Another middle finger to the vets...

Xenoberyll

The drop in ISO costs is designed to help newer players mostly.
If they had increased ISO drops overall it would have helped everybody equal. (i.e. 250/150 instead of 140/70 drops after fights)
Only the devs can say why they chose that route, but it seems like just another move in a line of changes that piss off the vets

Eddiemon

Xenoberyll wrote:

The drop in ISO costs is designed to help newer players mostly.
If they had increased ISO drops overall it would have helped everybody equal. (i.e. 250/150 instead of 140/70 drops after fights)
Only the devs can say why they chose that route, but it seems like just another move in a line of changes that piss off the vets

Because new players are acquiring 3 and 4* characters quicker than vets?

Unknown

I don't think this is a big deal because I don't think they will make it all that much cheaper (just guessing though).

I can kind of see where the OP is coming from though. EVERY aspect of this game is competitive aside from DDQ. So how well you do is partly down to what you have in your roster but also heavily dependent on what everyone else has. When someone has worked hard (Kind of telling the term work seems to fit so well here......) to get a good roster and then the next guy gets it easier than them you can see why someone would feel a bit put out.

Still, it seems an impractical thing to have done (ppl compare it to roster slots but the work required to do that is, I suspect, less than refunding ISO for levels) and you can make a decent enough argument that, by having those levels earlier and using the hero in question to gain more covers, you got more value than the guy levelling a hero up after the update.

I don't see it as the same as hero over-nerfs, where I still think a full ISO and HP refund should be the case because none of your heros got worse or ceased to sill the function you intended.

All that aside.... one interesting note.....

Every time they ruin a character with an over-nerf white knights come out and tell everyone that you can't expect a reasonable level of compensation because it's not a real thing, you don't own anything and you took some kind of risk so have nothing to complain about. It's a digital "good" so what do you expect?

Then some retroactive change leaves ppl feeling cheated because they never had that benefit and people are told that you would never expect that from a physical good dropping in price so why should you expect it here?

It's a digital non-good when it suits one argument.... then it's a physical good when it suits another... just find it interesting.

EDIT: One other thing regarding the "The fact is, you bought the game (leveled your heroes) at the original price, so you felt the value was right for the payout before. If it's getting even better now, you certainly don't deserve a refund for that." statement. That only goes so far... lets say (as a more extreme example) you buy a full set of kingpin covers because you think it's reasonable... then they let me have them all for 50HP a piece the next day. Is that fine just cause you thought the price was ok at the time?

As I alluded to above, the state of other peoples' rosters impacts you as well. So consistency in pricing, and to a degree difficulty to acquire (through progression/placement etc) is very important. People won't be willing to invest in something if you then proceed to significantly devalue it.

NighteyesGrisu

To be fair, you could turn that argument around as well. If they think MPQ purchases should be treated as real products when they nerf somebody, why do they now here demand something they wouldn't demand of a real product?

To me it really does come down to this. There are quite a few things you can complain about in this game. Complaining about them lowering prices just seems silly to me and counter-productive on top of that. Good luck getting them to lower roster slot prizes that way. Something that IMO is a way bigger problem than for example the high character introduction rate.

Xenoberyll

Eddiemon wrote:

Because new players are acquiring 3 and 4* characters quicker than vets?

that's a different matter. it's not like the change in cost as planned by the devs is giving new people more covers.

Unknown

bonfire01 wrote:

That only goes so far... lets say (as a more extreme example) you buy a full set of kingpin covers because you think it's reasonable... then they let me have them all for 50HP a piece the next day. Is that fine just cause you thought the price was ok at the time?

It heavily depends on timing, physical/digital goods going on sale is good example. If you bought something that next day cost 75% less, you could be pissed. But right now I'm buying 7+ AAA titles that would cost >300$ when they came out, for less than 5 dollars, and yet no one is feeling cheated.

