227 replies to this topic

[TercieI]

TKSax, on 20 May 2015 - 06:28 AM, said:

I personally think this was just a bad idea in many ways, just reading the threads you can see why.

Something I saw in another thread makes sense though, as in if they ever decide to offer and "exclusive" pack again, why would I want to but if I can look back and see the offered their first "exclusive" pack for sale again. Are they going to let people buy more Gold Timberwolfs again even though they sold out???

QFT. PGI put themselves in a no win situation here. Just saying "sorry, never means never" would have saved them a lot of headache.

[Joseph Mallan]

Terciel1976, on 20 May 2015 - 06:33 AM, said:

QFT. PGI put themselves in a no win situation here. Just saying "sorry, never means never" would have saved them a lot of headache.

So would Never saying Never when it comes to doing business.

[The Great Unwashed]

Joseph Mallan, on 20 May 2015 - 06:34 AM, said:

So would Never saying Never when it comes to doing business.

Translation: when we have to choose between money and moral values, you can trust us to make the right choice.

This is really a PR blunder.

Edited by The Great Unwashed, 20 May 2015 - 06:39 AM.

[TKSax]

Joseph Mallan, on 20 May 2015 - 06:34 AM, said:

So would Never saying Never when it comes to doing business.

Yep and it has something PGI has learned even if they have taken a beating. Still have not voted but I think it would be in PGI's best interest to just leave the Phoenix pack as an one time thing only. Repacked those mechs as a differt pack, like and IS start pack with new stuff would probably be a better course of action.

[Reptilizer]

Savage Wolf, on 20 May 2015 - 06:32 AM, said:

If this line was present when the Phoenix packs were sold, then it applies.

To content, yes. They can change the mechs all they want.

To the conditions of a sale contract, no.

[Savage Wolf]

Reptilizer, on 20 May 2015 - 06:39 AM, said:

To content, yes. They can change the mechs all they want.

To the conditions of a sale contract, no.

Hmm... you might have a point. Not sure how or if it applies here. As I said, it's never simple.

[Nightmare1]

Savage Wolf, on 20 May 2015 - 06:02 AM, said:

I'd like to remind you that I'm among those people, even if I can't seem to find my badges anywhere. Where was it that you configured which to display again?

You can't even figure out how to show your badges but you expect people to take you seriously when you say you want to reopen the package???

Dude, open the game, go to Achievements, and then select the Title and Badge you want. It will update on the forums. If it doesn't, contact Support. PGI made a post about this a while back.

Savage Wolf, on 20 May 2015 - 06:02 AM, said:

I see it more as one huge contract with shareholders. I have one vote, you have one vote.
Why would it? If we say Yes now doesn't mean we would say yes to anything, just like saying no wouldn't mean we would say no to everything. They would simply have to ask every time to know.

Except we're not shareholders? Shareholders get an economic return. We don't. There is a difference between a shareholder and a consumer. In this instance, we are consumers and PGI is obligated to uphold their product promise.

Savage Wolf, on 20 May 2015 - 06:02 AM, said:

A Phoenix II pack wouldn't need any approval at all if it was all new variants or mechs. But this is about those that were in Phoenix pack 1, so not relevant.
And yes, there will no doubt be people who would get butthurt over a Yes, no matter how big a Yes (presuming it would never be 100%). And then there are people who see this as a good thing and now will love PGI more.
I'm already glad PGI has dropped the practice of selling exclusive content and entitlement. Now I don't have to rush to buy packs anymore and maybe buy packs I regret. So I'm only glad to see them correct a past mistake. And I trust that in the future, there will be no more Phoenix packs.

To quote your own, crass analogy, it sounds as though you have "butthurt" over exclusive content. I don't know why that would bother you considering that exclusive content has a long-standing presence in consumer merchandise and services. Personally, I think exclusive content is cool.

Savage Wolf, on 20 May 2015 - 06:02 AM, said:

You called it a second founders pack. It isn't. Yes the Phoenix is currently exclusive and the resistance pack is not. But symbolically they are both just mechs. Nothing remotely founderish about any of them.

Your words. Mine were that it was "similar." I never claimed it actually was one. Symbolically, the Founder's are just Mechs, but with a fancy designation. If you really want to split hairs, then I can play that game too.

