.. and the award for Worst MMO Business Model in 2016 goes to ...

[Jeweledleah]

A 3.000 Vote Article. What a reliable Article you found there mate. Good job. Around the Hundred Millions of Online gamesr you represent us a 3.000 Vote Article? Which most of the voters are the drama queens and kings of this Forum? Extraordinary.

 

P.S. Most of the games on the list have already shut down or have like 1-2 people player base. And SWTOR is the worst? I see what you did there dude.

 

uh. which one of those games have shut down, because as far as I know and from googling the ones I'm less familiar with - all seem to be active. as for smaller player base - at least half of those games have MUCH larger player base than TOR, a few that have comparable, and very few, that have relatively smaller number of players.

 

the irony of you ragging on a user poll (even though the original awards weren't even selected by users in a first place), while making blatantly incorrect statements is hilarious.

[Alssaran]

Their gambling packs are TERRIBLE. They are a TERRIBLE, DISGUSTING, SHAMELESS way to squeeze as much money out of a few desperate players addicted to gambling. We ALREADY purchased the game.

 

All of this applies to Overwatch aswell. You purchase the game at full price. You can then choose to buy the gambling packs for cosmetic items at ~1$ a piece (reduced prices apply for multiple boxes), or slowly unlock them as you play the game. The same thing goes for SWTOR: I can either choose to buy the gambling packs, or I can farm credits and unlock the few cosmetic items I want through the GTN.

 

How does this qualify SWTOR as the worst business model when Overwatch and Battlefield 1 (with an option to purchase gambling crates too) follow the same business model?

 

Gambling boxes have become a spreading phenomenon in the multiplayer genre. Quite a few games use them right now. This in itself is not a qualification for "worst business model."

 

Another TERRIBLE, DISGUSTING, SHAMELESS way to squeeze even MORE money from existing players.

 

Do you need to buy them from the CM? Or can you unlock them for credits too...?

 

Nothing in this sentence suggests that it is even remotely as bad as Rift, ArcheAge or Black Desert Online. You can buy outright advantages in those games. Some things on the CM aren't even cosmetic additions (thus optional additions unlockable through the auction house), but are outright gameplay advantages. Elion's Tear comes to mind. The only way to win boss loot is to be one of the top players in the contribution list. To reach that, you have to keep your uptime as high as possible. If you die, you have to run back to the boss and reduce your effective uptime. That makes it a requirement to purchase Elion's Tears at ~0.70$ a piece for every time you die at a world boss encounter. And that in a game you purchased at roughly 40$ a copy.

 

EA needs to back off of all this gambling crap.

 

Which multiple companies have moved to in recent years. Do you know why? Because it's working. There is a reason gambling was always and still is around in our lives. Come new laws applied to gambling, companies will find other ways to move around the issue.

 

Whether we agree or disagree with the award, I think that some of their reasons are very shady to begin with. Other games have downright power creeps and Cash Shop requirements beyond simple cosmetic items. Those games are B2P titles too (such as Black Desert Online). It simply is unreasonable to make SWTOR the worst business model alive when that game (BDO) had three major controversies regarding the cash shop this year alone.

Edited December 21, 2016 by Alssaran

[Anzel]

All of this applies to Overwatch aswell. You purchase the game at full price. You can then choose to buy the gambling packs for cosmetic items at ~1$ a piece (reduced prices apply for multiple boxes), or slowly unlock them as you play the game. The same thing goes for SWTOR: I can either choose to buy the gambling packs, or I can farm credits and unlock the few cosmetic items I want through the GTN.

 

How does this qualify SWTOR as the worst business model when Overwatch and Battlefield 1 (with an option to purchase gambling crates too) follow the same business model?

 

Gambling boxes have become a spreading phenomenon in the multiplayer genre. Quite a few games use them right now. This in itself is not a qualification for "worst business model."

 

 

 

Do you need to buy them from the CM? Or can you unlock them for credits too...?

 

Nothing in this sentence suggests that it is even remotely as bad as Rift, ArcheAge or Black Desert Online. You can buy outright advantages in those games. Some things on the CM aren't even cosmetic additions (thus optional additions unlockable through the auction house), but are outright gameplay advantages. Elion's Tear comes to mind. The only way to win boss loot is to be one of the top players in the contribution list. To reach that, you have to keep your uptime as high as possible. If you die, you have to run back to the boss and reduce your effective uptime. That makes it a requirement to purchase Elion's Tears at ~0.70$ a piece for every time you die at a world boss encounter. And that in a game you purchased at roughly 40$ a copy.

