heirloom skins are going to be permanent additions to the market

[Tiltskillet]

59 minutes ago, PollexMessier said:

They promised they wouldn't do something like the founders pack again, but they did.

What was the promise exactly?

[(XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA]

1 hour ago, PollexMessier said:

But they did.
They did break their word.
They promised they wouldn't do something like the founders pack again, but they did.
That's the problem.

So yeah, I do want them to be consistent with breaking their word at this point. Most of us have no trust in their word anymore anyways, so why not break it to benefit the players for once?

"Why not bring Excal prime back too then?" Exactly. Why not? Some founders actually lost that stuff to DE's half baked cross save launch so it's really only fair to them to be able to get it back at this point. I don't really care about getting the founders stuff myself but if that has to happen for them to make up for this trainwreck, then just do it. If they get sued for it, good. They deserve it. Not for reverting their crap decision mind you, but for making it in the first place. Shouldn't have happened.

And I'm going to continue pissing about it until they do, or I get too fed up with their BS to ever come back. Because they don't keep their word.

What was that promise exactly? Because if it was "we dont do another *prime pack* like that" or something along those lines that's COMPLETELY irrelevant as the heirloom pack =/= prime pack. 

If it was "we promise not to do a time limited exclusive bundle ever again".. then you might at least have a point about them saying "they wouldnt do something like this again".

4 minutes ago, Tiltskillet said:

What was the promise exactly?

Yeah id like to know too

[PublikDomain]

7 hours ago, Tiltskillet said:

What was the promise exactly?

IIRC they (Rebecca?) promised DE would not to do another Founders-type pack. It was on a stream ages ago, maybe someone knows when this was and could point to it. Though I think this may have been more about not doing FOMO/exclusive gameplay content like weapons or mods. Either way if people want to act like the first Heirloom packs should be treated like Founders packs, then DE's promise not to do things like Founders packs again is relevant. FWIW I don't think Heirlooms are anything like Founders and they shouldn't be treated like similar situations.

8 hours ago, PollexMessier said:

But they did.
They did break their word.
They promised they wouldn't do something like the founders pack again, but they did.
That's the problem.

The ones you're looking for are Supporter packs. Those were cosmetics sold as exclusive, limited time, cash-only bundles and some are now available on the market permanently for plat. If you keep talking about Founders you'll keep getting these deflections and excuses. The Deimos Supporter Packs are an almost perfect analog to the first Heirloom packs (cash only, "exclusive", "limited time", "get them before they're gone", etc.) and yet these were brought back just a few months ago with no fanfare, no legal threats, no apologies, no refunds, no nothing. Talk about those.

[Tiltskillet]

22 minutes ago, PublikDomain said:

If you keep talking about Founders you'll keep getting these deflections and excuses.

It's not a deflection to ask about the nature of a dev statement, when nothing about it has been specified.  With no facts I can look up myself I'm making no judgement, but I have noticed that players cite more promises than developers make.

 

Edited June 10 by Tiltskillet

[PublikDomain]

2 minutes ago, Tiltskillet said:

It's not a deflection to ask about the nature of a dev statement, when nothing about it has been specified.  With no facts I can look up myself I'm making no judgement, but I have noticed that players cite more promises than developers make.

I mean the deflections of "well if they bring back Heirlooms then what about Founders". Founders is irrelevant. Heirloom packs aren't Founders packs and don't have the history or supposed importance of Founders packs. The thing that's actually relevant are not the Founders packs, it's the Supporter packs. And with those DE has already brought some back even though they were also sold as exclusive and limited time.

[Tiltskillet]

28 minutes ago, PublikDomain said:

I mean the deflections of "well if they bring back Heirlooms then what about Founders".

Oh, got it.

[PollexMessier]

1 hour ago, PublikDomain said:

The ones you're looking for are Supporter packs. Those were cosmetics sold as exclusive, limited time, cash-only bundles and some are now available on the market permanently for plat. If you keep talking about Founders you'll keep getting these deflections and excuses. The Deimos Supporter Packs are an almost perfect analog to the first Heirloom packs (cash only, "exclusive", "limited time", "get them before they're gone", etc.) and yet these were brought back just a few months ago with no fanfare, no legal threats, no apologies, no refunds, no nothing. Talk about those.

