The aftermath of selling a post-nerf lvl.519 OML and what it taught me.

Brigby

@Jonny1Punch @Tony Foot

Redirect Links are marked with the Closed tag since they are not technically threads to begin with. (Not sure why that happens, but that's just how the redirect feature works) They also have the word "Moved:" in front of the title to signify that it was redirected.The original thread however is still 100% available for commenting, and is not Closed.

Having said that though, I understand that it can cause some confusion, so I will inquire with the designer about a way to remove the Closed tag from Redirect Links.

Daredevil217

bbigler said:

I believe the real problem that many people have here on this forum is that they invest too much of themselves into this game.  It becomes their life, their purpose of living.  So, when things change, they don't handle it very well on a psychological or emotional level.  If you set your heart on something that can change, you're setting yourself up for disappointment and frustration.  In the words of Yoda "Train yourself to let go of everything you fear to lose".

On the bright side, if someone quits the game because they're so upset about some change, then it is surely good for them to quit, because they're addicted to it. 

There's a whole lot of assuming going on here.

- Someone buys a product, and expects a certain level of return on that investment.
- Said product is "recalled" and made worse.
- Said person wants a refund and is angry at the company for not giving them a refund or even exchange.
- Said company handles this all with no tact or grace.

I think people are well within their rights to be upset and what you are essentially doing while playing armchair psychologist is blaming the victim.  Now it very well COULD be that people prioritize this game too much and it is too big a part of their life, or they are addicted or whatever.  But when it comes to this topic and many other changes, the "real problem" is not the players who are upset.

I am 100% free to play, don't have a viable OML (only use him to Court some Deaths), but can have empathy for those affected by this and feel they are well within their rights.  I also will gladly voice my displeasure here and in online reviews when I feel the devs make stupid decision after stupid decision (because I can't vote with my wallet when I already spend $0). But I'd ask you not to assume anything about me, my life (I'm an actual psychologist, btw) or anyone else's, because I have no problems voicing my displeasure about decisions they have made. 

itstime1234

Damn, I just had to log in and show some support to J1P. I was pretty serious player but didn't drop much on this game.

That said writing was on the wall ages ago. When the only way to actually see results was to hoard a ton of CP and use it strictly on Legendary tokens it moved into the time to retire zone. Best decision I made. Hopefully in a few weeks you will be much happier too J1P.

The fact that 5s remain only available from Leg tokens and the fact that only current Legs were available for dupe switching showed Dem only cares to appease the whales. After all whales have the old 5s all champed so not like they would get any unusable covers.

Anyways long story short. Loved the original OP, they def did wrong and have yet to make amends. I hope others take your comments to heart.

Jonny1Punch

Thank you very much itstime. Definitely a major cautionary tale and hopefully others can learn from my experience and my massive spending mistakes. I can definitely say in light of recent changes and the devs unwillingness to fix them or even address them to me privately or publically I regret every penny spent on MPQ. I will continue to encourage everyone to spend nothing or spend casually for as long as possible on every MPQ group I have.

i still can't believe I trusted and invested so much..... shame on me. Major buyers remorse and regret now. Would hate to see others blow their retirement/life savings on this game only to get completely **** by the devs with nothing to show for it.

Ripley27

I'm showing my support too, not just cos it's infamous J1P but because he and everyone that's commented is absolutely right.
D3 should be ashamed for changing something that people have poured their precious time, money and energy into buying while leaving all the things that should be updated, debugged and fixed in their rear view mirror.
It must really be great for them to be paid to just sit back and design new charaxters!!!

 There's no protection for gamers out there, the developers take the money but don't deliver full satisfactory goods and what can we do about it but rant in complaint messages that get "bot answered"!!

And the only reason, I do mean the ONLY reason majority of us "over used" OML is because the drop rate is so bad you can't win high enough 5* to replace them. 

All the suggestions Johnny gave were spot on, scrub out events and put out new ones, fix the characters you have instead of pumping out a new one every other week and would it kill anyone to sort the broken MMR??
All of these players have given D3 the information needed to make this game great again, question is now, what are they going to do about it?? Don't tell me "bot answer"...

