268 replies to this topic

[King Arthur IV]

modijn, on 08 January 2013 - 11:03 AM, said:

i would buy for dollars, colours (like formulas) and patterns (like design blueprints) to stay in the simulation.
or the system could depend on gallons and if i buy green and blue i could mix yellow ... i love simulations
If i got a "Designs licenses" pattern i could use it on 1 mech but always. Permanent.

Repainting would costs C-Bills, workerks to pay

my range for a pattern with colours (2-5$). and permanent.

Colours could also be nice a reward. Metalic painted parts etc.

sounds reasonable for both parties.


btw 380 nearly at 400!!!!!

[modijn]

oh, its not additiv its subtractive
yellow and blue = green

and a game relevant aspect of the paints would be nice, heat-spreading, laser- radar- reflective or absorbance. ..finetuning at its best.

[Sir Dead]

I was unaware that removing a paint removed it forever... I bought the phraken (sp?) skin for one of my awesomes, and tried to move it to another awesome, the same way I can move the rest of the visual upgrades(bobbleheads, etc.) I removed it and now realize i wasted 750 mc. the message you get when removing a paint job should be more specific about this.

Is there a way i can reclaim lost mc or paint? wasnt planning on buying more for a while, and that is a notable amount to waste

[RG Notch]

King Arthur IV, on 08 January 2013 - 10:21 AM, said:

i stopped there. chill out man. post only been up a few weeks during holiday.

if you dont want to join the good fight because you think its futile, that is fine. not everyone has to be an actives.


"we may battle fiercely but it is only because we love this country deeply and we care so strongly about its future"

-obama 2012

Maybe don't talk down to people. I guess if your education stopped in high school it makes sense that you have an issue understanding and communicating.Perhaps if you got past the part where I returned your insult you might get what I was saying, but I doubt it. Few people who aren't interested in listening ever learn.
Keep saying the same things that have been said since they first announced how this would work and keep acting like you care about PGI's bottom line and you will keep getting exactly what you have been getting ..ignored.
Also to the brain surgeon who said that making it permanent wouldn't effect one time buyers, that only works if they don't change the prices, which even a lot of proponents of permanancy are saying should be part of any change.
Anyways, much like the people who whined that double armor was a terrible idea and would ruin the game, and the people who kept harping on the need for different sized weapon hard points, no matter how much you keep saying the same thing from the same people, you too will eventually get that for all your noise, you're accomplishing nothing.
Please point out to me any time the devs have said they are looking into changing the camo purchase scheme to a permanent one, I can find tons of polls and threads saying they should and how no one was going to spend any money on this system. I wonder why they wouldn't address this obvious "win-win", unless it's not so clear cut when you can see what people really spend.
Anyways, if want to insult people but not expect them to respond in kind, too bad.

[p4g3m4s7r]

RG Notch, on 08 January 2013 - 01:36 PM, said:

Maybe don't talk down to people. I guess if your education stopped in high school it makes sense that you have an issue understanding and communicating.Perhaps if you got past the part where I returned your insult you might get what I was saying, but I doubt it. Few people who aren't interested in listening ever learn.
Keep saying the same things that have been said since they first announced how this would work and keep acting like you care about PGI's bottom line and you will keep getting exactly what you have been getting ..ignored.
Also to the brain surgeon who said that making it permanent wouldn't effect one time buyers, that only works if they don't change the prices, which even a lot of proponents of permanancy are saying should be part of any change.
Anyways, much like the people who whined that double armor was a terrible idea and would ruin the game, and the people who kept harping on the need for different sized weapon hard points, no matter how much you keep saying the same thing from the same people, you too will eventually get that for all your noise, you're accomplishing nothing.
Please point out to me any time the devs have said they are looking into changing the camo purchase scheme to a permanent one, I can find tons of polls and threads saying they should and how no one was going to spend any money on this system. I wonder why they wouldn't address this obvious "win-win", unless it's not so clear cut when you can see what people really spend.
Anyways, if want to insult people but not expect them to respond in kind, too bad.

