What combination? The game was announced as F2P a while ago, it’s been running tests for a while and was always assumed to have MTX. The only thing that changed is they will make the MTX live during a test run and then refund them, which is not particularly rare.
If you must know, it normally has as much to do with seeing how popular your ideas for cosmetics are as it does with testing that your commerce system works properly.
But none of that is what’s sparking the fake outrage.
So you refuse to accept that people mean what they say and feel the need to defend a for profit company by twisting any complaints into some kind of faked outrage conspiracy.
No, I am seeing what people say and how it relates to reality, then deriving conclusions from that.
For instance, my conclusions just got significantly reinforced by the fact that you’re framing my stance as “defending” the subject of built-in outrage because of what or who they are, as opposed to what they did.
That’s a meaningful part of that statement. Unintended, for sure… but meaningful.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
What combination? The game was announced as F2P a while ago, it’s been running tests for a while and was always assumed to have MTX. The only thing that changed is they will make the MTX live during a test run and then refund them, which is not particularly rare.
If you must know, it normally has as much to do with seeing how popular your ideas for cosmetics are as it does with testing that your commerce system works properly.
But none of that is what’s sparking the fake outrage.
So you refuse to accept that people mean what they say and feel the need to defend a for profit company by twisting any complaints into some kind of faked outrage conspiracy.
Have fun with that.
No, I am seeing what people say and how it relates to reality, then deriving conclusions from that.
For instance, my conclusions just got significantly reinforced by the fact that you’re framing my stance as “defending” the subject of built-in outrage because of what or who they are, as opposed to what they did.
That’s a meaningful part of that statement. Unintended, for sure… but meaningful.
I don’t think interacting with your reality is very productive.