should pc get some exclusive skins?

[Krankbert]

Okay, I’m done here. I’m not going to have a discussion about whether your interpretation of my own comment is the correct one or my own, and if there was any doubt left, your gloating that the Discord bundle was evidence of nothing as if I was the one who kept bringing it up and not you has removed it. I hope for you that you’re a troll.

[KnossosTNC]

3 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

Then I gotta ask you, where are all these universally available cash-only lines of cosmetics that are so much more motivating to DE? There are only something like 5 universal cash-only bundles:

• The Parotia Syandana from the Origin pack.
• The Itzal armor set from the Empyrean Supporter pack.
• The cosmetics in the 3 Deimos Supporter packs.

Am I forgetting any? Compared to the 37+ exclusive bundles on Xbox/PS/NSW/Discord. Even if you include Prime Access Accessories, there are still a few more exclusive bundles. If it's so much more profitable for DE to make universal bundles instead, why aren't they? Yes, they make universal skins for plat, but I don't think you can fairly compare the economics of plat payments to cash if "maximizing revenue" is your only metric.

This is why I don't believe your simplistic view DE's monetization policies, because what you're saying hasn't happened in reality. It's been the opposite.

Another arbitrary redefinition of standard of fact. The vast majority of DE cosmetics packs are universal. Just because you don't pay for them with cash does not mean DE aren't profiting from them. Indeed, the free-to-play economy is arguably actually designed to maximize revenue beyond that of a cash-based purchase model.

Your attempt to saddle an arbitrary condition on what should be considered as "universal cosmetic pack" is dishonest.

[(XBOX)Cram Duahcim]

On 2021-05-07 at 11:03 AM, BloodKitten said:

considering the fact consoles get skins exclusive to thier platform, should PC users get some skins exclusive to the platform?

for example, nvidia themed skin or anything (this is unrelease yet available in game)

The thing about these exclusive bundles is its one of the reasons why Cross Play hasn't been implemented yet. They have listed it as one of the reasons why. 

Personally I'd say release all the bundles to all platforms and eliminate this reason. But again there could be some sort of agreement made with each console to prevent this from happening. 

The thing is cross save/play is the #1 request and the reasons why it likely hasn't happened yet are not only due to technical hurdles but agreements signed in a boardroom where were not privileged to know this information.

I say scrap the exclusive bundles and get this done instead.

[Paradoxity]

3 hours ago, (XBOX)Cram Duahcim said:

The thing about these exclusive bundles is its one of the reasons why Cross Play hasn't been implemented yet. They have listed it as one of the reasons why. 

Personally I'd say release all the bundles to all platforms and eliminate this reason. But again there could be some sort of agreement made with each console to prevent this from happening. 

The thing is cross save/play is the #1 request and the reasons why it likely hasn't happened yet are not only due to technical hurdles but agreements signed in a boardroom where were not privileged to know this information.

I say scrap the exclusive bundles and get this done instead.

It's a reason, but I doubt it's a major reason. With what's been coming out of the epic-apple lawsuit, it sounds like one of the big stumbling blocks is that sony don't like cross platform titles with crossplay or cross save unless they think it'll benefit them substantially. 

 

In all honesty, that lawsuit is super interesting in what all it's exposing in the games industry, especially in terms of stuff like this. 

[PublikDomain]

11 hours ago, KnossosTNC said:

Your attempt to saddle an arbitrary condition on what should be considered as "universal cosmetic pack" is dishonest.

Are we talking about deluxe skins? No. We've been talking about the exclusive cosmetic bundles available on consoles since the OP:

Quote

considering the fact consoles get skins exclusive to thier platform

What do these skins exclusive to their platforms look like? This:

https://ec.nintendo.com/NZ/en/titles/70010000009423/consumables/adktxm0ownaj7dug

This is what we've been talking about.

1. Cash only
2. Reskins for existing models, including Warframes
3. Come with plat and boosters
4. Only sold on specific storefronts

Where are the universally-available cosmetic bundles with the same properties, if they are so much more attractive for DE's bottom line?

Edit: If you've been talking about something different this whole time, then that's kind of on you. I've been clear what I'm talking about since the start:

On 2021-05-07 at 9:32 AM, PublikDomain said:

So why not Steam/EGS/etc skins? There was one set of Discord skins, though I don't think they were ever heavily advertised.

Maybe we've been talking about different things. 🤷‍♀️

[KnossosTNC]

1 hour ago, PublikDomain said:

Are we talking about deluxe skins? No. We've been talking about the exclusive cosmetic bundles available on consoles since the OP:

What do these skins exclusive to their platforms look like? This:

https://ec.nintendo.com/NZ/en/titles/70010000009423/consumables/adktxm0ownaj7dug

This is what we've been talking about.

1. Cash only
2. Reskins for existing models, including Warframes
3. Come with plat and boosters
4. Only sold on specific storefronts

Where are the universally-available cosmetic bundles with the same properties, if they are so much more attractive for DE's bottom line?

Edit: If you've been talking about something different this whole time, then that's kind of on you. I've been clear what I'm talking about since the start:

Maybe we've been talking about different things. 🤷‍♀️

Again, your attempt to restrict definition of cosmetic packs to fit your argument is arbitrary and has no basis in reality. DE get the most revenue out of universal cosmetic packs, and the vast majority of these packs are universal. Just because they aren't purchased with cash does not mean DE haven't maximized their revenue from them; in fact it's probably the opposite, due to how the free-to-play economy works.

Stop being dishonest.

[PublikDomain]

23 minutes ago, KnossosTNC said:

Stop being dishonest.

Are plat and cash sales something you can honestly compare? No. The economics of the two are completely different.

An honest comparison to packs like this: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/p/warframe-jade-axa-bundle/bx4zkt98zmn9

Might be something like this: https://www.epicgames.com/store/en-US/p/warframe--deimos-hive

But these packs are clearly different than the consistently-themed reskin bundles, so it's not a very good comparison. There are only 5 of these kinds of universal, cash-only, time limited cosmetic bundles. Even if you include Prime Access Accessories packs, there are still a few less than the exclusives.

