For those who believe every change is informed by greed

DFiPL · May 2015

puppychow wrote:

sinnerjfl wrote:

Billigoat wrote:

People don't have a problem with new characters being released. The problem is the ever-increasing cost of roster slots and the stubborn attitude of D3/Demiurge to not offer a viable solution (DDQ & doubling our measly pittance of HP that we get once in a while is not a solution). My next roster slot will be the 58th, it will cost me 750 HP. Eventually they end up costing over 1000 HP (that's roughly 10$) and they never stop costing more.

Ever-increasing cost of roster slots is plain greed, you can't deny or justify this tinykitty.

My 82nd slot cost me 1,050 hp to keep vision. I expect to pay another 1,050 hp for 3* bullseye.

Are there even 82 characters in the game right now? Honest question.

Unknown · May 2015

DFiPL wrote:

Are there even 82 characters in the game right now? Honest question.

Maybe he's stacking multiple 1* such as BW and Juggs for teamups?

Pylgrim · May 2015

simonsez wrote:

I'm sure it's just a coincidence that the moment downvoting is turned off, we get some of the wettest, sloppiest buttkissing we've seen in ages...

Another change working as intended...

I am positive that you have seen enough of my threads and posts to know that downvotes were never a concern for me. This is a most disingenuous attack on my character to dismiss my point.

TLCstormz wrote:

I can't be bothered to read through all of this madness (especially with people in here on my blocked list), but I just wanted to say :

Turn To Smoke
Bullseye triggering multiple times
"Refunds" which aren't even FULL refunds
Bait And Switch
Algorithms
Luck / Chance Odds
Etc etc etc

It's okay to be a fan of something, but is not okay to continually give problems to those who speak up about issues that they have with the thing that you are a fan of.

See, this is the kind of thing I am talking about. Turn to Smoke? Algorithms? Luck? As a proof of greed? So you experienced a glitch and had some bad luck and believe that this is a purposefully engineered tactic to squeeze money from you? Please do tell how much money has been drained from your pockets by these buck-vampires using these strategies.

Monstercod wrote:

Of course, the poster didn't explicitly say that other people are not allowed to have a different opinion. It's just that the poster made every attempt to belittle and ridicule opposing opinion.

I will not be coy, I am ridiculing the notion that "greed" is the principal factor and motivation in every little change in the game because it is a demonstrably ridiculous notion. People bring up changes or features that may or may not be motivated with monetising in mind, I'm not going to disagree with that. As it's been stated, people need to pay bills and make a living. It is the unsustainable idea that every single decision is driven by greed, the desire to obtain much more money than deserved which I believe is as toxic as it is absurd.

Arondite wrote:

Where do you get the idea their motivation isn't money?

I don't, as I have stated several times. Money, by necessity, has to factor in the equation and that's not a reprehensible thing. I, too, have a job and one of the reasons I keep at it is because I need money to live. It is not the only one, though, nor is my every action and decision while practising engineered to obtain more money. Conversely, where do you get the idea that their motivation is solely money and more money?

sinnerjfl · May 2015

Pylgrim wrote:

I don't, as I have stated several times. Money, by necessity, has to factor in the equation and that's not a reprehensible thing. I, too, have a job and one of the reasons I keep at it is because I need money to live. It is not the only one, though, nor is my every action and decision while practising engineered to obtain more money. Conversely, where do you get the idea that their motivation is solely money and more money?

This is a rough list of changes made in-game that are arguably about money:

Roster slots costing more and more to infinite
Characters in your queue expire after a certain time
Health packs/Downed timer/Heal rates
True Healing™
Shields
Shield cooldowns
Alliances/Alliances slots cost that increase with every one added up to 20
Cover packs that used to guarantee 1 cover of the featured

do not anymore
Lowering of odds in cover packs (to really ridiculous numbers, now theyre back up a little)
Releasing clearly overpowered characters while expecting people to drop money to max them right away
Nerfing those overpowered characters 6 or so months later
PVP MMR that makes every match last forever and being visible to everyone at a certain treshold forcing you to shield
Health buffs without changing the abilities
Team-Ups that damage your whole team vs goons (this one will be fixed a little)
Insane scaling meant to kill your characters

Unknown · May 2015

Pylgrim wrote:

Monstercod wrote:

Of course, the poster didn't explicitly say that other people are not allowed to have a different opinion. It's just that the poster made every attempt to belittle and ridicule opposing opinion.

