10/05/2010 · 01:41 PM
#23
there are few types of players in this game... new players... old players... short-term empires... long-term empires... players play to fight... players play to manage... strategists that use market as weapon... strategists that use the market as economic management...
but this game has been moulded just purely for fight as some would prefer it forever... some categories of players are being left out... when there are few suggestions to cater all the needs, it has been strongly objected by some quarters that think UC is for the rest who want some changes...
haven`t we learned? life evolves... and SFGC must do the same to survive...
honestly, i respect that Stephen can still let go (but not the ownership) of SFGC until the stage, he doesn`t bother much... i still can`t understand why; coz IF an owner of anything wants to do something, he can just do it... what point is he trying to prove?
i always mention this b4... a great game will cater all categories... more categories can be catered, more players will come and play... more players mean more money... but i respect Stephen for ignoring this fact... perhaps he owed his "life" to someone that is in the purist camp... :P
as for me... never been in my SFGC`s life i`ve slowed down my interest so much in this game for the past 6 yrs... when SFGC only revolve only to fight and nothing much else to do, it`s getting boring... perhaps the purists prefer that... but the best part, they push the blame on certain empires... :)
i`ve seen other games that know how to attact more players but SFGC is being withheld hostage by some quarters... :P
anyway, i couldn`t be bothered much whether SFGC is going to be soft reset or hard reset anymore... that`s how much i`ve no longer interest in SFGC... the purists think they`re right, let them be... i`ve seen "places" that know better how to treat their customer`s needs...
sorry Stephen... such a pity... sigh...