Lol, the devs never commented on anything. When everyone hated LRMs they never commented, they just nerfed. When everyone hated streaks they never commented, they just introduced ECM (and f'd everything up even more). I don't know why you're so angry that someone has an opinion that's counter to yours. Granted, King Arthur was perhaps a bit rude in his responses, you don't need to deride his ideas because of how he presents them...

Given that the current MWO purchasing scheme also was implemented in WOT after a permanent system had already been in place, I'm guessing they aren't going to change anything. Which is sad. There's no way a permanent system makes you less money, unless you're too cheap or incapable of being creative to produce more camo schemes.

[PropagandaWar]

I've stated it on other threads but will continue even on the new ones. I am willing to go as far as buying paints/camo or "skin boxes" on a per mech basis. I switched paint jobs a couple times in the beginning but will only do it once per mech now. In fact because I know I can't keep paint I went with my basics and PC gamer colors and skin on a Awesome I dont plan on piloting much, where as if I could swap paint/camo I would have probably bought one out right.

[RG Notch]

p4g3m4s7r, on 08 January 2013 - 03:36 PM, said:

Lol, the devs never commented on anything. When everyone hated LRMs they never commented, they just nerfed. When everyone hated streaks they never commented, they just introduced ECM (and f'd everything up even more). I don't know why you're so angry that someone has an opinion that's counter to yours. Granted, King Arthur was perhaps a bit rude in his responses, you don't need to deride his ideas because of how he presents them...

Given that the current MWO purchasing scheme also was implemented in WOT after a permanent system had already been in place, I'm guessing they aren't going to change anything. Which is sad. There's no way a permanent system makes you less money, unless you're too cheap or incapable of being creative to produce more camo schemes.

I wasn't deriding his ideas or opinions I was deriding him. If the non permanent method doesn't make more money why are they and apparently WoT using it? Do they not like money? Do they want to **** off part of their player base? Why else but that it makes more money, despite what you, I and all the F2P marketing experts in this thread believe? Could it be that we are wrong and the people with the data and who make money off the scheme know otherwise? None of the experts can tell me why they would choose a less profitable, less popular method unless it's not less profitable.

[Kurshuk]

I'm on board too. I'm not shy about spending money since I've already sunk $120 into the game, but I don't like feeling so nickel and dimed. I feel the general pricing in MWO is way too high in most cases and the paint is just one more area I won't spend MC on. I'm just not keen on spending several dollars for a single paint job.

I'm starting to feel more and more like PGI doesn't care about the players at all and only cares about money. I'm not against companies making money because everyone has expenses in our world, but I feel like the best companies are the ones that strive to do what's right for the customer. It's like they approach content and customer feedback wihout any ratiocination and just guess and check, nerf and buff. Afterall who doesn't like playing forum whack-a-mole.

If paint were permanent I would have purchased quite a few patterns and colors by now. But the colors and such came out around the same time they offered 20% bonus MC for the first time. I felt like the bonus MC when the paints came out was such a shallow grab for cash I may never add another dollar to MWO.

Maybe it's just me, but PGI just feels really slimy and greedy and I don't feel like they care about making the right choices for their customers. So as a customer I choose not to add money to their company. If they change, I will too.

Cheers,
Kurshuk

[DirePhoenix]

World of Tanks' pay model for visual customization is why I have never bought any visual customization in World of Tanks. And I play a lot of WoT (see my Raptr profile in my sig), with 6 tanks now. None of them have any camo or inscriptions because the WoT pay model for visual customization is silly.

MWO's pay model for camo patterns and colors is even more ludicrous. Not only is the pattern (and/or colors) paid for on a PER 'MECH basis, but it's on a PER CHANGE basis. If you're going to paint your 'mech at all, you'd better be absolutely sure it is exactly what you want forever, otherwise it's going to cost $3-$10 to change it again. Even if it's just to change it back to a pattern/color scheme you bought previously!