I will not be coy, I am ridiculing the notion that "greed" is the principal factor and motivation in every little change in the game because it is a demonstrably ridiculous notion. People bring up changes or features that may or may not be motivated with monetising in mind, I'm not going to disagree with that. As it's been stated, people need to pay bills and make a living. It is the unsustainable idea that every single decision is driven by greed, the desire to obtain much more money than deserved which I believe is as toxic as it is absurd.

Topic aside, if you have an opinion, you can make your point and convince other people based on the merit of your opinion. You won't convince anybody by ridiculing their opinion. Even if other people are completely ridiculous, it doesn't make you right.

But perhaps, you are insecure about your opinion. Hence the need to ridicule other people opinion in order to help hide the fact that your opinion is just slightly less ridiculous than other people's opinion.

NighteyesGrisu · May 2015

sinnerjfl wrote:

Pylgrim wrote:

I don't, as I have stated several times. Money, by necessity, has to factor in the equation and that's not a reprehensible thing. I, too, have a job and one of the reasons I keep at it is because I need money to live. It is not the only one, though, nor is my every action and decision while practising engineered to obtain more money. Conversely, where do you get the idea that their motivation is solely money and more money?

This is a rough list of changes made in-game that are arguably about money:

Roster slots costing more and more to infinite
Characters in your queue expire after a certain time
Health packs/Downed timer/Heal rates
True Healing™
Shields
Shield cooldowns
Alliances/Alliances slots cost that increase with every one added up to 20
Cover packs that used to guarantee 1 cover of the featured do not anymore
Lowering of odds in cover packs (to really ridiculous numbers, now theyre back up a little)
Releasing clearly overpowered characters while expecting people to drop money to max them right away
Nerfing those overpowered characters 6 or so months later
PVP MMR that makes every match last forever and being visible to everyone at a certain treshold forcing you to shield
Health buffs without changing the abilities
Team-Ups that damage your whole team vs goons (this one will be fixed a little)
Insane scaling meant to kill your characters

Several of those are not changes but have been like that since the beginning. Some actually changed for the better in the mean time....Also otheres were huge improvements to the game, so I absolutely don't understand who you can put those in your list (like shields...do you remember what PVP used to be like before?)

It really doesn't help your point if you mix valid points with tinfoil hatty stuff...

sinnerjfl · May 2015

NighteyesGrisu wrote:

Several of those are not changes but have been like that since the beginning. Some actually changed for the better in the mean time....Also otheres were huge improvements to the game, so I absolutely don't understand who you can put those in your list (like shields...do you remember what PVP used to be like before?)

It really doesn't help your point if you mix valid points with tinfoil hatty stuff...

Unknown · May 2015

We've all seen the south park episode.

scottee · May 2015

People want a game that is free, fun, and has lots of regularly updated content. I want that too. The problem is that no one has the time to make such a quality game in their freetime.

So people who say this game design is motivated too much by greed, please propose a strategy by which a freemium game can provide the above while still generating an ok amount of profit. If a game can't generate profit, they shut off the servers and it ceases to exist.

firethorne · May 2015

A system exists where retuning customers are charged more each time, effectively getting fewer character slots as they continue to increase in price. As long as that exists, I'll see D3 as greedy, having one primary motivation...

ArkPrime wrote:

We've all seen the south park episode.

Unknown · May 2015

The most viciously monetized F2P games out there use money items to do the following (in approx order of descending evil):

Reclaim given rewards that would otherwise be lost Make it near impossible to win without IAP Make it impossible to progress without In App Purchase (IAP) Speed up tasks on a timer Premium items that can't be earned with effort Lottery gambling with extremely low odds to win.

Reclaim given rewards that would otherwise be lost
Cover expiry & Roster Slots. If you don't have the roster slots, you lose rewards. This can be mitigated by cover hoarding, but how many players know to do that? The people who open tokens as soon as possible (ie most people) get hit quickly. Further, sometimes you need the roster slot for an essential or have to throw an old character out. Programatically, it makes sense too: having thousands of unsold covers starts to cause database and performance issues. Demiurge has done us a small favor by extending cover expiry to 2 weeks. With many games the number of pending rewards is also limited, and if you don't have space for them, they get thrown out! (like teamups now). I'm somewhat thankful that they don't charge hp to increase the number of pending cover slots, though that would probably mess with their revenue stream.
Rating - Barely

Make it near impossible to win without IAP
I can see a couple things here:

Buying cover packs for a shot at the essential Buying AP boosts Buying health packs Buying covers Now with a 2*, 3*, and 4* essential, it's no longer as necessary to have that one essential. If anything, I think they've hurt their cover pack revenue with this change, but made a better game. Further, it's still not too hard to get the next essential -> top 15% in PVE or PVP. Unless it's a new character, it's not too hard to grab at least one cover.
AP boosts drop like candy.
Health packs: Debatable. Everyone's restricted to the same number of health packs, and you can save up for a rainy day if you're not uber competitive. Further, this makes it more of a skill game, as opposed to one where you can just pay to win. You actually have to beat Juggernaut + 2 green feeders, he's not going to take a hp bribe and go home.
Cover buys: 1,2* covers drop like mad, and it's rare that you need to buy covers unless you're trying to speed up a task. People in the 2-3* transition might disagree.