[KnossosTNC]

13 minutes ago, PublikDomain said:

Are plat and cash sales something you can honestly compare? No. The economics of the two are completely different.

The bottom line is the bottom line. Just because you aren't paying for them with cash doesn't mean DE don't profit from them, and just because the free-to-play economy works differently from cash purchases doesn't mean DE haven't maximized revenue from them.

So no, you probably can't compare them - because the free-to-play economy is likely even better for revenue.

[PublikDomain]

1 minute ago, KnossosTNC said:

So no, you probably can't compare them - because the free-to-play economy is likely even better for revenue.

Right. It's a complicated ecosystem, which is a statement I think you would agree with, so there are very few direct comparisons that can be made to the exclusive cosmetic packs in terms of economic benefit. See my edit (if you missed it) where I gave some examples of similar packs that can be used to make reasonable comparisons.

Having a diverse revenue stream is also even better for revenue than focusing on only one, which is a statement I think you'd also agree with. And we can tell that this is the case because DE has a diverse revenue stream and has for years - plat sales are only one half of the puzzle. They also sell exclusive bundles for cash and sell things like Prime Access for cash. It's the same with many other games which offer various different types of DLC and expansions to "maximize revenue". And revenue is itself only one part of the economics of a F2P game, things like retention and marketing are just as important. For example, DE fixing Whipclaw's LoS doesn't make them any money, but they've spent money to address that issue in their own way. Addressing complaints about Gara Kaleida's glass cosmetics disappearing on ability use doesn't make them any money either, but they're looking into it.

So would equivalent plat reskin lines like maybe the Excalibur Prisma Bundle be more profitable in terms of dollars and cents than direct cash reskins like the exclusives? No one can honestly say, because the economics of the two are completely different. "So no, you probably can't compare them". But when just looking at just cash-only cosmetics and not the type of cosmetics, since none are quite the same as the exclusive bundles, it seems that exclusive bundles are as more prolific. That is an honest comparison, while comparisons to plat sales kind of aren't.

And just so you know, despite Krank's childish insults, I've been completely honest with you since page 1. I honestly believe that the kinds of exclusive cosmetics available on console platforms would be a profitable addition to PC software platforms like Steam or EGS for all parties involved. I honestly believe that if these bundles were to be added, they would look no different than the exclusive Discord bundle we've already seen made available to PC players in the past. I honestly believe that DE is perfectly capable of reaching out to their Steam and EGS reps to initiate this kind of deal. And I honestly don't buy the various explanations for why these packs couldn't happen given what I've seen with my own two eyes. There is zero animosity here.

[KnossosTNC]

48 minutes ago, PublikDomain said:

Right. It's a complicated ecosystem, which is a statement I think you would agree with, so there are very few direct comparisons that can be made to the exclusive cosmetic packs in terms of economic benefit. See my edit (if you missed it) where I gave some examples of similar packs that can be used to make reasonable comparisons.

You can't compare and contrast their economics, hence my use of the word "probably," but they still all fall under the category of cosmetic packs. Your attempt to arbitrarily carve out the plat purchase ones just because of their different economics in order to justify your argument is what's dishonest and has no basis in reality, for they all still generate revenue, which is what I've been talking about.

48 minutes ago, PublikDomain said:

Having a diverse revenue stream is also even better for revenue than focusing on only one, which is a statement I think you'd also agree with. And we can tell that this is the case because DE has a diverse revenue stream and has for years - plat sales are only one half of the puzzle. They also sell exclusive bundles for cash and sell things like Prime Access for cash. It's the same with many other games which offer various different types of DLC and expansions to "maximize revenue". And revenue is itself only one part of the economics of a F2P game, things like retention and marketing are just as important. For example, DE fixing Whipclaw's LoS doesn't make them any money, but they've spent money to address that issue in their own way. Addressing complaints about Gara Kaleida's glass cosmetics disappearing on ability use doesn't make them any money either, but they're looking into it.

Never said revenue is the only business consideration, just that's it's the primary one. Businesses will gravitate towards maximum revenue generation as first priority, with every other considerations secondary, but not discarded entirely.

48 minutes ago, PublikDomain said:

So would equivalent plat reskin lines like maybe the Excalibur Prisma Bundle be more profitable in terms of dollars and cents than direct cash reskins like the exclusives? No one can honestly say, because the economics of the two are completely different. "So no, you probably can't compare them". But when just looking at just cash-only cosmetics and not the type of cosmetics, since none are quite the same as the exclusive bundles, it seems that exclusive bundles are as more prolific. That is an honest comparison, while comparisons to plat sales kind of aren't.

A universal cosmetic pack will most likely generate more revenue than exclusive ones. We do not have DE's exact financials and analytics to say for sure, but that's just logic. And considering the vast of majority of DE's cosmetic packs are universal, they seem to think so. Difference in their underlying economics is no justification to exclude them, just that comparing their economics is a murky area.

48 minutes ago, PublikDomain said:

And just so you know, despite Krank's childish insults, I've been completely honest with you since page 1.

You dishonestly cropped out one of my posts to try to paint me as arguing semantics. You dishonestly twisted my words to somehow say that I said DE are somehow reluctant to discuss business with storefronts and platform owners, when one of my posts on page 2 clearly stated that's not the case. You dishonestly arbitrarily cut out the plat purchase cosmetic packs just because their existence don't justify your argument.

If this was baseball, you'd strike out by now, but I'm more patient than that. Plus, I don't like baseball.