Savage Wolf, on 20 May 2015 - 06:02 AM, said:

The people who missed out are denied access to a piece of content that we were not. So if you can use the victim card, then so can they. For different reasons, but both equally valid. If they cannot use it, neither can you.

That is literally one of the dumbest things I've ever read.

Just because I choose not to buy a special edition Dodge Charger, that does not make me a victim.

Just because I wasn't around in '69 to buy a '69 Camaro, does not make me a victim.

Similarly, people who chose not to buy the Phoenix Pack are not victims. They exercised their rights, as consumers, not to purchase.

People who joined later simply missed out. There isn't any victimization going on. If you knew of a party across town and chose to arrive late, and missed some of the early festivities, then you have not been victimized.

This victim thing you have going is really very ludicrous. Allow me to spell it out for you:

Phoenix Owners were guaranteed something. If PGI breaks that promise, it willingly commits false advertising and business malpractice. It willingly victimizes people by intentionally misleading them.

Non-Phoenix Owners, by their own choice, did not participate in the package. Nobody is taking advantage of them. They are not victims.

It's just...that...simple...

Savage Wolf, on 20 May 2015 - 06:02 AM, said:

No, I'm not blind to it and it will be up to PGI to decide the pros and cons depending on the outcome of the poll. And it might as well be in your favour if the answer is a big No. Then they can always refer to this poll if anyone asks again and then the case is closed.
But it might split the community, that is true. But sometimes that is necesary. Not certain the Phoenix pack does this. If it did it probably wouldn't be worth it. It not THAT important.

It's already split the community. Bringing this up was an error on PGI's part.

[C E Dwyer]

Alan Davion, on 19 May 2015 - 03:05 PM, said:

No offense, but have any of you who voted no thought that because you voted no, you are potentially denying PGI a huge wave of income, and potentially a "Phoenix Wave 2" further down the line with mechs like the Stinger/Wasp, Phoenix Hawk, Crusader and Marauder, and even more?

If the Phoenix Project were re-opened, it could very well pay for the remaining Phoenix Mechs that were not touched due to Harmony Gold's stranglehold on them. Who the hell seriously cares about "false advertising" these days anyway. We are CONSTANTLY bombarded with false advertisements in this day and age.

Think this through guys, you're denying PGI even more money that could be spent to add more mechs to, and overall improve this game.

Just because we are CONSTANTLY bombarded with false advertising, DOESN'T make it right

[Codestar]

Nightmare1, on 20 May 2015 - 05:35 AM, said:

Except in this case, we don't have a solid copy that can be sold. We have digital copies bound to our accounts. The value is set in stone. Releasing the package, again, would depreciate the value of the package we already have.

Not to mention it would essentially prove, once and for all, PGI's willingness to take advantage of the consumer by making a contract and then attempting to break it with the assitance of tools like you.

Nightmare1 I look forward to meeting you on the battlefield.

There is "zero" value in digital content if PGI cease trading due to not being able to pay staff salaries. You cannot sell your account and you lose nothing if a new player purchases a bundle of phoenix mechs + fluff. You were given the choice to allow PGI to use existing assets (zero cost to them) to be used for additional revenue to create new stuff for everyone. You chose no and the game will be weaker because of it. New players would have had the choice to choose an additional pack of mechs to get them started. There will now be one less pack. PGI were not breaking any contract. They asked you for permission.

Shallow and pedantic! (Seemed apt.)

Codestar

[Reptilizer]

Nightmare1, on 20 May 2015 - 06:55 AM, said:

*snip*

It's already split the community. Bringing this up was an error on PGI's part.

^^^
Of all things, THIS exactly!

[C E Dwyer]

Joseph Mallan, on 20 May 2015 - 05:49 AM, said:

With a disclaimer that they can make changes to the game at any time and for any reason they deem necessary. So many people seem to forget they have to accept 'nothing is etched in stone' before even loading the game.

So let them change it, let them go do the deed without our help, let them be proven the liars once again, showing once more how utterly untrustworthy PGI are.

Let the steamers come along, and see

Never again means never again unless we have run out of ideas.