As for leveling cost decrease and refunds, I'm portraying inverse situation - what if instead of decreasing leveling costs, they would instead increase Iso drop rates. Would you be outraged that people who play game now are getting more stuff for same work you had to pull before? I think it's pretty absurd, no? Right now people are all over Hit Points increase as if it will make matches longer and take more damage. In that case, all the fights you did were easier than they will be in future, should they strip some of he Iso from you from playing 'ez mode'?

bonfire01 wrote:

I don't see it as the same as hero over-nerfs, where I still think a full ISO and HP refund should be the case because none of your heros got worse or ceased to sill the function you intended.

That I fully agree on. In Hearthstone, Blizzard's digital card game, when any card is having balance change, negative or positive, you are able to get full dust value. That means destroying card to obtain resource that you can use to craft ANY card in game. Even if card is Legendary and you used it for multiple seasons to get to rank legend and win countless matches (Leeroy), when it get nerfed, everyone who had the card could destroy it and any copies they had extra and craft any other legendary they want (or 4 epics, 16 rares etc...), they could even keep the dust (it doesn't disappear, ever) and save it for future expansion cards. So far, it didn't bankrupt them at all and keep community relatively happy when they nerf things because you never lose value you've earned.

Unknown

bonfire01 wrote:

Every time they ruin a character with an over-nerf white knights come out and tell everyone that you can't expect a reasonable level of compensation because it's not a real thing, you don't own anything and you took some kind of risk so have nothing to complain about. It's a digital "good" so what do you expect?

The "digital economy" is worth billions and is constantly growing.

Digital "goods" are to become a major thing in the years to come. They should be considered as a property, just the same as paper, plastic (CDs/DVDs/Blu-Rays...) things.

Most of the guys who claim nothing in this game is worth anything are F2P players who still want to enjoy the game for free. Fair enough, that's the philosophy behind Freemium.

But sometimes, those F2P should think that other people pay for MPQ, and thanks to them, they can enjoy the game.

D3 should take into consideration the amounts of money some of us put in this game, and consider some compensation when it would be fair to compensate.

Bashing/mocking the whales consistently, saying how stupid they could be since they paid for Iso/covers/whatever is not the right behaviour IMO. This way, most whales don't tell how much they spent, and D3 does not feel guilty in any way to devaluate what has been paid for...

Unknown

Just reiterating what has been said in this thread and in other business model threads. The decision to lower ISO cost is one that was made in the interest of increasing profitability of the company (fully covered in teh thread, the Business behind the changes). It is no different then when something goes on sale after you had bought it earlier.

The argument that when something goes on sale and then you can get a refund with a receipt is not a true analogy, as in that case, no one told you far in advance that the sale was coming, in this case, we know the price change is coming, so no one has to use ISO if they don't want to. While D3 may indeed give an ISO award to everyone (as it is essentially free to them), they will do so only if they calculate this would be best for the viability of the game. Giving an ISO award to me for some charcter i leveled a year ago doesn't realky make a lot of sense.

Just save your ISO for now and this too shall pass.

Unknown

Nivrax wrote:

bonfire01 wrote:

That only goes so far... lets say (as a more extreme example) you buy a full set of kingpin covers because you think it's reasonable... then they let me have them all for 50HP a piece the next day. Is that fine just cause you thought the price was ok at the time?

It heavily depends on timing, physical/digital goods going on sale is good example. If you bought something that next day cost 75% less, you could be pissed. But right now I'm buying 7+ AAA titles that would cost >300$ when they came out, for less than 5 dollars, and yet no one is feeling cheated.

As for leveling cost decrease and refunds, I'm portraying inverse situation - what if instead of decreasing leveling costs, they would instead increase Iso drop rates. Would you be outraged that people who play game now are getting more stuff for same work you had to pull before? I think it's pretty absurd, no? Right now people are all over Hit Points increase as if it will make matches longer and take more damage. In that case, all the fights you did were easier than they will be in future, should they strip some of he Iso from you from playing 'ez mode'?

First, just to reiterate, I don't agree with the OP, was just saying I can definitely see his point of view.

