This is just appalling

[Kaurie]

http://support.na.square-enix.com/ru...2&tag=users_en

Those expectations could only be founded out of willful ignorance as to the nature of the agreement between square and the player. They're rather openly - to the point of putting in bold all caps and underline on the first page of the agreement saying you're getting access to the servers for a limited time and nothing else.

This stuff is all in plain site and above board. If folks aren't readin' it, well that's their own problem. Perhaps a problem borne of complacency becoming the SOP among consumers these days... but this stuff is all above board.

OK, well I think we are arguing two different things for pages now. I'm going to bow out, as I am probably approaching my post cap, and have said my piece. Just going to clarify that when I state 'expectations' I mean societal expectations based off normal usage. Subscriptions generally are inclusive. I did not mean that it stated it in their terms of service. The fact that the terms of service states things differently than the common usage of the word re-enforces that the usage is shady.

Again, the point is optics and that they might lose business due to poor optics, and not that they have broken a contract or are doing something illegal.

[Greedalox]

Just going to clarify that when I state 'expectations' I mean societal expectations based off normal usage. Subscriptions generally are inclusive.

Nowadays I can think of way more examples of microtransactions under a subscription based model than not. Not putting weight to either side of the argument, but in recent years I feel the norm is microtransactions.

[Kaurie]

Nowadays I can think of way more examples of microtransactions under a subscription based model than not. Not putting weight to either side of the argument, but in recent years I feel the norm is microtransactions.

UGH, I already bowed out of this conversation! :P

Do you have any good examples? I can only really think of WoW, PlayStation Plus, Netflix, Hulu, Funimation, Crunchyroll, Microsoft Office, Magazine subscriptions. Of those, only WoW offers microtransactions.

[ErikMynhier]

UGH, I already bowed out of this conversation! :P

Do you have any good examples? I can only really think of WoW, PlayStation Plus, Netflix, Hulu, Funimation, Crunchyroll, Microsoft Office, Magazine subscriptions. Of those, only WoW offers microtransactions.

UGH! We're not all talking to you! Its not all about you!

Note that Hulu offers Showtime access for an added fee.

[Nix]

I came back to the game after a long hiatus recently, and I'm kinda iffy on the cash shop situation.

Don't get me wrong - it's not a question of not being able to afford it; I am fortunate that I have a well paying job and could spring for cash shop stuff if I wanted to purchase it.

The question is one of principle... It seems like SE is starting to bump up the price on things but decrease value. Take Y'shtola's modish attire for example; it's $15 on cash shop right now iirc, but you get boots, pants, jacket, hair etc; then there's the new fuga attire which is $18 for a jacket and pants.

I could see $10 being a fair price for this, but $18 is just a bit crazy.

I've seen people try to counter our arguments with things like "You just want things for free!" and this isn't the case; we want value for money, and to not feel like we're being nickel and dimed.
I also get that cash shop purchases are entirely optional, I don't think anyone has ever said that they are mandatory; that being said, we're still within our right to say "Hey guys, don't you think you can dial it back just a tad?"

Note: I understand the OP and I too feel the outfits are overpriced. Welcome to the new age of gaming (I miss the old days were there are no DLCs or PreOrders) sigh~

No kidding- It feels like I bought the hamburger, but now I feel like they're making us pay again for the fixings to go on it

[HPDelron]

I could see $10 being a fair price for this, but $18 is just a bit crazy.

Dan the Doodler draws doodles.
He goes to market and draws his doodles for people want them
He charges $5 for a doodle.
He sells doodles all day long, one after another.
The next day he goes to market again
He charges $10 for his doodles.
He sells doodles all day long, one after another
The next day he goes to the market again
He charges $15 for his doodles.
He sells doodles all day long, one after another.
Fredric the frugal walks up and says
"Dan the doodler. $15 is too much for a doodle. It is not a fair price that people should have to pay for one your doodles"
As Fredric the frugal talks, another customer comes up and pays $15 for one of the dan the doodler's doodles.
Dan the doodler leaves.
The next day he goes to market again
He charges $20 for his doodles.
He sells doodles all day long, one after the another
Fredric the frugal approaches him and says "This has become far too much. $15 was too much for a doodle, but $20 is plainly unfair! Absurd! Dishonest! Shady! Corrupt!"
As Fredric the frugal talks, another customer up and pays $20 for one of dan the doodler's doodles.
Dan the doodler leaves.
The next day he goes to market again
He charges $25 for his doodles.
He sells doodles all day long, one after another.
Fredric the Frugal approaches yet again and says "Dan why do you not listen to me! These doodles are too expensive! They are not worth what you charge and you are being very unfair!"
Another customer approaches and says "I would like one doodle please, here is your $25"
Dan the doodler turns to Fredric the Frugal and says "I do not listen to you because I like what he says better" as he hands his customer a doodle.

[Nix]

snip

I get what you're saying, and you could have said it in far fewer words! haha
Still both points are valid: SE will charge what they want, and I (along with some others) will still think that the price tag does not match the product.

As a quick edit; I don't think it'd bother me them selling the stuff at this price if it didn't feel like they were taking a step backward - there's other outfit packages that they are selling that come with much more, and even a hairstyle for less than what they are charging now for the fuga attire.

[ZhaneX]

The Delightfully Descriptive Drama of Dan the Doodler

Fair point of course, but there's nothing wrong with saying why you might be a "Fredric the Frugal". The idea of this forum is to give feedback, yes?

Voting with their wallets may be the most important thing (however ineffectual in the face of a less pensive market), but they still have every right to express their opinion; even if it does come across as just ineffectual complaining to some.

[HPDelron]

did not mean that it stated it in their terms of service. The fact that the terms of service states things differently than the common usage of the word re-enforces that the usage is shady.

This is like calling someone shady because they put out a sign that says: "One Bunch of 6 Apples: $8.99" buying said apples, and then complaining you were mislead because "Everyone knows a bunch is at least 8 apples - that's the convention! Look at all the other apples they have! I should have those!!!".

If we're at the point where doing the text equivalent of yelling at the top of their lungs saying "We're only offering access to the servers" doesn't count as honestly informing the consumer, what exactly can they do to not be shady? Send over some guy to grab every new sub by the shoulders and shake them saying "Just so you know we'll also be putting some items up for sale in a cash shop! Just want to make sure you know!".

This isn't some fine print on page 7 written in dense legalese or anything. Should there be 9 pop-ups or something that say "Beware! Beyond here lies $30 kimonos"?

[Kaurie]

This is like calling someone shady because they put out a sign that says: "One Bunch of 6 Apples: $8.99" buying said apples, and then complaining you were mislead because "Everyone knows a bunch is at least 8 apples - that's the convention! Look at all the other apples they have! I should have those!!!".

It's like saying "One Bunch of Apples: $8.99" with fine print at One Bunch = 6 apples. Where the standard is one bunch = 8 apples. Yes.

Isn't this just like Amazon Prime Video where you pay 11$ a month to stream unlimited content, but certain/many films are not included and you have to pay extra money for them (which if bought is about equal or even more than a whole month of "base-sub" and renting [a digital good] still about half?)?

Thanks for the example =) I am unfamiliar with Amazon Prime Video, as I don't think that service has made it to Canada.