48 minutes ago, PublikDomain said:

I honestly believe that the kinds of exclusive cosmetics available on console platforms would be a profitable addition to PC software platforms like Steam or EGS for all parties involved. I honestly believe that if these bundles were to be added, they would look no different than the exclusive Discord bundle we've already seen made available to PC players in the past. I honestly believe that DE is perfectly capable of reaching out to their Steam and EGS reps to initiate this kind of deal. And I honestly don't buy the various explanations for why these packs couldn't happen given what I've seen with my own two eyes. There is zero animosity here.

And I've already explained to you how these packs came into existence, and why you can't really call them "PC exclusive." Never claimed these packs can't exist, or that DE is somehow reluctant to discuss business with their partners; in fact I've said the opposite. You're twisting my words into arguments I haven't made.

[PublikDomain]

Spoiler

20 minutes ago, KnossosTNC said:

You dishonestly cropped out one of my posts to try to paint me as arguing semantics.

You were, or at least that's how you've come off. You didn't like the specific term "PC exclusive" being used to describe exclusives made for Steam or EGS, and you didn't like the specific term "platform" being used to describe platforms like Steam or EGS. And it's taken up now 5 pages despite being an argument over the words used and not their intent. If this wasn't arguing semantics, then what was it?

22 minutes ago, KnossosTNC said:

You dishonestly twisted my words to somehow say that I said DE are somehow reluctant to discuss business with storefronts and platform owners, when one of my posts on page 2 clearly stated that's not the case.

You were, or at least that's how you've come off. You spend a lot of time on idea that the initiative is on the storefronts and platform owners to approach DE, and repeatedly claimed that DE has no incentive to approach them first.

26 minutes ago, KnossosTNC said:

You dishonestly arbitrarily cut out the plat purchase cosmetic packs just because their existence don't justify your argument.

I've been talking about a specific type of cosmetic bundle since page 1: themed bundles sold for cash, for example the existing exclusive bundles referenced in the OP. You're the one that brought up things like plat bundles as a comparison when "you probably can't compare them".

27 minutes ago, KnossosTNC said:

Never claimed these packs can't exist, or that DE is somehow reluctant to discuss business with their partners; in fact I've said the opposite.

So after 5 pages we're right back to the start, and it sounds like you agree with me. If these packs can exist, and DE is not reluctant to discuss this with their partners...

On 2021-05-07 at 9:32 AM, PublikDomain said:

why not Steam/EGS/etc skins?

But this isn't what "PC exclusive" means. But that's just semantics. They'd still be exclusive to PC players if they were exclusively sold on the various PC-based platforms, which are equivalent to the console platforms. And one of these packs has already been sold in this fashion.

But Steam isn't a platform. But again that's just semantics. Steam is a software platform, and these platforms are the PC-based equivalent to the console platforms -something you agreed with me on.

But the initiative is actually on their partners to approach DE. But it doesn't need to be, DE can reach out on their own. They don't need to be hesitant about approaching other businesses, something you seem to now agree with me on.

But they don't have an incentive to approach their partners, because it isn't as profitable for them to do exclusives as it is to make universal bundles. But this isn't very convincing because of how many of these bundles they've actually made, especially when they haven't made the same kinds of bundles universally available. Nothing directly equivalent exists. DE has made at least 5 universal cash-only bundles but even at a glance you can tell that they're not quite the same thing, and even if you include other cash-only things like Prime Access Accessories there are still a few more exclusive bundles than universal. If it really wasn't as profitable to make exclusive cash-only bundles, then it stands to reason that there would be more universal cash-only bundles. But this isn't the case in reality: there are no direct equivalents, and even after relaxing the comparison the universal bundles don't even break even.

But you're leaving out plat bundles. I never brought them up to begin with, and you agree with me that "you probably can't compare them". So it's not a good or honest comparison and doesn't carry much weight when talking about expanding the existing lines of exclusive cash-only bundles. It's apples and oranges.

[KnossosTNC]

4 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

So after 5 pages we're right back to the start, and it sounds like you agree with me. If these packs can exist, and DE is not reluctant to discuss this with their partners...

But this isn't what "PC exclusive" means. But that's just semantics. They'd still be exclusive to PC players if they were exclusively sold on the various PC-based platforms, which are equivalent to the console platforms. And one of these packs has already been sold in this fashion.

I've already demonstrated why it isn't just semantics. You even had to dishonestly crop my post to make it look like I was arguing semantics.

4 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

But Steam isn't a platform. But again that's just semantics. Steam is a software platform, and these platforms are the PC-based equivalent to the console platforms -something you agreed with me on.

Never my argument. You just cooked this one out thin air.

4 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

But the initiative is actually on their partners to approach DE. But it doesn't need to be, DE can reach out on their own. They don't need to be hesitant about approaching other businesses, something you seem to now agree with me on.

Never said DE can't do anything. As I already stated, business discussions happen continuously on all manner of topics. All I said was storefronts and platform owners have to put their own stakes on the table to make it happen. Again, you cooked this one out of thin air.

4 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

But they don't have an incentive to approach their partners, because it isn't as profitable for them to do exclusives as it is to make universal bundles. But this isn't very convincing because of how many of these bundles they've actually made, especially when they haven't made the same kinds of bundles universally available. Nothing directly equivalent exists. DE has made at least 5 universal cash-only bundles but even at a glance you can tell that they're not quite the same thing, and even if you include other cash-only things like Prime Access Accessories there are still a few more exclusive bundles than universal. If it really wasn't as profitable to make exclusive cash-only bundles, then it stands to reason that there would be more universal cash-only bundles. But this isn't the case in reality: there are no direct equivalents, and even after relaxing the comparison the universal bundles don't even break even.

Again, not what I said. What I said was exclusivity deals need storefronts and platform owners to intervene to make them happen, because baseline business incentives will gravitate towards one that generate the most revenue, i.e. universal packs.

And again, your "cash-only" qualifier is arbitrary and has no basis in reality, existing only to justify your argument. The vast majority of cosmetic packs are universal, and they all generate revenue.