They want these mechs packed again fine, they can call it the No integrity Pack, and change the (P) mechs camo to look like a guy in cheap shades, with a back pocket full of dollars

[Nightmare1]

Savage Wolf, on 20 May 2015 - 06:06 AM, said:

So now that I voted yes, I'm suddenly a criminal? I'm not allowed to have this opinion?
But I guess that does state that you do not respect the votes at all.
Which begs the question, why do you expect people to respect your opinion and vote then?

"I disagree with your opinion, but will defend to the death your right to have it." - Voltaire

That holds true for opinions. However, your right to that opinion ceases when you attempt to force it on someone else. In essence, that is what this poll is about; whether PGI can use the opinions of their tools to justify overturning a sales agreement with the community at large. That is the issue. Whether or not you respect my opinion or vote does not concern me. I am in the right, and that is enough for me. Seeking approval from tools that don't understand right from wrong is not high on my list of priorities.

Edited by Nightmare1, 20 May 2015 - 07:08 AM.

[The Great Unwashed]

The only value the packs have is getting your hands on new mechs earlier than the rest. That value can no longer be attributed to the Phoenix mechs, so there is no harm done in rereleasing them for money as far as their worth is concerned. It will rub a few of their paying customers the wrong way, just has the quirkening is doing with the Wave I owners.

The risk is selling no new packs that do have a bit of early-bird value: I choose not to pay for developing new content. I thought I was collecting, but it turned out buying packs is merely a subscription fee. I already knew that the moment I bought Wave I (and II and the Phoenix pack) so I'm not angry and I do not feel belittled... but now I think... better buy good wine for the same money. Good wine is still good wine when you store it and the hangover is worth it.

Edited by The Great Unwashed, 20 May 2015 - 07:11 AM.

[Nightmare1]

Codestar, on 20 May 2015 - 06:55 AM, said:

Nightmare1 I look forward to meeting you on the battlefield.

There is "zero" value in digital content if PGI cease trading due to not being able to pay staff salaries. You cannot sell your account and you lose nothing if a new player purchases a bundle of phoenix mechs + fluff. You were given the choice to allow PGI to use existing assets (zero cost to them) to be used for additional revenue to create new stuff for everyone. You chose no and the game will be weaker because of it. New players would have had the choice to choose an additional pack of mechs to get them started. There will now be one less pack. PGI were not breaking any contract. They asked you for permission.

Shallow and pedantic! (Seemed apt.)

Codestar

Releasing the Phoenix again will not have a significant impact on the game. Repacking old content is something of a loser's gambit anyways; PGI should be looking ahead and developing new content rather than trying to take a shortcut by undermining their loyal fanbase.

As for the battlefield, let me know if we meet. I doubt I will remember you as I eviscerate your Mech.

[Reptilizer]

The Great Unwashed, on 20 May 2015 - 07:08 AM, said:

*snip*
I thought I was collecting, but it turned out buying packs is merely a subsription fee. I already knew that the moment I bought Wave I (and II and the Phoenix pack) but now I think... better buy good wine for the same money.

Fun fact: The Phoenix mechs actually ARE collectible items. As are the founders.

[The Great Unwashed]

And I really enjoy owning them

[Savage Wolf]

Nightmare1, on 20 May 2015 - 06:55 AM, said:

You can't even figure out how to show your badges but you expect people to take you seriously when you say you want to reopen the package???

Dude, open the game, go to Achievements, and then select the Title and Badge you want. It will update on the forums. If it doesn't, contact Support. PGI made a post about this a while back.

There it was. They moved it.
Also, my inability to navigate an unintuitive GUI does not disqualify me from having an opinion.

Nightmare1, on 20 May 2015 - 06:55 AM, said:

Except we're not shareholders? Shareholders get an economic return. We don't. There is a difference between a shareholder and a consumer. In this instance, we are consumers and PGI is obligated to uphold their product promise.

It was an analogy. No, we are not actually shareholders. Neither are we contractors or have any actual contract. We are simply consumers. But by asking us, they are treating us as shareholders with a vote each.

Nightmare1, on 20 May 2015 - 06:55 AM, said:

To quote your own, crass analogy, it sounds as though you have "butthurt" over exclusive content. I don't know why that would bother you considering that exclusive content has a long-standing presence in consumer merchandise and services. Personally, I think exclusive content is cool.

