xxomegafaustxx
Member
|
@igfod13 I'm actually quite surprised by the civility in your post. You express your thoughts clearly and quite succinct. Let me add towards your argument: But first to reach some ample understanding and to clarify my rationale: Yes, I am mores so adopting a nonvarium standpoint because I myself am one but this is similar to what varium users may feel as well. Analogically, both clients want to feel valued by the enterprise that provides the needy service to themselves as consumers. Free customers want to feel as valued as much as the person who has purchased the service because both have benefited from it through past and present experience. The purchaser however will do in personal effort to maximize their advantage and heighten their distinction over a free customers creating a image of "being above the average". They want to feel rewarded because they have paid for something that a free person didn't. This fits in accord with my understanding as of now. But this separation should not breed any form of hatred or greater difference. This separation should reinforce the the incentive to "maximize enjoyment" rather than in ED, "maximize one's chances to survive" in the platform. Varium is brought for the very wrong reason: It should provide more enjoyment and should not be a forced option to take to continue competing. The experience of enjoyment should not created by the user but created by itself within the PvP interface. Yes, many varium players want their money to be well spent, that their purchase should "not go in vain", but it should not indicatively manifest into sheer "free wins" against the nonvarium user. The purpose of such a purchase of varium initially was to convey an "advantage" and granted users an incentive to compete better in the ED platform. But as we are seeing now is that the GAP the competitive margin has been soo enlarged that it has almost excluded the nonvarium tier. And the funny thing is varium users know of this but are abusing the privileges of being clients to the ED community. We are socially contracted and because of this, a *community likewise in ED can exist. This does not fit accord with my understanding as of now. *Horse and Man analogy And of course the customers don't decide how "free it is" rather, it is their continual interest and support that is also equated into the mix along the value and price of the software. We as free customers may not have direct control on the price or marketing of the software but indirectly, we have the ability to influence the decision by the developers who must feel the urge to supply our needs and I greater obligation to provide versatile service. Because successful antivirus software like AVAST have garnered an increasing amount of users to adopt the program in their computer interface, it has gained them the respect and credibility to be the most trusted antimalware program in the world. OF course we as consumers don't have the capacity to engineer "changes" within the software or fix bugs and so forth. That is up to the provider or the developer of the software. But to resolve your understanding, I believe that the "value of software" is dependent upon "the amount of support" it receives. Without any support, how can the software continue to be successful? And success does not necessarily have to be how much money one gains. It could be how much support it receives which translates into more people adopting the software and increasing the likelyhood to purchase more features as a personal incentive and choice. Of course, not everyone is gonna buy all the features, but if there are way way way more people who like it, chances are there going to by more people buying it. Because the support derives from the foundation of the software itself; likewise the ED community. You must listen to both sides of the spectrum both varium and nonvarium not just one. For programs like AntiVirus, one does not necessarily need to unlock a plethora of features and pay it all in order to rival the features obtained from that of a purchaser. That's what made it so enticing for so many people in the world; they don't need to pay for fancy "Norton Security" or "Viper AntiMalware" to rival its premium features. Like AVAST, you don't need to feel obligated to pay because you need to; it is because you want to. Varium should not be a choice to survive; it should be a choice to enjoy the game at a much more greater level. For the average nonvarium user, he needs to survive the platform and is pressure because the competition around him is so great, enlarged and unfair. Even if you purchase varium, you'll still won't find yourself thoroughly satisfied because the circumstances around you have forced you to pay. It should be the client controlling the circumstances that allow oneself to be interested in paying or not paying. If one downloads AntiVirus, one has the ability to purchase one or many features. The other features are provided as voluntary incentives. OF course for the purchaser who purchases such a software will have some distinct advantage over the free user. But that's up to the free user whether he or she want's to have such features. And such additional features should not convey a LARGE LARGE difference. And yes, steps by lessening the GAP would be to lower down the stat enhancements. Other than that, I completely agree with you.
< Message edited by xxomegafaustxx -- 8/9/2011 23:20:28 >
|