Add in the fact that the premium currency is earnable, (maybe 500 hp / week for a semi-casual player including DDQ?) and you have not a small number of players with stockpiles of HP despite being F2P.
Rating Some => Barely

Make it impossible to progress without In App Purchase (IAP)
Cover purchases. If you're in the 3-4* transition, maybe. Takes a couple weeks to save up enough hp for a single 4* cover.
Rating Only if you're forcing your progression.

Speed up tasks on a timer
Health packs. I covered the health system in an earlier post
Rating Barely, except for the start when you have no heroes.

Premium items that can't be earned with effort
Rating None.

Lottery system-like gambling with extremely low odds to win.
Token purchases
Rating Average.

Surprisingly, Demiurge/D3 partakes in almost all of these tricks! HOWEVER, the extent to which they do them is much less than most games out there now. I'm sure I've missed some stuff, so if anyone disagrees vehemently please show what evil tricks I'm taking for granted because I've just gotten used to them.

Linkster79 · May 2015

scottee wrote:

People want a game that is free, fun, and has lots of regularly updated content. I want that too. The problem is that no one has the time to make such a quality game in their freetime.

So people who say this game design is motivated too much by greed, please propose a strategy by which a freemium game can provide the above while still generating an ok amount of profit. If a game can't generate profit, they shut off the servers and it ceases to exist.

Nintendo hit the f2p scene in spectacular fashion with Pokemon Rumble World. In case some are unaware of their strategy with it basically it is free to download and play, the usual purchase gems for cash in order to get a leg up is there too. However once you have spent £30 (roughly the cost of a full retail game) you need never spend again and in fact you are unable to spend more!

Unknown · May 2015

Linkster79 wrote:

scottee wrote:

People want a game that is free, fun, and has lots of regularly updated content. I want that too. The problem is that no one has the time to make such a quality game in their freetime.

So people who say this game design is motivated too much by greed, please propose a strategy by which a freemium game can provide the above while still generating an ok amount of profit. If a game can't generate profit, they shut off the servers and it ceases to exist.

Nintendo hit the f2p scene in spectacular fashion with Pokemon Rumble World. In case some are unaware of their strategy with it basically it is free to download and play, the usual purchase gems for cash in order to get a leg up is there too. However once you have spent £30 (roughly the cost of a full retail game) you need never spend again and in fact you are unable to spend more!

Really? I thought you could still spend on diamonds for trips back to places or for the cooldown timer, or for newly released clothing and backgrounds, or for revives, or stage selects.

Linkster79 · May 2015

Nope there is a maximum number of diamonds you can purchase then the option is greyed out.

sinnerjfl · May 2015

scottee wrote:

People want a game that is free, fun, and has lots of regularly updated content. I want that too. The problem is that no one has the time to make such a quality game in their freetime.

So people who say this game design is motivated too much by greed, please propose a strategy by which a freemium game can provide the above while still generating an ok amount of profit. If a game can't generate profit, they shut off the servers and it ceases to exist.

I'd love to see the freemium model die a very swift death. Go back to a flat rate on entry and be done with it.
Of course that won't happen because people actually realized they would make more money with freemium than if they ever charged a flat rate. This is just my example, but I have spent around $60 overall for this game. This game is not worth $60, at best $30. But there's also the factor that they add multiplayer elements to the game to keep making you spend so maybe it's worth more than $30.

I really don't know, I'd just rather pay for the game and then enjoy it. It's hard to enjoy a game where the developper tries to make you spend at every turn.

An example of a good model that I have experience with, Awesomenauts, it's a 2D MOBA. The base price is $10 (it goes on sale for $1 all the time) and that is it. You can buy DLC but it's only skins, announcers, purely cosmetic. The game is updated on a regular basis, they also released an expansion for $10. It's very reasonnable and the developper are a small team as well. That is a healthy business model.

Pylgrim · May 2015

sinnerjfl wrote:

scottee wrote:

People want a game that is free, fun, and has lots of regularly updated content. I want that too. The problem is that no one has the time to make such a quality game in their freetime.

