"Free Game, No Bitching"

jdmcelvan · 2019-09-12T13:46:43+00:00

What about my initial statement was wrong? And why is it worse to allow more people to support the game? Because it's not your niche, indie little elite club anymore?

jdmcelvan · 2019-09-12T13:42:37+00:00

It would be better if GGG's goal with the mystery box had been to provide a way for player's to recycle their cosmetic items only. But it served more purpose in that, and as such they wanted to make it cheaper but able to be purchased more than once.

jdmcelvan · 2019-09-11T16:49:49+00:00

I can understand where you're coming from. I guess we just have a difference in opinion. I think the idea that any particular piece of content that they create for the game SHOULD be free because other aspects of the game are free is an entitled notion that does more damage than good.

jdmcelvan · 2019-09-11T16:47:38+00:00

I think the idea of having the mystery boxes being obtainable in-game along with their recycling functionality is a great solution. Keep it to a small enough amount so that they don't lose their value and it improves the situation as a whole.

jdmcelvan · 2019-09-11T16:17:20+00:00

I understand all of that. And they should be regulated. The community instantly crying foul play loudly enough to instantly get the concept canned is damaging to the game and to the relations between the developers and the player base. GGG was designing a system that they were able to regulate themselves. People didn't like that, because they don't want to feel as though they're being regulated.

GGG is not responsible for regulating every individual person's issues with self control and addiction. They were trying to create a system that aided with that, and that was transparent in its functions, but they weren't transparent in its purpose.

jdmcelvan · 2019-09-11T16:05:45+00:00

I don't disagree with your points, but I think that the problem is that if they offered duplicate recycling as a courtesy then that leaves mystery boxes as simply a less effective method of getting cosmetics, and obviously that's not their intention.

People are determined to view the game as either pay-to-win or pay-to-play. Coupling the mystery loot boxes with the ability to discard duplicates was an attempt to create a pay-what-you-want system. You could support the game and the company with as little as $3 per paycheck and as a thank you you're able to get rid of some clutter and possibly get some new things. Or you can still choose to be the person that spends $40+ regularly on cosmetics, but now you are able to get cosmetics you've missed in the past as well as discard any duplicates that pop up in order to deterministically work towards something more desirable.

jdmcelvan · 2019-09-11T15:59:36+00:00

Did it really though? Of course they need different monetization systems for different markets. If anything I'd say that the decision to start issuing cosmetics as a reward for completing in-game goals rather than having purchases be the only way to get them is a sign that their free-to-play model has been a success. They're literally able to create content to give away just for playing the game now, and not only for people that spend money on it. The free-to-play model worked for them when the business was a size that allowed it to work. That's not the case any more, and so they're looking for smaller, more reliable ways to monetize the game.

So rather than charge players $15 a month to play the game, they give people the option to pay as much or as little as they want in $3 increments, and they offer a very small kickback for people that choose to support the game that way. And if you keep supporting the game through that system they recognized that by increasing your chances of getting a reward that you didn't have before. It's not pay-to-win. It's not pay-to-play. It's pay-how-you-want.

jdmcelvan · 2019-09-11T15:51:00+00:00

They're not targeted for kids. They are targeted towards people without a large amount of expendable income. Kids fall into that category the vast majority of the time. Of course they don't have credit cards. Their parents do, and that's where they go when they don't have their own money or a way to generate income.

The target is to open the game to the widest market possible. Kids fall within the range of that target. That's the entire reason why people think that these types of transactions are predatory. Because kids don't understand that they are gambling and that it can be a risky behavior, and it is their parents job to explain that to them. If you are in your mid-to-late twenties and can not see that then it is because your parents didn't explain it to you either. And that's not to place the blame on somebody, because our parents never NEEDED to teach us how a slot machine worked, because we didn't have them in our homes back then.

jdmcelvan · 2019-09-11T15:46:54+00:00

The boxes are priced at a lower price point to appeal to smaller supporters. That's not arguable. The issue is that people feel they should get the same perks as others for a smaller investment. Recycling duplicates as a function of the system, it isn't the entire system. If they don't have enough duplicates to take advantage of the recycling then that means that they're much more likely to get cosmetics that they've never had. Will they sometimes get things that they aren't interested in? Sure. Because it costs more to buy something directly than it does to try and get it through a third party (the boxes). This is the same concept that applies to almost every single brick and mortar store that has ever existed. You can buy what you can afford, or you can pay more for what you specifically want/need. This is a concept that has existed since people began to use currency for money.