Jonny1Punch

Ripley27 said:

I'm showing my support too, not just cos it's infamous J1P but because he and everyone that's commented is absolutely right.
D3 should be ashamed for changing something that people have poured their precious time, money and energy into buying while leaving all the things that should be updated, debugged and fixed in their rear view mirror.
It must really be great for them to be paid to just sit back and design new charaxters!!!

 There's no protection for gamers out there, the developers take the money but don't deliver full satisfactory goods and what can we do about it but rant in complaint messages that get "bot answered"!!

And the only reason, I do mean the ONLY reason majority of us "over used" OML is because the drop rate is so bad you can't win high enough 5* to replace them. 

All the suggestions Johnny gave were spot on, scrub out events and put out new ones, fix the characters you have instead of pumping out a new one every other week and would it kill anyone to sort the broken MMR??
All of these players have given D3 the information needed to make this game great again, question is now, what are they going to do about it?? Don't tell me "bot answer"...

Amen to this 100x over. D3 could still make this right and fix this giant mess however they seem too arrogant to admit how wrong they were and how backwards their priorities are. I also find it shocking how cheap the compensation and rewards are all around ...... these are fake digital goods in a virtual Monopoly money economy with zero real world value. Yet they treat our covers and rosters like dirt meanwhile they treat their own rewards like solid gold. 

nickaraxnos

My sympathy for all the money, time and effort you have given to this game to get in the end nothing but dissapointment and frustration but make yourself a favor. Stop waisting time here.

Find a good lawyer to bring you back your money. 

You paid too much money to let it just go with some posts in a forum

Jonny1Punch

Nickaraxnos you are absolutely correct and the legal avenue is being pursued aggressively at the moment. 

SeveredSynapse

Jonny1Punch said:

[D3 could still make this right and fix this giant mess ...]

Completely agree with this.  They could also offer a "roll-back" type service where you can return to pre-OML sale for those who were left underwhelmed by the outcome.




Long-Time player, infrequent forum posts however.  Just echoing support and a few thoughts on this conversation (read all 4 pages prior).


In the framework of all of our individual uniqueness, differences & quirks:

I view Jonny's reaction as Bold & Brave for this reason:

What other high-level, veteran player and strong financial supporter ACTUALLY took action to stand up against what Demiurge has done?

Sure, another veteran championed an effort to get the entire community to weigh-in, and write a cohesive letter...

   ---> but that seems to have been promptly ignored by whomever fielded the inquiry.


Many mentioned that the whales should stop whaling, but that never transpired ... and the staff at Demiurge expected that.

I hope that J1P's post & actions generate some introspection by Demiurge so that they consider their future business model.

Jonny may be among the subset of players who were hit hardest by the nerf (guys who rely on OML to play because all your scaling & MMR is set to his highest playable roster). 

By simply diminishing the power of OML without adjusting scaling for the opponents he would queue would severely impact the efficacy and experience of his game-play. 

Additionally, PvE can be brutal with current nerf OML as your main tank & firepower if your roster is limited and your scaling is set to the level of your OML.

I commend Jonny for taking a strong stance to stand-up for us as a community & customer base!




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Game Economics:
  ** imagine your savings account you worked hard to build and develop was immediately invalidated by a small group of individuals at your banking institution.  Your life-savings immediately gone... and the memo sent to the masses was along the lines of "we found this currency to be obsolete, so we removed it... this will better accommodate future investors and the entire investing population at large". 
  then, when the individuals most significantly impacted by it were offered an extemporaneous solution with a take-it-or-leave-it countdown timer.
  Complex this with a 50% return on investment.

In this scenario, banking/investment confidence in the company would be shattered... fortunately, we have regulatory authorities to protect our assets and prevent this from happening.

with MPQ, unfortunately we have no such protection... no recourse... no advocacy agency.

all of your investment (time and or money) can immediately be erased or devalued with no explanation, and no recompense.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative Solution:
if we accept the sole reasoning behind the change of OML at face value... why was this the main solution explored?

