Time Gem Season Updates *Updated (10/19/17)

1…2122242627…38

Comments

  • Bowgentle
    Bowgentle Posts: 7,926 Chairperson of the Boards
    mega ghost said:
    Bowgentle said:
    mega ghost said:
    The fact that I can't even see the upcoming season or System Reboot in-game yet is making me wonder if they've delayed the push because they're fine-tuning it up until the wire, either because a) they're responding to some feedback or b) they rushed this change and didn't have time to implement or message it properly.

    I'm hoping on a) but based on how this is unfolding it's probably b). 
    Neither.
    Season preview always goes live in a few hours from now.
    But doesn't the new season start today? For some reason I had it in my head that you could see the season preview the day before it begins.
    No, it's always only been a few hours.
  • mega ghost
    mega ghost Posts: 1,156 Chairperson of the Boards
    Bowgentle said:
    mega ghost said:
    Bowgentle said:
    mega ghost said:
    The fact that I can't even see the upcoming season or System Reboot in-game yet is making me wonder if they've delayed the push because they're fine-tuning it up until the wire, either because a) they're responding to some feedback or b) they rushed this change and didn't have time to implement or message it properly.

    I'm hoping on a) but based on how this is unfolding it's probably b). 
    Neither.
    Season preview always goes live in a few hours from now.
    But doesn't the new season start today? For some reason I had it in my head that you could see the season preview the day before it begins.
    No, it's always only been a few hours.
    In that case, I am mistaken!
  • Spudgutter
    Spudgutter Posts: 743 Critical Contributor
    edited October 2017
    corytutor said:
    As for not wanting to dignify things with responses, for someone too dignified to respond you've only mentioned it a handful of times already while the conversation has moved on. If anything you appear eager to address it. Repeatedly. 
    While i appreciate the clarification two posts above, this didnt need to be said. I have other things to do today, not hit refresh constantly and reply right then and there.  I check and respond to the posts that i want to reply to, regardless of where the discussion is.  That has zero bearing.  So if i say something about you that you take personal, and 15 comments are posted before you see it, you wouldn't comment because "the conversation moved on."

    Edit: now that I think about it, you basically did the same thing lol.  You could have left it at the clarification comment, but had to post more, even though the conversation moved on.

    I guess instead you would just go create a whole new thread to discuss your transgression? 
  • Philly484
    Philly484 Posts: 173 Tile Toppler
    Daredevil217 said:

    I'm not a developer. But as a psychologist I’d say the former is more important to the developers. Hooking people early, getting them resourced and invested is far more important than speeding up the end game for many reasons.

    The biggest from a psychology perspective is once they have you hooked/addicted it is much harder to leave if you are unhappy later. Look at any theory on dysfunctional relationships, sunk cost fallacy, cognitive dissonance theory and you can understand that people will put up with a lot once they feel they are invested.  We grip and complain but will still grind it out for Nightcrawler tomorrow.  Much easier for a new player to get curbstomped over and over in PVP, see that they have to roster, collect, and level 100's of characters in order to transition to the end game, and say "what's the point?".

    The second is purely speculation on my part, but 1) vaulting decisions 2) removing CP from progression 3) putting off CL126 for as long as possible, all tell me that perhaps it's intentional that they are trying to speed up the early game and slow down the late game which makes PERFECT sense.  You need to get people transitioning faster or else the light at the end of the tunnel isn't visible and people quit.  But if people at the top transition too fast then they either quit when they reach the ceiling and have no where to go (boredom), or we need to open up the 6* tier, which I really don't want.  Maybe, just maybe... the developers aren't incompetent fools, but are willing to break a couple eggs in order for the game to have longevity.  They also view the game on a larger scale than "how is my individual roster development impacted".

    Finally, I would like to say that by removing the 15 CP they are essentially slowing down everyone's progress, so it is not like other stuff they have done intentionally (A/B testing comes to mind) or unintentionally (bonus draw rates glitch that many missed out on)  where you suffer and someone else gains.  Obviously the people who were hitting 1200 suffer the most, but theoretically, this CP is being taken from EVERYONE.  So if the end game transition slows down, at least it slows down for everyone and it's not like your neighbors are now transitioning faster than you.  Just younger rosters get to catch up faster which is GOOD for the health of the game.

    Again, psychologically speaking it's easier for us to stomach stuff that impacts us negatively if we can just paint ourselves as victims and vilify others, but reality is much more complex.  Something to consider.

