Nah, pressure definitely helps, it did with the specialty vendors
that was a mistake from too little forethought... that is different than a cash shop that has been in the works for months if not years... besides... as i told eme when the specialty vendors thing came out... there wouldnt have been such a huge backlash if they had given ppl a weeks notice that the vendors were going to be removed... instead of announcing it a few hours before the shutdown.
Wrong. A very large number of people hate double dipping cash shops, just as a lot of thoughtless children and younger gamers, don't understand why it's bad, and actually argue in favor of paying more money for things.
You have no way of knowing what quantity of people are opposed to it. None of us do. Even EME doesn't.
I know how many NA mmorpgs that tried it, failed. All but one.
Failed in what fashion? How many? Which ones?
I've asked multiple times, but the only answer is get is "Well, Aion put up P2W and it failed!". While Aion going that route is certainly sucky, I have yet to see any "proof" that 1) Vanity-only Cash shops in P2P games caused irreparable damage to the game and it goes under or 2) That all P2P MMOs that start off with vanity shops ends up then changing to P2W.
1. Champions, terrible word of mouth caused low pop servers for three years, until went free to play.
2. Star Trek Online Released 2010, within months had "come back to us" promotions and went free to play a year and half later.
3. Age of Conan. Released 2008, struggled with terrible word of mouth until it too went free to play .
There is no proof that NA 'vanity only' cash shops have failed, because the only one to do so, can succeed while taking a dump in its players' mouths at this point.
Arguably, nothing sold in any of those cash shops mentioned was required to enjoy the game. Hell people said the same thing about them that you are, about this game's shop. OPTIONAL. Vanity or not.
Cash shops don't belong in subscription based games. They were created for free to play, and only the most greedy publishers include them on top of subs, people like Bobby Kotick who said " want to take the joy out of game development", and wishes games were even more expensive. (actual statements of his)
Those are the kind of people who promote these shops, and what they think of you as a customer.
Vanity or not, cash shops in American games don't do well. People think because WoW did they have the same kind of unique clout.
1. Champions, terrible word of mouth caused low pop servers for three years, until went free to play.
2. Star Trek Online Released 2010, within months had "come back to us" promotions and went free to play a year and half later.
3. Age of Conan. Released 2008, struggled with terrible word of mouth until it too went free to play .
There is no proof that NA 'vanity only' cash shops have failed, because the only one to do so, can succeed while taking a dump in its players' mouths at this point.
Arguably, nothing sold in any of those cash shops mentioned was required to enjoy the game. Hell people said the same thing about them that you are, about this game's shop. OPTIONAL. Vanity or not.
Cash shops don't belong in subscription based games. They were created for free to play, and only the most greedy publishers include them on top of subs, people like Bobby Kotick who said " want to take the joy out of game development", and wishes games were even more expensive. (actual statements of his)
Those are the kind of people who promote these shops, and what they think of you as a customer.
Vanity or not, cash shops in American games don't do well. People think because WoW did they have the same kind of unique clout.
I wasn't aware that any of those 3 had vanity shops? Also, I don't consider a game as "failing" just because it didn't end of being as popular as WoW, or even if it goes F2P. IMO, a game hasn't "failed" until they can no longer turn enough profit to keep their servers open at all.
EQ2 has had a rather large cash shop for many years. They only recently went to a semi-F2P model (sub optional, limited F2P mode). Seemed to work out fine for them.
Sorry, I just disagree with the whole "Cash shops belong only in F2P games" train of thought. I believe that line of thinking is just the way of the past. Things evolve. I'm fine with that. Frankly, as I've mentioned in many posts, I don't view it any differently than paid expansions. That's content they make, that is withheld from anyone who doesn't pay RL money for it. People have been accepting of that for years and years. But somehow offering fluff "content" for RL money is a sign of the Apocalypse. I don't get it, but I also understand that not everyone thinks the same.
Excuse me if I've missed any response, but I've been under the impression that all of us that are disgruntled about "Premium Items" would be addressed soon. Can you give us an ETA for this address please?
There will be no response to the 56 (?) people who +1 or /signed the petition.
Please post your request in the ' petition to remove cash shop' and let the mods do
their jods.
im not arguing in favor of paying more money for things... but these are VANITY items... if you dont want em... dont buy em... the ppl who want them will buy them... you pay for your subscription... which allows you to play the game... dont expect to get extra. when you pay to get into a theme park, you expect to have to pay for food... this is the same way.
Yes you are. You're saying that an arbitrarily chosen optional item, is acceptable to be removed from the game we're all paying for, and sold extra. But so much of this game is already "optional". So what's the difference? Other than some corporate clown decided to take advantage of gamers with obsessive spending habits and screw everyone else out of content they may enjoy.
