Mazey

Legend
  • Posts

    334
  • Joined

  1. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Zombieluvr View Post
    This is Nemesis we're talking about. It's already happened.
    Yep, you see all those people walking about as you go through Paragon?
    Not a single one of them is an actual person...
  2. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Techbot Alpha View Post
    I'm pretty sure it's the same reason all NPCs are gender limited; resources and concept design.

    We know that Mu have an equal chance to be male or female. Yet there are only male models. Banes and Widows at elast are split into those two corps, so that's a sort of balance. There would be female psykers in the PPD too, but they are all male. And we see male Seers in FW yet none in the rest of Praetoria or the 'Seers' group.

    Simple reason; the concept designs were for female/male for each group, and the Devs stated before on gender equal groups that the reason there were hardly any was because 'they wanted more groups rather than a few with equal gender portions, since they could only do one or the other'.

    It's that simple. You'r reading too much into it. There ARE male loyalist psykers in Praetoria. They just don't have in-game models. Much like there would be female Hellion, Skull and Outcast members, more female goons in the Council and Fifth Column (who cares what gender you are, so long as you're fascist and know how to goose-step?) etc etc.
    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.
  3. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Roderick View Post
    American :: British
    Color :: Colour
    Armor :: Armour
    Neighbor :: Neighbour
    Whining :: Whinging
    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.
  4. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ironblade View Post
    So, your argument is that it MIGHT be?
    umm.... The position you're arguing is "maybe"?
    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.
  5. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Hyperstrike View Post
    Try again. I said ONE of the points I raised is straight-line accounting.
    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.

    Quote:
    No. I'm simply making a point, whether "compensation" as you call it needs to be documented and accounted for. Whether it happens to be in cash, services, or goods (real or virtual).
    I don't see any point at all in repeating things which have already been accepted as potential problems by both sides.

    Quote:
    English comphrehension please. You have yet to supply a cogent reason why giving something to the users as compensation for downtime makes any real sense from Paragon's POV.
    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:

    Quote:
    I'm not saying YOU are saying Paragon "should" or "must" do this. Merely that you supply a reason that doesn't take massive quantities of alcohol and mind altering drugs to actually accept.

    This question is designed to help you formulate an acceptable answer. Which you have to do.
    I've have done, your refusal to accept it doesn't mean no-one can.


    Quote:
    Yet when I said that "You are not entitled to 720 hours a month of gaming.
    YOUR first response was
    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.

    Quote:
    And I'm saying I fail to see the business case.
    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.
  6. And I just repeat this so it doesn't get lost:

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

  7. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Hyperstrike View Post
    Your end of the argument consists of:
    • Self-entitled players feel slighted and demand compensation
    • Paragon caves in the nebulous name of "good will".
    • ????
    • PROFIT!

    My end of the argument is mathematics and accounting.
    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.

    Quote:
    Not that fiddling with someone's bill date won't mess with their in-game rewards.

    Not that this, or compensation through points doesn't have to be accounted for...

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

    Quote:
    Look at what I said. Why should Paragon eat ANY costs? PERIOD. I simply gave ONE example. Then you ran with it and tried to mutate it into me saying that's what you were arguing.
    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.

    Quote:
    Maybe when you're actually clear on the concept of what you're talking about we can actually discuss this.
    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.

    Quote:
    I have no intention of getting into a further shouting match with someone who is going to attempt to "win" a discussion with such dishonest rhetorical style.
    Irony.
  8. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Nalrok_AthZim View Post
    Thread milestone reached!

    Coming up next: Ad hominem!
    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...
  9. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Hyperstrike View Post
    No. I'm pointing out that the entire line of "reasoning" (and I'm being kind) is wrong.

    If the world was as simplistic as "We give people free stuff and they like us so much they spend even more", Paragon would be swimming in cash from free outlay.

    Unfortunately, reality is a great deal more complex than this and the social interactions are nowhere near as clear-cut.
    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.

    Quote:
    Oh! This again.

    So now, with the talk about "compensation", you're now going to try freighting the goalposts for all you're worth.

    Compensation, at its base is all money regardless of if you're talking hard cash, points, etc.

    At some point it still costs and the outlay has to be accounted for. Pretending that it doesn't changes nothing.
    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.
  10. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Aggelakis View Post
    People getting free points means people won't buy those points means a financial effect. Clearly you did not think that sentence through.
    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".
  11. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Kitsune Knight View Post
    So... is it actually good business sense to give free time to "build loyalty"? Giving free time directly impacts their bottom line negatively, by pushing back the next time they get VIP renewals. That would be fairly easily measurable by NCSoft (and it would be more significant than you would likely assume).

    "Loyalty", on the other hand... can't really be measured in any way. And in an entertainment item like an MMO, is "loyalty" what keeps people playing, or is it interest? I could remain "loyal" to CoH, but stop playing due to losing interest (and by "could", I mean "did").
    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.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by flipside View Post
    What do you call an extra day of game time? Money compensation. If my monthly billing cycle ends on April 18th, but you make it end on April 19th, you've paid for me to have an extra day. Dollars and cents, that is identical to paying back (in my example) $37,500 to all subscribing customers the "day" they lost.
    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.