 

 

 

Which multiple companies have moved to in recent years. Do you know why? Because it's working. There is a reason gambling was always and still is around in our lives. Come new laws applied to gambling, companies will find other ways to move around the issue.

 

Whether we agree or disagree with the award, I think that some of their reasons are very shady to begin with. Other games have downright power creeps and Cash Shop requirements beyond simple cosmetic items. Those games are B2P titles too (such as Black Desert Online). It simply is unreasonable to make SWTOR the worst business model alive when that game (BDO) had three major controversies regarding the cash shop this year alone.

 

 

So wait a minute. Are you saying that you also pay $15 a month to play BF1 and $15 per month to play Overwatch? Because I don't. I don't pay $15 per month to play Destiny either. Also, in Destiny I have a SUPERBLACK shader that I got for FREE from their Halloween event. A shader that I can make copies of for FREE for all of my characters.

 

they are asking players to purchase their game, purchase their expansion, purchase a SUBSCRIPTION AND pay through the nose to gamble. There's a reason why they are NUMBER ONE on this list with a bullet.

[Jeweledleah]

what makes SWTOR into the worst (for the players) business model is that they lock acess to just about everything behind subscription, despite selling multitude of unlocks to people to get preferred status, despite being a so-called f2p game - f2p version of the game is barely playable thanks to staggering amount of restrictions, and on top of that - not only there is barely any new content to play through - but just about everything nice cosmetically speaking is locked behind cartel market. they have been adding almost no in game stuff to go for, and I'm estimating roughly, but I'd say about 90% of the new cosmetics - are cartel market only. and just because cartel items are tradable for credits, doesn't change the fact that cartel market is the only way to acquire them. while gambling - since direct purchase stuff also makes up for a tiny fraction of stuff added..

 

there are games that handled gambling packs in a worse fashion. but with SWTOR its just a combination of ALL of the above that makes it pretty darn awful, ESPECIALLY when compared to other subscription optional games on the market.

 

this game has become incredibly player unfriendly in its monetanization (and just in general)

[NeverLoseFaith]

uh. which one of those games have shut down, because as far as I know and from googling the ones I'm less familiar with - all seem to be active. as for smaller player base - at least half of those games have MUCH larger player base than TOR, a few that have comparable, and very few, that have relatively smaller number of players.

 

the irony of you ragging on a user poll (even though the original awards weren't even selected by users in a first place), while making blatantly incorrect statements is hilarious.

 

I guess you are totally unaware of what's going on in gaming communities. Prolly you are one of those guys that have never stepped out of SWTOR but you have opinion for everything.

 

1)It doesn't rly count if the result came out of the votes or out of an expert as it's probably his opinion which make the whole thing subjective and not objective. So again it's not accurate. And it will never be accurate if BioWare doesn't release specific numbers showing that they failed to do their part.

 

2) a)Wildstar has the lowest player base and numbers from all of NCsofts games and they are discussing about Shutting it down in the very near future. Keep in mind that it is F2P.

 

b)Rift same as Wildstar. Old - 0 promotion / marketing, player base lower than SWTOR for sure.

 

There are like 4 or 5 more games on the list barely surviving and it is not even questionable if they do have any business model. Cause they don't.

 

P.S. Do some research please

Edited December 21, 2016 by NeverLoseFaith

[NeverLoseFaith]

what makes SWTOR into the worst (for the players) business model is that they lock acess to just about everything behind subscription, despite selling multitude of unlocks to people to get preferred status, despite being a so-called f2p game - f2p version of the game is barely playable thanks to staggering amount of restrictions, and on top of that - not only there is barely any new content to play through - but just about everything nice cosmetically speaking is locked behind cartel market. they have been adding almost no in game stuff to go for, and I'm estimating roughly, but I'd say about 90% of the new cosmetics - are cartel market only. and just because cartel items are tradable for credits, doesn't change the fact that cartel market is the only way to acquire them. while gambling - since direct purchase stuff also makes up for a tiny fraction of stuff added..

 

there are games that handled gambling packs in a worse fashion. but with SWTOR its just a combination of ALL of the above that makes it pretty darn awful, ESPECIALLY when compared to other subscription optional games on the market.