4 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

But you're leaving out plat bundles. I never brought them up to begin with, and you agree with me that "you probably can't compare them". So it's not a good or honest comparison and doesn't carry much weight when talking about expanding the existing lines of exclusive cash-only bundles. It's apples and oranges.

I said you can't compare their economics, but that was never a justification to exclude them when talking about business incentives, other than to arbitrarily justify your argument. Again, dishonestly twisting my words.

That you failed to include plat purchase packs, seemingly out of some idea that they don't generate revenue and therefore have no bearings on business incentives, is not my problem.

[kgabor]

I'm not a fan of exclusive skins in general, but releasing more skins for the platform relevant to the platform like the Nvidia ones sounds good to me.

No hurt in that, War Thunder also has an Nvidia decal.

[(PSN)DoctorWho_90250]

On 2021-05-07 at 9:03 AM, BloodKitten said:

considering the fact consoles get skins exclusive to thier platform, should PC users get some skins exclusive to the platform?

for example, nvidia themed skin or anything (this is unrelease yet available in game)

PC have exclusive stuff that won't come to consoles. For example, Vauban's Phased Skin (Steam) and Chapelon Helmet are not on consoles.

[Paradoxity]

4 hours ago, (PSN)DoctorWho_90250 said:

PC have exclusive stuff that won't come to consoles. For example, Vauban's Phased Skin (Steam) and Chapelon Helmet are not on consoles.

There's also always the founder packs, but I'm not sure if those'd really be PC exclusive per se, or just they were a timed exclusive deal. 

[PublikDomain]

5 hours ago, KnossosTNC said:

Never my argument. You just cooked this one out thin air.

Then you've done an incredibly poor job of articulating yourself.

Spoiler

On 2021-05-07 at 11:21 PM, KnossosTNC said:

Unfortunately for you, the term "platform" is very well defined. I'm only following that definition.

As I said, platform or storefront exclusive content is driven purely by business decision making. Therefore, whether it happened or not ultimately comes down who decided for what. I would point out the intent behind these deals again; are they intended to benefit the platform, or only the storefronts?

On 2021-05-08 at 3:55 PM, KnossosTNC said:

You can call it "overly-narrow" all you want. As I said, unfortunately for you, the term "platform" is very well defined. You do not get to arbitrarily ignore or merge it.

 

It reads as if you consider platforms and storefronts as separate concepts. Whats all this if not you arguing over the definition and usage of the term "platform"?

Though I did find a quote that maybe highlights where your misunderstanding stems from:

On 2021-05-08 at 12:19 PM, KnossosTNC said:

But again, you do not get to arbitrarily discard "PC" as a hardware and OS platform just because you think they're not important.

I didn't say PC isn't a hardware or software platform, I said that there is no singular owner of it so the premise that some singular entity needs to reach an exclusivity deal is nonsensical. So I said that instead of asking "who owns PC" like you did on page 1, it's better to say "no one, duh" and move on to focus on the individual companies like Steam or EGS who are involved in that ecosystem. And that when you do that, it becomes clear what bundles available to PC-based players would look like: just like the Discord bundle we had in the past. In that way your concerns about Steam and EGS having to sell the same pack doesn't exist since they'd each get their own, nor do your concerns about Steam and EGS hypothetically one day moving to consoles since their exclusives would follow them. Hopefully this clears it up.

5 hours ago, KnossosTNC said:

Never said DE can't do anything. As I already stated, business discussions happen continuously on all manner of topics. All I said was storefronts and platform owners have to put their own stakes on the table to make it happen. Again, you cooked this one out of thin air.

Then again you've done an incredibly poor job articulating yourself, since you've repeatedly said this over the last 4 pages:

Spoiler

On 2021-05-07 at 2:28 PM, KnossosTNC said:

They could, but there is no incentive to. At the end of the day, the storefronts still have to offset the lost benefit. The ball is ultimately in their court.

On 2021-05-07 at 12:59 PM, KnossosTNC said:

The initiative lies with the storefront owners.

So again, who's going to negotiate for PC as a whole?

On 2021-05-07 at 1:27 PM, KnossosTNC said:

Why would they want to? DE benefit much more from making such cosmetics available to all platforms. Again, the initiative lies with the storefronts, or anyone willing to make a deal and pay up front.

On 2021-05-07 at 2:28 PM, KnossosTNC said:

They could, but there is no incentive to. At the end of the day, the storefronts still have to offset the lost benefit. The ball is ultimately in their court.

On 2021-05-07 at 4:23 PM, KnossosTNC said:

I'm simply explaining why that hasn't happened yet; it's because they have no incentive to.

 

 It reads as if you're saying DE has no incentive to initiate these kinds of discussions, and that instead their partners need to have the initiative. What else were you trying to say, if not that? And ironically:

On 2021-05-08 at 7:14 PM, KnossosTNC said:

Now you're twisting my words to set an arbitrary standard for fact. As I've already explained, business discussions happen continuously on all sorts of things. There is no initiation by any side, and the result is a mutual agreement.

So you've said multiple times that DE has no incentive to initiate these kinds of discussions and that the initiative lies with the storefronts, but you've also changed your mind and said that there is no initiation by any side. Yet I'm "dishonest". 🙄

5 hours ago, KnossosTNC said:

And again, your "cash-only" qualifier is arbitrary and has no basis in reality, existing only to justify your argument. The vast majority of cosmetic packs are universal, and they all generate revenue.

That you failed to include plat purchase packs, seemingly out of some idea that they don't generate revenue and therefore have no bearings on business incentives, is not my problem.

Well no, it's not arbitrary, because these things don't have anything to do with DE selling packs like the exclusive cosmetic bundles since they're in different revenue streams. Like, if you want to talk about DE selling new hoodies on their merch store, does it make any sense to bring up how DE sells Prime Access packs and would be more incentivized to sell more of those instead? Not really, because they're different parts of separate revenue streams so directly comparing them in terms of profitability or "maximizing revenue" doesn't make sense; it's apples and oranges. Or really apples and strawberries, since apples and oranges at least both grow on trees. There is no honest comparison that can be made, so a comparison shouldn't be made. But you could make a comparison to other physical merchandise and say idk that DE should focus on selling T-shirts instead because they might sell better than hoodies, or something. That'd be apples to apples.

