Welcome to the Wizard101 Message Boards


Player Guide
Fansites
News
Game Updates
Help

Follow important game updates on Twitter @Wizard101 and @KI_Alerts, and Facebook!

By posting on the Wizard101 Message Boards you agree to the Code of Conduct.

Menu Chat only for Free to Play

AuthorMessage
Geographer
Dec 14, 2009
892
I agree. Having "menu chat" only for non-members would be a huge boon for everyone else to enjoy the game. It would certainly curtail the chaos normally found in general chat.

Explorer
Feb 13, 2011
89
an idea... how about you ban the IP, instead of the account, staff... this will make it so the potty mouths need to pretty much hack to get back in, or just wait out the ban. BAM! problem gone

Survivor
Mar 13, 2011
42
Orbit100 wrote:
Honestly I think no because KI will probably lose a ton of players for this so i honestly think it won't happen


If this happens to Free to Play wizards how exactly they'll lose players? Those who have a Subscription or have Purchased at least one area in the game (in other words those who pay in order to play the game) will have normal or open chat. No customers and no money loss.

Mastermind
Jul 28, 2010
312
anstarx wrote:
Orbit100 wrote:
Honestly I think no because KI will probably lose a ton of players for this so i honestly think it won't happen


If this happens to Free to Play wizards how exactly they'll lose players? Those who have a Subscription or have Purchased at least one area in the game (in other words those who pay in order to play the game) will have normal or open chat. No customers and no money loss.


Its never that simple. -.-

Here is just the begining of it. I will give you an example.

Think about all the reason why a person would play a game. Some players will go on to socailize. Even if those players don't pay they will have friends which they could invite to the game. Those friends of the socializing player might get hooked and get a membership which equals gain in revenue.

Another example. Simply even if you have free players they have an important role in the game. If they enjoy their experience they will rate the game good, though if they dislike the game they will drive customers away stating the negatives.

Also to Vollans you stated that, "Do you mean the people create so many accounts which sole purpose is to "socialize"? That's not playing the game as intended." The thing is there is no true purpose of a game. It has many things that make it the game it is. One of those things is talking. Simply you can't state thats not playing the game as intended. Truely the only person that can dictate this would be the CEO and that is saying this is a private business. If it is open to the public than investors get to make the decisions.

Just a thought.

Defender
Aug 07, 2011
116
Snowyandspots wrote:
anstarx wrote:
Orbit100 wrote:
Honestly I think no because KI will probably lose a ton of players for this so i honestly think it won't happen


If this happens to Free to Play wizards how exactly they'll lose players? Those who have a Subscription or have Purchased at least one area in the game (in other words those who pay in order to play the game) will have normal or open chat. No customers and no money loss.


Its never that simple. -.-

Here is just the begining of it. I will give you an example.

Think about all the reason why a person would play a game. Some players will go on to socailize. Even if those players don't pay they will have friends which they could invite to the game. Those friends of the socializing player might get hooked and get a membership which equals gain in revenue.

Another example. Simply even if you have free players they have an important role in the game. If they enjoy their experience they will rate the game good, though if they dislike the game they will drive customers away stating the negatives.

Also to Vollans you stated that, "Do you mean the people create so many accounts which sole purpose is to "socialize"? That's not playing the game as intended." The thing is there is no true purpose of a game. It has many things that make it the game it is. One of those things is talking. Simply you can't state thats not playing the game as intended. Truely the only person that can dictate this would be the CEO and that is saying this is a private business. If it is open to the public than investors get to make the decisions.

Just a thought.


Here's another thought and the one I see happening, frankly. They're passing along the message to their friends that here is a free chat room for the taking and you don't have to worry about the ToU because if you get muted or banned all you have to do is spawn another free account.

I was free to play for six months before I could afford memberships for my grandson and myself and you know what? We played the game! Yes, in WC. We had fun. We practiced pvp'd, we gardened and we fought mobs together, we even made in-game friends and had a blast and we told other people how fun it was. All without text chat because I didn't realize F2P could get text chat. Those who are really trying out the game are going to play, not sit around using the commons and the dye shop as a chat room.