So people who say this game design is motivated too much by greed, please propose a strategy by which a freemium game can provide the above while still generating an ok amount of profit. If a game can't generate profit, they shut off the servers and it ceases to exist.

I'd love to see the freemium model die a very swift death. Go back to a flat rate on entry and be done with it.
Of course that won't happen because people actually realized they would make more money with freemium than if they ever charged a flat rate. This is just my example, but I have spent around $60 overall for this game. This game is not worth $60, at best $30. But there's also the factor that they add multiplayer elements to the game to keep making you spend so maybe it's worth more than $30.

I really don't know, I'd just rather pay for the game and then enjoy it. It's hard to enjoy a game where the developper tries to make you spend at every turn.

An example of a good model that I have experience with, Awesomenauts, it's a 2D MOBA. The base price is $10 (it goes on sale for $1 all the time) and that is it. You can buy DLC but it's only skins, announcers, purely cosmetic. The game is updated on a regular basis, they also released an expansion for $10. It's very reasonnable and the developper are a small team as well. That is a healthy business model.

It depends. I agree that if you take the game as is you'd be willing to pay only $30 or even less. However, if you've been playing continuously for over 500 days of continuous developing, $60 (I myself have spent a total of $54) doesn't seem like that much. That's why it is harder to compare it with traditional games. Maybe a better comparison would be an MMO with a monthly subscription fee? So far I've spent an average of $3 per month and all of it has been opted-in to buy covers of characters I wanted to accelerate (and once, foolishly, a 10-pack). I have never spent money because I /had/ to in order to advance.

Dauthi · May 2015

Monstercod wrote:

Pylgrim wrote:

Monstercod wrote:

Of course, the poster didn't explicitly say that other people are not allowed to have a different opinion. It's just that the poster made every attempt to belittle and ridicule opposing opinion.

I will not be coy, I am ridiculing the notion that "greed" is the principal factor and motivation in every little change in the game because it is a demonstrably ridiculous notion. People bring up changes or features that may or may not be motivated with monetising in mind, I'm not going to disagree with that. As it's been stated, people need to pay bills and make a living. It is the unsustainable idea that every single decision is driven by greed, the desire to obtain much more money than deserved which I believe is as toxic as it is absurd.

Topic aside, if you have an opinion, you can make your point and convince other people based on the merit of your opinion. You won't convince anybody by ridiculing their opinion. Even if other people are completely ridiculous, it doesn't make you right.

This is true, but then you go on to say:

But perhaps, you are insecure about your opinion. Hence the need to ridicule other people opinion in order to help hide the fact that your opinion is just slightly less ridiculous than other people's opinion.

Don't attack other's opinions, now watch me attack yours.

dkffiv · May 2015

Pylgrim wrote:

sinnerjfl wrote:

scottee wrote:

People want a game that is free, fun, and has lots of regularly updated content. I want that too. The problem is that no one has the time to make such a quality game in their freetime.

So people who say this game design is motivated too much by greed, please propose a strategy by which a freemium game can provide the above while still generating an ok amount of profit. If a game can't generate profit, they shut off the servers and it ceases to exist.

I'd love to see the freemium model die a very swift death. Go back to a flat rate on entry and be done with it.
Of course that won't happen because people actually realized they would make more money with freemium than if they ever charged a flat rate. This is just my example, but I have spent around $60 overall for this game. This game is not worth $60, at best $30. But there's also the factor that they add multiplayer elements to the game to keep making you spend so maybe it's worth more than $30.

I really don't know, I'd just rather pay for the game and then enjoy it. It's hard to enjoy a game where the developper tries to make you spend at every turn.

An example of a good model that I have experience with, Awesomenauts, it's a 2D MOBA. The base price is $10 (it goes on sale for $1 all the time) and that is it. You can buy DLC but it's only skins, announcers, purely cosmetic. The game is updated on a regular basis, they also released an expansion for $10. It's very reasonnable and the developper are a small team as well. That is a healthy business model.

It depends. I agree that if you take the game as is you'd be willing to pay only $30 or even less. However, if you've been playing continuously for over 500 days of continuous developing, $60 (I myself have spent a total of $54) doesn't seem like that much. That's why it is harder to compare it with traditional games. Maybe a better comparison would be an MMO with a monthly subscription fee? So far I've spent an average of $3 per month and all of it has been opted-in to buy covers of characters I wanted to accelerate (and once, foolishly, a 10-pack). I have never spent money because I /had/ to in order to advance.