Looks like all my future 'mechs are going to be using the Default patterns using the Default olive green and the (bait'n'switched) PC Gamer colors until they change this model. And we don't even get the PC Gamer pattern on any of the new 'mechs...

The only hope for this system (outside of a badly needed revamp) is Community Warfare. So if I want a different camo pattern or colors, I'll have to ditch my Merc Corps and join a faction and unlock House Unit patterns and colors with rep... That is, IF they don't put those "unlocks" behind MC purchase barriers as well. (and if they do, note I called it here)

Edited by DirePhoenix, 08 January 2013 - 04:39 PM.

[King Arthur IV]

Sir Dead, on 08 January 2013 - 11:53 AM, said:

I was unaware that removing a paint removed it forever... I bought the phraken (sp?) skin for one of my awesomes, and tried to move it to another awesome, the same way I can move the rest of the visual upgrades(bobbleheads, etc.) I removed it and now realize i wasted 750 mc. the message you get when removing a paint job should be more specific about this.

Is there a way i can reclaim lost mc or paint? wasnt planning on buying more for a while, and that is a notable amount to waste

this stuff is unfair.

[King Arthur IV]

RG Notch, on 08 January 2013 - 01:36 PM, said:

Maybe don't talk down to people. I guess if your education stopped in high school it makes sense that you have an issue understanding and communicating.

one word, hypocrite.

just so anyone wants too see what im talking about, those are his/hers post as follow.

RG Notch, on 08 January 2013 - 08:06 AM, said:

Maybe they are so stubborn about this is because despite the bitching on the forums they are making good money selling paint? Don't you think if it was as one sided as these polls are they would do something? You can see it in this thread, people own up to buying or being ready to break down and buy. I think they'd be better off with permanent unlocks, but I think a lot of people talk about not spending a dime yet some one is spending or PGI would do something. No one is going to stick to a decision if it's really costing them money. Have they even said a single thing about the camo costs?

RG Notch, on 08 January 2013 - 09:34 AM, said:

Go **** yourself. No need to dumb it down, if you can't see that all the whining that you have done hasn't made them even comment on the whole scheme there's little to bother discussing. I'd dumb it down for you but I doubt I can stoop to a level appropriate to your particular level or lack there of intelligence. I'll give it a shot for some of the potentially less dense.
These posts have appeared since the camo pricing was announced, and the same folks come out and say they will never spend a dime. If that was the actual case, PGI would do something. If you think they would sit on this scheme for months just out of spite, then continue to post polls and get the same people to come out and whine. Some one is spending on camo. Maybe that is just short term, but once people realize it's unlikely to change, a lot more people who swore not spend will, at least once. Since only a small % of F2P players ever actually spend anything, that should work fine for them.
I already said I think that permanent sales would be better, but that's because it would save me money, not necessarily make PGI any more money. I'd rather be honest than try to spin it like I care if PGI makes money on it like some folks here.
If it was such an obvious win win for everyone why wouldn't PGI do it? Because, despite all the business, marketing and economics expert here it may not actually make PGI more money. I think it would, but I don't profess to know this business as well as some posters.
So if it's a simple win win for everyone as all the "experts" contend can you explain why it was done this way or why it hasn't changed? Is PGI that dumb? Do they not like money? Do they have actual numbers that show they make more this way?
Again I know how easy it is ti find experts on all topics on the internets, so I'm sure they will be here with the answers.

im not sure if i should bother with you. the way you talk has gone sour and it might be a waste of my time. do you understand consumer behavior or not? you think there is more behind the scene then any of us know, ok fine ill play ball if you can come up with something more then just "i think".
maybe it all doesnt matter because you dont want to talk/discuss/fight for it but rather tell everyone its pointless.

thanks for your concern but i will keep this poll running and let everyone who feels the same as me, be heard.

