Oops! I did it again! Profe$$$$or X situation 2.0

ThaRoadWarrior

In the end it won't affect me a ton either way, since you can still hit progression without it (assuming you can do the Challenging Node that many times), but i still think it's an OVERCLOCKED! move to put a required character in an event before they're readily available. Whether that's ST or a regular rotation event. 

I don't know if it was intentional or an accident, but there are a LOT of Northstar covers available in progression right now though; I came out of release with 4 covers, and i'm sitting on 9 (one was an organic pull) with one more available to me at the top of Simulator. So even though it was a very early use of him, there was actually progression-based opportunity for me to get what I needed to do ST this time. I'll be curious if that happens again.

HoundofShadow

What's wrong with that sentence? For example, when the dev allowed 1 for 1 exchange of latest 5* cover, it was an example of goodwill. The players were made aware that it will not last forever. When it was "taken away", it was expected to be included into the game as a feature after Saved Covers was rolled out.

When Places of Power gave out 8 LTs, players were happy. In the subsequent new PvE (Sinister 600?), players were down on this event due to the "nerf" of rewards. The devs get called names because Sinister 600 didn't give 8 LTs.

They get taken for granted for being nice and generous. Their generosity are expected to be converted into a feature or daily occurrence in the game.

Assuming that 27/2 requires the latest 5*, players have to make choices. You miss out the 5* nodes for one event, or you can spend CP or HP to get the cover. Nothing in life is going to be perfect. Right now, players don't want that to happen because spending 500 CP is a terrible idea and buying 40 packs are p2w. The only correct way to implement latest 5* as essential is after players have the chances to make multiple pulls from CP store. Players don't want to adapt to changes like this.

tiomono

https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/comment/914052#Comment_914052

You could call it hypocrisy if hound claimed that he was helping to keep game the alive but also making the statement that he does not pay. If some forum members could get over their bad opinion of hound they would see he has some valid points just like many other members of this forum.

It does nothing helpful to constantly trash someone's viewpoint and reply to them in sarcastic or aggressive means.

If the new 5* will be required before it is in a cp store that would stink for sure. If bringing attention to dissatisfaction with that possibility could get the devs to not do it that would be great. But we still do not have solid facts that they are doing it.

Maybe when that happened with the professor they saw a spike in spending. So maybe they would want to try it again to see if that was a fluke or if spenders are ok with that.

We do not have access to the data that the devs do. They will continue to make decisions based on that data. So what may seem like a horrible decision to many players may actually be paying off for them if enough players support it.

DAZ0273

https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/comment/914223#Comment_914223

Hound is calling upon others to do what he himself will not, at least by the history of his posts on these boards. That is the definition of "Hypocrisy".

Not sure I "trash" him otherwise, nor do I have any agenda against him. If Hound feels that is the case then I would assure him there are no ill feelings and apologise for any "hurt feelings". He doesn't strike me as particularly caring what others think of him but those are my words not his and I stand to be corrected otherwise.

But calling a spade a spade when it is in fact a spade over a particular subject seems reasonable enough to me. If Fight4thedream believes otherwise then I will be suitably sanctioned and rightfully so, otherwise I prosper that my post is neither sarcasm nor untrue.

Hound is acutely aware of his behaviour on the boards with regard to blanket insinuations/accusations against his fellow players but can also contribute useful and welcome additions also. Hound though also has a history of calling out players to spend more whilst being a FTP. He is of course welcome to take such a stance spinning it in such a way as to state that a "fair profit" should be the goal of any company aspiring to capitalist principles but that doesn't give him a free run to criticise others views or approach to the game when he knows he is FTP and contributes nothing to the company bottom line.

bluewolf

@tiomono

Speculation time......

The HP store idea seemed to work pretty well with Professor as people burned their hoards and spent, probably due to a combination of him being a very good 5 and being essential in the following event.

Since then we have seen 2....less exciting 5's (Carnage is good for annoyance but probably didn't drive anyone to spend on that store; Sinister has been called as a mediocre 5) and BRB (who at least one person whaled from the HP store to champ status).

So my guess is their data showed that 2/3 of the stores since Prof have been failures on the revenue-raising front.

If their goal was "Make people spend money" - which it is, after all - there are two choices:

1.  Make each new 5 absolutely meta or very good so you are in a constant state of power creep, and people choose to chase the NEW5 in the HP store to try to keep a competitive advantage over other players.

2.  Use the other tool (access to points/nodes) to drive people to want to chase at least a cover or two of the NEW5 wherein your competitive advantage is due to access to that node and its points.

As I've said the fact that you can get half a cover in PVE for a 5, if you choose to play in 10, is pretty good and could be presented by the devs as a "trade-off" - if they cared to make an argument for their decisions - for making you probably-unable to fully play one event without a serious commitment of resources or dollars.  

Anyway maybe it's better to have an event every 4-6 weeks, or whatever, where you are shut out vs being in a constant state of power-creep in the 5 tier.

Bryan Lambert

https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/comment/914179#Comment_914179

In other words, freemium game players resoond positively to positive changes in the in-game economy and negatively to negative changes in the in-game economy. I’m not sure why this is being mean to the devs.

