something I want to get my monies worth.  So I tend to feel I should be playing that game even if I feel like playing something else or I am wasting my money. 

 

We are talking around £2.50 a week.

Can I ask... what other games do you actually play? Single player ones?

Or are you one of those guys that claim to play 4 MMORPGs at once? Y'know... the ones that make up the super transient super casual (in each game) player base that damage community building and whine for everything to be achievable in 30 min chunks and everyone to be equal no matter how much time they invest?

Can I ask how what's the minimum time that you feel you would need to play a MMORPG in a week to feel that you have gotten your £2.50 worth? An hour? Two? Ten?

How many hours a week do you usually play your chosen MMO(s)?

Sorry for the questions, but I like to try and understand the mindset behind the statements of preference we see.

 

That is the whole point.  I feel like I'm wasting my money if I'm not playing the MMO.  I would say when subbed to an MMO I usually spend 4 hours a night on nights off playing the MMO.  So about 16 hours a week.  So if I choose to spend that gaming time playing a single player game like Civ IV(I dont play it online dunno why) then I am wasting my money because I don't really like to play super casual.  If I want to try a new MMO and I have 16 hours a week to play MMOs and the new MMO has a sub then I am wasting my money if I keep both subs because I will only be playing one.  Say I manage to do it and start playing each 8 hours a week, but another comes out I want to try.  Now I'm really wasting my money paying 3 subs for 16 hours a week.  Now don't get my wrong if I wanted to waste my money on 3 subs I could and it wouldn't be a problem, but I would still be wasting money.

This is why I no longer am a huge fan of the sub model.  It makes it hard to try other games without wasting money.  I'm married I work full time and I got a 2 year old.  I don't have time to game like I used to.  It actually makes the freemium model preferred.  I have the income I can spend it on a game if I want to, but I'm not locked into spending the money if I don't want to.  I can either pay for stuff that month if I feel I want or not because I'm playing something else.  Also if I pay for certain content it usually is permanent so if it takes me three months to get through it because I chose to try two other games all I paid was the 10 bucks or whatever the content cost.

I wouldn't say there is a set amount of time that I consider it a waste of my money, but generally if I buy a single player game I get hundreds of hours of gameplay for $50 or less because I usually don't buy till it is $20.  So lets take Civ IV, I paid $20 and got atleast 400 hours out of it so far.  That is what 5 cents an hour?  Now with any sub game if I have 16 hours a week to dedicate to the game at $15 a month I'm paying around 0.20 cents an hour to play.  If I take a break and don't cancel my sub I'm paying $15 for nothing aka wasting my money.

In closing yes if I pay a sub and do not play the game yes I am wasting my money.  So is anyone that pays a sub and doesn't play the game.  That is basically the definition of wasting money.

---

Originally posted by ice-vortex
I was basically determined to purchase Darkfall: UW, but now with the monthly fee reveal of $15, I have decided against it. An MMORPG just isn't worth almost twice the price of Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu Plus, Xbox Live, and Playstation Plus. At Darkfall's price point, I could subscribe to Gamefly or Blockbuster and have an unlimited supply of new games to play. With other sandbox games like the Repopulation, which is free to play, coming out, I just don't see a reason to subscribe to Darkfall at the price point the developer has set.

---

I am really glad you told us you aren't gonna play. It's super important news.

Originally posted by Thebozz

Originally posted by Vesavius

Originally posted by Thebozz
I don't know the reasons for everyone that has a problem with sub MMOs, but for me personally I have moved away from them because the sub tends to lock you into playing that one game.  If I am spending money on something I want to get my monies worth.  So I tend to feel I should be playing that game even if I feel like playing something else or I am wasting my money. 

 

We are talking around £2.50 a week.

Can I ask... what other games do you actually play? Single player ones?

Or are you one of those guys that claim to play 4 MMORPGs at once? Y'know... the ones that make up the super transient super casual (in each game) player base that damage community building and whine for everything to be achievable in 30 min chunks and everyone to be equal no matter how much time they invest?

Can I ask how what's the minimum time that you feel you would need to play a MMORPG in a week to feel that you have gotten your £2.50 worth? An hour? Two? Ten?

