257 replies to this topic

[Lukoi Banacek]

VanillaG, on 26 April 2017 - 10:47 AM, said:

Especially when I will be sitting on 460K of GXP.

Except, using 460,000 GXP to master future mechs will also cost you 25,875,000 in c-bills whereas the GSP will cost you nothing in cash (and only helps you master 6 or so mechs vice the 72 from yer GSP stash).

Edited by Lukoi Banacek, 26 April 2017 - 10:58 AM.

[DrxAbstract]

MechaBattler, on 26 April 2017 - 08:50 AM, said:

You paid for bonuses. And you're still getting bonuses.

I'm pretty sure nobody is arguing the whole "Paid for bonuses" thing, that much is plainly obvious. What you, and the rest of that crowd are ignoring is the very valid argument that the Skill Tree also provided bonuses using nothing but XP/GXP, and that is what is being updated/changed - It is entirely separate from the Module System save the one point of interaction they actually had - The Mastery Module Slot. Modules themselves are separate 'endgame' content to further enhance your Mechs in a selectively limited fashion that are only purchasable with C-Bills, the same C-Bills used to purchase Weapons, Equipment, Engines and entire Mechs.

Now that the Skill Tree is going to incorporate former Module bonuses does not change the fact they were two separate systems to begin with and now the C-Bills you sacrificed to get those Modules rather new Mechs, Weapons, Engines and Equipment, are going to vanish because PGI is essentially locking them into a system with limited usability. Making the decision to use C-Bills on Modules rather than other things is not grounds to justify the act of robbing people of that investment choice, especially when the system you're applying it to forces people pick and choose, which could very well result in not obtaining the bonuses you actually footed the cash for unless you want a Mech with sub-par performance.

Allowing people a full refund and giving them the opportunity to step back and decide whether they want to reinvest in the new "Mech Bonuses" system is the ethically responsible decision. Taking their spacebucks and tossing them into your new system, that has historically been separate from Modules and C-Bill Investment, and saying "You chose to spend your spacebucks on this in the past so we're forwarding your balance into this new, shiny, untested and ambiguous system for you!" is an irresponsible and morally defunct act of making decisions with other people's money;

I spent 800 Million C-Bills on the OLD Module system--This is NOT that system, nor should it be presumed that I would make that same investment regardless of the extensive yet-to-be-vetted changes being made to it.

[Alan Davion]

StaggerCheck, on 26 April 2017 - 08:57 AM, said:

I fail to see why anyone is upset with PGI at this point.

Maybe because we expect PGI to conduct their business in a common and sensible manner, and they constantly find new and ever more baffling ways to completely and totally overcomplicate something that doesn't need to be overcomplicated?

That could have something to do with it.

[Bishop Steiner]

VanillaG, on 26 April 2017 - 10:47 AM, said:

As others have said, the reason the GSP for modules feels bad is the modules were used to increase the performance of a fully mastered mech.

And this, is where you are wrong.

A mech without Modules was never fully mastered. The Modules were the end game OF said mastery.

[Tarogato]

Lukoi Banacek, on 26 April 2017 - 10:27 AM, said:

I agree with you on 90% of things but not here.

When you bought the seismic sensor for 6m c-bills, you bought it for the impact it could have on a mech. You understood when you did that, it would only perform that function. If you decided you didn't need it anymore, or you desperately needed to liquidate for some reason, you could turn around and sell it at a depreciated rate of 3m.

Now, the seismic sensor is being recalled. PGI is giving you 6million worth of GSP related coupons that could also be used to buy seismic impacts via the node tree OR some other node related item, so in effect, you're getting a more flexible version of that purchase. You can still sell the module before the recall for $3mil in c-bills however.

--------------------------------
You bought a CD-player for $100 knowing it can only play CD's. You can sell it later for a depreciated rate of 50$ or keep using it as a CD-player in your car, house, backyard etc.

For some crazy reason, Sony decides they wanna retain you as a customer but know CD players are going the way of the dodo due to technology creep and recalls the CD-player because it's about to be unusable. They GIVE you $100 towards the cost of a $100 dollar Sony blue-tooth capable player instead of 100$ cash. Before the post-man comes to get the cd-player though, you can still craigslist it for $50.

Crazy analogy, but essentially the same thing.

In this closed, warped economy, the GSP still has extreme relative buying power and if you don't like it's form, you can still pre-empt the recall by selling (at an already known and understood loss) to get liquidity.

I see what you're trying to say, but you're forgetting that C-Bills aren't just for leveling mechs. We made a decision in regards to where we spend our C-Bills, be it on mech buffs (modules), equipment, or mechs themselves. PGI has decided that for those of us who bought a lot of modules, we get GSP for them, which can only be used for mech buffs. While the conversion rate may be fair for people who didn't buy a lot of modules (because in the old system, you didn't need to buy modules for every mech - you could swap them around), it's not fair to people who begrudgingly threw away their C-Bills for convenience factor alone. Now all of the C-Bills they spent on convenience are locked away as GSP, and a lot of these players say they are getting more GSP than they'll ever need, so it's effectively wasted.

