Mazey

Yep, you see all those people walking about as you go through Paragon?
Not a single one of them is an actual person...

Except that it's not that simple for the seers.
It's explicitly stated at points that the seers are all female. Yes, there are loyalist male psychics, but they don't ever end up as one of the seers that "protect" Pretoria, and that's intentional.

Not really, Whining and Whinging are two different words with two different pronunciations, and subtly different connotations. Rather than just a different spelling of the same word.

Yes, exactly.
Go back and read my first post, it wasn't in favour of compensation, it was in favour of the discussion being allowed, rather than just being shut down immediately by over zealous NCSoft protectors.

And I think it's been worthwhile, this thread has had at least four different suggestions on ways to compensate, and potential problems for many of them have been brought up too.

If it had just been shut down at the start, we'd have had one suggestion, without even a consideration of its problems.

And the other one was what? Mathematics? Because I've yet to see anything that would count as that from you, and I haven't seen any other points other than "It would cost them money!!!!" Which I've repeatedly admitted.

I don't see any point at all in repeating things which have already been accepted as potential problems by both sides.

That's because you refuse to accept that an increase in loyalty could be worthwhile, and yet provide no reason for this beyond ridicule. For example, your next paragraph:

I've have done, your refusal to accept it doesn't mean no-one can.


Did you even bother to read the first word of that post?
It was "no", as in "no, we aren't entitled to anything" as in, I was agreeing with you on that. The rest of my post was offering the suggestion that maybe things would be better if they were different and that shutting down the discussion before it got anywhere was nothing but counter productive.

Yes, it would be the 15,000th time you've said that in one form or another. But you're hardly the only person in the world.

You just said that it was a complex issue. And now you're saying it's simple enough to work out quickly with accounting.

How hilarious that your next line is one of telling me to keep my argument straight.

What? That doesn't even make sense.
You're just randomly repeating other people.

There's no should about it.
Why do you keep forcing words into my mouth?

NCSoft are under no obligation to compensate us in any manner. None what so ever. I've said this repeatedly.

My argument has never been that they "should" compensate us, but that it might be good business sense to do so.

And, yes, I "ran" with that example, because that is the example I was disputing at the time.

I've been clear on what I've been saying throughout. You've just be constantly trying to make out that I'm saying something that I'm not.

Go back to my first posts, without the prejudice that anyone who argues in favour of compensation must only be doing so for selfish entitled reasons, and you might be able to understand what I've actually been saying.

Irony.

I really don't know why I ever bother with forums where it isn't the use of fallacies that gets made fun of, but the act of daring to point them out...

Yes, the world is more complex than that. Which is why I've never said that NCSoft would definitely profit from such a move.

You, on the other hand, have been very clear-cut in your position that it would harm them financially.
Where exactly is your complex world there? You seem to think it's actually very simple.

Wow, red herring or what?
I never said that compensation wouldn't cost them, in fact I said the exact opposite (so, please try to learn to read before responding in future).

The fact that it isn't monetary compensation is important because, even though it will still cost them money, it won't cost them, to quote yourself "several thousand MORE in transaction fees".

I never once said that somehow it would magically cost them nothing because it was "just gametime". That's something you made up.

That certainly would happen to an extent, but it wouldn't happen as much as you might think.
I suspect most people would view those points as "extra" and use them to buy something they wouldn't have otherwise.
Hell, those free points might even inspire someone to buy more points, so they can afford something they wouldn't have bought otherwise.

I'm fairly sure there are items that cost both 440 points and 480 points, some one might not be willing to pay $10 to get those items, but they might be willing to spend $5 if they already have the 80 points and just need the 400.

Yeah, giving free points would likely cost money for NCSoft, but it wouldn't be anywhere near the total the points were "worth".

It's both, of course interest is important, but that doesn't mean loyalty isn't too.
You're absolutely right that loyalty is a lot harder to measure than the cost of inspiring it, which is why so many companies fail to all the things they can to inspire it.

But being difficult to measure doesn't mean that it doesn't have a large effect.

No it isn't. It's the same amount of direct cash, yes, but you yourself just listed a whole load of problems that exist in actually giving the money back, and none of those problems exist in giving the player-base an extra day instead.
Yeah, it has a few of its own problems, but those are much lesser than the problems involved in actually giving money back.

You can call it monetary compensation if you want, but the vast majority of people use that phrase to distinguish between when a company gives out part of their product as compensation, and when a company gives out actual cash.