So if you want to make an honest comparison to the exclusive time limited, reskin-focused, consistently themed, cash-only packs, what universal packs would there be? Which universal packs look like this:

There are none that are quite the same thing. But there are a few universal time limited, model-focused, cash-only packs. There's the Origin pack or whatever it was called, the Empyrean Supporter Pack, and the Deimos Supporter Packs, and maybe Prime Access Accessories. They look like this:

So while they're not identical, they're close enough to be reasonably comparable. These are the packs you can make honest comparisons to. I hope this helps you understand what I've been trying to say.

[KnossosTNC]

1 hour ago, PublikDomain said:

Then you've done an incredibly poor job of articulating yourself.

  Reveal hidden contents

 

It reads as if you consider platforms and storefronts as separate concepts. Whats all this if not you arguing over the definition and usage of the term "platform"?

You claimed that I said, quote; "But Steam isn't a platform." Nowhere in the bits you quoted have I even suggested that, let alone explicitly asserted it. It is not relevant to my points, which are a) Steam, EGS and the PC platform are separate and distinct entities, and b) the definition of what is a platform is very well-defined. You can't just arbitrarily mash them together or discard them just because you feel like it.

Again, you cooked this out of thin air.

1 hour ago, PublikDomain said:

Though I did find a quote that maybe highlights where your misunderstanding stems from:

I didn't say PC isn't a hardware or software platform, I said that there is no singular owner of it so the premise that some singular entity needs to reach an exclusivity deal is nonsensical. So I said that instead of asking "who owns PC" like you did on page 1, it's better to say "no one, duh" and move on to focus on the individual companies like Steam or EGS who are involved in that ecosystem. And that when you do that, it becomes clear what bundles available to PC-based players would look like: just like the Discord bundle we had in the past. Hopefully this clears it up.

And as I have already demonstrated, storefront exclusives and "PC exclusive" are not the same thing. Just because the PC has no singular owner does not mean you get to arbitrarily discard the PC platform as unimportant to this distinction, just because you think it's "nonsensical." The PC platform, with its lack of singular owner, is still there, just as valid to discussion as the Xbox platform or the PlayStation platform. Again, unfortunately for you, the term "platform" is very well defined. You do not get to pick and choose this.

1 hour ago, PublikDomain said:

Then again you've done an incredibly poor job articulating yourself, since you've repeatedly said this over the last 4 pages:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

It reads as if you're saying DE has no incentive to initiate these kinds of discussions, and that instead their partners need to have the initiative. What else were you trying to say, if not that? And ironically:

So you've said multiple times that DE has no incentive to initiate these kinds of discussions and that the initiative lies with the storefronts, but you've also changed your mind and said that there is no initiation by any side. Yet I'm "dishonest". 🙄

And I have already explained on page 2 that businesses discuss all sorts of things all the time, a lot of which do not come to fruition. You're talking about initiating any kind discussion from scratch, which I explicitly stated is not how these business discussions work. I'm talking about turning those discussions into actual deals. You can flap your gums all you want but nothing gets done until a deal is signed, and that's where the initiative lies with the storefronts, because DE's baseline business incentive will gravitate them towards universal packs.

So yes, you're dishonestly constructing an argument I never made and has explicitly refuted all the way back on the second page.

1 hour ago, PublikDomain said:

Well no, it's not arbitrary, because these things don't have anything to do with DE selling packs like the exclusive cosmetic bundles since they're in different revenue streams. Like, if you want to talk about DE selling new hoodies on their merch store, does it make any sense to bring up how DE sells Prime Access packs and would be more incentivized to sell more of those instead? Not really, because they're different parts of separate revenue streams so directly comparing them in terms of profitability or "maximizing revenue" doesn't make sense; it's apples and oranges. Or really apples and strawberries, since apples and oranges at least both grow on trees. There is no honest comparison that can be made, so a comparison shouldn't be made. But you could make a comparison to other physical merchandise and say idk that DE should focus on selling T-shirts instead because they might sell better than hoodies, or something. That'd be apples to apples.

Nope, what's actually apples and oranges is you equating side merchandise business with core software business, the later of which is what these cosmetic packs are, regardless of how you pay for them. The product is the same, and revenue is revenue. You do not get to arbitrarily exclude plat purchased packs just because their existence is inconvenient to your argument.

1 hour ago, PublikDomain said:

So if you want to make an honest comparison to the exclusive time limited, reskin-focused, consistently themed, cash-only packs, what universal packs would there be? Which universal packs look like this:

There are none that are quite the same thing. But there are a few universal time limited, model-focused, cash-only packs. There's the Origin pack or whatever it was called, the Empyrean Supporter Pack, and the Deimos Supporter Packs, and maybe Prime Access Accessories. They look like this:

Ah yes, first it was "cash-only," now its also "time limited," "reskin-focused," and "consistently themed." Let's just staple yet more arbitrary conditions to further narrow definition of what's being discussed to try to justify your argument. But wait...

1 hour ago, PublikDomain said:

So while they're not identical, they're close enough to be reasonably comparable. These are the packs you can make honest comparisons to. I hope this helps you understand what I've been trying to say.

Oh, they're "not identical." I suppose we can't compare them after all, by your logic. There seems to be a limit to your arbitrary condition to what counts after all.

As I said, what you're trying to say has no basis in reality. They are all software cosmetic products, which is explicitly the topic of this thread, and they all generate revenue. They all therefore have weight when it comes to DE's business incentives when marketing these cosmetic packs. You do not get to arbitrarily exclude some just because they're "not identical."

