149541-chase-events-nothing-but-a-dirty-grab-for-money

Page 1, Page 2, Page 3

Content
{| style="width: 100%;"

Paying for items on the shop is one thing... creating an ingame that on the outside looks like something that is ment for the player but in truth is nothing but an advertisement for these items, is another thing.


 * }
 * }

{| style="width: 100%;"

It's not about feeling entitled(nice way to try and diminish our problem, kudos :) ).  We understand value, and rarity, and exclusivity, and all that *cupcake*, but should that value, rarity, and exclusivity come at the price of hundreds of dollars that may not even give us those valuable, rare, and exclusive items?  Especially since they can't be traded and obtained by actually playing the game?  We're making our displeasure known.  We do want the items, just not the way they're trying to give them to us.  Sure, keep them in an RNG box, but either lessen the RNG a bit or give us other means to obtain them too.

True, speak with the wallet, but actually giving input with that closed wallet is helpful too. Someone that admits they fight/play dirty doesn't mean they don't fight/play dirty anymore just because they were honest about how they do things.

Edited February 8, 2016 by beattlebilly


 * }
 * }

{| style="width: 100%;"

I wish I could like you 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 times.


 * }
 * }

{| style="width: 100%;"

I don't buy into the lottery, either. If I'm spending money on something, I want to 1) know what I'm getting and 2) get what I'm wanting to purchase.

Availability has been scarce and the cost has been way more than I am willing to spend plat-wise when I'm already constantly scraping the bottom of my plat barrel due to rune costs. It's really ~not hard~ for Carbine to make things available for direct purchase, either.

Edited February 8, 2016 by Naunet


 * }
 * }

{| style="width: 100%;"

This is basically me at this point. I think Carbine have actually done well by making the stuff from gamble boxes saleable. This ~could~ be a system where, if bias and personal distaste for any RNG ~presence~ in the game were set aside, works wonderfully. It would be a uh... what's the word when both sides feed off of each other's strengths? It would be that. And yea, I got everything I wanted from Sim Chase without needing RNG cases, except the Caretaker. Which I wanted badly. But as previously stated, can't always get what you want. While I understand it's more irksome when you feel blocked by real money or RNG, that's just part of a big game that has a lot to offer.


 * }
 * }

{| style="width: 100%;"

Naunet, I'm not contesting whether these things target whales. Come on now. :P If you think my quote implied that then I'm sorry, maybe I failed to be clear. But look at what I wrote in full and in context— it's a counter-argument that attempts to undermine the idea that these events are "only" about whaling. They're not, and it's so easy to see they're not it hurts my brain to read lazy ass conjecture like the player I quoted wrote. That's my main beef with this whole thread. Not only does JHeezy's statement completely disregard the very real existence of people having fun with these events, it also disregards the possibility of having said fun without recourse to RNG. That's frustrating on a few levels:  1. It's not helpful feedback when your posts suffer from lack of obvious knowledge, 2. it's not helpful to generate lies of omission, 3. it's not particularly cool to nullify the existence of other players in the attempt to lead the studio into adopting your own needs.


 * }
 * }

{| style="width: 100%;"

You could buy the Sim Chase boxes with Omni-bits IIRC.... so...... yea.... run content | Get Omni-bits | get boxes Again, not saying this is necessarily the best system, but it works, and it get people playing and doing stuff. Or if we are too lazy, paying.


 * }
 * }

{| style="width: 100%;"

So you make an assumption that I don't spend money to support the Chase events, even though I gave no indication that was the case, I explain why you're way off base, and you call that convenience? Yes, generally when someone makes a false claim that invites clarification, clarification is the way to go. Welcome to the world of productive discourse my friend. And uh... when did I say I buy RNG cases? I clearly stated that I bought Sim Cards and Space Chase currency. Wait, do you not even know what those are and what they represent in this context? You're quite bad at this. And since you seem to have abandoned the weak premise I criticized you for earlier, I'm happy to just move on. :)


 * }
 * }

{| style="width: 100%;"

Exclusively focusing on whales and gambling addicts is not a sustainable business model. Like drugs it gives a short term high but long term use causes significant and permanent damage. Flipping off the non-whales is a great way to make them leave. Whales need somebody to show off to, when all that's left are whales, showing off to somebody that also has your shiny just isn't as fun. What's better? Selling ten $60 items or a thousand $3 ones?