 

this game has become incredibly player unfriendly in its monetanization (and just in general)

 

The fact that SWTOR never was a F2P at all doesn't make it the worst business model for the players and that's because there is also another category of players called "Subscribers" which they get 500CC for free from Subscription every month and 100CC from Security Key. Other MMO's won't give you anything back for your Subscription payment. So it's nice to criticize a Business Model as a F2P but not as a Subscriber.

 

P.S. Yeah, someday SWTOR staff has to realise that the whole F2P "wannabe" joke doesn't work, and remove totally that statement. Or make it F2P for real.

Edited December 21, 2016 by NeverLoseFaith

[Tsillah]

How dare they want us to give them money for entertainment! For shame....or something?

 

You need to learn the difference between charging customers for a product and milking your customers. I'll give you a hint: one of the two is perfectly fine, the other is not.

[TUXs]

P.S. Most of the games on the list have already shut down or have like 1-2 people player base. And SWTOR is the worst? I see what you did there dude.

Which ones have shut down and what one has 1-2 people playing it?

 

Star Wars The Old Republic (67%, 2,219 Votes)

Pokemon Go (4%, 124 Votes)

RIFT (5%, 164 Votes)

Black Desert (5%, 164 Votes)

ARK: Survival Evolved (2%, 54 Votes)

Neverwinter (1%, 41 Votes)

Star Trek Online (1%, 28 Votes)

Blade and Soul (1%, 25 Votes)

Guild Wars 2 (1%, 22 Votes)

World of Warcraft (2%, 71 Votes)

Elder Scrolls Online (1%, 21 Votes)

Final Fantasy XIV (0%, 14 Votes)

EVE Online (0%, 11 Votes)

Riders of Icarus (0%, 3 Votes)

TERA (0%, 5 Votes)

Skyforge (0%, 12 Votes)

DC Universe Online (0%, 7 Votes)

The Secret World (0%, 6 Votes)

WildStar (0%, 12 Votes)

ArcheAge (6%, 193 Votes)

EverQuest II (0%, 5 Votes)

Trove (0%, 7 Votes)

Lord of the Rings Online (1%, 20 Votes)

Landmark (0%, 11 Votes)

RuneScape (0%, 10 Votes)

Nothing (1%, 32 Votes)

Something else (tell us in the comments). (1%, 38 Votes)

[Jeweledleah]

I guess you are totally unaware of what's going on in gaming communities. Prolly you are one of those guys that have never stepped out of SWTOR but you have opinion for everything.

 

1)It doesn't rly count if the result came out of the votes or out of an expert as it's probably his opinion which make the whole thing subjective and not objective. So again it's not accurate. And it will never be accurate if BioWare doesn't release specific numbers showing that they failed to do their part.

 

2) a)Wildstar has the lowest player base and numbers from all of NCsofts games and they are discussing about Shutting it down in the very near future. Keep in mind that it is F2P.

 

b)Rift same as Wildstar. Old - 0 promotion / marketing, player base lower than SWTOR for sure.

 

There are like 4 or 5 more games on the list barely surviving and it is not even questionable if they do have any business model. Cause they don't.

 

P.S. Do some research please

 

oh the irony.

 

one. I have actualy played wildstar and rift. have you? wildstar is floundering, no doubt about it, and rift has been very quietly chugging along in a SWTOR's direction of going back to subscription only model. however. since you are such a devil for research - named me a SINGLE game on that list, that was shot down. there are games that are relatively new on that list, but not one of them has shot down yet.

 

moreover, that list has a freaking WoW on it. and Tera. and Neverwinter. and Final Fantasy and STO and GW2 so many other games that either have larger player base than SWTOR (fact) or at least roughly the same one.

 

moreover, those games that are barely surviving in your own worlds. Do they actualy have an awful for players business model? or are you just changing the subject here? SWTOR won this award because its business model IS EXTREMELY PLAYER UNFRIENDLY. the fact that its losing players in part because of it, in part because content updates are lacking - is consequences of SAID BUSINESS MODEL. so please. tell me. are those games genuinely as bad? you know charging their players several times over to play content that's years old.

 

 

and btw, swtor may have started out as b2p subscription only game but its been marketed as FREE TO PLAY for years now. in fact - when you go to swtor.com - guess what greets you? play now, for FREE.

 

moreover, you are the one that apparently doesn't know anything about other games. because EVERY SINGLE SUBSCRIPTION OPTIONAL game gives you extras for subscribing. ESO gives you equivalent of $15 worth of crowns (cartel coin equivalent - to SWTOR's measly 500) aside from several perks. TSW also gives you perks as well as their store currency. Wildstar subscription comes with currency as well (in addition to perks) Lotro - 500 turbine points per month. and I can keep going.