Regarding AAA games... When you buy a AAA game I already own it doesn't impact me at all. On the other hand... when someone levels up a hero in MPQ it does impact other ppl. Their roster gets better and therefore start competing with me (or you) for better prizes. That's why someone getting something for less than you had to "pay" for it stings because they will get the ability to compete with you for prizes without having to go through the same amount of effort to reach that point. I still don't see it as a reason to need an ISO refund, but that's just my opinion and doesn't stop me from seeing the OP has a decent reason for his own opinion.

As far as increased ISO rewards... ppl probably wouldn't mind as much despite the exact same impact. Ppl would progress to compete with you faster than you had previously progressed and while you get more ISO to spend on levelling heroes, it's functionally the same as you now having to pay less. Just look at the anniversary week where a whole slew of new 166 teams appeared thanks to all that bonus ISO.... it just FEELS better that way around. Perception is a funny old thing....

dr tinykittylove

Lowering the cost of iso for levelling characters does not help newbies. It helps everyone, but it helps vets most. The developers will continue to release new characters rapidly down the road, and those new characters will be easier for us to get and level. And there are very few vets who do not have a bunch of unlevelled/low-level characters sitting around uselessly for want of iso, who can also be levelled and used.

Meanwhile, the newbies will continue to be buried under a million undercovered underlevelled characters old and new and trying to dig their way out of that hole while the developers throw more characters on top.

Perhaps this change will relieve their suffering slightly... we still have more capacity to earn iso through pvp, sim and LR in addition to pve and ddq, so the benefit they gain is limited. And the hole they are in is deep. I fear nothing can save them. Poor, poor newbies.

Unknown

The main point of the OP was that everything is done to help the newcomers to level their roster (which will end up being impossible considering the pace of release) and play the game, meanwhile, the vets, who contributed to the success of the game (with time and money) would only have to tell themselves "oh well, I've played long enough so I should not worry about the money I spent".

I stopped maxing (buying extra covers) **** characters with Starlord, and for the first time, will do the same for a 3* (Quicksilver).

Reduced my investment in shield hopping too.

If everything is nerfed to help the newcomers, what do we have left ?

darkmagearcanis

Seriously, who cares about the ISO change to level characters in the early stages. The change could easily be " We dropped the first 10 levels of leveling a character by 20%", so that nets you what 500 ISO. (Not taking the time do the math)

There are larger concerns with buying roster slots. I have 50 slots open now and the price goes up. That IMO is what needs to be adjusted. Hopefully compensated on the slots I have opened so that I could open more slots. Or D3 open the extra slots for me so that they knew exactly where the HP should go.

Virus_Type_V

darkmagearcanis wrote:

There are larger concerns with buying roster slots. I have 50 slots open now and the price goes up. That IMO is what needs to be adjusted. Hopefully compensated on the slots I have opened so that I could open more slots. Or D3 open the extra slots for me so that they knew exactly where the HP should go.

OnesOwnGrief

bonfire01 wrote:

Nivrax wrote:

bonfire01 wrote:

That only goes so far... lets say (as a more extreme example) you buy a full set of kingpin covers because you think it's reasonable... then they let me have them all for 50HP a piece the next day. Is that fine just cause you thought the price was ok at the time?

It heavily depends on timing, physical/digital goods going on sale is good example. If you bought something that next day cost 75% less, you could be pissed. But right now I'm buying 7+ AAA titles that would cost >300$ when they came out, for less than 5 dollars, and yet no one is feeling cheated.

As for leveling cost decrease and refunds, I'm portraying inverse situation - what if instead of decreasing leveling costs, they would instead increase Iso drop rates. Would you be outraged that people who play game now are getting more stuff for same work you had to pull before? I think it's pretty absurd, no? Right now people are all over Hit Points increase as if it will make matches longer and take more damage. In that case, all the fights you did were easier than they will be in future, should they strip some of he Iso from you from playing 'ez mode'?

First, just to reiterate, I don't agree with the OP, was just saying I can definitely see his point of view.

