FORUMS


Officer Briefings being GP only



Posted: //
May 3, 2016, 8:13 p.m.



How about we all just calm down and wait for a official response from the devs. I mean come on, no dev/publisher would do something this stupid, even Wargaming doesn't have anything this bad.


Posted: //
May 3, 2016, 8:13 p.m.



INB4 they say it's not a direct game play advantage. INB4 "Working as intended". INB4 try it before you judge it.


Posted: //
May 3, 2016, 8:15 p.m.



You vastly underestimate the power of human stupidity.


Posted: //
May 3, 2016, 8:15 p.m.


Updated //
May 3, 2016, 8:18 p.m.


Posted: //
May 3, 2016, 8:17 p.m.



I refuse to play a game that has powerful player buffs locked behind a paywall. More than that, I'll discourage my friends from doing the same.

Good job, GB.


Posted: //
May 3, 2016, 8:17 p.m.



There have been some semi official responses in discord that this was intended. To test how we feel. Well I think we are making that pretty clear.

Bad decision. Need a ton of explanation to justify this P2W model. This is kind of PR disaster.


Posted: //
May 3, 2016, 8:18 p.m.



Nuclearmoose#1670 posted (#post-29992)

How about we all just calm down and wait for a official response from the devs. I mean come on, no dev/publisher would do something this stupid, even Wargaming doesn't have anything this bad.

That's what I said! smile I hope it's only a mistake. I mean, in comparison to this WG looks like a bunch of nuns.


"I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time like tears in rain..."


Posted: //
May 3, 2016, 8:18 p.m.



If this stays I'm out as well, no further questions asked.


Posted: //
May 3, 2016, 8:19 p.m.



Nuclearmoose#1670 posted (#post-29992)

How about we all just calm down and wait for a official response from the devs. I mean come on, no dev/publisher would do something this stupid, even Wargaming doesn't have anything this bad.

They have already discussed this topic before. The Devs have always said that this game would never have P2W mechanics that affected gameplay. As a matter of fact, go back to the OP and check for a YouTube link to their most recent livestream (last week) and you can see/hear them say it out loud. The reason this publisher decision is being reacted to so harshly is because, at its base level, this is a massive violation of consumer trust. There has always been a pledge to keep the game F2P except for cosmetic items (which is a totally normal F2P model). That pledge, perhaps against Dev wishes, has just been absolutely destroyed.

And as far as Wargaming goes, how long have you been playing? You must not remember that fiasco 6 months back when they actually tried to do something similar. They tried to increase the cost of camouflage/emblems in World of Tanks and then make them actually affect the performance of your tank crews (better reload speeds, increased view range, etc.). The community outcry was so massive that, within a week of implementation, Wargaming reverted to the previous model (you can still see the foundation for what they were trying to do when you mount external modules). These guys had better respond in the same manner, or they are going to lose this game before it's even officially released.


Posted: //
May 3, 2016, 8:22 p.m.



Quite simply I have no interesti n P2W. I will drop this game without hesitation if it becomes P2W. I will happily spend some money on the game just like I do with WoWs and other games that sell cosmetic features or the ability to advance faster. Either go F2P without P2W or just sell the game.

This forum is restricted, posts cannot be made.