    Quote:
    And again, how do you extend that to free/premium players? You can't, since they don't pay a cent in the first place.
    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.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Hyperstrike View Post
    Sorry. Not going to let you off lightly on this.

    BULLSCHNITZEL!

    Then entirety of the "compensation" argument stems from supposition that one has lost or been deprived of something.

    So please don't try to wrangle your way out on a "not my exact verbiage" technicality.
    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.

    Quote:
    You're comparing the loss of MAYBE $1 MAX in the last 4 years on a per-person basis to Paragon spending out tens of thousands of dollars to give people back a couple cents, PLUS several times that in transaction costs.
    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.
  12. Quote:
    Originally Posted by flipside View Post
    *snip*
    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.
  13. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Hyperstrike View Post
    The discussion itself isn't productive.
    Well, it produces pissing matches. But nothing else...
    You certainly made your point there...

    Quote:
    If you think you are losing big money over this, think about what Paragon/NCSoft are losing. Instead of keeping staff working on other things, they're forced to pull them off that (sometimes at odd, overtime-bearing hours) and make them work on "Get it back up NAO!"
    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?

    Quote:
    Why should Paragon take the hit?
    Ah yes, the "hit" of grateful customers, the poor poor people at Paragon.

    Quote:
    Sorry, but "becuz they want our phat loot" isn't a convincing argument.
    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?
  14. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Hyperstrike View Post
    You are not promised 720-748 hours of gameplay a month.
    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.
  15. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr_MechanoEU View Post
    and the Liger or Lion pet available seperately...
    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.
  16. Quote:
    Originally Posted by ThatGuyThere View Post
    Observation:

    Both of the returning players I tried to get into the game didn't opt to pay for VIP, because the points and reward token came after the month.

    Both of the new people I've convinced to join since Freedom launched have bought extra points as part of their first VIP sign-up.

    Edit: In all four cases, being unable to be definitive about when their reward tokens and Paragon Points would "arrive" was a factor in their decisions.
    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.
  17. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Venture View Post
    Actually Twilight's Son tells you straight up in the Ouro tutorial that the Menders have never been successful with any of their attempts at temporal intervention.
    I thought he was referring specifically to his attempts to resurrect the Kheldian race, not to all of Ouroboros's time travel attempts.
  18. Many of those methods may be the same way repeated.
    The different tech ways, for example, could all be based on the same fundamental principle.

    I believe the numbers given are intended to be low enough to be interesting, but high enough to allow players to include time-travel in their backstories without being limited by the lore.
  19. Quote:
    Originally Posted by firespray View Post
    Yes, it is.



    I never said it's just arbitrary mechanics. I realize that character concepts are important (to some), but there's no good reason why a single alignment between hero and villain couldn't support the exact same concepts as the two we have now do.



    But only because they've been defined that way. It would be just as easy to combine them into a single alignment and open the concept up to include both those willing to step over the line a bit to do the right thing, and those who are strictly out for personal gain regardless of the morals involved.



    Sure I can. The mechanics of having two different purple alignments are clunky and awkward. And since combining them, if done correctly, would improve the mechanics without stifling character concepts, there's no good reason not to do it.
    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?
  20. Quote:
    Originally Posted by firespray View Post
    Though I would add to the list that the biggest thing you could do to help convince people to play purple is to only have one alignment. Having two is just stupid.
    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.
  21. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Bloodly View Post
    Let's say a free/premium hits 50. What can they do with themselves? Aside from making another character, I mean. As fun as that can be, of course. Geez, now it sounds like a complaint. It's not, it's an honest question.
    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.
  22. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Electric-Knight View Post
    That's great.
    Everyone mark the calendar, as this is the day that Mazey proclaims Memphis_Bill is displaying an egregious sense of entitlement.
    Sounds good to me.
    Don't forget to get started on the commemoration statue.
  23. Quote:
    Originally Posted by TwoHeadedBoy View Post
    I don't feel anywhere near as adamantly about this as Bill does, but this guy up here is a bit out of line.

    Let's say you are a regular contributor to a non-profit organization and another donor offers to give a van to the organization. They say, "we're going to give you this van for free," which you think is very nice of them. Once you get the van though, you find that it is missing windows. Would it be a "sense of entitlement" if you approached them about the missing pieces and asked if they had plans to include them? I don't think it would.

    On the other hand, if they said, "We can do that, but it would cost us money to do, so we'd need you to pay us for it" I think that would be pretty reasonable. At this point, you would decide how important windows are to you. If you would really like windows, you can pay for them, or you can continue to drive the van around without them. It's your choice, and I don't think any party is necessarily right or wrong.
    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:

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill View Post
    No.

    This would be the sort of thing that would make me leave again, and warn others against getting involved with the game.
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill View Post
    They have given us *part of* something. They have done *partial* work. If there were no power customization *right now,* and had not been as part of the *base game* for six issues, you would have a point.
    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.
  24. These are awesome.
    Probably one of the few costume sets that will be an instant buy for me.
  25. Quote:
    Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill View Post
    Incorrect.

    They have given us *part of* something. They have done *partial* work. If there were no power customization *right now,* and had not been as part of the *base game* for six issues, you would have a point.
    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.

    Quote:
    "Entitled," as you insist on incorrectly using it, would be if I were saying "Not only should they finish it, but they should add 5 alternate animations for every power and give ALL of that free."
    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.