How many hours a week do you usually play your chosen MMO(s)?

Sorry for the questions, but I like to try and understand the mindset behind the statements of preference we see.

That is the whole point.  I feel like I'm wasting my money if I'm not playing the MMO.  I would say when subbed to an MMO I usually spend 4 hours a night on nights off playing the MMO.  So about 16 hours a week.  So if I choose to spend that gaming time playing a single player game like Civ IV

ok, so you play games for 16 hours a week? And that time is split up amongst both MMORPGs and other titles?

I don't really like to play super casual.

Friend, playing 3 MMORPGs a week in a 16 hour timeframe (around 5 hours a week per game per week) *IS* super casual.

I wouldn't say there is a set amount of time that I consider it a waste of my money, but generally if I buy a single player game I get hundreds of hours of gameplay for $50 or less because I usually don't buy till it is $20.  So lets take Civ IV...

No, lets not use Civ as an example to prove the point, because it is one of the exceptions. As we both know most single player games offer a lot less hours, usually around 20 these days.

In closing yes if I pay a sub and do not play the game yes I am wasting my money.  So is anyone that pays a sub and doesn't play the game.  That is basically the definition of wasting money.

No, it isn't the definition of anything. It is *your* definition, but certainly not mine.

You see, most people *can* put a time on how much play they have to reach a week to justify that £2.50 spend, and once they reach that time it is no longer a 'waste'. For me personally that would be around an hour, but tbh, I wouldnt be playing a MMORPG if I only had 1-5 hours a week to do so... because the genre dosen't suit that kind of tiny investment (or at least it didn't before it started to cater to the transient ADHD super casuals).

F2P and Cash shops;

• Create a super casual player base that leads to the notion that everyone in a game should have equal rewards, no matter how little they play.
• Create a transient player base that flits between titles and adds nothing to the community
• Has a hugely negative impact on core game design, as the game becomes structured to manipulate the user into paying.
• Rely on the exploitation of the vulnerable and gullible to make money
• Deliver worst value for anyone but the casuals
• Promote pay to achieve over play to achieve

Originally posted by Vesavius

Originally posted by Thebozz

Originally posted by Vesavius

Originally posted by Thebozz
I don't know the reasons for everyone that has a problem with sub MMOs, but for me personally I have moved away from them because the sub tends to lock you into playing that one game.  If I am spending money on something I want to get my monies worth.  So I tend to feel I should be playing that game even if I feel like playing something else or I am wasting my money. 

 

We are talking around £2.50 a week.

Can I ask... what other games do you actually play? Single player ones?

Or are you one of those guys that claim to play 4 MMORPGs at once? Y'know... the ones that make up the super transient super casual (in each game) player base that damage community building and whine for everything to be achievable in 30 min chunks and everyone to be equal no matter how much time they invest?

Can I ask how what's the minimum time that you feel you would need to play a MMORPG in a week to feel that you have gotten your £2.50 worth? An hour? Two? Ten?

How many hours a week do you usually play your chosen MMO(s)?

Sorry for the questions, but I like to try and understand the mindset behind the statements of preference we see.

That is the whole point.  I feel like I'm wasting my money if I'm not playing the MMO.  I would say when subbed to an MMO I usually spend 4 hours a night on nights off playing the MMO.  So about 16 hours a week.  So if I choose to spend that gaming time playing a single player game like Civ IV

ok, so you play games for 16 hours a week? And that time is split up amongst both MMORPGs and other titles?

Yes

I don't really like to play super casual.

Friend, playing 3 MMORPGs a week in a 16 hour timeframe (around 5 hours a week per game per week) *IS* super casual.

Exactly Why I wouldn't play three sub games at a time without feeling like I was wasting money.

I wouldn't say there is a set amount of time that I consider it a waste of my money, but generally if I buy a single player game I get hundreds of hours of gameplay for $50 or less because I usually don't buy till it is $20.  So lets take Civ IV...

No, lets not use Civ as an example to prove the point, because it is one of the exceptions. As we both know most single player games offer a lot less hours, usually around 20 these days.