Truth be told, if I had had text chat we probably not only wouldn't have got memberships, our word of mouth would have been the direct opposite -- telling people to stay away from the game because of the filth spewed.

Hero
Jan 24, 2010
705
To Those Who Protest Limits on F2P Chat Privileges,

A question:

Why would someone have 16 accounts? Why would someone need that many wizards? Might it be because that person has been repeatedly muted on other accounts? If that is true, why should that person be allowed repeated access to the game in F2P areas?

I ask, because I saw someone the other night, that infamous night, in the Dye Shop who repeatedly taunted the monitor with really bad swears. He made a game out of being muted and then returning on one of his many other F2P accounts, just to do the whole thing again. He announced this to the crowd each time he logged back on. It is just this sort of depraved fool who should find another place to socialize, say a nice little chat room in an adult forum somewhere.

I saw one F2P wizard who was very disappointed the other night in the Dye Shop when he realized that he could no longer skip Merle's tutorial after selecting a new wizard. He was so intent on coming back to the Dye Shop that he actually worked through the tutorial. His only purpose in making the F2P account was to re-enter the fray and further add to the mayhem and ugliness that happened that night. He explained to the crowd that he had run through his other F2P accounts, and needed a new one so he could circumvent his mutes. He was miffed that it took so long to rejoin the crowd.

Yet another charming young F2P spent her time that evening running in and out of the Dye Shop shouting strings of profanity, including lewd sexual suggestions. When she was muted, she also returned on another F2P account. I saw several, several other wizards do this same thing all summer long, while I reported with the WC Protectors in the Dye Shop and in the Commons.

These are examples of F2P people who do not come into the game to play, unless you consider picking up a stranger for some cyber sex is appropriately called "game play". Personally, I call it looking for trouble, and I don't like it one bit. What if one of these lovely people did such a thing to my 8 year old son? My son plays on a subscription account; doesn't that entitle him to a clean and safe place to play the game?

IMHO, there's no need to stand around free areas and talk, since we all have plenty of opportunity to socialize while questing or in dungeons, in our houses and/or dorm rooms, etc. As far as I know, children are not allowed to congregate in mobs for the purpose of harassing other people nearby IRL, nor are they allowed to gather in hoards for the sole purpose of playing curse-o-mania. Such behaviors are known as GRIEFING , TROLLING, and HARASSMENT. Do you really think we should give space in the common areas of the Spiral to such individuals? Do the paying players, not just a $10.00 gift card "payment", not deserve a pleasant environment in which to play?

Another pattern I have noticed about F2P players: Many of them make wizard names that are suggestive of sex, such as "Hexgiver" and "Fallon Pants". What a shame that someone would spend that much time on choosing a name for the sole purpose of being sexually suggestive. I rarely see someone with a nice level, gear, stats, etc. fit this pattern. In fact, I have come to believe that I can point out F2P players who do not play by the following criteria:

Guardian's Outfit with no stats
Suggestive name (often brief)
Low level (usually between 1-12)
Stay in the Commons and Dye Shop
Enjoy trolling the environment
Deliberately circumvent the chat filters

I don't find that these sorts of players contribute to my desire to spend money and play in the Spiral. Would KI prefer to have my money on a regular and frequent basis, or would KI prefer to maintain lots of free accounts and collect the occasional $5-$10 from a F2P player? I'm betting KI would like to keep my custom, along with the other adults and families who bring a steady stream of large cash coming their way. I can't imagine they created this beautiful game for free players to trash. That doesn't make good business sense.

I have to disagree with those of you who want to keep the current F2P settings. We must encourage KI to limit access among these players, until they prove they are in the Spiral for something other than causing trouble.

Warmest Regards,

Qbb

Defender
Mar 10, 2012
182
vollans wrote:
conno365 wrote:
It makes me laugh that you think making the game safer is by taking chat away from F2P, while in reality you would be ruining their game experience.

Who's game experience is being ruined? Do you mean the people create so many accounts which sole purpose is to "socialize"? That's not playing the game as intended. There can be no "game experience" if there is no game being played.

conno365 wrote:
So Wc protectors is this what you do all day?, purposely going to wu realm to report someone?