I find it kinda funny that you are one of the only ones that constantly tries to defend the developers but you are the type of customer that they do not want. Their actions are scaring away customers who are willing to spend $10+ per month (hell during the height of shield hopping weren't people dropping $10+ per event?)

El Satanno · May 2015

*I meant to post this the other day, but somehow managed to send it as a PM instead. Durp. Anyway...

Since you took the time to address me directly, I suppose it's only polite to respond in kind. Although I honestly can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not. It's more interesting to assume so, though, and surely there are plenty reading that either believe in your sincerity or believe it themselves, so....

Billigoat wrote:

Gameplay problem: A viable team MUST have a healer for the player to do well. Everyone has OBW or spidey.
Solution: Remove true-healing from most characters
Result: Teams are much more diverse because healers are no longer mandatory.
Forum Backlash: The devs want us to pay money for health packs! EVIL

One thing that is constantly making me insane is my inability to find the post by the devs which shows what an insignificant percentage of their income is from health packs. It was something laughable like 1%. Every time I hear someone bang on about "Hurp durp buy moar helth pks!" my eyes roll like cherries in a slot machine. You obviously have no idea how business works if your strategy for increasing profit revolves around infuriating your dedicated customer base in an attempt to turn 1% into 2%...

Oh, and I also kick myself because I am no good at finding the post by the devs which states that the healing mechanics before True Healing was totally out of line with their vision for the game. So, you know, it might have been for another reason.

Billigoat wrote:

Gameplay problem: x-force is so OP that he's mandatory to be competitive
Solution: Nerf x-force. Offer a grace period for a percentage refund if players paid money for him.
Result: I have no idea because I'm not in 4-star land
Forum backlash: The devs intentionally nerfed him after everyone paid money to get him as a way of bleeding more money from the players! EVIL

I love this assumption. First, there is exactly zero evidence to support this. Second, there are likely more people who spent the time and effort to build their X-Forces (and 4ors, for that matter) or inherited them than paid out cash. I'm certainly one of them. Let's not forget that you get at least one of all 3 colors before you even hit a year of play, and anyone who has been around that long has almost definitely picked up many more besides during that era when he was one of only two four-star characters. Despite my general reluctance to do so, I will go ahead and make the unsubstantiated claim that a significant majority of X-Force owners paid exactly zero for him; he was already maxed out or close to it from way back in his original incarnation as a pretty trophy.

Billigoat wrote:

Gameplay problem: a large amount of heroes are missing in the game
Solution: release more characters! yay!
Result: A new character every week
Forum backlash: Players who compulsively collect every character feel overwhelmed because they 'must' grind continually to keep up with the game. Others assume it's somehow a cash grab from the company, releasing more content to... make more money? EVIL

I'm not even willing to accept this as a legitimate problem. What does this even mean? Have you ever played the Marvel Ultimate Alliance console games? There are a staggering number of heroes and villains appearing in that series, and it's not even close to spanning the entire Marvel continuum. Claiming that characters are "missing" is so ridiculous that it's barely even worth talking about.

The backlash is equally ludicrous, and it links directly into something which has been alluded to in other posts on this topic as well. The bottom line is, complaints about the release schedule and especially about roster costs comes from a very specific type of player: the compulsive.

I have 60-odd roster slots. My next slot will cost 850 HP. Yes, it's expensive. But it really doesn't matter to me because I already have at least 12 characters that haven't been touched in months and will immediately get the axe without regret should I ever be hard-up enough for HP to have to do so. It's pretty much only the players that simply cannot bring themselves to ditch anyone that are up in arms. Expecting the devs to cater to this sort of obsessive mentality is laughable.

The release schedule and roster slots both are not indicators of a greedy mindset, but rather simply a different one. Namely (in my interpretation) that you're not supposed to keep all the characters, and so you're not supposed to be looking at some outrageously expensive roster slot cost. You keep the characters you want or like, and if you run out of space and/or HP you do one of two things. You either drop someone to make room, or you (GASP!) pony up some cabbage to satisfy your irrational need to keep everyone!

sinnerjfl · May 2015

El Satanno wrote:

You keep the characters you want or like, and if you run out of space and/or HP you do one of two things. You either drop someone to make room, or you (GASP!) pony up some cabbage to satisfy your irrational need to keep everyone!

As probably everyone is already aware, you cannot just keep whoever you like and dump whoever you don't because of the essential system, which they actually made worse by including

's &

's into the mix. Being locked out of essential nodes will basically kill your score if you play any PVE. Nothing irrational about it.

For those who believe every change is informed by greed

Comments

Categories