This is actually not true.
In the faq of the supporter packs most if not all of them had a statement specifying that they might return at a later date. This was also the case for prime accessories.
As much as I'd love to use them as a parallel to this situation, DE never actually promised permanent exclusivity on those. Or if they did there was already an existing statement contradicting it.

This is a fine-print BS sort of situation.

Edited June 10 by PollexMessier

[PublikDomain]

9 minutes ago, PollexMessier said:

This is actually not true.
In the faq of the supporter packs most if not all of them had a statement specifying that they might return at a later date. This was also the case for prime accessories.
As much as I'd love to use them as a parallel to this situation, DE never actually promised permanent exclusivity on those.

This is a fine-print BS sort of situation.

The Deimos Supporter pack did not have those notes. The other two did, but only if you interpret the fine print in one of two ways.

The idea of "permanent exclusivity" is odd to me though given how the Deimos Supporter packs were sold:

Quote

For a limited time, begin your journey to the Heart of Deimos with a bang! Get instant access to exclusive Customizations today.
https://store.epicgames.com/en-US/p/warframe--deimos-hive

Quote

Save on Deimos Supporter Packs

Get exclusive Customizations before they’re gone

 

With our next update on the horizon and a new threat to conquer, don’t miss out on the discounted Deimos Supporter Packs, brimming with exclusive Customizations including otherworldly Weapon Skins, the iconic Festering Ephemera and more before they’re gone!

 

Each Supporter Pack is available here for a limited time.

Keep your memories of defeating Infested swarms on the Cambion Drift festering with the Deimos Supporter Packs before they’re gone!

https://www.warframe.com/news/save-on-deimos-supporter-packs

This all suggests that there is a limited time to get exclusive cosmetics before they're gone. Not limited time at the moment. Not gone for a few years. Not exclusive for a short while. Gone gone. Don't miss out because they're going to be gone. And they're exclusive. If anyone can now have them, they're not exclusive.

There are also others which were permanently exclusive and are now not, like the Avia Prime armor set which was "exclusive" to Twitch Prime and was "available for a limited time only". Not "a limited time only for now", limited time only. But these didn't involve direct payment to DE so I'm sure people would nitpick and make excuses for them.

Edited June 10 by PublikDomain

[PollexMessier]

13 minutes ago, PublikDomain said:

The Deimos Supporter pack did not have those notes. The other two did, but only if you interpret the fine print in one of two ways.

The idea of "permanent exclusivity" is odd to me though given how the Deimos Supporter packs were sold:

This all suggests that there is a limited time to get exclusive cosmetics before they're gone. Not limited time at the moment. Not gone for a few years. Not exclusive for a short while. Gone gone. Don't miss out because they're going to be gone. And they're exclusive. If anyone can now have them, they're not exclusive.

There are also others which were permanently exclusive and are now not, like the Avia Prime armor set which was "exclusive" to Twitch Prime and was "available for a limited time only". Not "a limited time only for now", limited time only. But these didn't involve direct payment to DE so I'm sure people would nitpick and make excuses for them.

At one point I found an actual faq page for older supporter packs that explicitly said they may return at a later date. I can't seem to find that page now but I'm certain I did. I don't really have the time to go digging for it atm tho.

But yeah, the upfront language of them is very clear that they wanted you to think they wouldn't

Edited June 10 by PollexMessier

[PublikDomain]

1 minute ago, PollexMessier said:

At one point I found an actual faq page for older supporter packs that explicitly said they may return at a later date. I can't seem to find that page now but I'm certain I did. I don't really have the time to go digging for it atm tho.

I'm not sure if there's a generic Supporter Pack FAQ page, but there are footnotes on a few of the packs themselves:

Quote

One per account. Items marked with * will be exclusive to this pack for a limited time. All other items and Customizations are available for purchase with Platinum in the in-game Market.

https://www.warframe.com/news/angels-of-the-zariman-supporter-packs

Quote

One per account. Items marked with * will be exclusive to this pack for a limited time.

...