Actually, no. We all have lives offline. As has been stated, some of us have jobs; we are educators, law enforcement, burger flippers, bus drivers, cab drivers, or cashiers. Some of us are in school. Some of us have medical issues that have to be addressed daily in order for us to function on a coherent level.

conno365 wrote:
Its sad if you do I bet these offenders dont come to you, you come to them.

Actually, no. Some of the offenders DO come and find us, wherever we might be.
For example, Friday I was Questing in Celestia, on the Satyr server. Two of them joined my battle - I recognized the name, faces, and clothing from Wu Dye shop.
They started to harass me by calling me all kinds of nasty racist names. These two followed me through three fights. Not once did either of them select an attack. If one of them died they simply ported back to the other.
So you see, THEY hunted ME down.
I did not look for them.

conno365 wrote:
the only reason why you think this game is not safe is because you purposely go to the worst realm hoping to find swearing so you can report them.

This is not limited to Wu. Not one little bit. Wu just happens to be the epicenter of the problem.

conno365 wrote:
All i see is that you guys are looking for trouble and you try to "fix it", just leave it to the professionals which are ki workers.

KingsIsle gave every single player the tools they need in order to inform them of the problems that need to be fixed. They would very likely not even know there were problems if no body let them know.

conno365 wrote:
Connor goldenflame, Founder of the Anti Wc protectors because i am the only one in it :P

It's funny. You used to be a member of WCP's group. Did you purposely go looking for the group so you can find out what we're saying about people that swear behind closed doors? A little hypocritical, don't you think?

"Alia" - Wizard City Protector and Member of the Watch
I was never a Wc protector your probably mistaken me for someone else, goodbye.

Defender
Mar 10, 2012
182
booga799 wrote:
an idea... how about you ban the IP, instead of the account, staff... this will make it so the potty mouths need to pretty much hack to get back in, or just wait out the ban. BAM! problem gone
Actually they do, its called computer ban and no matter how many new accounts you make you still cant go on wizard101.

Mastermind
Jul 08, 2011
305
conno365 wrote:
Snowyandspots wrote:
Alright golden I have a question for you. You talk of profanity and how it has plagued this game. Though my question is what do you consider profanity. The definition of profanity is quiet vague which can lead to different view points. I view profanity as using the f, b, a, and s words. I don't view crap as profanity. Also another question how come you see so much of it? You have stated many times to "open your eyes". I am not oblivious. I do see profanity but what you describe is much more profanity than what I see.
I think our Wc protector has given up on this war.

Connor, Anti Wc protector


ALRIGHT! You got us. We are going to give up now.

Is that what expected us to answer? Well we aren't.

I think our Anti Wc protector is just making stuff up now.

Kevin Deaththorn Wizard City Protector

Armiger
Feb 25, 2009
2177
Another example. Simply even if you have free players they have an important role in the game. If they enjoy their experience they will rate the game good, though if they dislike the game they will drive customers away stating the negatives.

This does not make sense. In most online games that are going for the ratings, FREE players don't get a vote.

As with some posts seen on Central, a lot of false statements are flying around that really shouldn't be. If a player gets mad over something, naturally they are going to say bad things about it to their friends. RUMOR.

Rumors spread like WILDFIRE until someone figures out that the one who started the rumor did so because they were mad about something.

CEO was mentioned. An email was sent to KI with this idea outlined at about the same time this topic was posted. Any thoughts about that?

The idea is a sound one and will make a major difference in the language of the game. It will make it safer and more fun.

Fallon WinterLeaf Founding Member WCP

Illuminator
Feb 24, 2009
1357
I think an IP ban would be a better solution. First account created on the IP can have text chat, the rest will have menu. Sounds like a fair compromise to those that don't like this and those that do?

Illuminator
Oct 22, 2011
1304
F2P that want to test out the game ... great. The F2P that don't want to play, and think that W101 is the new Facebook, and all they want to do is socialize and hang out ... that's not what the game is intended for.