You're arguing in favor of content, no matter how minor, being removed from the game, and sold at outrageous prices on top of a subscription fee, and box sale.
To my knowledge, when new rides come out at amusement parks, they don't set them aside and make them optional rides for extra money.
I mean is paying one fifth the price of the entire game, worth one weapon skin, that only applies to one character?
Weapon skins on XBL don't even cost this much, and that [filtered] is run by Microsoft!
At least when Blizzard decided to be Activision's private fan f***ing, money vacuum, they had the small decency to make all their cash crap account bound.
this "content" was never in the game... it was never content... it was always optional... since it was never in the game... it was never removed from the game... meaning im perfectly content continuing to pay for the game i decided to pay for and not pay extra money on things i dont really care for... do i want free weapon skins? sure... but im not going to [filtered] to my mommy that the company is somehow doing something wrong by charging for things they are clearly already making money from.
What's your point? It's developed FOR the game,and then set aside. Every mmorpg has content updates not on the disc. That's the nature of the genre.
You're being glib. The point is, everything is being designed after the fact. So what makes these skins for instance, so different, that they should be set aside and sold for 1/5th the asking price of the entire game EACH?
I mean according to your logic, everything that is applied to the game after release, is fair game to be charged for.
No, you're not going to "[filtered] to your mommy". You're going to come to these forums, and [filtered] to people, who refuse to draw the line exactly where you do.
It's difficult to tout yourself as a mature, level headed gamer, when you'e doing the exact same thing they are, only from the opposite direction. Like you pat yourself on the back, for being above [filtered]ing, but you're more than willing to go the opposite route, and actually [filtered] at people who are trying to SAVE YOU MONEY.
That's worse!
This is a business, you can use all the fanboy buzzwords like "entitlement" all you want, but telling a company what they need to do, to get our money and what we won't pay for, is our rights as consumers.
If it's not important to you, then get out of the way.
1. Champions, terrible word of mouth caused low pop servers for three years, until went free to play.
2. Star Trek Online Released 2010, within months had "come back to us" promotions and went free to play a year and half later.
3. Age of Conan. Released 2008, struggled with terrible word of mouth until it too went free to play .
There is no proof that NA 'vanity only' cash shops have failed, because the only one to do so, can succeed while taking a dump in its players' mouths at this point.
Arguably, nothing sold in any of those cash shops mentioned was required to enjoy the game. Hell people said the same thing about them that you are, about this game's shop. OPTIONAL. Vanity or not.
Cash shops don't belong in subscription based games. They were created for free to play, and only the most greedy publishers include them on top of subs, people like Bobby Kotick who said " want to take the joy out of game development", and wishes games were even more expensive. (actual statements of his)
Those are the kind of people who promote these shops, and what they think of you as a customer.
Vanity or not, cash shops in American games don't do well. People think because WoW did they have the same kind of unique clout.
I wasn't aware that any of those 3 had vanity shops? Also, I don't consider a game as "failing" just because it didn't end of being as popular as WoW, or even if it goes F2P. IMO, a game hasn't "failed" until they can no longer turn enough profit to keep their servers open at all.
EQ2 has had a rather large cash shop for many years. They only recently went to a semi-F2P model (sub optional, limited F2P mode). Seemed to work out fine for them.
Sorry, I just disagree with the whole "Cash shops belong only in F2P games" train of thought. I believe that line of thinking is just the way of the past. Things evolve. I'm fine with that. Frankly, as I've mentioned in many posts, I don't view it any differently than paid expansions. That's content they make, that is withheld from anyone who doesn't pay RL money for it. People have been accepting of that for years and years. But somehow offering fluff "content" for RL money is a sign of the Apocalypse. I don't get it, but I also understand that not everyone thinks the same.
I agree with this. The game isn't dying just because a few people don't like the cash shop.
Bottom line here is that while any publisher can choose to ignore their customers when a fair percentage of that customer-base is upset by something tha said publisher has done, it's not very smart to do so. They apportion a lot of $ to marketing, promotion etc. This kind of controversy will be damaging them. They really do need to avoid ignoring us. This year is particularly abundant with competitors for a company like EME. They need goodwill and friends and contented customers. Awell thought-out statement would have great value to EME.
Hmmm, the theme park analogy was quite good. I agree with it thoroughly but with a different wording. You paid to enter the theme park, but you still have to pay extra for a souvenir. Its entirely optional if you buy this souvenir in a theme park just as it is in a video game. Just like most dlc for games. you dont need to buy it but you can if you so desire. And nobody can say they are paying for a subscription and that i should be included, because technically nobody has paid for a subscription yet at all. You paid for the game, if the devs want to release some dlc for the game then that is perfectly alright.