Mordraug

You're talking as if the company were selling its product to a wholly different subset of customers, and that "players" are just there to make things difficult. Pro tip: In the gaming industry, "players" ARE the customers.

I love how the $1 copies of WU keep being brought up like the players had broken into the warehouse where the WU's are kept and sold on the black WUarket. Details, eh.

Embed wasn't working so i just left the link to the tweet... or that ain't showing?

Though it can really apply to any non-pandemic times too.... A bit of constructive trolling: Challenge here (a tweet) Donate blood, film "the moment", bring terror unto your friends who are afraid of needles. We all win. Enjoy!

A fair point re: black market. As for your second line.... check out the rest of the replies i'm getting, all ad hominem, zero any form of points. It's kind of adorable but also makes it impossible to have any form of respect for 'em.

Oh it's pretty on-topic. This isn't the first one of these threads, and history repeats itself. If those items truly weren't for "freedumbers" (another inconsistency, dishing it out but not being able to take it), y'all would do the ethical thing and say "not for sale, it's our stuff for our pride whatever thing" or at very least make it very clear, specially if it isn't an old timer buying it, that "You may log in one day to ownership of something other than what you paid for". And one last inconsistency.... "It's not for the money! We don't need the silver!" ....... reeeheeeheeeaally..... then why the sales? "Give me the money for it but you don't own it". "How dare you dislike us?" ... stupid question. Cheerio.

I just noticed a certain inconsistency and pointed it out.

I wish the defenders of color changes who keep chanting the "to hell with buyers" line were consistent when they didn't like a change made by the devs. At the end of the day, the choice belongs to the people who risked money to start the game and keep it alive, not a few bucks for a subscription, eh?

If the missing rest of the log is a wogic rant, then it must have been an /ignore storm, given that staff says it wasn't abuse..... a fluke. Hard to tell from ONE MINUTE of logs XD

I still would like to see the GL-Freedom log that got the guy muted..... #JustSaying

It's been a while actually. And it's usually when they're: a) Not being civil (I have much stronger terms for that but I'll leave it there) b) Shooting down suggestions that would improve the game for hundreds for the benefit of a couple of dozens. c) Acting like they speak for staff. Many of those times, I answer those people because of A and C, not even paying attention to whether they're PvP'ers of not. BTW, remember that thread about "Why don't more people from PvE come to PvP"? Full of textbook examples of the three reasons I just gave. "You are an ignorant fool! You know nothing! We are majority! Without us there would be no game!" style replies all over.

"Spoken like a blind fool": Theeeeere's that attitude that's bound to bring in thousands of undecided players over. "As for this "majority" you speak of...": The numbers seem to agree and have been doing so for yeeeeeeeears.

Wurmians: We need more players! The grind and fails and high difficulty is gonna make the Steam launch fail! Also wurmians: You're making it less grindy!? Removing fails on certain item creations? REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!! IT'S BEING DUMBED DOWN! We don't want no filthy casuals! Keep wurm niche and elites-only!! *Sigh*

Silver sellers were costing Wurm money, plain and simple. (I'll use $1 for 1s for simplicity's sake) With P2P RMT: A needs 10k bricks, buys 10 silver to buy the bricks off B. CC has $10 C needs 10s to buy 10k mortar, buys the 10s for it off B at half the price. CC has $10, B has $5. C buys mortar off D. CC has $10, B has $5. D sells his 10s to E (who needs bricks) for $5. CC has $10, B has $5, D has $5. E buys 10k bricks off B who's been running a few free alts to cut them. CC has $10, B has $5, D has $5. B goes off and sells those same 10s to someone else. CC has $10, B has $10, D has $5. Without P2P RMT: A needs 10k bricks, buys 10 silver to buy the bricks off B. CC has $10 C needs 10s to buy 10k mortar, buys the 10s for it off B at half the price buys 10s for it off the website. CC has $20, B used his silver on ingame stuff. C buys mortar off D. CC has $20, B has more ingame bling, D has 10s. D sells his 10s to E (who needs bricks) for $5. E needs 10s for bricks, buys them off website CC has $30, B and D have more ingame stuff. E buys 10k bricks off B who's been running a few free alts to cut them. CC has $30, B (who now has even more silver) and D are off making more stuff to sell for silver. B goes off and sells those same 10s to someone else. Someone else needs 10s and buys off the website CC has $40 for development and servers So let's say this change made poor B and D quit..... A, C, E and "Someonelse" still need their bricks and mortar and whatnot and there are plenty of non-RMTers out there willing to make the mats and sell them so they'll get their stuff anyways. Meanwhile, CC got more than B and D's subscriptions made them just in silver sales. So yeah, tell us more about how this change is what will finally kill Wurm

Methinks they're trying to find loopholes or ways to convince CC to revert the RMT ruling (with a couple in the mix having legitimate concerns). I mean, Wurm is the only game in the entire industry where not all the players have static IP's