 

subscription required games - do not. but they also don't milk their customers nearly as much with their cash shops.

Edited December 21, 2016 by Jeweledleah

[DarthDymond]

Go on, keep feeding. I'm sure it'll turn into a genuinely productive conversation if you rebut one more of his so very, very earnest claims. Edited December 21, 2016 by DarthDymond

[DarthSpuds]

P.S. Most of the games on the list have already shut down or have like 1-2 people player base. And SWTOR is the worst? I see what you did there dude.

 

Go on then, name the 50% of those games that have closed down, or have no player base.

 

I see what you did there, and it really wasn't very intelligent now was it.

 

All The Best

[Vember]

Go on then, name the 50% of those games that have closed down, or have no player base.

 

 

None of them have shut down as far as I know, but there are a large number of them that are virtually dead games.

[Lium]

All of this applies to Overwatch aswell. You purchase the game at full price. You can then choose to buy the gambling packs for cosmetic items at ~1$ a piece (reduced prices apply for multiple boxes), or slowly unlock them as you play the game. The same thing goes for SWTOR: I can either choose to buy the gambling packs, or I can farm credits and unlock the few cosmetic items I want through the GTN.

 

I would agree with this if it wasn't for the fact that the economy in SWTOR is totally broken. Anything worthwhile you could get from a gambling pack is on the GTN for tens of millions of credits. In some cases more. For example, the unstable lightsaber is going on my server (Jedi Covenant) for 150 million credits and up.

[LordArtemis]

I think the evidence shows this is still happening now.

 

Recall the DvL achievement fiasco and Eric posting that "they understood the frustration" it caused.

 

I would agree that some of the recent changes in the last 2 years or so, here and there, demonstrated a lack of understanding, certainly. Even Bioware owned up to that from time to time.

 

I think the difference, however, is pretty stark. The original dev team, prior to the F2P launch refused to admit anything was wrong. They continued to post misleading statements on the forums and around the net despite the obvious dropoff of players.

 

Now, I do not expect a company to come straight out and say something like "this game has lost 75 percent of its players, staff is getting fired, fire sale in effect" naturally. I doubt any company would do that.

 

But, to its credit, the new staff HAS conceded some mistakes and corrected them, even if only partially.

 

So I would say that is a pretty big difference between the two groups.

[Jeweledleah]

I would agree with this if it wasn't for the fact that the economy in SWTOR is totally broken. Anything worthwhile you could get from a gambling pack is on the GTN for tens of millions of credits. In some cases more. For example, the unstable lightsaber is going on my server (Jedi Covenant) for 150 million credits and up.

 

another reason why this doesn't exactly apply is because in order for you to buy cartel market stuff on GTN, SOMEONE had to have spent cash on it. boxes in overwatch you can buy through gameplay alone, you don't have to hope that someone else somewhere spend their cash so that they could trade them to you for in game currency. with boxes like in overwatch, paying for boxes with cash is a genuine choice - an option rather then the only way.

[LordArtemis]

I would add that, though it is certainly fine to discredit the poll or the site that posts it, it is a bit silly in this case.

 

I would think it is plainly obvious by now that SWTOR has one of the worst F2P systems on the market...I think any sensible person could simply compare this model to many of the MMOs on the market and conclude as much.

 

Whether or not it is has hurt the game is hard to say conclusively, for all we know it might be performing better here than elsewhere to be fair....but I doubt it.

 

Even if it is doing well I contend it could be doing far better. Naturally a combination of factors IMO hinder the games health and growth, but I feel the F2P is definitely one of those factors.

 

I could be wrong of course. But it is likely pretty silly to resort to deriding the source or the poll in an attempt to discredit what is obvious here....this F2P is one of the most restrictive on the market.

[Kurj]

I would agree that some of the recent changes in the last 2 years or so, here and there, demonstrated a lack of understanding, certainly. Even Bioware owned up to that from time to time.

 

I think the difference, however, is pretty stark. The original dev team, prior to the F2P launch refused to admit anything was wrong. They continued to post misleading statements on the forums and around the net despite the obvious dropoff of players.

 

Now, I do not expect a company to come straight out and say something like "this game has lost 75 percent of its players, staff is getting fired, fire sale in effect" naturally. I doubt any company would do that.

 

But, to its credit, the new staff HAS conceded some mistakes and corrected them, even if only partially.

