The Problem with the New Year Bundles

[General_Durandal]

I'm seeing people argue about the bundles,
people saying the bundles are bad and why,
people replying Warframe has always been this way,
but it actually hasn't.
So, let me explain where everyone can see/read it.

See, the problem is that with the New Year Bundles,
you can't buy the items separately.

With all the Halloween Bundles,
each item was not only something that is not normally in the market,
but was also buyable separately.

Same, mostly, with the Christmas Bundles.
I say mostly, because one of the Christmas Bundles has a Snowflake Emblem,
you only get from buying that bundle.

With these though,
you can only buy the bundle.
Non of the unique items are buyable separately.

If you only want the weapon skins,
you need to buy 2 of the three bundles.
Start Anew Bundle - 185 Platinum,
and
Luminous Brilliance Bundle - 470 Platinum.
together 655 plat.

If you only want the Kavat Statues,
you need to buy all three packs, which is 785 plat.

Also, you can only buy a bundle once,
so you can only own one of each statue.

So, you can't buy one set for yourself,
and a 2nd set(or more) to donate to your dojo.

[Skaleek]

I don't understand,

why you chose to format your post,

this way?

[Marvelous_A]

Some players have been asking for separate bundle item and a reduce in bundle price if you already own some of the items for some years.

DE and some other players are stubborn to implement it and now everybody loses.

Weapon skins in deluxe bundles are still unobtainable unless you get the whole bundle in the beginning.

[KittySkin]

5 minutes ago, Marvelous_A said:

Some players have been asking for separate bundle item and a reduce in bundle price if you already own some of the items for some years.

DE and some other players are stubborn to implement it and now everybody loses.

Weapon skins in deluxe bundles are still unobtainable unless you get the whole bundle in the beginning.

Something infuriating when you already own the deluxe skin, so you have twice the skin just for the weapon. At least they could allow us to gift duplicates to someone else

[TheGuyver]

11 minutes ago, Skaleek said:

I don't understand,

why you chose to format your post,

this way?

Google translate probably 

[Skaleek]

2 minutes ago, TheGuyver said:

Google translate probably 

Damn, really? I had the hardest time reading it!

[EdinaMonsoon]

14 minutes ago, KittySkin said:

Something infuriating when you already own the deluxe skin, so you have twice the skin just for the weapon. At least they could allow us to gift duplicates to someone else

i hate my past self for buying the rhino deluxe skin instead of the bundle

but as you said: if i could gift the spare, i wouldn't mind too much

[vanaukas]

My problem with the year of the ox bundles is the amount of salt and repetitive threads, I wish a mod merges all together since you felt the need to copypaste your same comment into a new thread.

[BloodKitten]

news flash, free to play games offered useless cosmetics for real money for years, its not like its completely out of the norm for free to play games.

hey, atleast its not a steam or epig only bundles for non tradeable currency. (though atleast with steam you could sale stuff from other free games for steam wallet funds i guess)

[Hypernaut1]

 You guys REALLY REALLY want your gold cat skin ship deco....sheesh.

Its a flex. If you cant afford it, you cant flex. 

[(XBOX)GearsMatrix301]

8 hours ago, Marvelous_A said:

Some players have been asking for separate bundle item and a reduce in bundle price if you already own some of the items for some years.

DE and some other players are stubborn to implement it and now everybody loses.

Weapon skins in deluxe bundles are still unobtainable unless you get the whole bundle in the beginning.

This is a completely separate issue from Deluxe bundles.

We’re talking about DE throwing a bunch of boosters and rivens into a cosmetic bundles to Jack the price up to $50.

[Zimzala]

Some cool dudes once sang. "You can't always get what you want" and I think that is very appropriate for a large portion of the gaming population to take the time to grok the fullness of that verse.

[(PSN)goonie4good]

5 minutes ago, Zimzala said:

Some cool dudes once sang. "You can't always get what you want" and I think that is very appropriate for a large portion of the gaming population to take the time to grok the fullness of that verse.

I'd say the entire population in general needs to get that through their heads. 