Considering I generally play MMOs, sports games, or strategy games, I would say I never play a game with only 20 hours of gameplay before I put it down.  So yes Civ is a good example, because it is an example of something I play.

In closing yes if I pay a sub and do not play the game yes I am wasting my money.  So is anyone that pays a sub and doesn't play the game.  That is basically the definition of wasting money.

No, it isn't the definition of anything. It is *your* definition, but certainly not mine.

So spending money on something you are not using is not wasting money to you.  Spending money on something you are not using is not wasting... definition.com disagrees with you.

waste

/we?st/ Show Spelled [weyst] Show IPA verb, wast·ed, wast·ing, noun, adjective.

 

verb (used with object)

1.

to consume, spend, or employ uselessly or without adequate return; use to no avail or profit; squander: to waste money; to waste words.

 

2.

to fail or neglect to use: to waste an opportunity.

 

3.

to destroy or consume gradually; wear away: The waves waste the rock of the shore.

 

4.

to wear down or reduce in bodily substance, health, or strength; emaciate; enfeeble: to be wasted by disease or hunger.

 

5.

to destroy, devastate, or ruin: a country wasted by a long and futile war.

 

 

You see, most people *can* put a time on how much play they have to reach a week to justify that £2.50 spend, and once they reach that time it is no longer a 'waste'. For me personally that would be around an hour, but tbh, I wouldnt be playing a MMORPG if I only had 1-5 hours a week to do so... because the genre dosen't suit that kind of tiny investment (or at least it didn't before it started to cater to the transient ADHD super casuals).

 I am currently not playing an MMO, but I wouldn't be playing much of anything if I didn't have atleast a 4 hour block to play.  I have always only planned on getting something done in an MMO if I have at minimum 2 hours to dedicate at a given time. 

F2P and Cash shops;

• Create a super casual player base that leads to the notion that everyone in a game should have equal rewards, no matter how little they play.
• Create a transient player base that flits between titles and adds nothing to the community
• Has a hugely negative impact on core game design, as the game becomes structured to manipulate the user into paying.
• Rely on the exploitation of the vulnerable and gullible to make money
• Deliver worst value for anyone but the casuals
• Promote pay to achieve over play to achieve

 

People blame the decline of the MMORPG on quest hubs and 'clones', but to me it's mostly happened because of guys like you. I am not personally attacking you or trying to insult you, but your play style is, in my eyes, responsible for the move into solo centric, super casual, pay to achieve game design that has ruined the genre.

Well so you know I prefer group centric game play, play to acheive game design.  I didn't talk once about buying my way through a game, I was mostly referring to paying for additional content like the DDO freemium design.  I have ran into as much poor design from sub fee games with the time sinks to keep people paying.  Just look at the original darkfall for a poorly designed sub fee game.  When it came out it was a giant time sink so people swam into walls in town or macroed for hours.  I prefer playing a game than doing stuff like that.

Originally posted by Thebozz

Gonna cut and paste you here to reduce the mess that our quotes are becoming.

Just to clarify though... you agree now that you qualify as a super casual in each of the MMORPGs you play at maybe 5 hours a week in each?

 "So yes Civ is a good example, because it is an example of something I play."

Well, I read it that you were using Civ as am example to demonstrate a wider point of how single player games are better value then MMORPGs. If you are saying that this one game is better value then I would agree, but we agree that it is still one of the exceptions and not the rule?

The vast majority of single player games do not deliver the same value in play time (enjoyment value is another debate).

"So spending money on something you are not using is not wasting money to you. Spending money on something you are not using is not wasting... definition.com disagrees with you."

Like I said, if I get 1-2 hours out of a MMORPG that I paid £2.50 to play then I *have* used it, so your point is invalid.

You just seem to think that if I haven't used it for, what, 20 hours a week then it's somehow a 'waste'. I am telling you that, to me, that isn't the case and that if I play for an hour or two that's worth £2.50 *to me*.

Are you honestly saying that if I haven't played a game for the full 168 hours a week then the £2.50 I have spent is 'wasted'..? this is obviously ridiculous.

You definition quote is irrelevant so I haven't copied it over in interests of clarity.

"Well so you know I prefer group centric game play, play to acheive game design."