 * }
 * }

{| style="width: 100%;"

Interesting video. So what in that video has anything to do with Wildstar? How is Wildstar exploiting people? We can't claim that the simple presence of RNG or money or RNG and money is reason to regulate or claim they're involved in unethical practices, otherwise you're creating a whole new argument that targets the idea of lottery itself (which leads to a very useless and I would say irrational approach that will attempt to vilify everything that can be abused, like alcohol, and seeks to coddle the entire world to save us all from ourselves). The video itself indicates that there are varying degrees of fallout when we interact with F2P models, with some games having a dire impact on only a few people. And I would say that in many cases the victims' compulsions are, in fact, to blame, not the product or media they engage with. Though they may still deserve empathy and willingness to help from others, those responsibilities should not be expected from a company, but from family and institutions made and educated to support such problems. So let's look at Wildstar: 1. All gameplay content seems available from F2P model without spending money 2. Restrictions on how often you can buy nCoin exist 3. Not P2W (at least in any aggregious sense; you could pay money to get ahead with service token runing I gather, but it's not necessary and alternatives exist; further, this is min/maxing, which is not a requirement to have fun and is generally employed only by a small subset of people) 4. RNG cases contain only cosmetics, and plentiful cosmetic alternatives exist in the game-- in fact, the vast majority of cosmetics aren't on the cash shop, and some people criticizing Carbine have pointed out that some/many of the cosmetic offerings on the cash shop (and even in RNG cases) aren't that great; examples include the reused assets in the Dungeon Chase cases, underwhelming offersings from the Sim Chase event like rubble and pine trees with a tiny metal piece stuck to them, and reskinning in general 5. RNG case contents are BOE (or intended to be, like the fail with the equivar pony last Chase); consequently whether you like RNG cases/don't want to support it or not is useful for ~your~ position, but not useful as an argument to ignore this fact: the option of auction buying and player trading as a fairly easy alternative to real money cases does make the use of RNG cases less 'exploitative' 6. The contents of the cases are pretty straight-forward, though we don't know ratio; however, knowing ratio would potentially compromise their saleability ~as well as~ the fun that some players, who are ~not~ being exploited, do actually have with them; further on this point, though you might feel the need to crticize people who like gambling, doing so would demonstrate your ideology rather than any grounded, objective moral argument Is this predatory? Where's the basis for regulating a game like Wildstar? Where's the basis for accusing Carbine of ~purposefully~ seeking to exploit a select group of buyers with this model? At what point can your dislike of something, based on a personal opinion and personal conception of ethics, be extended to a relevant argument that warrants the attention of the community or external forces like government/CPAs? Again, when it comes to games like the fictional one South Park bashed, which have no industry-comparable gameplay value, and/or are P2W, and/or have no internal restrictions on spending, there are clear reasons why players should be skeptical. The idea is that they can't get fun without money, and getting the fun-from-money encourages them to spend more. So again, how does that apply to Wildstar in all of its many details of context? I really, really— for my own benefit as well as other players'— want to read more of an argument than "I don't like this thing " or "studies show that ".

Edited February 9, 2016 by EsperXIV


 * }
 * }

{| style="width: 100%;"

Yep. A chance at a reward means fun in participation. These events are excluding a large number of players because there is no incentive for them to run them. RNG boxes are not game content, thus they have zero impact on a portion of the population to participate - no one is arguing they should be abolished, but rather that having them as the only "event content" available for a large number of players (who are not interested in housing or particular decor set) is not really working and is detrimental to the game. Adding just a _chance_ to earn event rewards by actually participating in them would make the turnout and profits greater. Adding _more options_ to the store would make players spend more. It's fine if some people want to participate in gambling RNG, it's just that some of us would prefer to actually feel like taking part in the events was (more) rewarding and that there are other options available if we end up unlucky. The game events are currently designed to offer a really tiny carrot on a rather large stick for a large number of players. They are offering rewards only for people who are actively into housing and for people who love or cannot help themselves gambling. There is good reason for this to change. Not everyone is going to be interested in everything, having options that cover the vast majority of the playerbase would be the right way to go. Players are content for other players, it would make sense to try to draw in as many as possible into it. Cover all your bases or something like that.


 * }
 * }