Please note: The New War Supporter Packs will contain four time-limited exclusives: Ravurex Gunblade Skin, Narmer Color Palette, Archon Nira Glyph and Archon Nira Sigil. All other items and Customizations will be available for purchase with Platinum on December 15 in the in-game Market.

https://www.warframe.com/news/the-new-war-supporter-packs

But the wording can be interpreted in multiple ways. What words are "limited time" attached to? "Exclusive" or "this pack"? It could mean that the exclusivity is limited time, but it could also mean that the packs are limited time. With the New War packs they're a little more specific: those four items are specifically described as "time-limited exclusives". Where again you could say that either the items are time-limited and won't be available later unlike "all other items" which will be on the in-game market, or you could try to say that the exclusivity of these items is limited to an undefined range in time.

[PollexMessier]

7 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

I'm not sure if there's a generic Supporter Pack FAQ page.

Maybe I was just thinking of the prime accessories packs and got my wires crossed. I can't find anything of the sort anymore.

7 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

"One per account. Items marked with * will be exclusive to this pack for a limited time."

...

"Please note: The New War Supporter Packs will contain four time-limited exclusives: Ravurex Gunblade Skin, Narmer Color Palette, Archon Nira Glyph and Archon Nira Sigil. All other items and Customizations will be available for purchase with Platinum on December 15 in the in-game Market."

https://www.warframe.com/news/the-new-war-supporter-packs

But the wording can be interpreted in multiple ways. What words are "limited time" attached to? "Exclusive" or "this pack"? It could mean that the exclusivity is limited time, but it could also mean that the packs are limited time. With the New War packs they're a little more specific: those four items are specifically described as "time-limited exclusives". Where again you could say that either the items are time-limited and won't be available later unlike "all other items" which will be on the in-game market, or you could try to say that the exclusivity of these items is limited to an undefined range in time.

The thing that's weird about this is that all the items listed as time limited exclusives are also marked with a star, indicating that they'll only be exclusive for a limited time.

Regardless, the Deimos supporter pack has no such stipulations that I can find.

I think the catch with these is that limited time has never really meant "never to be available again" (tho I'd argue that adding "exclusive" to the end of that phrase does). What sets Founder and Heirloom apart from the supporter packs tho is that they did actually say that quite clearly.

Still, I say DE is very bad at keeping promises, It's very frustrating that most of the ones they do keep are the ones massive amounts of their playerpase are constantly telling them not to.

They're eating it financially ether way anyways.

[(XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA]

On 2024-06-10 at 12:45 PM, PublikDomain said:

I mean the deflections of "well if they bring back Heirlooms then what about Founders". Founders is irrelevant. Heirloom packs aren't Founders packs and don't have the history or supposed importance of Founders packs. The thing that's actually relevant are not the Founders packs, it's the Supporter packs. And with those DE has already brought some back even though they were also sold as exclusive and limited time.

I think "what about founders then" *is* relevant. But even if we pretend for a moment the founders pack never existed.

Fact of the matter is they promised time limited exclusivity. 

And they already responded to the feedback by saying theyre gonna stick to that because people bought it with that in mind. 

"They made a commitment" is a relevant point regardless of how you feel about founder packs.

[zThulsaDoomz]

1 hour ago, (XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA said:

I think "what about founders then" *is* relevant. But even if we pretend for a moment the founders pack never existed.

Fact of the matter is they promised time limited exclusivity. 

And they already responded to the feedback by saying theyre gonna stick to that because people bought it with that in mind. 

"They made a commitment" is a relevant point regardless of how you feel about founder packs.

This

 

[PublikDomain]

4 hours ago, (XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA said:

I think "what about founders then" *is* relevant. But even if we pretend for a moment the founders pack never existed.

Fact of the matter is they promised time limited exclusivity. 

And they already responded to the feedback by saying theyre gonna stick to that because people bought it with that in mind. 

"They made a commitment" is a relevant point regardless of how you feel about founder packs.

If you think they've made "commitments" to Heirlooms here, then what about all their other "commitments" they've made and then broken over and over and over and over again? In so many other examples DE has made the same kinds of claims of exclusivity and limited availability and people have bought things with those claims in mind. Do those not matter?