I find one of the [ greatest tragedies ] surrounding this change was the [ myopic approach ] to adjusting game-play and/or meta-gaming experience:
  If OML was deemed over-used....
  and the developers opine that the character was disruptively ubiquitous....

why was the solution to reduce his power & efficacy?...

Alternatives --> among the many options, why not try a few events where OML is restricted from event use? ... akin to PvE events where certain characters are locked-out...
  This would level the playing field with temporary impact, rather than universally devaluing the character.
  From this, developers could observe the community reaction, assess whether their concerns of ubiquity were rectified by removing OML from the event / forcing players to seek other options in their rosters / etc.
  If the data from testing the [ character restriction ] seemed amenable, then developers could adjust the event availability accordingly to mitigate the ubiquity of the character, while sustaining the value of the customers' investments.

=================================================================================
Blind Fighting:

As an option: developers could set up a "blind fighting" PvP...  you enter, never know the name of your opponent... nor your point totals.

CPU randomly selects 3 from your roster vs 3 from the unknown opponent's roster using same-MMR level (whether 2*, 3*, 4*, 5*) so that you are relatively closely matched.

Not boosted like Balance of Power...

You click and have no idea who or what you will face:  Just you vs. the machine.

Whenever the events expire, the scores/rankings are posted and you see for the first time how you did on that event with the randomness throughout the event.

This might prove a better test of depth of game knowledge,

may add a bit of refreshing diversity (especially for those with comprehensive rosters).

Because you cannot target other players, and have no idea who's rosters you are facing... this may mitigate some of the game politics and interpersonal tensions.  No loss penalty, no penalty for being attacked ... just straight progression based on wins.

Granted, this removes some strategy and alliance coordination... but this may be a good option for players who wish to remain more casual, to players who are unaffiliated, or just players who are looking for something different. 
This may offer an optional (parallel) PvP experience...

=================================================================================
Categorical PvP:

another option to change the game up a little bit ...
along with selecting a convenient time-slice & Shield Clearance Level, the developers could offer players a selection of PvP categories with different play-styles:
    Examples:
        War-Zone for Alliance vs. Alliance combat
        Community Events for players who wish to mutually "climb" progression together with the historical "baking / cupcake" system ... preferably in a non-hostile zone where hours of progress cannot be immediately stripped by opportunists.
         Anything-Goes for people who want to play free of constraints (snipers, vendetta retributions, vigilantes, nomads, etc.)

=================================================================================


Positive Outcomes?:

I have yet to hear anyone remarking on the positive changes this has brought about.
In my communications, this has not re-invigorated anyone to return from retirement to MPQ gameplay.

In the events since the OML change implementation: I still notice a frequent distribution of players relying on OML early in events, and later in events or higher-score opponents seem to have combinations of the most powerful characters in the current meta-game.

Regardless of character changes, regardless of restrictions... there will always be characters that are stronger in the current metagame.  The overwhelming majority of players would prefer to invest their time/money into characters which offer the best return on investment.  Thus, the most useful, most powerful, most versatile characters will invariably become more ubiquitous. 



Summarizing:
Reactive restrictions (aka "nerfing") on these characters is myopic, unfair to the player base, and invariably redistributes ubiquity to the next-best option.


Thank you again Jonny for taking action, and giving a voice to what many of us have all been saying and experiencing in-game, and among game-chats.   I think it is important for the community to have a voice rather than frustrations falling on deaf-ears outside of the forums.

we can only hope that developers will read, consider, and react appropriately to this situation and future situations moving forward.

 

Very Respectfully,

…:::   SeveredSynapse   :::…

Roster: https://mpq.gamependium.com/rosters/SeveredSynapse/

Jonny1Punch

SEVERED SYNAPSE!!!!!!!!!! Thank you SO MUCH FOR THAT!!!!!! Amazing and beautiful words thank you for that amazing support brother. I salute you.

i also agree 100% with everything you said and really hope the devs read this and take notice. Incredibly well spoken .