Regarding AAA games... When you buy a AAA game I already own it doesn't impact me at all. On the other hand... when someone levels up a hero in MPQ it does impact other ppl. Their roster gets better and therefore start competing with me (or you) for better prizes. That's why someone getting something for less than you had to "pay" for it stings because they will get the ability to compete with you for prizes without having to go through the same amount of effort to reach that point. I still don't see it as a reason to need an ISO refund, but that's just my opinion and doesn't stop me from seeing the OP has a decent reason for his own opinion.

As far as increased ISO rewards... ppl probably wouldn't mind as much despite the exact same impact. Ppl would progress to compete with you faster than you had previously progressed and while you get more ISO to spend on levelling heroes, it's functionally the same as you now having to pay less. Just look at the anniversary week where a whole slew of new 166 teams appeared thanks to all that bonus ISO.... it just FEELS better that way around. Perception is a funny old thing....

[*]Speaking of AAA games, there are many examples of them that go against this. Modern day shooters tend to have an option you can purchase to unlock all the weapons and perks you get from competitive multiplayer from the start. EA and Activision have both done things like this and it has also been met with polarizing viewpoints. The stuff you leveled up for in order to use was just given to someone who decided to put down $15-20 on an unlock key. Racing games have car unlocks that allow people to race against you on even footing without the same effort. In those situations, would you demand some sort of perk or bonus back because the company sells a means in order to progress through real money?

In a F2P title such as this, it should follow the same logic. When you download the game, you are agreeing to become a user of their service. They give you options to buy currency to speed for progression, you can choose to use it or not. If you decide to use that option then you should be doing so with understanding that things can and will probably change in the future. I can see if this is your first F2P game and have no idea what you're getting into but this is how F2P games typically function unless they go the route of ads.

[/*]
[*]On the subject of these changes to the game screwing over vets? They are the party in question LEAST affected by these changes. You can not discredit the gains they have made from their investment in the game. All that ISO that was pumped into their rosters did nothing but strengthen it, allowing them to climb in PvP/PvE gaining even more rewards. I leveled my XF Wolvie to 250, purchased a cover or two months ago. Can't tell you how much that investment has improved the rate in which I obtain ISO and HP compared to when I did not.

Even the character changes should be treated the same way with Iron Fist being the exception. Every other top character (past or present) in the game has had their prime moment and those people who had them were dominating. Sentry bombing went on for months and that carried on after XF was reworked. Many people easily made 1300 progression doing that strategy, myself included. This allowed easy acquisition of XF, IW, and Fury. Sentry got nerfed, another character replaced him. All that progress also meant they got a large influx of ISO that went into other characters. Many people at top have deep rosters sitting at 270/166. If anything, they are ahead of the curve of any changes to be made to those characters because they can adapt the quickest to new strategies.

The only real people who are effected by these changes are those who made purchases closer to the changes which they have records of. In that case, I can see them contacting customer service and seeing what they can do about compensation and D3/Demiurge can deal with that on a case by case basis. My experiences with customer service has been mostly pleasant and any time in which I felt there was enough cause for due compensation or I completely messed up something by my own mistake, they were happy to help.[/*]

Unknown

OnesOwnGrief wrote:

The only real people who are effected by these changes are those who made purchases closer to the changes which they have records of. In that case, I can see them contacting customer service and seeing what they can do about compensation and D3/Demiurge can deal with that on a case by case basis. My experiences with customer service has been mostly pleasant and any time in which I felt there was enough cause for due compensation or I completely messed up something by my own mistake, they were happy to help.[/list]

Tell me about it. 4 million Iso...

Unknown

I don't think of this as a middle finger to anyone, and frankly it's not comparable to, say, character nerfs.

As others have commented, if something continues to make the experience better for all moving forward, it seems like a win to me. Conversely, if an existing property is singularly downgraded by a change (say via nerfing), it seems less palatable to me.

tl:dr: If you still have what you have without penalty, that's a w.

Now, could we please discuss roster slot prices? If they decided to make meaningful changes to that HP suck, I would be the first to solemnly swear not to ask for retroactive benefits... lol

DBC

Unknown

OP is hilarious. Some people would complain just about anything no matter what.