[King Arthur IV]

p4g3m4s7r, on 08 January 2013 - 03:36 PM, said:

Lol, the devs never commented on anything. When everyone hated LRMs they never commented, they just nerfed. When everyone hated streaks they never commented, they just introduced ECM (and f'd everything up even more). I don't know why you're so angry that someone has an opinion that's counter to yours. Granted, King Arthur was perhaps a bit rude in his responses, you don't need to deride his ideas because of how he presents them...

Given that the current MWO purchasing scheme also was implemented in WOT after a permanent system had already been in place, I'm guessing they aren't going to change anything. Which is sad. There's no way a permanent system makes you less money, unless you're too cheap or incapable of being creative to produce more camo schemes.

i might have been rude, trying to get through to people while saying the same thing over and over can be frustrating. so if anyone comes across this post, my apologies for being a douche.

anyway back on topic, exactly right!! more color = more money, that is one of the simple concept i have to explain over and over. obviously infinite repaint trumps all but lets not kid ourselves, most of us wont repaint because you cant keep.

ty for being the nice guy, there are alot of nice people in here, i only hope it counter balances my douchiness.

[King Arthur IV]

Kurshuk, on 08 January 2013 - 04:15 PM, said:

I'm on board too. I'm not shy about spending money since I've already sunk $120 into the game, but I don't like feeling so nickel and dimed. I feel the general pricing in MWO is way too high in most cases and the paint is just one more area I won't spend MC on. I'm just not keen on spending several dollars for a single paint job.

I'm starting to feel more and more like PGI doesn't care about the players at all and only cares about money. I'm not against companies making money because everyone has expenses in our world, but I feel like the best companies are the ones that strive to do what's right for the customer. It's like they approach content and customer feedback wihout any ratiocination and just guess and check, nerf and buff. Afterall who doesn't like playing forum whack-a-mole.

If paint were permanent I would have purchased quite a few patterns and colors by now. But the colors and such came out around the same time they offered 20% bonus MC for the first time. I felt like the bonus MC when the paints came out was such a shallow grab for cash I may never add another dollar to MWO.

Maybe it's just me, but PGI just feels really slimy and greedy and I don't feel like they care about making the right choices for their customers. So as a customer I choose not to add money to their company. If they change, I will too.

Cheers,
Kurshuk

this person is a prime example of how many players feel about the current scheme. i see none of it as an empty gesture because i have seen many people willing to drop good money if its worth it. you can spend an infinite amount of cash right now and only end up with one paint job in a virtual world, that's just out outrageous.

[Ravennus]

If paint, camo, decals become permanent (and more reasonable... not paying $5 for ONE color) then I will definitely buy a bunch.

I was already going to, but thankfully found out from the forums they weren't permanent. No way in hell, I'm sorry.


IMHO, they should also be available for cbills. Why do players who have fun customizing cosmetic changes always get the shaft? It's not fair, and some people have more fun (or just as much) customizing the looks of their avatars/mechs than playing the game itself.

Oh City of Heroes... I will miss you greatly.... *sigh*

EDIT: Thank god I found the PC Gamer magazine promo.... at least I have shades of black, grey and red to play with now and my mechs don't look green crap.
I really want blue and white though..... but again, no way I'm paying that much per color, and especially not if it's not permanent.

Edited by Ravennus, 09 January 2013 - 09:25 PM.

[King Arthur IV]

Ravennus, on 09 January 2013 - 09:24 PM, said:

IMHO, they should also be available for cbills. Why do players who have fun customizing cosmetic changes always get the shaft? It's not fair, and some people have more fun (or just as much) customizing the looks of their avatars/mechs than playing the game itself.

this is sooo true!!! but some people do not acknowledge it. the people that find more fun out of customizing are also the ones that spend more money.

[King Arthur IV]

shameless bump lets get to 500!!

Edited by King Arthur IV, 10 January 2013 - 10:32 PM.