And all power to you for thinking so. And likewise I don't see the value in bought entitlement myself. I hate everytime I as a Founder is mentioned as somehow better than other players and worthy of all sorts of benefits. But that is subjective and we are both entitled to our opinion.

Nightmare1, on 20 May 2015 - 06:55 AM, said:

Your words. Mine were that it was "similar." I never claimed it actually was one. Symbolically, the Founder's are just Mechs, but with a fancy designation. If you really want to split hairs, then I can play that game too.

No, those were your words I was questioning. But then we agree that it is currently just a pack of exclusive mechs and nothing more, right?
And no, technically, the founders mechs are just mechs with unique models and designation. Symbolically, the Founders pack represents those that invested when there wasn't even a game to play. Founders founded the game is what it tries to symbolize.
I don't agree with that entitlement, but I can see where it comes from, unlike the Phoenix pack.

Nightmare1, on 20 May 2015 - 06:55 AM, said:

That is literally one of the dumbest things I've ever read.

Just because I choose not to buy a special edition Dodge Charger, that does not make me a victim.

Just because I wasn't around in '69 to buy a '69 Camaro, does not make me a victim.

Similarly, people who chose not to buy the Phoenix Pack are not victims. They exercised their rights, as consumers, not to purchase.

People who joined later simply missed out. There isn't any victimization going on. If you knew of a party across town and chose to arrive late, and missed some of the early festivities, then you have not been victimized.

This victim thing you have going is really very ludicrous. Allow me to spell it out for you:

Phoenix Owners were guaranteed something. If PGI breaks that promise, it willingly commits false advertising and business malpractice. It willingly victimizes people by intentionally misleading them.

Non-Phoenix Owners, by their own choice, did not participate in the package. Nobody is taking advantage of them. They are not victims.

It's just...that...simple...

But yes, it was not a very compelling reason to feel like a victim, but neither was yours. So it was equal.
Feeling like a victim for being asked your opinion sounds rather silly to me.

Nightmare1, on 20 May 2015 - 06:55 AM, said:

It's already split the community. Bringing this up was an error on PGI's part.

Any action from PGI at all seems to split this community. If simply asking a question can split a community, it's simply an awful community. But then again, we've already seen plenty of examples of that.

[Codestar]

@Nightmare1 "Eviscerate" good word!

Watched your twitch streams. Look forward to appearing on them as I ex-foliate your armour. Expunge your internals and then eject your pilot from the smouldering(p) wreck that remains!

R.E. Poll. No's have it. Lets move on and go have some fun in big stompy robots!

Codestar

[Nightmare1]

Codestar, on 20 May 2015 - 07:33 AM, said:

@Nightmare1 "Eviscerate" good word!

Watched your twitch streams. Look forward to appearing on them as I ex-foliate your armour. Expunge your internals and then eject your pilot from the smouldering(p) wreck that remains!

R.E. Poll. No's have it. Lets move on and go have some fun in big stompy robots!

Codestar

Cool, a fan!

Agreed: Stompy Mech time!

[Savage Wolf]

Nightmare1, on 20 May 2015 - 07:08 AM, said:

"I disagree with your opinion, but will defend to the death your right to have it." - Voltaire

That holds true for opinions. However, your right to that opinion ceases when you attempt to force it on someone else. In essence, that is what this poll is about; whether PGI can use the opinions of their tools to justify overturning a sales agreement with the community at large. That is the issue. Whether or not you respect my opinion or vote does not concern me. I am in the right, and that is enough for me. Seeking approval from tools that don't understand right from wrong is not high on my list of priorities.

Funny that you use that quote and then completely contradicting it. If I'm not allowed to say that I agree with the question, you are trying to keep me from expressing my opinion.

We are only being asked. That means we are simply expressing our opinion. It is still PGI who needs to execute on this and they could choose to ignore the answer, no matter what it ends up being.

Reptilizer, on 20 May 2015 - 07:13 AM, said:

Fun fact: The Phoenix mechs actually ARE collectible items. As are the founders.

Fun fact: Collectibles doesn't have to be exclusive to be collectibles.