Founders packs are the only things that have ever had this "commitment" actually backed up, and the only reason the community gives them a pass - which we really shouldn't - is because of the mythos that's been built up around them. This is why I say they're irrelevant here. Founders are the one exception and Heirlooms are nothing like them. What they're actually like are all the other times DE sold cash-only, time-limited, exclusive cosmetic content in Supporter Packs. So there's no reason they can't break these supposed "commitments" here as well, the same way they've broken them for this kind of content in the past, even as recently as only a few months ago, which they've done for the good of the entire rest of the community that had been left out.

And on the topic of "commitments", what has DE actually committed to for Heirlooms? Not selling them this way ever again. Not using FOMO, not selling elitism, and not inflating packs with fluff. They've even committed to not selling them only for cash! The "commitment" DE wants to make with Mag and Frost on the other hand is the commitment to not correct any of these things that happened in the past even though they're doing so for every other Heirloom that will follow in the future. Their "commitment" is to not make things right for any of the players they used the fear of missing out to coerce into purchasing things they may not have wanted at that time or may not have been able to afford, or to players who only wanted one of the two skins or who didn't want the filler plat and Regal Aya but had no choice but to pay for it anyways. There's someone in the main Heirloom thread who just today said they "had to live on noodles for a month" after buying these items. That's what DE's committing to upholding? If we're talking about "commitments", DE should be committing to the fair monetization that has made this game so successful - not some "commitment" to give a few people something to flex on the poors and newbies with.

Edited June 12 by PublikDomain

[(XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA]

12 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

If you think they've made "commitments" to Heirlooms here, then what about all their other "commitments" they've made and then broken over and over and over and over again? In so many other examples DE has made the same kinds of claims of exclusivity and limited availability and people have bought things with those claims in mind. Do those not matter?

Founders packs are the only things that have ever had this "commitment" actually backed up, and the only reason the community gives them a pass - which we really shouldn't - is because of the mythos that's been built up around them. This is why I say they're irrelevant here. Founders are the one exception and Heirlooms are nothing like them. What they're actually like are all the other times DE sold cash-only, time-limited, exclusive cosmetic content in Supporter Packs. So there's no reason they can't break these supposed "commitments" here as well, the same way they've broken them for this kind of content in the past, even as recently as only a few months ago, which they've done for the good of the entire rest of the community that had been left out.

And on the topic of "commitments", what has DE actually committed to for Heirlooms? Not selling them this way ever again. Not using FOMO, not selling elitism, and not inflating packs with fluff. They've even committed to not selling them only for cash! The "commitment" DE wants to make with Mag and Frost on the other hand is the commitment to not correct any of these things that happened in the past even though they're doing so for every other Heirloom that will follow in the future. Their "commitment" is to not make things right for any of the players they used the fear of missing out to coerce into purchasing things they may not have wanted at that time or may not have been able to afford, or to players who only wanted one of the two skins or who didn't want the filler plat and Regal Aya but had no choice but to pay for it anyways. There's someone in the main Heirloom thread who just today said they "had to live on noodles for a month" after buying these items. That's what DE's committing to upholding? If we're talking about "commitments", DE should be committing to the fair monetization that has made this game so successful - not some "commitment" to give a few people something to flex on the poors and newbies with.

>but what about other commitments 

>no no you cant bring up another commitment (founders pack) thats irrelevant.

At this point its just cherry picking.

They made a "commitment" in the description of the pack itself and if im not mistaken already responded to the backlash by saying while they would add plat to increase the value proposition they wouldnt reneg on the exclusivity. If i remember correctly, they also said they wouldnt drop the price on those either because people already bought it.

yeah, they made all these commitments about heirloom packs *moving forward* but that doesnt mean theyre obligated to apply that retroactively.

They already have a backlash from people throwing a fit about mag and frost lets not pretend nobody would be mad of they did what people are asking, brought them back permanently the new price structure.

"i wish i knew if i had just waited i could get these skins for a pittance of plat instead of having to spend like 80 dollars or whatever and buy all this extra S#&$ i didnt really want anyway"

"Can i get a refund?"

"De lied to me" 

Etc.

If you wanna talk about what other commitments DE has allegedly broken we can talk about that but from what im seeing in this thread its not exactly a slam dunk.

