Mogstation taking another step to the darkside

[SamRF]

You're chasing shadows. There has to be some precedence otherwise you can make fallacy claims against anything.

And no. It wouldn't have been made at all. Like I said in my previous post, the team SE has handling the MogStation are separate from the dev team. If the MogStation didn't exist, that team would be working on something else.

This idea we'd get all the cash shop stuff in-game if it weren't for that dastardly SE needs to stop. None of it would be made at all because cash shop exclusive items are designed solely for profit. Take the profit away and what incentive does SE—who we've established is a greedy company—have to make them?

Now this isn't to say I agree with their prices, timing or any of the such. I'm simply being pragmatic.

I kind of doubt those claims. It seems to me that you are getting tricked by PR.

[MikkoAkure]

I kind of doubt those claims. It seems to me that you are getting tricked by PR.

What evidence or precedence is there that suggests that it's all a big scam and we're all being tricked because these could have been in the regular game if it weren't for the mogstation? It's really weird that a spriggan mount is bringing all the conspiracy theorists out of the woodwork. The problem with those kinds of ideas is that they exist because they makes people feel better about themselves if they've "figured it out" and that anyone who buys in is a sucker.

[SamRF]

What evidence or precedence is there that suggests that it's all a big scam and we're all being tricked because these could have been in the regular game if it weren't for the mogstation? It's really weird that a spriggan mount is bringing all the conspiracy theorists out of the woodwork. The problem with those kinds of ideas is that they exist because they makes people feel better about themselves if they've "figured it out" and that anyone who buys in is a sucker.

My only evidence would be common sense and logical reasoning with how PR operates. SE is no indie game company, it's really not a stretch to assume those claims are simply PR management.

I don't believe that you're a sucker if you do buy stuff from Cash Shop (I have bought stuff too), I'm just putting forward arguments of what kind of game we might be promoting if Cash Shop is tolerated to get more significant. If that's the kind of game you want, or are okay with, then by all means you should buy stuff from the Cash Shop. I'm just saying that there could be a potential concern you are not aware of, even with seemingly harmless micro transactions.

[ForteNightshade]

I kind of doubt those claims. It seems to me that you are getting tricked by PR.

Based on?

What motivation is there for Yoshida to lie, especially when there are much better lies to spin than openly admitting our sub fees go to other SE projects? It's one thing to posit something as PR speak, however you need to provide a tangible counter argument beyond "common sense." That isn't an argument, it's putting forth a conspiracy theory and pretending it's fact.

For your argument to work, there needs to be some sort of change from the precedence set—which has yet to happen in six years. If SE were going to adopt obscene micro transactions like EA has done, they'd probably be going it by now. Instead, this is the first exclusive mount they've added in almost a year.

[SamRF]

Based on?

What motivation is there for Yoshida to lie, especially when there are much better lies to spin than openly admitting our sub fees go to other SE projects? It's one thing to posit something as PR speak, however you need to provide a tangible counter argument beyond "common sense." That isn't an argument, it's putting forth a conspiracy theory and pretending it's fact.

For your argument to work, there needs to be some sort of change from the precedence set—which has yet to happen in six years. If SE were going to adopt obscene micro transactions like EA has done, they'd probably be going it by now. Instead, this is the first exclusive mount they've added in almost a year.

Alright I'm not going to pretend like my assumption is a fact. You might be right, I don't know. The fallacy might have gripped me deeper than I'm aware of, although to some extend you can label any kind of reasoning a fallacy to score a point for your arguments.

While SE might not have set a precedent (that I'm specifically aware of), other companies have. You can usually see certain patterns returning when it comes to particular business decisions, although I'm willing to bet you can blame that on some kind of fallacy too (justifiably or not). You can also think for yourself and assume what would potentially be the best business decision and that way predict what may ensue.

With PR tricks I meant the claims that Cash Shop is handled by different team and set resources that would never have impacted base game, not the admittance of sub fee going to other SE projects, since I wouldn't doubt that at all.