Page 2 of 2
Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2005 7:13 am
by Crispleaf
What disturbs me is that gil selling is more profitable than the monthly fees that SE collects to run the game in the first place.
To me, that's just a giant red flag that screams "something is wrong with this picture."
Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2005 12:04 pm
by Neoshinobi
Crispleaf wrote:What disturbs me is that gil selling is more profitable than the monthly fees that SE collects to run the game in the first place.
To me, that's just a giant red flag that screams "something is wrong with this picture."
Perhaps
{raise
} the monthly fee?
Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2005 2:00 pm
by Tivia
Crispleaf wrote:What disturbs me is that gil selling is more profitable than the monthly fees that SE collects to run the game in the first place.
To me, that's just a giant red flag that screams "something is wrong with this picture."
Not quite true, the values they are listed are a culmination of numerous games, hardly the trade in one alone.
Posted: Tue Jul 12, 2005 12:41 am
by Alya Mizar (Tsybil)
Thanks Prrsha. It is kind of a pity that a gamer's magazine, staffed and writen by devout gamers, had to be led by the nose to do this article, but I am happy they finaly did it.
Read the article in the print magazine. Remember print magazines? They still exist.