Ultimately, yes, they’ll make more money putting the screws to the player base than they would if they, say, got me to go back to VIP by adjusting the effort to reward ratio in my favor But there’s an upper limit on that - a pont at which the effort stops being worth it and nobody’s playing anymore.

Colognoisseur

https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/comment/914028#Comment_914028

I can’t respond in general since you couched your points with the passive-aggressive qualifier “generally speaking”. Especially when it was my motivation being questioned by you. But since some of that vaunted bluntness you are so proud of seems to have been lost in translation let me deal with your response in order of the post.

1. On this issue my motivation is crystal clear I would like more communication about lots of things. I have ceased to spend a lot of time trying to change things because I finally realized it isn’t going to change. As for them changing things it can be frustrating to plan ahead for something to be coming only to have it changed. Bottom line I would rather have the sneak peek threads even if they make changes. The reason for the OP was mainly to see if it wasn’t too late to change to what we have had since profe$$or x release. If not it was an equal attempt to make players who want to plan ahead the awareness it was happening.
2. Ive been playing this game since its debut. I have never been unable to play an event because of anything. I was resigned that if rng did not produce a px cover I was going to have that change. I got lucky and got one on my second 40-pack. I think it is reasonable to want to play every event completely. You think differently. I can’t extrapolate into saying generally as you did because I don’t know that.
3. That has never applied to me I respond to where the best rewards are which has required significant changes in my play style. It is currently happening with cl10 I am playing PvE as progression only and enjoying it. I don’t have to play quite as hard in pvp to receive better rewards. Again that is me I don’t presume to speak generally because I don’t know.
4. Again absolutely incorrect when applied to me. Trade offs are fine with me in fact I’ll say some of them have allowed the game to still be here 6years plus and counting. Again that’s me I don’t presume to speak generally because I don’t know.
5. You will never find a post where I suggested any of those things. You will find a post where I suggested expressing your displeasure in the review section of the relevant mobile store. That was an alternative to the things you mentioned. It seems like it was one which some other players also thought was worth doing. Did it contribute to the health of the game? It did play a part in resolving the Shardpocalypse. I think that is healthy but I don’t presume to speak generally because I don’t know.
6. That is a joke when applied to me. I am loving everything about cl10 PvE including the very challenging enemy levels and teams. The resources being used are commensurate with the effort. I would like more but I don’t presume to speak generally because I don’t know.
7. I think I’ve bought 90% of the bundles I’ve been offered I think the ones I have purchased have been great. I will buy more but I don’t presume to speak generally because I don’t know.
8. Responding to your premise of “goodwill doesn’t keep the game alive, money does” directed at me there aren’t enough laughing emojis to put down to know how hysterical that comment is. I will continue to spend because the game provides good value to me for what I spend. Again that is just me I don’t presume to speak generally because I don’t know.

Finally I was thinking you had failed on being blunt. Then I looked up the definition. The primary meaning is:

Having a worn-down edge or point; not sharp

I retract my earlier statement this entire response by you is Exhibit A of the primary definition of blunt.

HoundofShadow

Let me qualify the "Goodwill doesn't keep the game alive" statement. When I ask players to spend more, it's meant for those players who demand devs to rain down resources on them, and yet they continue to spend a small amount of money on the game. Often, this can be summarised as "If the devs don't do what I want them to do, I will stop spending money, spend lesser or get other players to stop spending on the game." Some of them will then term this expectation of "generosity" as a goodwill to the players but they continue to keep their pocket tight. I will see myself as a hypocrite if I demand the devs to do things my way, get players to boycott the game and leave terrible reviews simply because the devs are not listening to my instructions, and yet I don't spend money.

I do agree that more communication are definitely welcomed. However, if players continue to nitpick, continue to expect the devs to do things their ways, continue the dev to be perfect, and continue to be sarcastic, I don't think the dev would want to communicate more than what's necessary. The last incident with the dev in discord has more or less caused even lesser communication in this forum, in my opinion. You might say they deserve everything they got, but with this attitude, I don't think this place is a good outlet for open communication.

I think players in here are stressed out because they can't let go of imperfection. The dev, I believe, mentioned (about 1.5-2 years ago) something like players would be happier if they are not always focus on completing everything. If you put the pressure on yourself, and you can't achieve your goal, don't expect the dev to change the rules just to make you happy. Likewise, if the upcoming 5* requires the latest 5*, then adapt. I have times where I can't get the essential, I simply adjust my goals. In life, nothing goes your way every single time.

As far as being blunt is concerned, I have a group of lovely fans who like to flag my posts. So, the last time I was blunt (without "insulting" the players at all), my post got flagged quickly. I was merely suggesting the dev to push back the implementation of SCL 10 because the responses were largely negative.

As far as generalising is concerned, I can't name names, that's why I have to generalise. If my posts hit your nerve, chances are, it's meant for you. If it's not, ignore it.

DAZ0273

HoundofShadow said

As far as being blunt is concerned, I have a group of lovely fans who like to flag my posts

Maybe they are just overenthusiastic Big Bang Theory fans?

fight4thedream

***Mod note: Locking thread as it has gone off topic.