You could give them a free day of VIP status, for example, by picking a day at a weekend and turning VIP on for everyone, or you could simply not compensate them at all.

As you say yourself, there's no obligation to compensate everyone, or even anyone.

Why are you so desperate to insist that I'm going "I want compensation, I want it! Wah wah wah!!!"? I'm not.

Would I like compensation for unexpected downtime? Of course I would, I'd guess you wouldn't mind it either, but I don't care that much.

I'm not making this argument for myself, I making it to point out how it could very well be good business sense for NCSoft.

The only people who've brought up monetary compensation are your crowd.
The argument is not for NCSoft to do anything that would have transaction costs, the argument is that they do something that they have full control over themselves.

Why are you (and others) talking about monetary compensation?
Yes, that has a whole load of problems, and absolutely wouldn't be worth it.

Which is why the suggestion was nothing to do with that, and was instead a suggestion that accounts be given a extra day of game time, to inspire loyalty.

As I've already said, no NCSoft don't owe us anything, that doesn't mean it isn't good business sense to give it anyway.

You certainly made your point there...

I never said I was losing anything over it.
You're right, NCSoft are the ones losing the most, so why on Earth wouldn't they try and use the opportunity to recover some of that loss by inspiring customer loyalty?

Ah yes, the "hit" of grateful customers, the poor poor people at Paragon.

The desire for money isn't a convincing argument for a company?
What dimension are you living in again, and are you drinking the Cole-Aid there?

No, but maybe we should be.

All these posts going "You're not entitled to anything, shut up." are completely missing the point. No, we're not entitled to that at all, but maybe we should be, maybe NCSoft should make a promise against unexpected down-time.

They want our money, and time and time again its be proven that people are more willing to give money to people and businesses they trust.

Shutting down the discussion before that's even properly considered is completely counter productive.

That's not new, you could get them separately last week too. It's just that they weren't on the "featured items" list, you had to look for them under permanent powers -> non-combat pets.

The paragon points for being a VIP should arrive with-in a couple of days of starting the subscription, only the reward token takes a month to come.

I thought he was referring specifically to his attempts to resurrect the Kheldian race, not to all of Ouroboros's time travel attempts.

Go on then, you say there's no reason not to do "it", and everything would be encompassed by "it" without loss.
So please describe what "it" would actually be.
What would the name of this new alignment be? What missions would lead to it from each side? What would its alignment power be? What would be done with the old vigilante/rogue missions and powers?
Importantly, what access would this new alignment have, and what limitations?

You say it would have to be "done correctly", but what exactly is the correct way to do it?

No it isn't.
This game isn't just arbitrary mechanics. It's a game about character concepts.

Vigilantes, as defined in CoH, are pretty much the exact opposite of Rogues concept wise. You can't say "combine them and be done" just because the mechanics are similar.

This has always been a game about making new characters.
The "end-game" incarnate content is very new.

That said, if you pay for an invention licence, or have it unlocked already, you can spend quite a bit of time with a level 50 building an "uber"-build for them, so you can solo AVs and other feats.

Other than that, I recommend just making a new character.
Personally, I rarely even make it to 50 before I start on someone new.

Sounds good to me.
Don't forget to get started on the commemoration statue.

That's a perfectly reasonable point of view, and one I share entirely. And it's completely different from the one Memphis_Bill holds.

To emphasis the point, look at these two posts of his:

He's not getting upset because they're charging for something he thinks shouldn't be charged for, because he'd be perfectly happy if they had never released it at all, and they released it all at once and charged for the whole thing.

He's upset because he got part of it for free. He thinks he deserves the entire lot for free because he got part of it for free, and because he got something for free, he feels like he has the right to bad mouth the people who gave it to him. Not be thankful that he got anything at all but bad mouth the people who gave him something.

I don't understand how people can see that as anything other than an extremely entitled attitude.
And, further, an attitude that could potentially put the devs off of the idea of giving us new things that we want. Like giving us power pool customisation at all.

So you're saying that, because they gave us something, rather than just leaving us with nothing, that puts your expectations higher?

You're right, that's not just entitled, that's outright spoilt brat.

This is the part I love.

I believe you're being entitled, you believe you are not.
Now, to you, that's not a difference of opinion, that's me using the language incorrectly.

It's seems your entitlement extends to the point of believing you ought to have control over the meanings of words.