[(NSW)Symberzite]

The economy of the game is kept afloat on vanity cosmetics, which isn't the issue since a decent amount of cosmetics can be unlocked through normal gameplay (Baro + Lich ephemeras). I don't mind it since it keeps a vast amount of content accessible to everyone. 

[Zimzala]

3 minutes ago, (PSN)goonie4good said:

I'd say the entire population in general needs to get that through their heads. 

I cannot disagree with your assessment.

However, I don't see Honda buyers, for example, demand that Lamborghini prices be changed.

[Rakosta_Kai]

I'm not purchasing the bundles personally due to no interest.

That said, DE never carries enough plat sinks in the Market so adding a limited time one isn't a bad look on the whole.

The real issue, as some have noted, is that doing them along the lines of a bundle discourages purchases.

Leaving each of those items up for a while for sale and the Kitties as multi-purchaseable would have been better for the economy imo as it gets platinum out of circulation for good.

[PublikDomain]

1 hour ago, Padre_Akais said:

Leaving each of those items up for a while for sale and the Kitties as multi-purchaseable would have been better for the economy imo as it gets platinum out of circulation for good.

Right? There's a lot of "nyeh nyeh you can't always get what you want" from the peanut gallery, but like... I'm not the one with the declining revenue. If DE doesn't want to take my money then that's fine by me, I'll put it into a different hobby. 🤷‍♀️

[Hypernaut1]

1 minute ago, PublikDomain said:

Right? There's a lot of "nyeh nyeh you can't always get what you want" from the peanut gallery, but like... I'm not the one with the declining revenue. If DE doesn't want to take my money then that's fine by me, I'll put it into a different hobby. 🤷‍♀️

Lol. now you're a financial consultant? DE is losing money because they don't want to give away a gold reskin of a luck Kavat? 

[Zimzala]

14 minutes ago, Hypernaut1 said:

Lol. now you're a financial consultant? DE is losing money because they don't want to give away a gold reskin of a luck Kavat? 

So very many posters here have made the choice that anything DE does they do not like means WF will die.

It's hilarious IMO.

I continue to subscribe to the idea that "I am not young enough to know everything", personally.

The entire arm-chair CFO thing is even funnier to watch than the arm-chair developers, TBH, IME.

I have been able to afford and not afford things in my life. I cannot recall thinking a game company should change a price because I did not approve.

The idea that if a company does not produce something at a price point a gamer 'approves of' will cause a financial hit or ruin a company is truly laughable.

"As the Hamster Wheel Turns" will be back next time, when gamers try and dictate how much profit the game companies are allowed to make, because game makers don't deserve to have thing the players don't have in RL...

[Sovyul]

14 hours ago, TheGuyver said:

Google translate probably 

I honestly thought that it was an attempt to make a poem

[Veridian]

4 minutes ago, Zimzala said:

It's hilarious IMO.

I'm amazed of the masses' shortsightedness.

I may not like some decisions, but I'd never go as far as some "easy fix, I have the answer". I may have when I was 13...

The problem with the bundles, as someone else put it, is that there hasn't been any relevant content since Deimos and there are certain people, which always look for a problem, who are latching to whatever they can currently find.

[(PSN)SolarPhantom82]

13 minutes ago, Zimzala said:

So very many posters here have made the choice that anything DE does they do not like means WF will die.

It's hilarious IMO.

I continue to subscribe to the idea that "I am not young enough to know everything", personally.

The entire arm-chair CFO thing is even funnier to watch than the arm-chair developers, TBH, IME.

I have been able to afford and not afford things in my life. I cannot recall thinking a game company should change a price because I did not approve.

The idea that if a company does not produce something at a price point a gamer 'approves of' will cause a financial hit or ruin a company is truly laughable.

"As the Hamster Wheel Turns" will be back next time, when gamers try and dictate how much profit the game companies are allowed to make, because game makers don't deserve to have thing the players don't have in RL...

I think your grossly misrepresentating the gamer in this case.  In a world of EA and for warframe now Tencent. . Gamers have watched their hobby get raped by greedy publishers over the last 10 to 5 years. ..  if gamers don't start dawning lines in the sand,  things will only get worse. .