"They said they wouldnt do founders packs again". Heirloom pack =/= founders pack. I guess you could argue theyre SIMILAR in some ways but this reminds me of when a few salty founders were crying about excalibur umbra being similar to excalibur prime.

"What have they actually committed to"

Well, if you bothered to read the description for the pack, and DE's response to feedback about it, they've committed to time limited exclusivity for those packs for better or worse.

 

15 hours ago, zThulsaDoomz said:

This

 

Thank you.

Edited June 12 by (XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA

[PublikDomain]

51 minutes ago, (XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA said:

At this point its just cherry picking.

Yes, some people are cherry picking.

People are pointing to the outcome of the Founders packs while ignoring the mountain of other examples of the exact opposite happening.

If you look at these examples as a whole, and look at more than just one cherry-picked example (Founders), DE does not actually honor these "commitments" to exclusivity or limited availability. Founders is the sole exception to that rule due to its very specific circumstances that Heirlooms do not share.

51 minutes ago, (XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA said:

yeah, they made all these commitments about heirloom packs *moving forward* but that doesnt mean theyre obligated to apply that retroactively.

While it's true that they're not obligated to correct the mistakes they made in the past, they should anyways. "We won't fleece or coerce you in the future, but we're also not going to do anything to help the people we already fleeced and coerced in the past". That's just S#&$ty.

51 minutes ago, (XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA said:

They already have a backlash from people throwing a fit about mag and frost lets not pretend nobody would be mad of they did what people are asking, brought them back permanently the new price structure.

Even though the reception to Ember Heirloom has been immensely positive?

Quote

Absolutely massive W.

$25 is a lot, but isn't completely unreasonable if you truly love it.

And if you just want the signa? Buy the signa.

10/10. Other companies say they listen, but DE ACTUALLY listens. It's refreshing as hell.

Quote

Heirloom plat buy options, can be all bundled or separate purchases. They'll also be in the market on rotation with future heirlooms, making them easily available.

Mag and frost Heirloom's died and took all the sins with them.

Big win o7

Quote

Actually huge change, way better than I expected.

Quote

You can get it for plat and not only real money like the last heirloom (475 I think). Big up to DE

Previous heirlooms won't come back but futures ones seems to go the way Ember is going.

Etc.

Sure there's a handful of people angry at the idea of the poors getting to participate, but who should DE be making their commitments to? A handful of elitists who want to flex their money, or *everyone else*?

51 minutes ago, (XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA said:

"i wish i knew if i had just waited i could get these skins for a pittance of plat instead of having to spend like 80 dollars or whatever and buy all this extra S#&$ i didnt really want anyway"

People paid a bunch of money for things they didn't want to pay a bunch of money for?

That's bad.

Those players should get a refund, and DE should be ashamed of resorting to these kinds of predatory practices in the first place.

51 minutes ago, (XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA said:

Well, if you bothered to read the description for the pack, and DE's response to feedback about it, they've committed to time limited exclusivity for those packs for better or worse.

Which, if you bothered to look at all of these other examples, is a commitment DE does not actually uphold outside of one exception. Their "commitment" to limited exclusivity has been routinely dropped for the sake of the rest of the community.

Edited June 12 by PublikDomain

[(XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA]

5 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

Yes, some people are cherry picking.

People are pointing to the outcome of the Founders packs while ignoring the mountain of other examples of the exact opposite happening.

If you look at these examples as a whole, and look at more than just one cherry-picked example (Founders), DE does not actually honor these "commitments" to exclusivity or limited availability. Founders is the sole exception to that rule due to its very specific circumstances that Heirlooms do not share.

While it's true that they're not obligated to correct the mistakes they made in the past, they should anyways. "We won't fleece or coerce you in the future, but we're also not going to do anything to help the people we already fleeced and coerced in the past". That's just S#&$ty.

Even though the reception to Ember Heirloom has been immensely positive?

Etc.

Sure there's a handful of people angry at the idea of the poors getting to participate, but who should DE be making their commitments to? A handful of elitists who want to flex their money, or *everyone else*?

People paid a bunch of money for things they didn't want to pay a bunch of money for?

That's bad.