 

So I would say that is a pretty big difference between the two groups.

 

I agree, and that alone would make a huge difference if the decision to use RNG for end-game gearing wasn't so horribly, utterly moronic from the get-go. I don't buy packs from the CM because I hate RNG. I would rather pay more to get what I want. It's annoying, but not a big deal because it only affects one non-essential aspect of the game. Now GC applies RNG to everything, combined with an end-game grind that appears to dwarf the effort required to level to 70, with no meaningful new end-game content. Where is the upside?

 

I re-subbed to play 5.0. I finished the story in 3 nights of after-work play. Getting back into PVP has been great, but how long is that going to keep me as a paying customer with all of the unanswered frustrations this expac creates? Like many here, I love this game because it is Star Wars, but those credits only take you so far. It's sad to say, but this game looks like it is heading in a direction I have no desire to go.

[LordArtemis]

I agree, and that alone would make a huge difference if the decision to use RNG for end-game gearing wasn't so horribly, utterly moronic from the get-go. I don't buy packs from the CM because I hate RNG. I would rather pay more to get what I want. It's annoying, but not a big deal because it only affects one non-essential aspect of the game. Now GC applies RNG to everything, combined with an end-game grind that appears to dwarf the effort required to level to 70, with no meaningful new end-game content. Where is the upside?

 

I re-subbed to play 5.0. I finished the story in 3 nights of after-work play. Getting back into PVP has been great, but how long is that going to keep me as a paying customer with all of the unanswered frustrations this expac creates? Like many here, I love this game because it is Star Wars, but those credits only take you so far. It's sad to say, but this game looks like it is heading in a direction I have no desire to go.

 

To be fair, this is not the only foolish mistake in the past two years IMO. I think the CSM debacle, letting exploits stay in place, even after acknowledging their existence and the companion rebalance are good examples of a lack of understanding with respect to their playerbase as well. And there are likely more examples here and there...so this one mistake is not so much a change as it is a pattern of sorts.

 

Honestly, I don't know how to stop this foolishness....they have testing, according to folks involved they were repeatedly warned in testing yet ignored that advice for whatever reason...seems to me there may not be a fix.

 

Perhaps they do not believe either their testers or their community members are a proper litmus....perhaps this is a management choice and their hands are tied until folks start to leave the game in a substantial way....

 

It's really hard to say. Some of the decisions made recently do seem odd...

[DarthDymond]

To be fair, this is not the only foolish mistake in the past two years IMO. I think the CSM debacle, letting exploits stay in place, even after acknowledging their existence and the companion rebalance are good examples of a lack of understanding with respect to their playerbase as well. And there are likely more examples here and there...so this one mistake is not so much a change as it is a pattern of sorts.

 

Honestly, I don't know how to stop this foolishness....they have testing, according to folks involved they were repeatedly warned in testing yet ignored that advice for whatever reason...seems to me there may not be a fix.

 

Perhaps they do not believe either their testers or their community members are a proper litmus....perhaps this is a management choice and their hands are tied until folks start to leave the game in a substantial way....

 

It's really hard to say. Some of the decisions made recently do seem odd...

 

I suspect it is largely a capacity problem, either because of the overall staffing levels at BW Austin, the way the staff's time is being allocated between SWTOR, ME: Andromeda, and any unannounced projects they're working on, or (most likely) a combination thereof. Based on what we've seen over the past few years, I would guess that they have to prioritize - or even triage - where they're putting their resources.

 

The result seems to be that they're less nimble and responsive than one might hope for with a major, big-name product, and that some aspects of it get effectively discontinued (GSF), cut back on (16 Chapters in KOTFE to only 9 in KOTET) or put on the backburner for extended periods of time (years between WZs and Ops, who knows how long before we see a new Stronghold, etc.).

 

I've calibrated my expectations for how responsive and robust the game's updates are likely to be so that they're closer to what I'd expect in an indie title rather than a big-budget blockbuster. And I personally am comfortable with paying what I'm paying for the product I'm getting here, but as always that's a personal decision each player needs to make for him/herself.

Edited December 21, 2016 by DarthDymond

[Kurj]

Perhaps they do not believe either their testers or their community members are a proper litmus....perhaps this is a management choice and their hands are tied until folks start to leave the game in a substantial way....

 

I think someone has convinced upper management that a grinder, Pay2Play model will draw in huge amounts of new subscribers, that will more than make up for the loss of the traditional customer base, and we are going to be stuck waiting until reality sets in. Just my guess, no support for it whatsoever beyond what we can all see, and there can be as many interpretations of that as there are people who see it.