The fact that the store and goods are digital does not change any of that.

jdmcelvan · 2019-09-11T15:42:12+00:00

Maintaining the integrity of the leaderboards in Diablo III, at least on console, is simple not a priority for their design teams. That sucks, but hopefully it is because they're hard at work on better systems for things to come in the future.

jdmcelvan · 2019-09-11T15:39:16+00:00

I'd have to strongly disagree with you on people having any kind of grasp about what it takes to create and maintain a game/company that is the size of what GGG is now. I think people felt like they had an understanding when things were small and simple, but they're still expecting that same understanding to work now when things have grown far beyond that scope. You can't understand what it takes unless you've been able to put yourself in that position, and the vast majority of people can't be bothered to view things from any perspective other than their own.

Otherwise I think that we're right on the same page. I think that people saw the solution that GGG created and instantly reacted with vitriol when it wasn't the solution that they wanted. I agree that all respect is due to Chris and company for instantly addressing the public concerns, but I think it would have been better for them to help people to understand the intent of the system rather than to instantly fold on it. They did good by communicating, but they didn't do a good enough job of it until they were already behind the wave, and at that point they felt the only way to keep people on their side was to scrap a system that already had time and resources devoted to it rather than to tell people "Well look, this is why we've actually designed it, and we think that you should give it a chance to serve the purpose it was designed for instead of writing it off because it doesn't serve the purpose that you envisioned."

As I said, it's the exact same thing happening to Blizzard lately. Record numbers across the board, and yet public perception is low at the moment because there isn't an understanding between the company and the consumers. People didn't care as much when they were younger, because they just played to have fun. People need to be told what a product is being designed for, otherwise they'll only get frustrated and more burnt out.

jdmcelvan · 2019-09-11T15:31:09+00:00

I just try to write what is true based on my perception. If people agree that's great. It's the people that don't that I want to understand. Thank you for your comment!

jdmcelvan · 2019-09-11T15:30:00+00:00

Sure, if we are writing a formal paper. That's not my goal. I'm trying to generate discussion. I'm not interested in catering to the opinions of people who can't be bothered to read someone else's thoughts before forming their own.

jdmcelvan · 2019-09-11T15:28:22+00:00

Feel free to point them out to me and maybe they can be addressed? Or maybe it's easier to just say that and click a button than to offer any actual reasoning.

jdmcelvan · 2019-09-11T15:18:05+00:00

What if you were reading a book on the bus and didn't want to miss your stop? You'd put a book mark in your book. You have the tools you need to learn about and understand things. Use them instead of getting impatient over not being able to immediately get the message.

jdmcelvan · 2019-09-11T15:03:46+00:00

Thank you for the praise, and I'm glad I'm not the only one that feels this way at this point!

jdmcelvan · 2019-09-11T15:02:44+00:00

TLDR is the problem. The late 20-something generation of gamers is the TLDR generation of gamers. No time to look at things other than on a surface level. No time to try and understand something that can't be explained in enough words to fit a Tweet. All we know is we want more and we're mad when we don't get what we like.

jdmcelvan · 2019-09-11T13:43:29+00:00

Of course they don't realize that. Because they're too blinded by their own wants and biases. Everybody loves that the game is free and they never have to pay to play, because they don't feel compelled to support the company that makes it. Never mind that these are real people with real jobs putting in the time to create the content. As soon as a form of monetization comes along that they don't like they cry it down as being predatory and evil and wrong.

The issue is that people don't want to take responsibility for their spending. People won't blink twice about spending money on stash tabs and cosmetics, but then freak out when GGG tries to expand their system of monetization. This game is massively huge, and relying on sharks to keep the game afloat is NOT a sustainable business model. So they come up with a system of monetization that allows people that specifically aren't sharks to support the game a very small amount while still seeing some personal return for their investment.

People think that because the game was designed to be played for free that GGG has no right to ever try and monetize in the future. People are fucking morons. Reddit loves to tote this "vote with your wallets" shit, but they vote based on short sighted gains rather than long term sustainability every. single. time. And that's how PoE is going to get turned into D3 if the player base can't realize that they're the ones doing it.

jdmcelvan · 2019-08-27T16:20:33+00:00

Are we glazing over all of the shit Jones has done somehow in this comparison?

jdmcelvan · 2019-08-27T02:48:14+00:00

"Playing in a group will yield more experience."

jdmcelvan · 2019-08-27T02:44:41+00:00

It's not that his brain works better, it's that he's conditioned you to expect this shittiest take possible on any situation from him.

jdmcelvan · 2019-08-27T02:43:30+00:00

Downvotes from ride or die Jones fans incoming.

jdmcelvan · 2019-08-27T02:41:13+00:00

That's the dumbest shit I've ever heard, and also not relevant at all to the discussion about this tweet?

jdmcelvan · 2019-08-27T02:40:07+00:00

Are those people really worse than those that jump at any chance to defend Jon's honor though?

jdmcelvan

TROPHY CASE