Naoki Yoshida's Comment in Regard to Jump Potions/Boost Potions

[Moonlite]

I repeat myself. What is "fair"? And at what point isn't it just "player" greed?
Fair is whatever the market deems acceptable or well.. fair.
If it's not acceptable, the price drops or is simply not bought.

I am not sure you understand fair. Fair has nothing to do with price gouging. Fair has nothing to do with pricing. It is simply about profits. I do not work in gaming but indirectly a division of retail. I have seen many emails say "It is ok if we don't move X amount, we care about profits. We can get the people who buy to cover the lost sales."

To describe fair for me. Since I don't know actual cost of making a digital product. I base it on similar products that I feel set a baseline. Baseline being set at the cost of a regular game. Then the cost after and content equal to original game (sub and following content).

[VTXShiva]

I am not sure you understand fair. Fair has nothing to do with price gouging. Fair has nothing to do with pricing. It is simply about profits. I do not work in gaming but indirectly a division of retail. I have seen many emails say "It is ok if we don't move X amount, we care about profits. We can get the people who buy to cover the lost sales."

To describe fair for me. Since I don't know actual cost of making a digital product. I base it on similar products that I feel set a baseline. Baseline being set at the cost of a regular game. Then the cost after and content equal to original game (sub and following content).

That is precisely why i asked you to define what is fair. Because in my eyes, the game is complete once the expansion/patch hits (we can argue over a few details, of course but that's not the point i'm making here). All relevant content is there that needs to be.
An immersion-breaking, out-of-lore costume of Y'shtola has little or nothing to do with the game for instance.
the box price is similar to that of other MMOs in the same category.
The sub-price not only is the same, but even has a cheaper alternative to that of other MMOs.
You get trimestrial rewards for being subscribed, a perk other MMOs may not have or have in a different form.
And that's not even going into the price-per-entertainment-hour argument.
The idea that a mount out of 40 or so somehow devalues your subscription is a little on the farfetched end.

You ll see what will happen to the player base if SE doesn't keep the game balanced. hint: it won't be pretty.

The "threat" is cute but you misunderstand. If they do something bad, they'll suffer for it based on market demands etc. If the product isn't good it stops being bought. Of COURSE it's in their best interest to make it balanced, or specifically, a worthwhile product.
But "balanced' is a very vague nebulous and subjective term we can argue over until the end of time.
Moreso the word itself is a term that focuses on the control of ups and downs. It's not "in balance" if everything is good, or everything is bad.

[Moonlite]

That is precisely why i asked you to define what is fair. Because in my eyes, the game is complete once the expansion/patch hits (we can argue over a few details, of course but that's not the point i'm making here). All relevant content is there that needs to be.
An immersion-breaking, out-of-lore costume of Y'shtola has little or nothing to do with the game for instance.
the box price is similar to that of other MMOs in the same category.
The sub-price not only is the same, but even has a cheaper alternative to that of other MMOs.
You get trimestrial rewards for being subscribed, a perk other MMOs may not have or have in a different form.
And that's not even going into the price-per-entertainment-hour argument.
The idea that a mount out of 40 or so somehow devalues your subscription is a little on the farfetched end.

You and I are not going to agree on fair and that is fine.To me a game is complete if they have no recurring fees. Recurring fees to me mean a certain amount of extra content. Which is fine again I am not sure the overhead of my sub. In the past when WoW first started they had posted some breakdowns of subs and a minimal amount actually made it back into dev and profit.


The sub price I have serious issue with. This might be why you think everything is fine and I feel like I am paying for someone to travel the world and up their tax bracket. This game has a serious sub fee issue based on inventory. Now I have recently read some stuff about how good Blizzard actually is to get th glamour system to not need space. I also understand that the current system SE uses can't be fixed. But then they come out and say "We will let you have more inventory space, but pay for it." They had to know the system would be unfixable in 3.0. So then why did they itemize the game the way they did? Do we need a beast token for every tribe, we need a crystal for every zone and more. Don't charge for the increase in space, itemize the game better or fix the game.

When I was paying a sub in Aion we had the exact same type of veteran rewards. So that isn't something spectacular for a subscription model. They never got as far as 14 but since cash shop vet rewards have been less and less.

All I really want is for someone from SE to go up onstage or email saying. "We have made a financial decision. This won't truly affect your game play.(which is true I don't worry about good/bad players). We have made some poor design decisions and fixing them costs to much. This is a win win for SE."

[MilesSaintboroguh]

All I really want is for someone from SE to go up onstage or email saying. "We have made a financial decision. This won't truly affect your game play.(which is true I don't worry about good/bad players). We have made some poor design decisions and fixing them costs to much. This is a win win for SE."

People want this to happen, but it never will. Truth hurts and when people get hurt, they won't take it lying down. This is why PR exists.