So when players see a bundle which is so over priced.  Their not screaming poverty.    Their calling out the greed of it...   and they should. .  Those cats could and should of been in the alerts. .   We are celebrating Chinese new year right.!! .  So Celebrant by giving us MONEY.   

Again players aren't crying poverty.  Their calling out the greed of it. .  

Like you said , a company can deside to charge what they want.   But companys also trade on goodwill. ..   the more goodwill you lose   the less  the consumer will buy from you. .   Like how EA has gotten it's bad name. ...

[Zimzala]

16 minutes ago, Ver1dian said:

I'm amazed of the masses' shortsightedness.

I may not like some decisions, but I'd never go as far as some "easy fix, I have the answer". I may have when I was 13...

The problem with the bundles, as someone else put it, is that there hasn't been any relevant content since Deimos and there are certain people, which always look for a problem, who are latching to whatever they can currently find.

One of my main roles in what I do is to look for 'risk'.

So yeah, I can find a negative in just about anything anyone does or says, because I can see the risk involved.

Why some people think they need to act like a 'parent' to DE over the financial, operational, or creative directions DE chooses just because the player 'does not approve' is the real question of the day, IMO.

Where does this attitude of 'I must tell a game company what to do because I played the game for a while and I know better' come from in the first place?

IMO, the people that do it will say they 'love the game and want to protect it', but IME, they are mostly doing what they accuse others of doing - concern trolling.

The game company can take care of itself, IME. If not, then the company fails, which happens to like 3 out of 5 businesses in the first few years and is considered the norm, these things happen. I don't think the company's board is looking to the General Forum for answers and if they are, well, I think that is a much bigger risk.

[Zimzala]

3 minutes ago, (PSN)SolarPhantom82 said:

I think your grossly misrepresentating the gamer in this case.  In a world of EA and for warframe now Tencent. . Gamers have watched their hobby get raped by greedy publishers over the last 10 to 5 years. ..  if gamers don't start dawning lines in the sand,  things will only get worse. .

So when players see a bundle which is so over priced.  Their not screaming poverty.    Their calling out the greed of it...   and they should. .  Those cats could and should of been in the alerts. .   We are celebrating Chinese new year right.!! .  So Celebrant by giving us MONEY.   

Again players aren't crying poverty.  Their calling out the greed of it. .  

Like you said , a company can deside to charge what they want.   But companys also trade on goodwill. ..   the more goodwill you lose   the less  the consumer will buy from you. .   Like how EA has gotten it's bad name. ...

And I think the idea you present reeks of corporation phobia.

If you don't like what a game company does, that's fine, don't give them any money.

If you cannot afford to play a game? How is that the game makers fault? They have a profit margin their investors expect, that's how companies that produce things work. If you cannot afford full retail, wait for a sale that's how it works.

We are not talking about utilities, life-services, food, etc., we are talking about Entertainment. Nothing more. I cannot afford to play golf at a private club, but I don't go bashing their prices, for example. I cannot afford to rent out an entire theatre like some people have done during the pandemic, but I have not asked for them to make it cheaper for me.

The 'goodwill' you speak of goes both ways, IMO/IME as well. Why should any of these companies make anything for the ranting gamers of the world, who, IME, at scale, are terrible customers?

It has nothing to do with poverty, I totally agree, it has to do with the entitled attitudes of gamers that think they deserver to be given these things.

This has gamers mad because they think a game company 'makes too much money' and then they call the game company greedy, when their own greed to acquire things they cannot is driving the bus.

[Rakosta_Kai]

47 minutes ago, Zimzala said:

The entire arm-chair CFO thing is even funnier to watch than the arm-chair developers, TBH, IME.

I have been able to afford and not afford things in my life. I cannot recall thinking a game company should change a price because I did not approve.

The idea that if a company does not produce something at a price point a gamer 'approves of' will cause a financial hit or ruin a company is truly laughable.

There's some truth in that...

That said, I'm as hard pressed to understand why DE wouldn't want to sell those bundle items a la carte' given that there would definitely be players who would purchase multiples of those kitties for plat as I am hard-pressed to understand why players in SC fork over the insane amounts they are frequently prone to with a straight face on what is truly only a half-finished game with no actual sustainable revenue path at launch.

I guess it takes all kinds...