Phaserhawk

Jonny1Punch said:

Nickaraxnos you are absolutely correct and the legal avenue is being pursued aggressively at the moment. 

One avenue could be if there is proof that said they would never nerf a 5* which there appears to be, in WI verbal contracts are binding. Therefore if they essentially guaranteed this and you purchase based on this assumption they have violated state law regardless of what their EULA agreement states the created an addendum to it by making that verbal statement. Just saying 

beyonderbub

Phaserhawk said:

One avenue could be if there is proof that said they would never nerf a 5* which there appears to be, in WI verbal contracts are binding. 

IMO, this is forum hearsay attributed to misinterpretations of what was said by company reps in a promo video back in the day. Also people here quickly forget how they nerfed Silver Surfer hard after initial release because he was destroying maxxed 4 stars in a season demo 3-vs. 1 node back when they had those for you to test drive the new character release. 

Daredevil217

beyonderbub said:

Phaserhawk said:

One avenue could be if there is proof that said they would never nerf a 5* which there appears to be, in WI verbal contracts are binding. 

IMO, this is forum hearsay attributed to misinterpretations of what was said by company reps in a promo video back in the day. Also people here quickly forget how they nerfed Silver Surfer hard after initial release because he was destroying maxxed 4 stars in a season demo 3-vs. 1 node back when they had those for you to test drive the new character release. 

Not only that, but D3 is protected (I'd imagine) because no one here purchased OML outright. The only thing you can buy with dollars is virtual currency (lots and lots of it) and hope RNG is kind. They don't guarantee anything.  Essentially they are selling virtual currency to purchase virtual lotto tickets. 

Phaserhawk

Daredevil217 said:

beyonderbub said:

Phaserhawk said:

One avenue could be if there is proof that said they would never nerf a 5* which there appears to be, in WI verbal contracts are binding. 

IMO, this is forum hearsay attributed to misinterpretations of what was said by company reps in a promo video back in the day. Also people here quickly forget how they nerfed Silver Surfer hard after initial release because he was destroying maxxed 4 stars in a season demo 3-vs. 1 node back when they had those for you to test drive the new character release. 

Not only that, but D3 is protected (I'd imagine) because no one here purchased OML outright. The only thing you can buy with dollars is virtual currency (lots and lots of it) and hope RNG is kind. They don't guarantee anything.  Essentially they are selling virtual currency to purchase virtual lotto tickets. 

Not completely agreeing or disagreeing but if you purchased covers with cp and spent money for that purpose only, then yes you did purchase covers outright and trust me the 720cp is cheaper than hoping for a cover. And the hearsay and misinformation may be correct but if that was said depending on the state a verbal promise such as that is legally binding. Essentially they created an addendum to the EULA if indeed that was what was stated. So while under EULA they would be covered that is an addition to it thus if such a thing was said and the state that they made the comment in does allow verbal contexts/agreements to be binding then they are in violation of their own EULA contract and thus open to litigation if one chooses to do so. 

beyonderbub

This seems like an exercise in futility and would most likely fall under the category of frivolous lawsuits if actually pursued.  Waste of time and money all around. The player enjoyed years matching gems for a digital puzzle game. He just chose to pay more than others into it. He wasn't forced to do so.  If this scenario provides grounds to file a suit, then same can be said for all players who "invested" in Ragnarok, 2* and 3* Magneto, 3*Spider-Man, XForce Wolverine, and She-Thor when they were the 'it' character or combo dominating the MPQ meta at the time they were nerfed. 

Daredevil217

Phaserhawk said:

Daredevil217 said:

beyonderbub said:

Phaserhawk said:

One avenue could be if there is proof that said they would never nerf a 5* which there appears to be, in WI verbal contracts are binding. 

IMO, this is forum hearsay attributed to misinterpretations of what was said by company reps in a promo video back in the day. Also people here quickly forget how they nerfed Silver Surfer hard after initial release because he was destroying maxxed 4 stars in a season demo 3-vs. 1 node back when they had those for you to test drive the new character release. 