Those players should get a refund, and DE should be ashamed of resorting to these kinds of predatory practices in the first place.

Which, if you bothered to look at all of these other examples, is a commitment DE does not actually uphold outside of one exception. Their "commitment" to limited exclusivity has been routinely dropped for the sake of the rest of the community.

Oh christ.

1) thats a real nice display of mental gymnastics, but youre still cherry picking. My point stands.

2) I keep hearing all this ado about "but theyve broken commitments before so why cant they break this one". 

This fails to hold water with me on multiple levels. 

First of all, failing to keep a promise on one occasion doesnt mean they can or should say F it and not consider themselves bound to honor their word. 

Secondly, I have yet to see an example that sets any real precedent for them to drop their word on this that doesnt rely on ambiguity or a stretch of logic, or a stretch of interpretation. They seemed pretty clear about this not coming back. 

Im not aware of any examples of time limited exclusivity being worded this strongly and NOT being honored. Not without some fine print or asterisk or something. 

3) i think "predatory" is a bit hyperbolic. Nobody held a gun to my head and forced me to buy anything. Yes it would have been nice if you could just buy the skins by themselves but that ship has sailed.

4) "but look at all the positive feedback about ember" so what? Thats like saying because mesa prime access was well received they should bring back excal prime access. 

5) we can argue about this all day but my psychic prediction is they arent gonna bring them back, period. Whether they "should" or not. They've stuck to their guns on way bigger pushback than this. (Aoe nerfs wukong nerfs, excal prime, for examples)

6) even if just for the sake of argument they caved and brought them back what about the people who paid full price for the packs. That opens a can of worms.

You say i *should* get a refund, okay so am i gonna have to return the plat I already spent? The regal aya I already spent? Or do i just get all that for free? 

[PublikDomain]

1 hour ago, (XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA said:

1) thats a real nice display of mental gymnastics, but youre still cherry picking. My point stands.

Yes, because looking at all of the available examples is "cherry picking". Cherry picking what, the whole tree? There are a wealth of examples to choose from. There are cosmetics. There are promotions. There are paid FOMO exclusive bundles. There are weapons and mods. Which would you like to hear about?

1 hour ago, (XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA said:

First of all, failing to keep a promise on one occasion doesnt mean they can or should say F it and not consider themselves bound to honor their word. 

You call it "failing to keep a promise", but I call it "recognizing that their promise was harmful and not worth keeping". DE should not honor their bad promises.

1 hour ago, (XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA said:

Secondly, I have yet to see an example that sets any real precedent for them to drop their word on this that doesnt rely on ambiguity or a stretch of logic, or a stretch of interpretation. They seemed pretty clear about this not coming back. 

Im not aware of any examples of time limited exclusivity being worded this strongly and NOT being honored. Not without some fine print or asterisk or something. 

There are plenty of examples of DE relying on terms like "last chance" and "get it before its gone" and "exclusive" and "limited time". These don't have any fine points or asterisks because they don't need any. Here, have some examples of DE changing their mind on exclusive, limited time only content.

Spoiler

FOR A LIMITED TIME ONLY

EXCLUSIVE

FOR A LIMITED TIME, EXCLUSIVE

EXCLUSIVE, BEFORE THEY'RE GONE, FOR A LIMITED TIME.

EXCLUSIVE

ONLY be wielded by those Tenno who have been with Warframe through the thick and thin of Closed Beta. You have earned it!

EXCLUSIVE, THIS WEEKEND ONLY.

EXCLUSIVE

FOUR TIME-LIMITED EXCLUSIVES

The only way to claim that these aren't what they were so obviously marketed as is to, ironically, do exactly what you're complaining about and rely on ambiguity and a stretch of logic and interpretation.

1 hour ago, (XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA said:

3) i think "predatory" is a bit hyperbolic. Nobody held a gun to my head and forced me to buy anything. Yes it would have been nice if you could just buy the skins by themselves but that ship has sailed.

You can pick whatever term you'd like to describe using FOMO sales tactics. Remember, that's sales tactics that leverage the fear of missing out! What would you call a sales tactic that relies on fear? Underhanded? Icky? Skeevy? Not very nice? Coercive? Impolite? Pick whatever term you'd like. The EU calls these kinds of practices aggressive and unfair.