Frankly, the F2P socializers are a waste of server space. They don't play the game. So why should they have filtered or open chat? Oh, that's because (for many) their mommy and/or daddy set them up in the game, and gave them whatever they wanted (filtered/open chat), because their little sweetheart will be entertained in a "safe" environment, so mommy and/or daddy don't have to watch them all the time. Little do they know what their little "sweethearts' are typing.

In the Wu Commons tonight, thank goodness there was a Hall Monitor

- One girl typed her password in open chat - muted (I expect it will turn into a ban)
- One boy was describing his body parts to some of the girls around him - muted
- One boy did a creative spelling for the "F" bomb - warned. Did it again - muted. Came back on another account with the same name wizard, cursed - muted. Came back four more times with the same named wizard, cursed and also talked about hacking - muted each time. Came back again on different named wizard, and told everyone "this is my last account, I can't get muted again".

These are just a few of the examples in just a one-hour period.

By restricting F2P to menu chat, it will not only clean the game up more, it will prevent people from creating a new F2P account and come back within minutes to continue their behavior.

How hard is that to understand?

Survivor
Jun 13, 2011
17
I understand what you mean.But players who can't afford membership or crowns can be very sad indeed.I have lots of friends that aren't members and have text chat and none of them are rude.But I would like to inform you that I have not been a text chat player for long so maybe I haven't come up to one yet.

Survivor
Jun 13, 2011
17
Orbit100 wrote:
Honestly I think no because KI will probably lose a ton of players for this so i honestly think it won't happen


Yes I totally agree with that!

Survivor
Jun 13, 2011
17
To tell you the truth I reached a high level without text chat but sometimes I so badly wanted to tell some one something that wasn't on the list.

Defender
Aug 07, 2011
116
frostfreese wrote:
I understand what you mean.But players who can't afford membership or crowns can be very sad indeed.I have lots of friends that aren't members and have text chat and none of them are rude.But I would like to inform you that I have not been a text chat player for long so maybe I haven't come up to one yet.


If you can't afford membership or crowns -- as I couldn't for my first six months in game -- then you should certainly understand that you are able to play at all on the good graces of the host company and not complain about not getting perks that are paid for. As I said, I didn't realize I could get it without paying for it. That's because I assumed it would be something that came with buying the game. And it seemed totally fair and reasonable to me. Anyone who can't or won't pay for the game that it costs money to run and pouts about not being able to have the perks instead of feeling deeply grateful to be allowed to play (without annoying ads to boot) is a self-entitled spoiled brat who doesn't deserve the good graces they are getting and I really have no sympathy for them or their whining about it.

Finally, I have this to say -- Thank you, KI, for letting me play for free for six months. I know it paid off for you in the end but I still do deeply appreciate it even if I didn't realize I could text chat.

Mastermind
Jul 28, 2010
312
goldendragon18 wrote:
Another example. Simply even if you have free players they have an important role in the game. If they enjoy their experience they will rate the game good, though if they dislike the game they will drive customers away stating the negatives.

This does not make sense. In most online games that are going for the ratings, FREE players don't get a vote.

As with some posts seen on Central, a lot of false statements are flying around that really shouldn't be. If a player gets mad over something, naturally they are going to say bad things about it to their friends. RUMOR.

Rumors spread like WILDFIRE until someone figures out that the one who started the rumor did so because they were mad about something.

CEO was mentioned. An email was sent to KI with this idea outlined at about the same time this topic was posted. Any thoughts about that?

The idea is a sound one and will make a major difference in the language of the game. It will make it safer and more fun.

Fallon WinterLeaf Founding Member WCP


Hmm that sounded a bit sassy there. Well did I hit a nerve?

Yes you are right that there will be some players who will spread rumors though I am talking about the majority of free to play players. There would be a spike in bad reviews. Of course there will be those select few that give it a bad review or spread rumors. Though those people don't have a good reason. Think about it if I said"the game doesn't allow me to talk. It only allows me to select phrases." that would be a turn off for people. We are humans so we naturally like to communinicate.

