No More ammo with weapon purchase?

[Skybird]

Ammo is bought the same way hotels and houses and streets are bought in Monopoly. There is no buying with real money needed. I have never heard that somebody said he had to pay for playing Monopoly boardgame.

Trophy harvests earn you CSS scores. CSS scores equal the gm$ money tokens you get as a reward. This money tokens get paid with for ammo. Two CSS trophies of lets say 40 each, already gave you one fresh box of new rounds. Two bullets fired. Ten bullets gained back.

YOU MUST NOT BUY AMMO WITH REAL MONEY. NOT. AT. ALL. NEVER

Welcome back
No money needs to be spent on the game anymore, it is all free now.
Now why would you go and tell them they must never spend real money if you think this is the answer to prolonging the games life? Isn't that counter productive.

And a monopoly board game is not this game and has no relevance. You had to purchase the monopoly board game, where this game you do not need too.
apples and oranges

New players do not know the difference between em$ and gm$. Just leaving it to saying "ammo must be bought", immediately will raise question marks above many heads about the claim that the game is "free to play". It simply is misleading to explain it that simple, its as if you say that Monopoly is a game where you must invest money, but do not say that it is no real money, but ingame money tokens only. In Monopoly it might even be clearer, since it is w well known game, but The Hunter was known since a decade to have rela money microtransactions, and when you then say: "you must buy ammo" -ö what the ehll do you epxpect people will think? And it scares people away therefore. You can see it at Steam forums last week. Myself I got asked three times last week how they - the ocmpany - can get away with the claim once again that it is free to play when they did that in the past already but left it to a pay-to-win model back then, initially at least. I had to explain in detail to them all three that they must not pay to win and that they must not pay for ammo and in fact can earn any equipment item withion a reaiosnable time of playing alone, but that they cna use rela money to speed the process up. I have harvested earned several thousand gm$ in this one week, close to three thiosuanbd I think, so that is half the poric eof a new rifle already, a seocnd week of gameplay, and I would be able to buy a new one. With ingame money token alone.

CONTEXT, guys. Rip things out of the full context, and you distort them, and give a good thing a bad name.

Damn, and I just checked back to call up a PM I was notificated of.

[Skybird]

Honest mistake. "muss nicht" (must not) translates as "do not have to". But to be fair, your English is a LOT better than my German!

Yes, and I even know that, and "must not" is a demand, an order: "you should not..." But when I type fast I sometimes miss such things, especially when by sound and wording German and English are close, but mean totally different things: "Elk"(engl.) = "Wapiti" (ger), and "Moose" = "Elch". So, Elch (ger.) does not mean "elk". Such things can trap me. My fault,. sorry. I just type too fast and care to less for correcting my many typos and errors afterwards. You dont teach an old dog new tricks.

[DHRifleman]

The game has always been free to play, it has just gone through a couple of transitions where it has gotten freer to play. There was no need to explain anything to those 3 in the steam forum since they are never going to be paying players. You wasted your time again.

Just the fact that you are saying how easy it is to even get weapons by just playing says the game doesn't really need to be a grind. So you are showing that there is really no reason anyone will spend money now.
You seem to change your argument every time you post.
When it comes to the longevity of the game you say if people want to grind through the game they can but nobody wants to wait so they will spend and prolong the games life. Then when it comes to something that says it isn't free to play you show how easy it is and no need to spend at all.

Pick one and stick with it, you will never win if you take both sides of the argument.

[Tod1d]

Weird, I read it as 2 completely different, non-contradictory arguments.

1) You can now play the game completely free.

2) You should consider using real money occasionally or the game won't make enough money to survive.

What I've yet to determine is if there is enough incentive to spend real money. Is grinding for gm$ tedious enough that some people will opt to buy em$ instead?

[Skybird]

DHR,
whatever you claim, Teflonman. Play with thyself but dont waste my time.

[Schlachtwolf]

I see a new revenue stream coming...... Doc voice all american like on the Superbowl ads..... every time you harvest an animal...."This mule deer you shot was brought to you by Nosler-muledeer myhem you can trust".... now that would be annoying

[DYEUZ]

DHR,
whatever you claim, Teflonman. Play with thyself but dont waste my time.

Teflonman !!??

Thyself , probably means = with yourself .

Wow !! Rude and disrespectful .

[DHRifleman]

Weird, I read it as 2 completely different, non-contradictory arguments.

1) You can now play the game completely free.

2) You should consider using real money occasionally or the game won't make enough money to survive.

What I've yet to determine is if there is enough incentive to spend real money. Is grinding for gm$ tedious enough that some people will opt to buy em$ instead?