[PublikDomain]

5 minutes ago, KnossosTNC said:

You claimed that I said, quote; "But Steam isn't a platform."

Sorry, I should have been clearer with how I structured that post. The bits in italics are the arguments you've been using, or at least how they've been coming off to me. Though like I said, this is probably just due to you misunderstanding me, which you've been doing quite a lot of. For example again here:

6 minutes ago, KnossosTNC said:

And as I have already demonstrated, storefront exclusives and "PC exclusive" are not the same thing. Just because the PC has no singular owner does not mean you get to arbitrarily discard the PC platform as unimportant to this distinction, just because you think it's "nonsensical." The PC platform, with its lack of singular owner, is still there, just as valid to discussion as the Xbox platform or the PlayStation platform. Again, unfortunately for you, the term "platform" is very well defined. You do not get to pick and choose this.

Where it's like you didn't even read the quote you're replying to where I answered everything you've just repeated.

17 minutes ago, KnossosTNC said:

I'm talking about turning those discussions into actual deals.

Then you haven't been clear about this.

36 minutes ago, KnossosTNC said:

Ah yes, first it was "cash-only," now its also "time limited," "reskin-focused," and "consistently themed." Let's just staple yet more arbitrary conditions to further narrow definition of what's being discussed to try to justify your argument. But wait...

Sweetheart, I'm just trying to be specific since you keep getting so hung up it. I've said from the beginning what kinds of packs I've been talking about, but it's like it's in one ear and out the other with you. For example:

37 minutes ago, KnossosTNC said:

Oh, they're "not identical." I suppose we can't compare them after all, by your logic.

In the text you quoted I literally say that it's a reasonable comparison. Are you even reading the things I'm writing?

Maybe come back when you've cooled down, and take another read through. I've tried to point out where we're diverging and get on the same page with you, but now you're just getting belligerent.

[KnossosTNC]

1 hour ago, PublikDomain said:

Sorry, I should have been clearer with how I structured that post. The bits in italics are the arguments you've been using, or at least how they've been coming off to me. Though like I said, this is probably just due to you misunderstanding me, which you've been doing quite a lot of. For example again here:

And the issue I had was specifically the bit in italics that said "But Steam isn't a platform." I've never used this argument. Again, you just cooked this one out of thin air.

1 hour ago, PublikDomain said:

Where it's like you didn't even read the quote you're replying to where I answered everything you've just repeated.

You have not provided any sound justification to, quote, "move on." You have not provided any reason to discard the PC platform as a separate but still valid entity from the storefronts, other than because it has no singular owner, you think it's "nonsensical" to discuss it, as if the lack of a singular owner somehow disqualifies it from being a factor when pertaining to how exclusivity works. I have already demonstrated that this is not the case.

1 hour ago, PublikDomain said:

Then you haven't been clear about this.

You should have just asked instead of putting words in my mouth.

1 hour ago, PublikDomain said:

Sweetheart, I'm just trying to be specific since you keep getting so hung up it. I've said from the beginning what kinds of packs I've been talking about, but it's like it's in one ear and out the other with you. For example:

In the text you quoted I literally say that it's a reasonable comparison. Are you even reading the things I'm writing?

Then why is it not reasonable to include the plat-purchased packs in this discussion? Why, in your world, should they not factor into DE's business decision, which is the baseline driver of these packs' existence? This thread is explicitly about platform "exclusive" skins. There is no further qualifier beyond that word. No "cash-only," no "time limited," no "reskin-focused," and no "consistently themed." In the context of the question; "should PC get some exclusive skins," it is reasonable to discuss the opposite of that single qualifier. Everything else is just things you arbitrarily bolted on to try to justify your argument.

1 hour ago, PublikDomain said:

Maybe come back when you've cooled down, and take another read through. I've tried to point out where we're diverging and get on the same page with you, but now you're just getting belligerent.

I am "belligerent" because I do not like my post being dishonestly cropped to make it appear I am making an argument I am not. I am "belligerent" because you are arbitrarily discarding things, namely the separate and distinct nature of the PC platform as an entity and plat-purchased cosmetic packs, just because they are inconvenient to your argument. I am "belligerent" because you cooked up an argument I never made out of thin air.

If you're going to use dishonest and arbitrary arguments in this discussion, of course I'm going to call you out on it.

[PublikDomain]

8 hours ago, KnossosTNC said:

And the issue I had was specifically the bit in italics that said "But Steam isn't a platform." I've never used this argument.

Yes, and if you read the bit right after I tried explaining where this misunderstanding might have come from.

8 hours ago, KnossosTNC said:

You have not provided any reason to discard the PC platform as a separate but still valid entity

Because that's not what I've said, and you've completely misinterpreted what I wrote.

8 hours ago, KnossosTNC said:

You should have just asked instead of putting words in my mouth.

What do you think I've been doing? I've been trying to get on the same page with you but you keep hammering away at the same unrelated arguments to the things you've misunderstood.

On 2021-05-07 at 1:02 PM, PublikDomain said:

ETA: Maybe I misunderstood the question

On 2021-05-08 at 1:04 AM, PublikDomain said:

So correct me if I'm wrong, but using the above definitions by "platform" do you really mean "hardware platform", and by "storefront" do you really mean "software platform"? Because that's how what you've been saying comes off.

21 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

Edit: If you've been talking about something different this whole time, then that's kind of on you. I've been clear what I'm talking about since the start:

Maybe we've been talking about different things. 🤷‍♀️

I've got a pretty good understanding now where we've diverged and why nothing either of us is saying makes sense to the other. I've tried explaining why we're not on the same page, but you've ignored it repeatedly. Which makes making an honest reply to your other comment a bit of a wash, because I'll at least try:

8 hours ago, KnossosTNC said:

Then why is it not reasonable to include the plat-purchased packs in this discussion? Why, in your world, should they not factor into DE's business decision, which is the baseline driver of these packs' existence?
...
In the context of the question; "should PC get some exclusive skins," it is reasonable to discuss the opposite of that single qualifier. Everything else is just things you arbitrarily bolted on to try to justify your argument.