About ratings. You said f2p members don't get a vote. That depends on the poll. Even if they didn't get to vote they will talk about it on other social media sites. In this day and age it is easy to communicate.

Yes I mentioned the CEO. Though I also mentioned the investors. Frankly I mentioned a lot of things lol. Um I don't think I need to comment about the letter you sent. Seems explanatory enough. I could also send a letter to the CEO though it doesn't really matter unless he or she actually reads it and sends a letter back. :?

Sorry about just saying the CEO is a he didn't mean to come off sexist there. For all I know the CEO is a woman.


Mastermind
Jul 28, 2010
312
GrammyH wrote:
Snowyandspots wrote:
anstarx wrote:
Orbit100 wrote:
Honestly I think no because KI will probably lose a ton of players for this so i honestly think it won't happen


If this happens to Free to Play wizards how exactly they'll lose players? Those who have a Subscription or have Purchased at least one area in the game (in other words those who pay in order to play the game) will have normal or open chat. No customers and no money loss.


Its never that simple. -.-

Here is just the begining of it. I will give you an example.

Think about all the reason why a person would play a game. Some players will go on to socailize. Even if those players don't pay they will have friends which they could invite to the game. Those friends of the socializing player might get hooked and get a membership which equals gain in revenue.

Another example. Simply even if you have free players they have an important role in the game. If they enjoy their experience they will rate the game good, though if they dislike the game they will drive customers away stating the negatives.

Also to Vollans you stated that, "Do you mean the people create so many accounts which sole purpose is to "socialize"? That's not playing the game as intended." The thing is there is no true purpose of a game. It has many things that make it the game it is. One of those things is talking. Simply you can't state thats not playing the game as intended. Truely the only person that can dictate this would be the CEO and that is saying this is a private business. If it is open to the public than investors get to make the decisions.

Just a thought.


Here's another thought and the one I see happening, frankly. They're passing along the message to their friends that here is a free chat room for the taking and you don't have to worry about the ToU because if you get muted or banned all you have to do is spawn another free account.

I was free to play for six months before I could afford memberships for my grandson and myself and you know what? We played the game! Yes, in WC. We had fun. We practiced pvp'd, we gardened and we fought mobs together, we even made in-game friends and had a blast and we told other people how fun it was. All without text chat because I didn't realize F2P could get text chat. Those who are really trying out the game are going to play, not sit around using the commons and the dye shop as a chat room.

Truth be told, if I had had text chat we probably not only wouldn't have got memberships, our word of mouth would have been the direct opposite -- telling people to stay away from the game because of the filth spewed.


Good for you. Frankly one person who didn't mind having menu chat won't have a big impact. When there is a majority then it will have a large impact.

Just for a clarification I am not opposed to keeping the game clean. Though I am against menu chat for f2p.

Armiger
Feb 25, 2009
2177
frostfreese wrote:
I understand what you mean.But players who can't afford membership or crowns can be very sad indeed.I have lots of friends that aren't members and have text chat and none of them are rude.But I would like to inform you that I have not been a text chat player for long so maybe I haven't come up to one yet.


Frostfreese, We know there are players that possibly can't afford crowns or membership. Although a membership does not have to be paid for a whole year at a time. It can be done on a monthly basis for just under $10.00 a month. I actually have 2 accounst under a Master acount that runs me about $13.90 a month. That is actually not that bad.

As a Text Chat player, there are several things you will not see if it is not "WHITE" when typed in the chat line. Anything that turns yellow is visible only to Open chat. Anything that is RED, ONLY KI can see this. Unfortunately, many have found ways to make those RED words turn YELLOW but that is still a reportable offense. Even some Text Chatters have found ways to say things that are not allowed.

As Qbb has already stated and so have many more, there have been too many players making the F2P accounts for the sole purpose of cursing in the game. Enough is Enough. Changes need to be made to prevent this from continuing and if that means "Menu Chat only for Free to Play", then so be it.

It may also be a good idea for KI to start imposing more bans on those that have chosen to continue making the F2P for the purpose of cursing in the game. I would even say that might be the place to start and then move on to Menu chat only for F2P if those bans aren't enough to stop a large part of the problem. I would stop some, but I have my doubts about it making a major difference. Certainly not in the way Menu Chat only for F2P would.

