The Ethics of Optional Item Sales

[Evergrey]

I pay X amount on food each month (in this case it represents montly gamefee).
I see some candy I really would like.
But I already got food that will last untill next month and don't need the candy, but it's something that I will enjoy. Is it worth the extra or not?

Kind of a weird example I know. It's late and I'm getting tired.

[Loris]

People really need to just stop with Cash Shop threads, they're tired and have been done to death. Just get over it. A subscription in 2015 is pretty much just an access pass and doesn't entitle you to unlimited everything.

Do you get free food at a NBA/NFL/MLB game?
Do you get HBO for free with your cable subscription?
Do you get all free apps/music/movies on your Android/iPhone?
Did your car come with all the options included?

Didn't think so.

[Lexia]

There nothing unethical about the optional cash shop most the items were given out free in the game at some point in time through events/retainers and such. Also before someone goes "what about new players" Players join and leave MMOs all the time so don't need those quest always being redone cause "new players didn't get to do it" throw it in the cash shop and be done with it, if person wants it bad enough they can buy it otherwise collect the other free other from future events.

[Fawkes]

As a subscriber, I pay a monthly fee that is calculated based on the cost of the assets created for the game, the labor for their creation, and the updates/maintenance required to upkeep the game. That is the mutual agreement with SE when we give them $12-$14 a month. But FFXIV's optional items are assets created with subscriber money and then posted as completely stand alone items for the game because they are thought to be good enough to sell alone. This forces subscribers to pay more if they want the item they are paying SE, already, to create. In the end, such monetary practices devalue subscribers and create an incentive within the industry to lock the best content/design from subscribers.

Not really. That might be how we justify it, but it's not like your money goes directly to the people making FFXIV. The devs don't make more or less money as subscriptions go up or down. People who pay a lower monthly fee from legacy discounts or subscribing in bulk don't get access to fewer things just because they paid less.

Some of your subscription money is probably funding FFXV, but you're not going to get that for free.

[Welsper59]

But FFXIV's optional items are assets created with subscriber money and then posted as completely stand alone items for the game because they are thought to be good enough to sell alone. This forces subscribers to pay more if they want the item they are paying SE, already, to create.

I hope you realize that your argument also includes every non-digital item as well (obviously this includes real items that have an in-game code attached to it, like the soundtrack). If that wasn't your intention, you should realize that you can't pick and choose your points when you argue broadly like that. Too many holes (or just one big one) invalidates your argument drastically. If the RL goods was also part of your argument, then wow lol.

Everything that they sell (shirts, food, stickers, tickets to events, etc) falls into the category of them spending funds gained through profits from subscribers. Technically, you could even argue that because of the success and profits earned, the cafe in Japan was because of subscriber money. So, as you said, we're having to pay more if we want the item that we already (essentially) pay SE to create.

[slml320]

People really need to just stop with Cash Shop threads, they're tired and have been done to death. Just get over it. A subscription in 2015 is pretty much just an access pass and doesn't entitle you to unlimited everything.

Do you get free food at a NBA/NFL/MLB game?
Do you get HBO for free with your cable subscription?
Do you get all free apps/music/movies on your Android/iPhone?
Did your car come with all the options included?

Didn't think so.

umm EA employee.. subscription fee should entitle me to almost everything and if not why not .. or do we as gamers let game companies continually shit on us from above!! locking content behind pay walls works fine when I'm not paying a sub.. my fear i feel is slowly becoming reality vanity now pay to win content soon once they know ppl will blindly pay they WILL get greedy!!

[GenJoe]

We are subscribers to SE's service, not investors.
We are not entitled to receive perks from future implementation of SE's financial gains, we're not stockholders, just customers.

Customer service is all we're entitled to receive if you ask me.

[Welsper59]

umm EA employee.. subscription fee should entitle me to almost everything and if not why not .. or do we as gamers let game companies continually shit on us from above!! locking content behind pay walls works fine when I'm not paying a sub.. my fear i feel is slowly becoming reality vanity now pay to win content soon once they know ppl will blindly pay they WILL get greedy!!

Something that everyone should realize about subscription fees is that what you pay for is access. NOTHING MORE. Legally, you are not entitled to a single thing more than reasonable access and consumer protection (meaning the ability to cancel, etc) or whatever other AGREED UPON entitlement was established prior to. Everything that we (yes, this includes me) feel we deserve is simply a matter of business ethic and public relations. We applaud companies that give us more than we bargained for. We shun companies that give us the bare minimum. Yet, both of those companies are within their legal rights to be on different ends of consumer approval.

If SE were ever to gate actual content behind a pay wall beyond 1-time (per) expansion costs or subscription, in other words, a cash shop P2W, they'd fully be able to do that... but they'd lose consumer trust in the most horrible manner. Some would stick around, regardless, but others... MANY others, would drop either immediately or very shortly thereafter. At the same time, they'd tarnish SEs PR even further than it was/is. Vanity is not P2W, unless you decide to make it that way as a consumer, which still does not make it P2W. Why? The game is not designed with the intent that vanity is how you progress to unlock/earn new things.

[kyuven]

As a subscriber, I pay a monthly fee that is calculated based on the cost of the assets created for the game, the labor for their creation, and the updates/maintenance required to upkeep the game. That is the mutual agreement with SE when we give them $12-$14 a month. But FFXIV's optional items are assets created with subscriber money and then posted as completely stand alone items for the game because they are thought to be good enough to sell alone. This forces subscribers to pay more if they want the item they are paying SE, already, to create. In the end, such monetary practices devalue subscribers and create an incentive within the industry to lock the best content/design from subscribers.

No. You're underpaying. Inflation is a thing. Monthly fees have been nearly exactly the same for 10 years, even when they by all rights should have increased.
Instead, they've either stayed the same or even gone down.
The vast majority of players will not pay more than $15 a month for a game. EQ1 proved that a LONG time ago with their premium servers.
The average $15 monthly fee is based less on a cost analysis and more on a "what will our customers ACTUALLY pay" analysis. Game companies with P2P models will do less "We need to charge X amount" and more "We'll be getting X amount, what can we make with it?"
Also, read the ToS. Your monthly fee entitles you to access to their servers. Nothing more, nothing less.

[Izsha]

Not every dollar we pay goes to ffxiv. Some of it goes to shareholders. Some of it is going to ff16 or whatever their next big project is.

Just because you paid govt taxes doesn't mean you still don't have to buy stamps to send mail. Taxes is your govt subscription. Some of it even subsidies mail delivery (subscription subsidizes the cost to create digital cash ship items). But you still have to pay to use ups each time anyway (buy tax subsidized service with additional money).

There's nothing ethically at stake. It's just a business model that allows those with deeper pockets a way to spend more on a service. Instead of raising the subscription fee for EVERY ONE (no thanks!) They parse it out so you, the customer can choose how much to spend on your hobby.

Glass half empty: they are denying me stuff. We should all get it.
Glass half full: they are adding stuff without forcing everyone to pay more for it. If you want it you can buy it. If you dont, your not forced to pay against your will by raised subscriptions.

It's not an issue of ethics. It's an issue of perspective.