If you go by skybird it is definitely not.
As for his contradiction I was referring to other threads where he said this is the savior of the game and it will not surprise him if it is still here in 5 more years.

DHR,
whatever you claim, Teflonman. Play with thyself but dont waste my time.

Don't waste your time, you are the only one that can waste your time.
You are the one that said you were leaving the toxic environment of the forum, and couldn't make it a week. If you feel it is a waste of time why post?

[Skybird]

Weird, I read it as 2 completely different, non-contradictory arguments.

1) You can now play the game completely free.

2) You should consider using real money occasionally or the game won't make enough money to survive.

What I've yet to determine is if there is enough incentive to spend real money. Is grinding for gm$ tedious enough that some people will opt to buy em$ instead?

Indeed.

There are two basic scnearios possible, and nobody of us can say at this point which one is more true.

The first is that the new owner decided already to kill the game, because his new aquisition competes with itself - the second Hnter game COTW against Classic - and from a business point of view that maybe makes no sense. He nevertheless must honour legal implications: membership time already bought. So he decides to compensate the membership fees so that players can spend the money on ingame items, and keep the game free and open for as long until the last membership time interval has run out. Then the game gets shut down. - This is possible, some say even it is likely. Due to the inherent legal consideration, the game will run for until a one year membership last sold will have run out. Say end of Q1 2020 at the earliest.

The second scenario is that for some kinder reason they indeed try to keep the game open as long as can be defended from a business point of view: it shall not crate losses at least to run it. In this case they try to reduce running costs to possible minimums, and try to attract fresh players in the hope that at least every tenth player or so will occasionally spend a little money. In many mass online games and F2P games, a very small fraction of the players actually pay for items and unlocking content, and the overwhelming majority never pays even a single penny The ratio can be as high as 20:1, I have read last year. These games are brandnew, Classic is ten years old and will not attract as many players anymore as the latest super-popular mainstream shooter or whatever, so it will be difficult. Maybe - just maybe - the company also sees Classic as a legacy, a heritage, a signature of theirs, worth to be kept alive as part of their reputation basis and for advertising purposes - "We, the makers of famous The Hunter Classic, the longets lasting hunter game ever made..." etc etc. I dont say it is like this, I dont know - I only point out that this maybe also is a possibility: that they indeed try what they said: keeping the game open for the purpose of the game and the players, as long as they economically can

It sickened me last week to see how determined some people were to summon the sky falling down and to paint things as badly as possible - while we in fact do not know what is when going on and why. We all speculate, all of us, because nobody of us know for sure. And some went too far with that, and accused the company without being able to give evidence for their attacks and criticsm. This is unfair, and it is foul and not valid. Where you raise attacks, you are obliged to deliver evidence for the rightness of your attack. If you do not have that, either shut up, or mark your opinion as just your personal opinion and speculation, and do not present it as "fact".

I had read a very few comments on Steam over the week of players who indeed came back after longer time - and invested a little money again. I also had two guests doiung s in MP, and another boasting with that he has never done so in five years, and who laughed about paying players - I threw him out. So did I, spending a bit money I mean, additionally to the compensated em$ and the fact that just in winter I had already bought another one year license I spend another 10 Euros on some stuff. If every third or fourth player now playing would do that once a year, give ten euros, this most likely would already not just cover their running costs, but maybe would create a revenue that equals a profitable incentive to not kill the game.

But then it is possible that they have already done like it is common in business: that decisions already are made with ligntime planning in the background,. and now their execution gets carried out. Maybe they will shut down the game anyway, no matter what we do. We do not know. Its possibvle. But we do not know.

All the visual beauty laid out before the players eyes, yesterday I played in Timbergold and again was stunned and blown away but the landscape and sights in the binocular. It would be sad if all this just lands in the garbage bin. I prefer to keep some cautuous optimism and hope that the game stays around for some time longer, and maybe for a bit longer than just one more year. I do not talk about a fortune of money, just little nudging ammounts of money. Despite all its cons and flaws, the game is landmark achievement in the history of computer games, and it should not be just thrown away. COTW is good, but not that good that it can fully replace it already. To do so it still has a very long way to go.

keeping the hope up, does not cost me much. Not more than those ten Euros last week. And in autumn or early winter, I might do it again, against all odds. And maybe some others as well. Call us stupids, call us ignorrants - but I prefer to enjoy it for as long as it stays, and see the good in the time I have with it.

[DYEUZ]

... hmmm, now i am asked to shut up , if i don't say like some of you !

Again , that's pretty rude , if you ask me ! .