Because, like I said, plat-purchased packs are a different part of their revenue stream. When DE sells a new item for plat, what is it intended to do and what kind of player is it for? It's intended to take plat out of the ingame economy, from both paid players and F2P players who have obtained their plat from DE or elsewhere at some unknown point in the past. It doesn't necessarily make people buy more plat using cash, though it's nice if it does. For example, I've got about 1k plat sitting on my account right now. When DE adds Ember's new Deluxe skin, I won't need to spend money to get it, because someone else already has. They'll make no new revenue from that sale, because they've already made that money at some point in the past. This is still very important for DE to add these, and they do, because marketplace items and other plat services are the only way to get plat out of the economy and prevent rapid inflation.

The cash-only packs are different. They're intended to put plat into the ingame economy, and are only available to paid players. They generate immediate revenue, and every pack sold is always going to be new money. The time limited nature of these packs also makes them a good tool for getting F2P players to convert to being paid players, which makes it easier to get them to pay again in the future. So for example if I want the Deimos Supporter Pack's contents I have to spend money on it - there is no other way to get them than by giving DE $5-60.

So if we're talking about revenue, then two monetization strategies in two different revenue streams aren't comparable in any honest way, like in my exaggerated example about hoodies and Prime Access. Likewise, plat skin bundles like the Prisma Excalibur Bundle are not comparable to cash skin bundles like the Jade Axa bundle in terms of revenue, so if revenue is your primary argument it isn't an honest or relevant comparison. What is comparable in terms of revenue are other cash-only packs, like the Origin/Empyrean Supporter/Deimos Supporter packs and maybe Prime Access Accessories. These aren't the same kind of cosmetics, but they are in the same revenue stream, targeting the same players, and made for the same general purposes. And when you compare the relevant packs, you find that they're about evenly split between universals and exclusives. So the premise that universals are better than exclusives doesn't really hold up, because even with the most generous-but-still-relevant comparison there are still a few more exclusives. At best they're equally as prevalent and important.

9 hours ago, KnossosTNC said:

This thread is explicitly about platform "exclusive" skins. There is no further qualifier beyond that word. No "cash-only," no "time limited," no "reskin-focused," and no "consistently themed."

I cut this out because I wanted to address it separately. The platform "exclusive" skins this thread is explicitly about are cash-only, time limited, reskin-focused, and consistently themed. That's what every single one of the packs this thread is explicitly about look like. All of the Renown, Prestige, Esteem, and Prominence packs we're explicitly talking about in this thread were like this. So it seems pretty reasonable to me to keep talking about other cash-only, time limited, reskin-focused, and consistently themed skins. Like in my example before, it wouldn't make sense to bring up Prime Access when talking about selling merch, just like it wouldn't make sense to bring up always-available plat packs when we're talking about time limited cash packs.

9 hours ago, KnossosTNC said:

I am "belligerent" because I do not like my post being dishonestly cropped to make it appear I am making an argument I am not. I am "belligerent" because you are arbitrarily discarding things, namely the separate and distinct nature of the PC platform as an entity and plat-purchased cosmetic packs, just because they are inconvenient to your argument. I am "belligerent" because you cooked up an argument I never made out of thin air.

Right, you're getting belligerent because neither of us are on the same page. In your mind I'm dishonestly cropping things, arbitrarily discarding things, and cooking up arguments. In reality, neither of are talking about the same thing so the quote replies obviously don't make sense, what you're seeing as an arbitrary discarding is a misunderstanding, and the arguments you think I'm cooking up only seem that way because you aren't understanding them.

[Circle_of_Psi]

Nah, the skins for the consoles look terrible anyhow

[KnossosTNC]

2 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

Yes, and if you read the bit right after I tried explaining where this misunderstanding might have come from.

20 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

But Steam isn't a platform. But again that's just semantics. Steam is a software platform, and these platforms are the PC-based equivalent to the console platforms -something you agreed with me on.

Ah yes, falsely claiming that I am once again arguing semantics. Nice explanation.

2 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

Because that's not what I've said, and you've completely misinterpreted what I wrote.

Then answer this simple question: is "Steam exclusive" or "EGS exclucive" the same thing as "PC exclusive?" Simple yes or no. If "no," we can move on. If "yes," you're either going to need a better point or have to agree to disagree.

2 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

What do you think I've been doing? I've been trying to get on the same page with you but you keep hammering away at the same unrelated arguments to the things you've misunderstood.

I've got a pretty good understanding now where we've diverged and why nothing either of us is saying makes sense to the other. I've tried explaining why we're not on the same page, but you've ignored it repeatedly. Which makes making an honest reply to your other comment a bit of a wash, because I'll at least try:

In the first of your quoted instances, I directly answered your question, but then it seems you misinterpreted what I said to construct an argument I never made. In the second, I basically agreed with you, so I don't know what the issue is. And the third is just you limply trying to walk back when I called you out for arbitrarily stapling conditions of what constitutes a "cosmetic pack."

2 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

Because, like I said, plat-purchased packs are a different part of their revenue stream. When DE sells a new item for plat, what is it intended to do and what kind of player is it for? It's intended to take plat out of the ingame economy, from both paid players and F2P players who have obtained their plat from DE or elsewhere at some unknown point in the past. It doesn't necessarily make people buy more plat using cash, though it's nice if it does. For example, I've got about 1k plat sitting on my account right now. When DE adds Ember's new Deluxe skin, I won't need to spend money to get it, because someone else already has. They'll make no new revenue from that sale, because they've already made that money at some point in the past. This is still very important for DE to add these, and they do, because marketplace items and other plat services are the only way to get plat out of the economy and prevent rapid inflation.