That's ignoring the fact that PGI said multiple times that they'd be refunding all modules in full. They're backpedaling on a slippery slope.

[Bishop Steiner]

DrxAbstract, on 26 April 2017 - 11:02 AM, said:

I spent 800 Million C-Bills on the OLD Module system--This is NOT that system, nor should it be presumed that I would make that same investment regardless of the extensive yet-to-be-vetted changes being made to it.

PGI tried to pay you those 800 million Cbills. People bitched, or maybe you forgot that already?

Tarogato, on 26 April 2017 - 11:06 AM, said:

That's ignoring the fact that PGI said multiple times that they'd be refunding all modules in full. They're backpedaling on a slippery slope.

Actually, they tried to do that, maybe you forget the last bitchfit that was pitched?

Go thank your frikking islanders.

[Deathlike]

Lukoi Banacek, on 26 April 2017 - 10:45 AM, said:

I agree and to sate folks like you, PGI agreed to move the trigger date back to sometime in December. But if your argument is that every single module ever purchased fairly deserves a 100% c-bill refund (which it clearly seems to be) I'd argue that your own logic breaks that argument.

You don't get 100% return on purchase price, and that they are doing so with even some of our module purchases is I think a fair thing. The debatable portion of that would indeed be, on which date is it fair to start reimbursing people 50% vice 100%. Right now the 100% reflected on PTS is February. If you bought modules between the date they intend to go back to in December, those will be added in (to the detriment of your GSP of course). But nothing before the trigger date deserves 100% refund frankly.

The logic doesn't hold though.

Let's just say PGI decided to "remove" engines... and moved to a "nicer" system where upgrading engines would not be as onerous as it is now... like you would spend some amount of C-bills to upgrade or downgrade your engine, instead of buying an entire engine as you do now.

Well, this means that one that has spent tonnes of C-bills for the number of engines would get the equivalent shaft.

Under your logic, we would not deserve a refund... despite engines being required for the functionality of the mech. The difference is that modules are optional, but we're still paying it for C-bills anyways, using it for its intended purpose... to swap in and out as needed.

In that sense, asking for 100% C-bill refund isn't actually unreasonable in this instance.

Lukoi Banacek, on 26 April 2017 - 10:57 AM, said:

Except, using 460,000 GXP to master future mechs will also cost you 25,875,000 in c-bills whereas the GSP will cost you nothing in cash (and only helps you master 6 or so mechs vice the 72 from yer GSP stash).

I have almost 1.2m GXP, and will never need/use that many. Excess of something tends to become irrelevant value when something of greater need is in demand (C-bills).

[Alan Davion]

Lukoi Banacek, on 26 April 2017 - 10:45 AM, said:

But nothing before the trigger date deserves 100% refund frankly.

So people who've been playing this game since Day One get probably the biggest shaft up the butt without lube ever.

Yeah, great way to encourage people to stick around there.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Bishop Steiner, on 26 April 2017 - 09:07 AM, said:

oh look another fake spam acct. How original.

I wonder who it is? guessing is the fun part.

At this point I am just reading the comments. I got nothing to add. I saw my refund in the PTS, in my live I am getting a nice chunk so I got not complaints.

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 26 April 2017 - 11:11 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Alan Davion, on 26 April 2017 - 11:09 AM, said:

So people who've been playing this game since Day One get probably the biggest shaft up the butt without lube ever.

Yeah, great way to encourage people to stick around there.

go take your used dishes back to the store for a refund. People want to keep comparing this to retail, well, here's retail reality: Depreciation.

[VanillaG]

Lukoi Banacek, on 26 April 2017 - 10:57 AM, said:

Except, using 460,000 GXP to master future mechs will also cost you 25,875,000 in c-bills whereas the GSP will cost you nothing in cash (and only helps you master 6 or so mechs vice the 72 from yer GSP stash).

Not necessarily because I can use that GXP to respec to already unlocked nodes at no cost. I honestly can't see myself doubling the number of mechs I currently own because that would cost almost $100 in mechbays alone. It becomes the skill tree equivalent of banked premium time that hardly gets used because you are still going to be gaining XP and CBills for playing your mechs.

[Alan Davion]

Bishop Steiner, on 26 April 2017 - 11:10 AM, said:

go take your used dishes back to the store for a refund. People want to keep comparing this to retail, well, here's retail reality: Depreciation.

Except there is NO DEPRECIATION IN A DIGITAL PRODUCT.

Someone who bought a 6 million C-Bill module back in the games infancy is getting f***ed over while someone who bought that same 6 million C-Bill module today is getting the full refund in C-Bills.

Don't try and tell me that's fair, because you and I both know it isn't.

[L1f3H4ck]

Bishop Steiner, on 26 April 2017 - 11:08 AM, said:

PGI tried to pay you those 800 million Cbills. People bitched, or maybe you forgot that already?