And guess what? You were forced to buy these packs if you wanted anything they contained because DE intentionally used bundling practices to make you have to pay for more than you might want to which is not a nice thing to do to your customers. DE knew people would ask about the not very nice bundling practices used in the packs and that's why there was a bit in the FAQ telling these people to pound sand from day one!

1 hour ago, (XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA said:

4) "but look at all the positive feedback about ember" so what? Thats like saying because mesa prime access was well received they should bring back excal prime access. 

I guess I should just say "so what" about your points. Ok, here:

7 hours ago, (XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA said:

They already have a backlash from people throwing a fit about mag and frost lets not pretend nobody would be mad of they did what people are asking, brought them back permanently the new price structure.

So what?

1 hour ago, (XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA said:

They've stuck to their guns on way bigger pushback than this. (Aoe nerfs wukong nerfs, excal prime, for examples)

And they've caved to less pushback than this as well. Is there plat in Prime Resurgence? Yes? You're welcome. Pushback made that happen. Do you have an Ignis Wraith in your clan? You're welcome. Do you have a Primed Chamber? You're welcome. Do you have a Braton or Lato Vandal? You're welcome. Do you have Vacuum on all your pets? You're welcome. Is it not split into three individual mods? You're welcome. Pushback is the only reason we have any of these things.

1 hour ago, (XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA said:

You say i *should* get a refund, okay so am i gonna have to return the plat I already spent? The regal aya I already spent?

Well yeah because that's how a refund works? A refund isn't a magic "I get my money back and also get to keep all the things". Why would you expect anything differently?

[(XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA]

4 hours ago, PublikDomain said:

Yes, because looking at all of the available examples is "cherry picking". Cherry picking what, the whole tree? There are a wealth of examples to choose from. There are cosmetics. There are promotions. There are paid FOMO exclusive bundles. There are weapons and mods. Which would you like to hear about?

You call it "failing to keep a promise", but I call it "recognizing that their promise was harmful and not worth keeping". DE should not honor their bad promises.

There are plenty of examples of DE relying on terms like "last chance" and "get it before its gone" and "exclusive" and "limited time". These don't have any fine points or asterisks because they don't need any. Here, have some examples of DE changing their mind on exclusive, limited time only content.

  Reveal hidden contents

FOR A LIMITED TIME ONLY

EXCLUSIVE

FOR A LIMITED TIME, EXCLUSIVE

EXCLUSIVE, BEFORE THEY'RE GONE, FOR A LIMITED TIME.

EXCLUSIVE

ONLY be wielded by those Tenno who have been with Warframe through the thick and thin of Closed Beta. You have earned it!

EXCLUSIVE, THIS WEEKEND ONLY.

EXCLUSIVE

FOUR TIME-LIMITED EXCLUSIVES

The only way to claim that these aren't what they were so obviously marketed as is to, ironically, do exactly what you're complaining about and rely on ambiguity and a stretch of logic and interpretation.

You can pick whatever term you'd like to describe using FOMO sales tactics. Remember, that's sales tactics that leverage the fear of missing out! What would you call a sales tactic that relies on fear? Underhanded? Icky? Skeevy? Not very nice? Coercive? Impolite? Pick whatever term you'd like. The EU calls these kinds of practices aggressive and unfair.

And guess what? You were forced to buy these packs if you wanted anything they contained because DE intentionally used bundling practices to make you have to pay for more than you might want to which is not a nice thing to do to your customers. DE knew people would ask about the not very nice bundling practices used in the packs and that's why there was a bit in the FAQ telling these people to pound sand from day one!

I guess I should just say "so what" about your points. Ok, here:

So what?

And they've caved to less pushback than this as well. Is there plat in Prime Resurgence? Yes? You're welcome. Pushback made that happen. Do you have an Ignis Wraith in your clan? You're welcome. Do you have a Primed Chamber? You're welcome. Do you have a Braton or Lato Vandal? You're welcome. Do you have Vacuum on all your pets? You're welcome. Is it not split into three individual mods? You're welcome. Pushback is the only reason we have any of these things.

