I’d be much more excited if they would just devote an entire update to fixing bugs. Nothing else, just fixing bugs that have been around for months…
I want to use my hero in the arena but even though I got 3T sorceress or Deathknight class, hero can’t use his/her traits in the arena and very weak. Arena becomes useless this way. If you consider hero boost, can you add that boost to arena a little? Too much work to gain less rewards.
Maybe Jotnar will finally get the long needed buff that has been teased half a year ago?
You’re not excited about Unique GW Defends? What’s wrong witchu?! Sounds like someone’s just being a sourpuss.
I respect you having a different opinion, would be nice if you would respect other opinions aswell.
I bet they will fix the impervious bug and that’s enough to be happy about!
I just hope they’d stop releasing troops so quickly (especially mythic) as clearly there isn’t a sufficient QA or simulations going on resulting to flash nerfs and general people confusion and frustration.
If they slow the legendary/mythic release schedule, they need to either increase chest costs or decrease drop rates. I have no proof for this (since I am not on the dev team), but I am quite sure the game is supported by people buying gem packs for chests. If the troop release rate slows, people can stockpile more keys between releases, making them less likely to need gems to get that sixth copy of Grapplepot.
They could drastically reduce the price of Gem packs and probably make a lot more money. $40 for a 50-pack of Gem chests and $130 for a 50-pack of VIP chests is laughable.
They don’t set those prices. The publisher does; they can suggest different prices, but ultimately the publisher is who decides to listen to (or ignore) opinions like yours.
Lowering prices on stuff almost never brings in more money. I think in F2P that’s especially true b/c only a small percent ever buy and most of the money is driven by a very small number of big spenders.
FIX the Impervious bug asap
I didn’t say the devs set the prices; I’ve actually gone out of my way in multiple posts to point out that I’m specifically not blaming the devs for the problems with the game. They’re just following orders.
This must seriously be a rich-kid’s game if the idea of dropping $130 per slot machine pull is considered to be a good deal.
A problem I’ve seen repeated over and again with GoW is that the shop doesn’t really have much in the way of “micro” transactions. $50 monthly “subscriptions” (Path to Glory), etc, but not a whole lot of value in the $5-10 range. If they want more people to spend, they need to make it more approachable to do so.
If they’re in such financial straits that they’re nerfing Gem drops to try forcing more people to the shop, I’m going to assume people aren’t buying [enough of] what they’re selling.
It’s fine. Really. The publisher can continue to insist that $130 for a monthly slot pull is cheap/normal/encouraged/standard/whatever, and I (and others) can continue to show that it’s asinine by simply not buying it.
There are a handful of $5 purchases, including one just introduced with 3.1. We may never find out whether the daily gems, daily souls, or daily dungeon deal are better sellers than the typhoon of keys or path to glory. But the devs/publishers do seem open to smaller transactions.
True, but a $5 daily transaction is still $150 a month on average, which is even more spendy than a VIP pull. I commented in another post that I believe that their intention behind this pack is to get people to buy on Sundays when you get extra Diamonds, which knocks the cost down to $20-25 a month depending on how many Sundays occur that month. This, while more affordable, still goes against any advice I could possibly give right now.
I believe until the game direction is clearer, major issues are addressed, the shop gets an overhaul, and some compensation is made for LTs, it’s simply not worth spending on the game at all. Again, money talks. Don’t reward bad behavior.
By smaller transactions, I’m referring to things suitable to purchase 1-2-3x a month for $5-10. The daily gem pack isn’t bad, but I wish they’d offer the ability to “stack” those (as in, have multiple of them in play concurrently). That would actually bring Gems to a more affordable price point, in my opinion, as long as the player is willing to wait. Right now, if you buy them back to back you can accumulate slightly more than one 50-pack of Gem chests per month for $10, but that doesn’t help folks who want to pull VIP chests every month.
I would be really interested in the metrics of how many daily gems packs they sell vs how many typhoon of keys packs they sell in an average month. The former I consider a mostly fair deal; the latter I consider an utter ripoff.
Everything I’ve ever read suggests that whatever the $100 packs are, they always bring the most revenue. I’m sure they sell a lot more $5 packs, but it’s not 20:1. Again, F2P games are driven by “whales” that spend hundreds and thousands.
They’re not going to drastically reduce the shop prices. That’s not only a bad idea for their economics but it would piss off players that have been buying for THREE YEARS at those prices.
And they’re not going to revert LTs. You need to give up on that crusade. It never made sense to have a limitless source of Gems. It was a terrible idea to begin with.
They’re are many reasonable requests we can make. I think fixing the RNG meta is a huge one. The former two are not.
True a $130 daily pack is still $3900 a month… <- joke
In which honor, if you buy a daily pack it would mean that you will buy every day this pack for a month?
Do you understand that if everyone follows your advice the game will bankrupt?
I’m quite aware; however the lesser spenders and free players are also “content” for the whales. If the game were made of just whales, they’d only see each other in PVP, there’d be far less videos/guides/forum activity, there’d only be a couple guilds, etc. The world would be barren, and the whales would move on to something more populated.
The key is that the publisher needs to find a balance. You want to keep your big spenders happy, but you don’t want to piss off the peasantry, either. There need to be appealing options for both groups in the shop. Path of Exile pulls this off brilliantly with their Supporter Packs. Every tier gives you something special, but the spendiest tiers give you something truly unique. They’ve proven that whales like to stand out, and they give them a way to do so that isn’t utterly crapping on everyone else. (Interesting note, I’m not really a fan of PoE, but I highly admire their microtransaction structure because it is very approachable at all tiers.)
I’m not asking them to “revert” LTs. I’m asking for compensation for the Gem nerf, which nerfed the overall value far more than the indicated 16%. I’d love to see them add crafting mats, even if only in very small quantities, but seeing an increase in Gem or Event keys would also be great. Event keys specifically are rare as hell now, especially since they got nerfed by almost 50% from regular tasks.
Bad businesses go bankrupt all the time. I don’t give money for pity, I give money either because I like what is for sale or because I want to help the publisher out. I don’t currently like what’s for sale, and I don’t like the changes, so I don’t think it’s appropriate to reward the publisher for those changes by spending money.
I also many times took PoE as an example (mainly for the alternative animation of spell packs)… but sadly, we never have any comments about that by the devs. Since ages. So I assume that they cannot speak about that…
Yeah me too (even if I’m VIP 9). But I will not advice to do the same than me .
PoE is a super rare exception, like LoL. Most games absolutely can’t survive off cosmetics.
And I do think your “boycott agenda” does more harm than good. If the game starts to decline then the publisher will put MORE not less pressure on them to perform. Then they’ll kill it. The situation isn’t that dire. They are listening. They have already responded in multiple ways. We don’t need to drive them out of business in the process.