The virtual currency "Moogle Coins" in the FFXIV Companion app must be removed

[Mwynn]

I'm disrespectful because people have a sense of entitlement that needs to stop. We pay subs, but we are not guaranteed whatever we want or everything a game has to offer with those subscriptions.

Except it is Us Players that helped revive the Game after the state of 1.0.

Without the Players, Square Enix never would have made it this far and already would have closed this MMORPG for good before it even reached Heavensward.

Dare I drop this in here? A second Chance will not happen again.

In no Way this is against you, but even You as a Player, who pays the Sub as We do, should not be treated like this.

[Tinibou]

They would not need to search for extra revenues if they'd stop using resources to develop useless stuff. Who needs that app ? Sure that if it exists, people will use it. But was there a need ? Were there players always requesting for that app ? Can't the game be played without it ? I don't understand the purpose of such an app in the first place, it's totally useless / dispensable and still they're using some money and resources to develop that. I would have preferred two dungeons in patches or a new content instead of a companion app.

[polyphonica]

They would not need to search for extra revenues if they'd stop using resources to develop useless stuff. Who needs that app ? Sure that if it exists, people will use it. But was there a need ? Were there players always requesting for that app ? Can't the game be played without it ?

In Japan, a lot of people have very long daily commutes by train for school or work. They are the perfect candidates for this kind of app, and probably won't mind paying a bit for the ability to stay connected to the game when they can't and otherwise have nothing to do.

This sort of app doesn't make quite as much sense in North America or Europe where a lot of people drive, and probably couldn't use the app while they're at work anyway.

I don't understand the purpose of such an app in the first place, it's totally useless / dispensable and still they're using some money and resources to develop that. I would have preferred two dungeons in patches or a new content instead of a companion app.

In truth, while I get what you're saying, it's not really a zero-sum game here. The people working on the app are app developers (not game developers), and this monetization scheme suggests that the app is trying to pay for itself rather than coming from the regular game's budget. Even if they had never done the app, it probably wouldn't have changed anything either way in terms of the content they can produce each patch cycle.

[Vstarstruck]

In truth, while I get what you're saying, it's not really a zero-sum game here. The people working on the app are app developers (not game developers), and this monetization scheme suggests that the app is trying to pay for itself rather than coming from the regular game's budget. Even if they had never done the app, it probably wouldn't have changed anything either way in terms of the content they can produce each patch cycle.

Then they should never made the app to begin with, there should be NO REASON to add another fee for a basic UI feature (retainer to retainer) furthermore I want to see more of the game to warrant these costs. That is the problem, this game has too low of a budget and yet makes tons of money. Even if they ate the costs though our subs and mogstation they would still come out way head because that is how underfunded this game is, that is why this app shouldn't be costing anything, your sub money pays for this kind of thing.

SE really needs more research in the audience they are trying to appeal to, maybe in japan players it matches up but here, people are getting increasingly fed up with shady DLC, lootboxes and locking other basic features that EA has done or konami? the pay for more save slots? So people in general are questioning more and more on validity on microtransactions.

(I doono the exact tos guidelines linking a vid with mild cursing but it is in the vid)
https://youtu.be/bUX4fGCd_dk

with all this controversy, it was not a good idea to release arguably pay to win systems.

Just like here it starts off accepting small extra fees (retainers) then this app, then keep adding on top of it til you reach EA levels news media reporting how shady they entered. With all the increasing controversy around this concept you think SE would be more careful.

[polyphonica]

That is the problem, this game has too low of a budget and yet makes tons of money. Even if they ate the costs though our subs and mogstation they would still come out way head because that is how underfunded this game is, that is why this app shouldn't be costing anything, your sub money pays for this kind of thing.

Honestly, the real problem they have to combat is this perception. I suspect the objective truth is that their budget has never been higher than it is now, and they have more people working on the game than ever (and always hiring). But people don't "feel that" because it seems like the amount of content from patch to patch is going down. (It doesn't help, for example, that the amount of content they could release in the 2.x series was extremely high because they were reintroducing a lot of assets from 1.x.) So until people "feel like" their money is being well-spent, everything they do will be met with this sort of suspicion. This app and its monetization really just feed into this long-held resentment that people don't feel their money is being re-invested in the game, whether it actually is or not. If there's anything Yoshi-P needs to tackle to help with perception in the English community, it's this.

(Of course, this is a bit of a side-topic, and isn't trying to downplay the actual concerns about the IAP scheme; concerns that I share.)

Just like here it starts off accepting small extra fees (retainers) then this app, then keep adding on top of it til you reach EA levels news media reporting how shady they entered. With all the increasing controversy around this concept you think SE would be more careful.

Truthfully, I think they were trying to be "careful" in how they presented it from their point of view (in Japanese, anyway), but it's probably true that Yoshi-P isn't quite as sensitive to the way the Western market perceives things. When this info gets rebroadcast by the community teams, I suspect they'll be a bit more careful in how they phrase things. I'm sure the NA/EU Community Teams expressed their concerns already about how this might be taken.

[Vstarstruck]

Honestly, the real problem they have to combat is this perception. I suspect the objective truth is that their budget has never been higher than it is now, and they have more people working on the game than ever (and always hiring). But people don't "feel that" because it seems like the amount of content from patch to patch is going down. (It doesn't help, for example, that the amount of content they could release in the 2.x series was extremely high because they were reintroducing a lot of assets from 1.x.) So until people "feel like" their money is being well-spent, everything they do will be met with this sort of suspicion. This app and its monetization really just feed into this long-held resentment that people don't feel their money is being re-invested in the game, whether it actually is or not. If there's anything Yoshi-P needs to tackle to help with perception in the English community, it's this.