 

I suspect it is largely a capacity problem, either because of the overall staffing levels at BW Austin, the way the staff's time is being allocated between SWTOR, ME: Andromeda, and any unannounced projects they're working on, or (most likely) a combination thereof. Based on what we've seen over the past few years, I would guess that they have to prioritize - or even triage - where they're putting their resources.

 

I agree with that too, and the decisions they are making are not a good use of resources. Take all of the effort that went into GC, turn the new planets in the expac into new daily zones with a new OP for each planet, re-calibrate the comms system to slow down progression, and remove priority OPs, and voila! You've got yourself another 12 months of shelf life. The only positive aspect I see to GC is the removal of expertise, but you don't need GC to do that.

[eartharioch]

To be fair, this is not the only foolish mistake in the past two years IMO. I think the CSM debacle, letting exploits stay in place, even after acknowledging their existence and the companion rebalance are good examples of a lack of understanding with respect to their playerbase as well.

 

How exactly does the CSM debacle demonstrate a lack of understanding of the player base? It demonstrated a lot things, but that's the first I've seen *that* accusation. In know you're still hurting over this, but not *every* bad decision BW makes can be related to the CSM.

[MadCuzBad]

And yet you trolled in and left a comment... making you look like the larger dunce.

 

She always trolls me. She hates me.

[americanaussie]

I responded there too

 

Then don't cry if it gets deleted as it violates forum rules.

[LordArtemis]

How exactly does the CSM debacle demonstrate a lack of understanding of the player base?

 

That much is obvious.

 

It demonstrated a lot things, but that's the first I've seen *that* accusation;

 

Fair enough, but I think a first glance is no qualifier for reputation.

 

In know you're still hurting over this, but not *every* bad decision BW makes can be related to the CSM.

 

I think you meant to say "I" know. And it seems a bit of a juvenile comment to say someone is "hurting" over a video game decision, is it not?

 

I would suppose the context would have meaning, and perhaps you may consider looking inward as far as emotional stress related to the matter. I think your recent posts stand more in evidence of that than mine.

 

In other words, the relevance is obvious. Your counter is NOT....at least not on the surface devoid of the context of past interactions on this topic.

 

I would tend to think that those community members that have been here for some time now likely have a clear understanding of where you stand on the entire CSM issue eartharioch. I find it unlikely, at this stage, that it is necessary for you to remind folks of that position at every opportunity.

Edited December 22, 2016 by LordArtemis

[eartharioch]

That much is obvious.

No, it's not. If you look at Eric's initial post addressing the complaints, it says that BW made the slot machine in response to the favorable reaction to the Nightlife event. *That* shows that BW was, in fact, in tune with the player base (it *was* a popular event -- people asked for it to be brought back the next year, and it was, and this year, and there were complaints about it not being brought back). *Nothing* indicates that BW was out of touch with the player base.

 

The CSM was implemented poorly, nerfed hard, and left in a ditch because of player reaction to the implementation, not the concept, and not from a lack of knowledge of what the players wanted.

 

I think you meant to say "I" know. And it seems a bit of a juvenile comment to say someone is "hurting" over a video game decision, is it not?

It's 23 months later, and this isn't the only thread *today* in which you've brought it up. And while my attitude with you may be playful at times, I wouldn't call it juvenile. I know you have some valid reasons (some of which I share) for disliking what happened, I just think that *being out of touch with the player base* isn't one of them.

 

I would suppose the context would have meaning, and perhaps you may consider looking inward as far as emotional stress related to the matter. I think your recent posts stand more in evidence of that than mine.

I rarely bring up the CSM, but I will respond (imo, amusedly, not with any more malice than that) when others bring it up, especially others that were there... near me, if not with me... in the trenches

 

I would tend to think that those community members that have been here for some time now likely have a clear understanding of where you stand on the entire CSM issue eartharioch. I find it unlikely, at this stage, that it is necessary for you to remind folks of that position at every opportunity.

The same could be said of you and...others. But if it's fair for *you* to bring the CSM into a discussion, it's fair for others to respond to you. Do you have any idea how many times I *don't* respond to people still bringing up the CSM? How many people to this day still rant about [mat barrons] or whatever derisive terms they want to use for the "crafting elite" that they think brought down the machine?

 

If you think I single out you, it's because you were one of the only people "on the other side" that would discuss it rationally.