Not only that, but D3 is protected (I'd imagine) because no one here purchased OML outright. The only thing you can buy with dollars is virtual currency (lots and lots of it) and hope RNG is kind. They don't guarantee anything.  Essentially they are selling virtual currency to purchase virtual lotto tickets. 

Not completely agreeing or disagreeing but if you purchased covers with cp and spent money for that purpose only, then yes you did purchase covers outright and trust me the 720cp is cheaper than hoping for a cover. And the hearsay and misinformation may be correct but if that was said depending on the state a verbal promise such as that is legally binding. Essentially they created an addendum to the EULA if indeed that was what was stated. So while under EULA they would be covered that is an addition to it thus if such a thing was said and the state that they made the comment in does allow verbal contexts/agreements to be binding then they are in violation of their own EULA contract and thus open to litigation if one chooses to do so. 

But is there a way to buy CP outright, or does it come as a bonus when you buy HP in bulk?  Also he's at level 515. That is WAY more than the 10 covers he could possibly "buy but not really buy" (you have to pull the first three and every champ level after 13 covers).  Possibly 10 purchased out of I believe 78 covers.

nickaraxnos

I am not a lawyer. Having said that i think the case is if a court will accept 2 things
1) does the digital goods after purchaced by the players through money belongs to players? 
2) does the company not only accept the money but also encourages the players to spend a lot in order to purchace rare heroes?

And one more arguement. The difference in this case is the big amount of money the company took from the player without warning him that this might be bad for him. 
To give an example. You go to the barman and you ask for some drinks. You paid for them you can have them. But after one point the barman has to stop giving you more cause you might harm yourself. If he not only warn you to stop but encourages you to spend more he is in trouble.

In the digital world of games we have the example of play station. Before you start playing there is a warning to make short breaks after a few hours to protect yourself.

Finally, there is the after sales problem. The company took happily a very big amount of money from the player but when the player seems dissatisfied for some reasons they dont give a tinnykitty about it

beyonderbub

Daredevil217 said:

But is there a way to buy CP outright, or does it come as a bonus when you buy HP in bulk?  Also he's at level 515. That is WAY more than the 10 covers he could possibly "buy but not really buy" (you have to pull the first three and every champ level after 13 covers).  Possibly 10 purchased out of I believe 78 covers.

There is no way to buy CP directly; it comes as a bonus for in game currency purchases. You can maximize your return on CP through buy clubs. Get together with 19 other like minded individuals and blow 3-5 grand on Stark Salaries and get up to 7000 CP. That's 350 Legendary Token Pulls back when only OML, PHX and Silver Surfer were in the pool. Easy enough to get tons of champ level OMLs

carrion_pigeons

I think if there is a case to be made legally speaking, if can't really be based on anything that could be undone by reverting their design. They very clearly have it spelled out in their EULA that they reserve the right to change digital objects at will. Whether someone said something in a dev video or not, the fact that every player agreed to that condition before even being allowed to play, let alone spend, means that suit has no legs at all. 

There could be a case for material harm resulting from induced addiction, or something like that, but that's a pretty nuclear option, since if it went anywhere it has every chance of just killing the game outright (although it would set what I consider to be a very positive and valuable precedent), and anyway it has no potential to get you back your OML or anything like it.

Phaserhawk

carrion pigeons said:

I think if there is a case to be made legally speaking, if can't really be based on anything that could be undone by reverting their design. They very clearly have it spelled out in their EULA that they reserve the right to change digital objects at will. Whether someone said something in a dev video or not, the fact that every player agreed to that condition before even being allowed to play, let alone spend, means that suit has no legs at all. 

There could be a case for material harm resulting from induced addiction, or something like that, but that's a pretty nuclear option, since if it went anywhere it has every chance of just killing the game outright (although it would set what I consider to be a very positive and valuable precedent), and anyway it has no potential to get you back your OML or anything like it.

Agreed but again you would have to read it as we have the right to change digital objects at will but we won't nerf 5*'s since they added that clause by a verbal contract in addition to the EULA