The premium app is what finally made me unsub.

[Mahrze]

You make very good points and respect your perspective. Being that the gaming industry is a competitive nature and they keep things under wrap is to avoid unnecessary competition from the start of the idea. Revealing it near the end of completions is a strategic way of maintaining an edge against competitors. ( from a business analytical perspective ) I agree it does bring out controversies within the community and lets face it drama is part of human nature no matter what in one way or another. The fact of the matter is that it is a source of revenue so yes waving a free version to entice the consumer may seem as not being fair, however it si fair play in the business world.

And in equal respect I ask you: Who is FFXIV really competing with? It's only other direct competitor in the same business model is WoW, and it pales when comparing sub numbers alone. The F2P MMOs? Most of them you buy the main game/expac and don't bother with subs, due to the "freemium" options.

We're not business people and we certainly can understand the "keep it a surprise". But its not, it never is because they already talk about it to a degree. A surprise would've been never expecting the app at all (or the XIV Go App to have been the real app all along). The real surprise to a number of people was never disclosing it'll come with its own business model.
And this is again, looping back to poor communication. We can address that they do it in the "legal sense" and the upgrade campaign is a good example of communication that they handled well, credit where its due, but we can also show credit where its been... interesting to see them crash and burn with their hype, let alone the recent display of "disconnect" with the western side of the community in regards to the alliance loot change

All in all, they do things right and they do things right on the legal manner and that's fine. Business be business. The rest of the points, like LL translations, the EU issue with the maid/butler promos to name a few are instances where communication is not on point. Game wise, there's plenty that has been said that hasn't met the expectations they set, housing is the best example of something that has had horrid communication issues of expectation vs result.

Now as for the cash and grab perspective, yes based on the user base it may seem that way, what did people expect based on so many subscribers. Would it make a huge difference if they were only 5000 players? Do the numbers of potential subscribers dignify the means of these results? No it comes with the idea and potential. What I fail to understand, and correct me if I'm wrong, why consumers see it as scheme? its a product that justifies the needs of their players with both options of subscription and free versions. If people want to pay fine, if not don't? Yet to rage quit over this, I would think as a matter of principle will only show how many hypocrites there are. We all know eventually the majority will accept the fact and just come back just on the fact that this game is meeting their current internment need which is really what business do to begin with. If people don't accept it a simple concept and see it as evil they are welcome to perceive that. I just wonder what is the greater evil, what SE is doing, or ignorance of blaming a company for a product that meets consumers needs and thriving from it as well.

I think here we're overlapping and cross-sampling things

Players wanted: An app that allowed them to keep interacting with the game to a degree
Players got: exactly what they asked with a catch: money. Catch because: they weren't expecting to pay for certain features.

Company wanted: an app that addressed the request the players made.
Company gave: exactly what players asked but added a "premium" to make the service sustainable from those who're willing to pay for it and in turn, they (said players and company) get "a little extra".

The problem doesn't fall on where the ideas overlap, it where they didn't and the lack of transparency behind it. If they had said "off the bat" that it would come with costs, the consumer would've given them an early indicator of appeal. Regardless of drama, the feedback would've been early enough to consider the costs of this overall.

(the lack of) Communication is the reason: People (don't) understand what/how/why is being offered. It's not the product that its at fault. Its the communication one party is unable (albeit not incapable) of offering and the other party being unable to get the (reliable) information it needs to understand.