Actually, they tried to do that, maybe you forget the last bitchfit that was pitched?

Go thank your frikking islanders.

Exactly. March-Madness will cost me around 90 million CBills in lost module refunds. I'll still take that over another pointless delay. At this point, I don't care about my refund, I just want to get on with it.

[MechaBattler]

On the notion of "PGI back peddling" they said repeatedly that anything on the PTS was not set in stone.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Tarogato, on 26 April 2017 - 11:06 AM, said:

That's ignoring the fact that PGI said multiple times that they'd be refunding all modules in full. They're backpedaling on a slippery slope.

I'm sorry, I couldn't hear you over the angst of 3PV being introduced.

Come on man. If you think ANYTHING these guys say is binding, on ANY issue at this point, as long as you've been playing, I'd argue that's on you.

This isn't what they promised, but it's equitable.

And again, while c-bills might be good for more things that you want, you knew prior to the skill tree announcement that all of your modules were 50% off the sec you drove them off the lot. Don't conflate the first set of modules with the ones "post-announcement." They've decided to give you cash back for the ones purchased with eyes wide open. But the first ones you ever bought get rolled up into skill node. It's pretty reasonable.

Going 100% across all modules ignores the windfall issue and the MC-incentivization that PGI needs to maintain for profitability.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Alan Davion, on 26 April 2017 - 11:13 AM, said:

Except there is NO DEPRECIATION IN A DIGITAL PRODUCT.

You also "own" nothing here. You bought pre-announcement modules knowing you could only get 50% of their value back in c-bills if you didn't need/want them anymore and understood that their function was to provide bonuses to the mech.

Now you can accept a GSP that's full value in terms of the bonuses OR you can pre-emptively sell the modules for 50% in c-bills, putting your net position in terms of man-hour investment in exactly the same place as it is now.

The only exception to this entire thing, is PGI's grandfathering of post-announcement modules where they clearly stated you'd get 100% reimbursement. Seems legit.

[Bishop Steiner]

Alan Davion, on 26 April 2017 - 11:13 AM, said:

Except there is NO DEPRECIATION IN A DIGITAL PRODUCT.

Someone who bought a 6 million C-Bill module back in the games infancy is getting f***ed over while someone who bought that same 6 million C-Bill module today is getting the full refund in C-Bills.

Don't try and tell me that's fair, because you and I both know it isn't.

and there was no guarantee to protect from changes, either. Yet people keep wanting to use retail law to try to claim they are being robbed. Maybe you need to reread the EULA. No assigned value is guaranteed. In fact, if they decide to close the servers to morrow, we are guaranteed exactly nothing in return.

So damn sick of all the whining keeping anything from fricking moving forward.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 26 April 2017 - 12:14 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Lukoi Banacek, on 26 April 2017 - 11:44 AM, said:

I'm sorry, I couldn't hear you over the angst of 3PV being introduced.

Come on man. If you think ANYTHING these guys say is binding, on ANY issue at this point, as long as you've been playing, I'd argue that's on you.

Lol.

Um, got news for you...this is the case with ALL fricking game development. Reality and plans, don't always go hand in hand.

**** these forums

[Alan Davion]

Bishop Steiner, on 26 April 2017 - 12:13 PM, said:

and there was no guarantee to protect from changes, either. Yet people keep wanting to use retail law to try to claim they are being robbed. Maybe you need to reread the EULA. No assigned value is guaranteed. In fact, if they decide to close the servers to morrow, we are guaranteed exactly nothing in return.

So damn sick of all the whining keeping anything from fricking moving forward.

Believe me Bishop, I want the game to move forward just as much as you do, but I also want fair compensation for the time and effort I've put into the game.

If I were to sell all my modules right now I'd get 84.5 million C-bills for it. And I bought those long, LONG before this arbitrary date that PGI has set where if I let it go through I'll get jack-f***ing-shite for them.

Meanwhile, if someone bought the same modules I have after this totally arbitrary date, they'd be getting the full 169 million C-bill refund for it.

THAT is what I'm complaining about, because THAT is not fair to me for all the time it took me to save up GXP to level up those skills. To save up the C-Bills to buy those modules.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Alan Davion, on 26 April 2017 - 11:09 AM, said:

So people who've been playing this game since Day One get probably the biggest shaft up the butt without lube ever.

Yeah, great way to encourage people to stick around there.

I'm a closed beta founder and clearly a whale, codenamed "cheapskate" by Russ. You can keep up with the hyperbole, I'm talking facts and realistic expectations. You're not getting screwed without lube. You're merely not getting what you'd prefer.

Bishop Steiner, on 26 April 2017 - 12:17 PM, said:

Lol.

Um, got news for you...this is the case with ALL fricking game development. Reality and plans, don't always go hand in hand.

Bishop, I've got news for you; you've never provided me an insight or "news" on these forums. But I agree that we agree on this issue. Appreciate the echoing regardless however.