Also, I would like to ask you why you just did not make all of your replies in one post instead of 3 different ones?

Fallon Winter Founding Member WCP

Survivor
Aug 12, 2009
20
Snowyandspots wrote:
I don't know. I personally don't like the idea. Yes I understand you don't want your kids seeing profanity and such but in a sense you are also punishing the players who don't want to pay money. I don't feel this is the best solution to the problem.

Maybe have all free to play players stick to certain realms. Then at least there will be some separation. In one game I played there were certain (realms) where it was quick chat only. So maybe you could try it like that.

I just don't feel it is fair to all those f2p players out there. Some people go on games to socialize also, so you are taking there fun away. Also what happens for crown players. All one person has to do is buy a 5 dollar gift card cash it in and then they get open chat? So there is a whole in your system.

Sorry for seeming down on this but just wanted to point out some problems.


I agree. its not fair to punish those who want to socialize while playing with their friends just for the actions of a few who are rude and swear every other word. Also, if i may make a suggestion, do the three strikes and your out rule. The first time you mute them for a couple of days or so up to a week, then the second time for a week or more, then the third time mute them for good or ban them altogether (all three "strikes" depending on the severity of what they did of course). Just a suggestion.

Jasmine nightshard, level 45 conjuror

Defender
Mar 10, 2012
182
thejordanator wrote:
conno365 wrote:
Snowyandspots wrote:
Alright golden I have a question for you. You talk of profanity and how it has plagued this game. Though my question is what do you consider profanity. The definition of profanity is quiet vague which can lead to different view points. I view profanity as using the f, b, a, and s words. I don't view crap as profanity. Also another question how come you see so much of it? You have stated many times to "open your eyes". I am not oblivious. I do see profanity but what you describe is much more profanity than what I see.
I think our Wc protector has given up on this war.

Connor, Anti Wc protector


ALRIGHT! You got us. We are going to give up now.

Is that what expected us to answer? Well we aren't.

I think our Anti Wc protector is just making stuff up now.

Kevin Deaththorn Wizard City Protector
Imagine.

Survivor
Sep 23, 2010
42
lightningbug21 wrote:
[quote=
I agree. its not fair to punish those who want to socialize while playing with their friends just for the actions of a few who are rude and swear every other word. Also, if i may make a suggestion, do the three strikes and your out rule. The first time you mute them for a couple of days or so up to a week, then the second time for a week or more, then the third time mute them for good or ban them altogether (all three "strikes" depending on the severity of what they did of course). Just a suggestion.

Jasmine nightshard, level 45 conjuror


What then? three strikes times an unlimited number of f2p wizards?

That is a lot of strikes for a player who doesn't want to play the game but just wants to waste server space standing around in the dye shop cursing and griefing.
A wizard was in the dye shop wu realm yesterday was talking about how he had six wizards muted and was now back on number seven begging to be muted so he could start another one.
Being muted if you are f2p means nothing if you can just make another wizard to come back and resume disregarding the rules. It is a huge waste of time for KI to spend considering the punishments for players who are playing for free. If these wizards were out questing or training pets and behaving themselves they wouldn't need a three strike rule.

Hero
Jul 30, 2012
771
Funny idea - during regular game play maybe members beyond level 10 get the ability to place attack spells on other wizards (at a health cost?). Wizards not liked by the general community might find basic survival difficult!

ya, this may open another can of worms...

Explorer
Jul 31, 2011
95
IN a perfect world the three strikes and you are out rule would work.