    I get what your saying from a psychological perspective, but as a Psychologist also who works with the demographic of individuals who are the primary targets of this game on a daily basis, the monetary gain of a quick buck early on, greatly effects the long term outcome of what a player values in the end. The devs may do (A/B) testing, but there has never been a clear cut answer as who is involved in the testing. While the majority of their player base may be newer player over vets, I would like to see the statistical number of how many of those new players keep playing up to a year, once they are unable to level or compete at higher levels of play due to lack of in game currency and ISO.

    If their intent is to form an "addict," so that they will spend copious amounts of money early on, a problem they run into is that numerous amounts of extraneous variables at play. IE i used to play Avengers Academy and was spending as much on it as I did this game, however I hit the pt. where I could not progress and the game grew dull, even with the introduction of new battle features and characters. It didn't keep my interest, even with the heavy investment at play, so I being an exception the sunk cost fallacy doesn't apply to me even with being invested in it as I was. I also am a League of Legends Player and spend vast amounts of money on that game, as I do this, and I understand completely their is no outward benefit to my spending habits other than it makes me happy and I just want to collect the new skins, this game and LoL are my two escapes from the busy reality of my life. Sunk cost Fallacy is only applicable if the newer players transition into the mindset "I've invested this much so I have to go on," but as the Millennial groups are showing from statistical data, Fads come and go more quickly, then in previous generations of players. Meaning millennial's don't care how much the spend, or what they invested in if the "newer, better thing" benefits them more they will drop the previous. Hence decline in Facebook user to now Twitter and Instagram users. Cohen, D. (2015) showed a decline in FB usage as early as 2015. My point this age group doesn't live in the same generational mind thought as players like veterans are and could drop the game as quickly as they  started it.

    On another note cognitive dissonance doesn't play a key role for veterans players as what beliefs are being contradicted here? The fact is they removed CP from progression and gave to top 10 only players across the board. Which from my perspective would decrease PVP cooperative competitiveness. The "everyone gets a trophy" ideology is the only thing that would make veterans contradict their beliefs, but the buddy system puts that to rest in and of itself. Climb to 40 by hitting your friend retaliations over and over then go back to pts play with baking and #. 

    While I see your pts to a degree I don't necessarily agree that the move they are making is going to benefit the developers long-term or newer players. It seems they need to meet a quarterly number, so in order to make they number they implement this, and as you have put above "spend more money initially" which increase their profit margins for a time, but then start to decline once again forcing them to make another adjustment. 
  • Xalthim
    Xalthim Posts: 46 Just Dropped In
    So, would it be that hard to give players the option to enter PVP on point system or wins system? Run both and let players decide at beginning of season which way they want to play.
  • corytutor
    corytutor Posts: 414 Mover and Shaker
    @Spudgutter

    I felt it needed said after you felt the need to mention my previous post several times over, and then commented as if you were above mentioning it. Its rather hypocritical and no longer had bearing on the conversation, giving the impression you had a gripe with me or my comment. 

    If i interpreted that incorrectly then my apologies though i think we both know that i didnt. 
  • Vhailorx
    Vhailorx Posts: 6,085 Chairperson of the Boards
    Philly: you think the majority of players are millenials?  (no snark.  I don't know one way or the other but would be verious curious to find out.)
  • Spudgutter
    Spudgutter Posts: 743 Critical Contributor
    corytutor said:
    @Spudgutter

    I felt it needed said after you felt the need to mention my previous post several times over, and then commented as if you were above mentioning it. Its rather hypocritical and no longer had bearing on the conversation, giving the impression you had a gripe with me or my comment. 

    If i interpreted that incorrectly then my apologies though i think we both know that i didnt. 
    This is getting off topic. I was discussing your post with someone else.  We were going back and forth, and my gripe with it, and that person's blanket approval of your statement.  I don't see the hypocrisy.

    You are very bad at giving apologies. I take no issue with people on the internet, just their statement.  I can just as easily dislike any particular comment a person makes, while liking their next. 
  • corytutor
    corytutor Posts: 414 Mover and Shaker
    You dont see saying you're above responding, while responding numerous times hypocritical? Not even a little? You seem smart enough to grasp that concept. 

    As for apologies, it was intended to be half booty and i thought it came across in the context. I honestly dont feel the need to apologize because you felt slighted by a comment that was never directed at you or because someone else agreed with it. You can deal with your feels over your misinterpretation on your own. 

    All that said i dont dislike you @Spudgutter.  Not at all. 




  • tiomono
    tiomono Posts: 1,654 Chairperson of the Boards
    Personally I did not hit even 800 on progression regularly so this is a welcome change. I also understand the frustration of bigger rosters that are not the biggest basically having 15 cp yoinked away.