An irrelevant technicality when discussing baseline business incentives. Again, all cosmetic packs make money. Just because they don't do it precisely the same way doesn't mean you get to arbitrarily discard any one of them. I don't see how this would affect DE's baseline business incentive, which is the driver on their side for the existence of these packs. Like I said, revenue is revenue.

2 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

The cash-only packs are different. They're intended to put plat into the ingame economy, and are only available to paid players. They generate immediate revenue, and every pack sold is always going to be new money. The time limited nature of these packs also makes them a good tool for getting F2P players to convert to being paid players, which makes it easier to get them to pay again in the future. So for example if I want the Deimos Supporter Pack's contents I have to spend money on it - there is no other way to get them than by giving DE $5-60.

So if we're talking about revenue, then two monetization strategies in two different revenue streams aren't comparable in any honest way, like in my exaggerated example about hoodies and Prime Access. Likewise, plat skin bundles like the Prisma Excalibur Bundle are not comparable to cash skin bundles like the Jade Axa bundle in terms of revenue, so if revenue is your primary argument it isn't an honest or relevant comparison. What is comparable in terms of revenue are other cash-only packs, like the Origin/Empyrean Supporter/Deimos Supporter packs and maybe Prime Access Accessories. These aren't the same kind of cosmetics, but they are in the same revenue stream, targeting the same players, and made for the same general purposes. And when you compare the relevant packs, you find that they're about evenly split between universals and exclusives. So the premise that universals are better than exclusives doesn't really hold up, because even with the most generous-but-still-relevant comparison there are still a few more exclusives. At best they're equally as prevalent and important.

Unreasonable assumption. Just as some of the Tennogen skins are currently "Steam exclusive" for reasons that are unrelated to business incentives, you cannot assume that DE made these packs cash-only for the intentions you stated. You claimed that DE get more direct revenue from these cash-only packs. Then why not lop off the plats and make them the rule rather than the exception? If they drive the plat economy like you claimed, why aren't there a constant stream of them instead of the plats only packs which are already causing the "inflation" that you claimed? All of these questions cannot be answered definitively without possible alternative explanations, and therefore this is unreasonable assumption. DE is not a central bank, trying to save the Riven speculation market from crashing and putting all the Kuva farmers out of work. They're just a video game company trying to make money.

Aside from that, from a business standpoint, such separation are irrelevant. They are all software cosmetic products, they all generate revenue, and thus factor into DE's baseline business motivation. You don't get to staple on arbitrary and unjustifiably assumed qualifiers just because they conveniently suit your argument.

2 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

I cut this out because I wanted to address it separately. The platform "exclusive" skins this thread is explicitly about are cash-only, time limited, reskin-focused, and consistently themed. That's what every single one of the packs this thread is explicitly about look like. All of the Renown, Prestige, Esteem, and Prominence packs we're explicitly talking about in this thread were like this. So it seems pretty reasonable to me to keep talking about other cash-only, time limited, reskin-focused, and consistently themed skins. Like in my example before, it wouldn't make sense to bring up Prime Access when talking about selling merch, just like it wouldn't make sense to bring up always-available plat packs when we're talking about time limited cash packs.

And again, this discussion is about how these packs came into existence. These arbitrary qualifiers have no bearings on DE's baseline business incentive, and you cannot assume that they exist because of them with no alternative explanations. The thread asked for "exclusive skins." Nowhere are your additional qualifiers explicitly mentioned. That they coincidently align do not justify restricting discussion to just the products that carry these qualifiers, other than to conveniently justify your argument.

Correlation does not equal causation, unless evidence is overwhelming, no other possible explanation is available, and the one left makes the most logical sense with the least assumptions (Occam's Razor). As I said, the vast majority of cosmetic packs are universal, which aligns with my assertion that baseline business incentive will gravitate towards universal cosmetic packs, a logically sound inference with no unreasonable assumptions. In contrast, the packs that carry your additional qualifiers are the exceptions rather than the rule, and the existence of these qualifiers cannot be honestly explained through baseline business incentives with no alternative explanations, as I've demonstrated with the Tennogen example. Therefore, your attempt to staple on these qualifiers to narrow discussion is unjustified assumption and bunk.

2 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

Right, you're getting belligerent because neither of us are on the same page. In your mind I'm dishonestly cropping things, arbitrarily discarding things, and cooking up arguments. In reality, neither of are talking about the same thing so the quote replies obviously don't make sense, what you're seeing as an arbitrary discarding is a misunderstanding, and the arguments you think I'm cooking up only seem that way because you aren't understanding them.

On 2021-05-09 at 5:55 AM, KnossosTNC said:

And my point is that the lack of a singular owner is why PC has very few of anything software that is exclusive to it, and that a) these storefronts' business decisions represent only themselves, not the PC platform, and b) as they are separate entities distinct from the PC platform, you cannot assume they will be PC-based forever. To claim that these storefront-exclusive packs equate to "PC exclusive" is therefore technically incorrect and unjustifiably presumptuous, as the gaming market continues to change and evolve.

You cropped this post above to try to paint me as arguing semantics. You discarded the plat-purchased packs, which are the rule rather the exception, for unjustifiable assumptions just because the exceptions, i.e. the packs that carry your specific qualifications, happen to align with your argument. And as I've brought up at the top of this post, you cooked up an argument I never made anywhere, or as you put it, "the arguments you've been using, or at least how they've been coming off to me."

Oh yes, such misunderstanding indeed.

[Krankbert]

You guys still circling?

[KnossosTNC]

7 minutes ago, Krankbert said:

You guys still circling?

Eh. To recall a baseball metaphor I brought up earlier, I even like cricket more than baseball.

I'm in for the full Test match; the whole two Innings each over five days.

[(PSN)Kakurine2]

On 2021-05-07 at 12:08 PM, Ailia_Grimm said:

Tennogen is available for plats on consoles

Not all tennogen makes it too console.  Pc get all tenogen we get like the top 60% of it at a much slower rate.

Realistically pc has multiple benefits over console.