But unfortunately, there are quite a few "bad apples" that have ruined it for all of us. So their current system of punishments in succession (24hr, 3 days, 10 yr, banning) is not working and they are seeing this. Therefor they have created this new program, Hall Monitors, and are very open and willing to bring even more changes to their game. (possibly like the one proposed here)

The bad apples are those who use Wizard101 as a rated M chat room, a dating site or worse. They do not care about punishments handed down since they have little to no money invested in the game, or the money they used is not theirs in the first place. So they get muted and simply spawn a new level 1 wizard and continue their vulgar, inappropriate behavior.
Even Mr. Coleman has responded to many of the facebook posts on his page speaking about the steps they are taking and willing to take to rid the spiral of the vulgar and inappropriate behavior and language. He has stressed time and time again that his senior wizards and sometimes he himself are watching everyone very carefully and will not tolerate the abuse of the chat system and the abuse of the terms of use any longer.
I suspect we will soon see more IP banning and muting taking place in the near future and I know currently they have more senior wizards reviewing chat logs then before, not only to protect the well behaved students/players but to make sure they efficiently rid the spiral of those bad apples.

So I am sure something like we have suggested here will not be decided upon lightly, but if things do not change, I would not be surprised if they make anything but menu chat a high privilege that must be earned (via purchase, membership/sub or maybe something different) and in order to keep that privilege one must never break the TOU once, because if they go as far as limiting text chat to that extent I am sure they will also enact a one strike and your out rule.

What it all boils down to is this is Wizard101's world, they have the final say, all they have ever required from us is to follow their rules to the "T". They can in essence create any rule or restriction they want and they are confident that in the end, a safer cleaner spiral is a more successful business. Sure they may lose those bad apples who refuse to comply, but they will gain so many more new players and returning players.

I have full faith in whatever Wizard101 chooses to do, they are watching and listening and the changes they have made so far, are making a big dent in the problem and it is definitely flushing out the bad apples. :)

Defender
Aug 07, 2011
116
Snowyandspots wrote:
GrammyH wrote:
Snowyandspots wrote:
anstarx wrote:
Orbit100 wrote:
Honestly I think no because KI will probably lose a ton of players for this so i honestly think it won't happen


If this happens to Free to Play wizards how exactly they'll lose players? Those who have a Subscription or have Purchased at least one area in the game (in other words those who pay in order to play the game) will have normal or open chat. No customers and no money loss.


Its never that simple. -.-

Here is just the begining of it. I will give you an example.

Think about all the reason why a person would play a game. Some players will go on to socailize. Even if those players don't pay they will have friends which they could invite to the game. Those friends of the socializing player might get hooked and get a membership which equals gain in revenue.

Another example. Simply even if you have free players they have an important role in the game. If they enjoy their experience they will rate the game good, though if they dislike the game they will drive customers away stating the negatives.

Also to Vollans you stated that, "Do you mean the people create so many accounts which sole purpose is to "socialize"? That's not playing the game as intended." The thing is there is no true purpose of a game. It has many things that make it the game it is. One of those things is talking. Simply you can't state thats not playing the game as intended. Truely the only person that can dictate this would be the CEO and that is saying this is a private business. If it is open to the public than investors get to make the decisions.

Just a thought.


Here's another thought and the one I see happening, frankly. They're passing along the message to their friends that here is a free chat room for the taking and you don't have to worry about the ToU because if you get muted or banned all you have to do is spawn another free account.

I was free to play for six months before I could afford memberships for my grandson and myself and you know what? We played the game! Yes, in WC. We had fun. We practiced pvp'd, we gardened and we fought mobs together, we even made in-game friends and had a blast and we told other people how fun it was. All without text chat because I didn't realize F2P could get text chat. Those who are really trying out the game are going to play, not sit around using the commons and the dye shop as a chat room.

Truth be told, if I had had text chat we probably not only wouldn't have got memberships, our word of mouth would have been the direct opposite -- telling people to stay away from the game because of the filth spewed.


Good for you. Frankly one person who didn't mind having menu chat won't have a big impact. When there is a majority then it will have a large impact.

Just for a clarification I am not opposed to keeping the game clean. Though I am against menu chat for f2p.


What on earth makes you think I'm alone in that sentiment? I'm willing to bet -- except for those who are abusing the game -- there's not a F2P player that would be complaining that they didn't have text chat if they didn't to begin with. I bet they'd all be saying cool, they're letting me play for free as long as I want. That is those who were there for the game and not the adult chat anyway.