    It's the exact same issue as vaulting in my mind. As a whole the player base got more progress on a select few 4's, but very little progress on all the rest. With this change as a whole more people will have access to better rewards while they take away something from another group. Over time if they don't like how it turns out they will change it just like they did vaulting.

    Nothing they do will ever be universally liked. Whether they should be more transparent with how they make decisions or not is another topic entirely but so far the changes they make seem to try and help as many people as possible. Some group will always take a hit, but it seems like they try and balance that out over time. Like with story mode finally getting scl based scaling to help out the 5* people. It's all give and take though.
  • Spudgutter
    Spudgutter Posts: 743 Critical Contributor
    corytutor said:
    You dont see saying you're above responding, while responding numerous times hypocritical? Not even a little? You seem smart enough to grasp that concept. 

    As for apologies, it was intended to be half booty and i thought it came across in the context. I honestly dont feel the need to apologize because you felt slighted by a comment that was never directed at you or because someone else agreed with it. You can deal with your feels over your misinterpretation on your own. 

    All that said i dont dislike you @Spudgutter.  Not at all. 




    Responding to you about your comment and responding to someone else, about your comment, are two different things imo.  I don't think I'm above anything, but saying i wouldnt dignify it with a response was probably a little arrogant sounding.

    Ok, cool.
  • tiomono
    tiomono Posts: 1,654 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited October 2017
    Spudgutter said:
    corytutor said:
    @Spudgutter

    I felt it needed said after you felt the need to mention my previous post several times over, and then commented as if you were above mentioning it. Its rather hypocritical and no longer had bearing on the conversation, giving the impression you had a gripe with me or my comment. 

    If i interpreted that incorrectly then my apologies though i think we both know that i didnt. 
    This is getting off topic. I was discussing your post with someone else.  We were going back and forth, and my gripe with it, and that person's blanket approval of your statement.  I don't see the hypocrisy.

    You are very bad at giving apologies. I take no issue with people on the internet, just their statement.  I can just as easily dislike any particular comment a person makes, while liking their next. 
    Case in point me and spud disagree alot over several issues. I agree with his general feeling on this topic though. I only dislike you a little spud...te he he.
  • Orion
    Orion Posts: 1,295 Chairperson of the Boards
    tiomono said:

    It's the exact same issue as vaulting in my mind. As a whole the player base got more progress on a select few 4's, but very little progress on all the rest. With this change as a whole more people will have access to better rewards while they take away something from another group. Over time if they don't like how it turns out they will change it just like they did vaulting.

    With vaulting, everyone got the same theoretical benefit to go with the detraction.  With this, a lot of people benefit, but some people just get screwed.  Not the same thing at all, and that's why some people are upset.
  • tiomono
    tiomono Posts: 1,654 Chairperson of the Boards
    Orion said:
    tiomono said:

    It's the exact same issue as vaulting in my mind. As a whole the player base got more progress on a select few 4's, but very little progress on all the rest. With this change as a whole more people will have access to better rewards while they take away something from another group. Over time if they don't like how it turns out they will change it just like they did vaulting.

    With vaulting, everyone got the same theoretical benefit to go with the detraction.  With this, a lot of people benefit, but some people just get screwed.  Not the same thing at all, and that's why some people are upset.
    Fair enough. 75% of my 4 stars still felt screwed under vaulting though.
  • Bloody_Marvel
    Bloody_Marvel Posts: 209 Tile Toppler
    Okay so, Gambit (Modern) has entered the packs, and can be set as Bonus Hero. The same goes for Rogue.

    But Gambit (Classic) hasn't entered latest 5*s? Why is that?
  • sinnerjfl
    sinnerjfl Posts: 1,276 Chairperson of the Boards
    Bloody Marvel said:
    Okay so, Gambit (Modern) has entered the packs, and can be set as Bonus Hero. The same goes for Rogue.

    But Gambit (Classic) hasn't entered latest 5*s? Why is that?
    5*'s follow a different rule for them being added to tokens. Its 2 weeks after their special store closes, in Gambit's case this will be Monday or Tuesday.
  • Philly484
    Philly484 Posts: 173 Tile Toppler
    Vhailorx said:
    Philly: you think the majority of players are millenials?  (no snark.  I don't know one way or the other but would be verious curious to find out.)
    I would like to know their age range as well. I am basing my assumption off of the classes I am teaching at my University, and statistical data of what age groups are playing video games on mobile or app games. 
  • The rockett
    The rockett Posts: 2,016 Chairperson of the Boards
    T-Minus 4 hours until Time Season with win total goes live......no info or details yet. 

Categories