[DirePhoenix]

King Arthur IV, on 10 January 2013 - 10:32 PM, said:

shameless bump lets get to 500!!

Each time you "shamelessly" bump like this (and we see all the deleted bumps prior to this one), I lose a little bit of respect for you (and you're wearing a Steiner tag... social generals don't get to start with a much respect as it is).

You have a decent topic, if you want to keep this post on top, at least add a little bit of meaningful content to it. Surely you can think of something to say about it each time you do this other than "bump!". Here, let me give an example:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I still think the current payment scheme needs to be changed. Earlier today, I was thinking about how awesome a Stalker with a Phranken scheme would look, but while thinking about how I'd have to pay and pay again if I so much as wanted to change even one color, even if it's a color I had purchased previously; I decided against not only buying the paint scheme, but not even buying the 'mech. PGI is actively discouraging me from making purchases with the way they have decided to set up their payment model for paint patterns and colors.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

See? By adding content with more than a mere "bump", I have continued the discussion, provided input. and moved the thread back to the top of the list.

(And be glad I'm not in charge of moderation here, because a "bump" on my forums would've given this thread an autolock. When someone "bumps" a thread, it's usually a sign that not enough people care to keep it the discussion going on its own accord, and if someone wants to bring up the topic again they would probably be better served by making another thread anyway)

Edited by DirePhoenix, 11 January 2013 - 02:12 AM.

[King Arthur IV]

DirePhoenix, on 11 January 2013 - 02:07 AM, said:

Each time you "shamelessly" bump like this (and we see all the deleted bumps prior to this one), I lose a little bit of respect for you (and you're wearing a Steiner tag... social generals don't get to start with a much respect as it is).

You have a decent topic, if you want to keep this post on top, at least add a little bit of meaningful content to it. Surely you can think of something to say about it each time you do this other than "bump!". Here, let me give an example:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I still think the current payment scheme needs to be changed. Earlier today, I was thinking about how awesome a Stalker with a Phranken scheme would look, but while thinking about how I'd have to pay and pay again if I so much as wanted to change even one color, even if it's a color I had purchased previously; I decided against not only buying the paint scheme, but not even buying the 'mech. PGI is actively discouraging me from making purchases with the way they have decided to set up their payment model for paint patterns and colors.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

See? By adding content with more than a mere "bump", I have continued the discussion, provided input. and moved the thread back to the top of the list.

(And be glad I'm not in charge of moderation here, because a "bump" on my forums would've given this thread an autolock. When someone "bumps" a thread, it's usually a sign that not enough people care to keep it the discussion going on its own accord, and if someone wants to bring up the topic again they would probably be better served by making another thread anyway)

i delete to reduce clutter and im not here for respect, im here for change.
btw im unsure if you notice, but i reply to quiet a few of you when you bring up new or old topics. i could start new topics but the post is about one thing not many. it will always primarily be a poll, bumps keep it on first page to keep the awareness up. i/we need the votes to hopefully bring this to the attention of the devs, i will shamelessly bump as long as this game keeps my attention.

btw you bring up good points and insight to consumer behavior (maybe touched on before) but i personally think it should be an entirely new post because it can get very deep and side tracked from the poll. i do not bring up too much new topics because the devs need to think for themselves and convince themselves, we only need to try make them aware of it by pushing them into that direction.


"the poster mwo deserves but not the one we need right now, so you will hate me, cuz i can take it. the dark poster" im so Rame

Edited by King Arthur IV, 11 January 2013 - 02:48 AM.

[King Arthur IV]

lets get to 500 yawn!!

424,000 members
~1200 in forums at any given time
~400 in general at any given time
~200 signed in general... .... .... ..
rough average over 12hour period. (stats at bottom of forums)

i wonder how many people are actively scouring general and coming across this post? and of the ~424k, the amount that actually post. by those numbers this poll is doing not bad i say.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

428 to 26... anyone else think theyre losing money on this plan?