We should not be getting beta systems if that was the case. Eureka was not finished, despite delays, the glam dresser is a borderline failure in a scope they could just add glam log, without communication in WHY thy could not just just add a glam log, what we see is under funding result.

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...Community-team

"Server limitations" , "server limitations" When I see "server limitations" I read "we do not want to fund this game as much as we could because investors demand more profit" "Lets keep inventory bloaded as possible while appearing to make fixes here and there hoping people accept that is all we can do, when we really could do more, but chose not to so we have higher profit margins" "Be sure to release the 7th paid retainer with the glam dresser because we know it is bad to make people pay more for inventory space" "Be sure to make the glam dresser complex and far away user friendly as possible so people do buy that 7th retainer" They could do more to help inventory problems as well (i/e lockboxes should have been a currency, gear tokens being a currency/ changing how 8 man raid gear is dealt with in general) So people are not seeing well thought out systems in SB+ (maybe even HW+ but I think some assumed SB would fix all that)

Also this:
http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...g-Thread/page4
Why is the game so laggy if it is "properly funded" ????

So until I see real results, I sit here with the view they are largely penny pinching to fund other game developments.

[Solarra]

What I think is happening is the SE is looking to find a way to primarily pay for the App's development, which is understandable...With a game like WoW, where even at its weakest point it probably had over 5 times FF14's sub numbers, the cost of an App is easily absorbed and marketed as a feature. FF14 doesn't have that financial flexibility...

this monetization scheme suggests that the app is trying to pay for itself rather than coming from the regular game's budget...

This is an interesting point you both raise.
However, Square is not some small indie company putting out a niche product. I believe both HW and SB were more successful than anticipated. People have also suggested that some of this game's revenue is being syphoned off to fund other projects (no idea if there is any factual basis to that or if it's just guess-work).
So, in the light of the company's success in general and this game's success in particular, I don't feel taking the approach that the App has to be paid for by the users (or some of the users) is justified.

They obviously have other uses for this currency in mind and that worries me the most. There are always going to be people happy to pay (and pay a lot) if spending more means they can circumvent tedious aspects of a game or gain an advantage over other players. However, letting them do so in a sub-game is not only unhealthy for the game, it's basically double-dipping.

[polyphonica]

"Server limitations" , "server limitations" When I see "server limitations" I read "we do not want to fund this game as much as we could because investors demand more profit" [...]

Honestly, this is a failing in the way Yoshi-P messages things, no question. From a purely technical point of view, the server limitations they've talked about are very specific/detailed things -- like "we can't solve the problem in <x> way because of <y> problem," but it has never meant there is no solution. The fact they've more-than-doubled the inventory in SB shows that there were always other solutions (increasing the block size, using the retainer system more, restricting access in instances, etc.). But of course, it'll all get taken as "double-speak" when they sit there and sell more inventory space. How much will people believe you're truly trying to solve the problem if solving it would cause you to make less money...?

So anyway, I can't say I blame you or anyone for this suspicion. And the problem is that this suspicion poisons the well whenever the next thing comes along. I don't know how exactly they fix the issue at this point, but I guess continuing to work on the real glamour log solution (or vastly expanding the glamour dresser) is the only thing that will "redeem" them in the minds of many.

However, Square is not some small indie company putting out a niche product. I believe both HW and SB were more successful than anticipated. People have also suggested that some of this game's revenue is being syphoned off to fund other projects (no idea if there is any factual basis to that or if it's just guess-work).
So, in the light of the company's success in general and this game's success in particular, I don't feel taking the approach that the App has to be paid for by the users (or some of the users) is justified.

Basically, the problem with this is that there's no way to really understand the costs, revenue, and profit margin without having access to the numbers. There's just this perception that "you're already making enough" combined with "you're not reinvesting enough." And even if they completely showed all their books and could prove without question that most of the profit is already being reinvested directly into this game, it solves nothing if people don't feel like the priorities or quality are what they want/expect. As I said, the problem this game has with its community is this perception, and until they can really address that, the suspicion and mistrust will cloud everything.

[Zojha]

If there's anything Yoshi-P needs to tackle to help with perception in the English community, it's this.

Well, with a little help of their accounting department, that's easily done. Overnight in fact.

Internally, they will likely already track all the numbers, because they'll need them for the annual report. They just need to publish them in their financial reports - those are available in english. Takes maybe two-three slides.

It's a quick and foolproof way to smash the perception. Unfortunately, it doesn't work if it has merit.

[polyphonica]

Well, with a little help of their accounting department, that's easily done. Overnight in fact.

Internally, they will likely already track all the numbers, because they'll need them for the annual report. They just need to publish them in their financial reports - those are available in english. Takes maybe two-three slides.

It's a quick and foolproof way to smash the perception. Unfortunately, it doesn't work if it has merit.

I did think about this, but when people are already this mistrustful, I think they will just say they're lying. Like "how can it cost this much to do <x> when I read here that this other company did it for <y>?" Or "why are you spending so much money on <z> that nobody wants, when you could instead put it on <a>?" (You're already kind of on this road with "it doesn't work if it has merit," implying that not showing it supports that the conspiracy theory is true.)

Anyway, I'd love to see this info too, as I do think it'd be extremely eye-opening to everyone regardless of what it showed on this particular issue, but I suspect the main reason they'll hide it is probably competitive secrets.