Well, you are the guy that also told me he wasn't super casual in a game at 5 hours a week, so yeah...

Noone that supports play to achieve game design supports cash shops. They may say they do, but in reality they don't.

"I prefer playing a game than doing stuff like that."

This statement speaks volumes tbh and is the true mantra of the super casual transient cash shopper.

Just to repeat, and then I will leave this thread because we are now at the point I think where we will just repeat ourselves and that gets boring fast (you can have the inevitable last word, I really don't mind);

F2P and Cash shops;

• Create a super casual player base that leads to the notion that everyone in a game should have equal rewards, no matter how little they play.
• Create a transient player base that flits between titles and adds nothing to the community
• Has a hugely negative impact on core game design, as the game becomes structured to manipulate the user into paying.
• Rely on the exploitation of the vulnerable and gullible to make money
• Deliver worst value for anyone but the casuals
• Promote pay to achieve over play to achieve

People blame the decline of the MMORPG on quest hubs and 'clones', but to me it's mostly happened because of this.It is a play style is, in my eyes, responsible for the move into solo centric, super casual, pay to achieve game design that has ruined the genre.

*edited to depersonalise from you and make a wider point*

Originally posted by Vesavius

Originally posted by Thebozz

 

Gonna cut and paste you here to reduce the mess that our quotes are becoming.

Just to clarify though... you agree now that you qualify as a super casual in each of the MMORPGs you play at maybe 5 hours a week in each?

 

 "So yes Civ is a good example, because it is an example of something I play."

Well, I read it that you were using Civ as am example to demonstrate a wider point of how single player games are better value then MMORPGs. If you are saying that this one game is better value then I would agree, but we agree that it is still one of the exceptions and not the rule?

The vast majority of single player games do not deliver the same value in play time (enjoyment value is another debate).

 

"So spending money on something you are not using is not wasting money to you. Spending money on something you are not using is not wasting... definition.com disagrees with you."

 

Like I said, if I get 1-2 hours out of a MMORPG that I paid £2.50 to play then I *have* used it, so your point is invalid.

You just seem to think that if I haven't used it for, what, 20 hours a week then it's somehow a 'waste'. I am telling you that, to me, that isn't the case and that if I play for an hour or two that's worth £2.50 *to me*.

Are you honestly saying that if I haven't played a game for the full 168 hours a week then the £2.50 I have spent is 'wasted'..? this is obviously ridiculous.

You definition quote is irrelevant so I haven't copied it over in interests of clarity.

 

"Well so you know I prefer group centric game play, play to acheive game design."

 

Well, you are the guy that also told me he wasn't super casual in a game at 5 hours a week, so yeah...

Noone that supports play to achieve game design supports cash shops. They may say they do, but in reality they don't.

 

"I prefer playing a game than doing stuff like that."

 

This statement speaks volumes tbh and is the true mantra of the super casual transient cash shopper.

 

Just to repeat, and then I will leave this thread because we are now at the point I think where we will just repeat ourselves and that gets boring fast (you can have the inevitable last word, I really don't mind);

 

F2P and Cash shops;

• Create a super casual player base that leads to the notion that everyone in a game should have equal rewards, no matter how little they play.
• Create a transient player base that flits between titles and adds nothing to the community
• Has a hugely negative impact on core game design, as the game becomes structured to manipulate the user into paying.
• Rely on the exploitation of the vulnerable and gullible to make money
• Deliver worst value for anyone but the casuals
• Promote pay to achieve over play to achieve

People blame the decline of the MMORPG on quest hubs and 'clones', but to me it's mostly happened because of this.It is a play style is, in my eyes, responsible for the move into solo centric, super casual, pay to achieve game design that has ruined the genre.

*edited to depersonalise from you and make a wider point*

Thanks for letting me have the last word.  I never stated I play any game 5 hours a week, but yet you continue to say I think playing an MMO 5 hours a week is not super casual.  Not at all what I said.  So I am also done, because I can't have a logical conversation with someone that isn't going to take time to read what I say and actually respond to anything I actually say.  The definition of waste is also completely relevent to a conversation about wasting money in which one person states waste does not mean what waste means, but ok whatever.