Well yeah because that's how a refund works? A refund isn't a magic "I get my money back and also get to keep all the things". Why would you expect anything differently?

I'll go and say this while im at it. Its not like im gonna be upset if they bring them back, somehow. I just really dont think they're going to. At all. Ever. 

Hey, maybe i'll turn out to be wrong. Ive been wrong about what DE will or wont do but I doubt it. Based on comments they've made, *they* seem to think of it as similar to the founders promise of exclusivity.

*they*, clearly, have stuck to their guns on that one and it stands to reason if that is the case they will on this one too. 

I consider it even more remote of a possibility that they'll do what you really want and bring them back with the new pricing structure. I think its *unlikely* that many (read, more than a few) people would throw a fit about the packs being brought back in defiance of what they stated, but I think you *would* see some backlash about that. Moving on.

1) what i think is cherry picking is looking at the founders exclusivity promise and looking at the heirloom exclusivity promise and saying NO NO WE CANT COMPARE THOSE but at the same time trying to bring up other things happening, and ignoring differences or relying on things like ambiguity or semantics to make the comparison.

2) we can debate whether the promise is stupid and DE should forget it exists, or not, that's one thing. But using the basis of other "promises being broken" to justify breaking this one doesnt hold water with me for reasons already stated. At this point that becomes a completely different argument. 

3) "last chance" "get it before its gone" "limited time" and even "exclusive" doesnt explicitly state that whatever item(s) in question are going to be sold for a limited time only and never coming back.

You could argue a reasonably prudent person might interpret it that way, and I get that, but the way they've talked about these packs is different. Theyve said in no uncertain terms it isnt coming back. 

This is *exactly* my point about ambiguity. You can compare those things to the heirloom packs but you'd have to ignore the different phrasing in the description for the packs themselves, and ignore the words from DE, including when specifically responding to feedback about the time gate. 

4) Do i like FOMO? No. Would I be happy if DE decided to make a committment to never relying on FOMO ever again? Sure. But way I see it the magfrost fomo ship has already sailed.

5) i dont like the supposition that i was *forced* to buy these packs. The supposition that I was "forced to" implies it wasnt a voluntary decision on my part but something completely out of my control hoisted upon me like a drunk driver crossing over the center line and wrecking my S#&$. I might make impulsive decisions sometimes but Id like to think i have at least a smidge of self control. "Bundling" isnt a new concept, isnt unique to warframe, and isnt some huge alien monolith that brain washed me into giving DE my card info. 

6) objection. Relevance.

7) the issue is the plat that came with the bundle was already spent. And a decent amount of it was spent on trades with other players, not the market. Then theres the regal aya to consider. 

So DE would either have to put me at negative plat balance or take "the high road" and say okay we're refunding you AND the plat in question is on us.

That's a big ask my guy.

"Refund me the difference between ember's price 2x (mag and frost) and what i paid for the pack and let me keep everything that was in the pack" isnt something I'd hold my breath for. 

Im not gonna say thats impossible, but that seems pretty unlikely.

[(PSN)slightconfuzzled]

I feel like whenever I leave a really long detailed explanation on this subject, that thread in particular, will start to fade away, like I cursed it lol, but also means I feel like I am constantly having to repeat myself. I also get the impression sometimes, that some people will be more annoyed at DE if the brought back Heirlooms, because it will mean they "were wrong" in some of their online conversations. 

Personally? I don't know if DE will or won't bring the packs (Mag and Frost) back, I've covered the legal aspects multiple times in-depth before, to my best current understanding whilst acknowledging I am not a legal expert, so I won't here. At the moment I would think it currently unlikely, but I also thought the rerelease of Supporter packs was unlikely as well, before they happened. Also I recently rewatched a lot of last years Tennocon/Tennolive, and it was a bit amusing how much they avoided actually emphasising how much these packs "won't return" and instead referred to them as "like Support packs", and left all the specifics of the "won't ever return" back, to the FAQ, which, no longer exists? I can't find it anymore, maybe its just me. They could have referred to them as "being like Founders packs" but I think we all know why they didn't yes?

I personally think that the wording for them, (Heirlooms, is a bit more emphatic than certain past items, but not dramatically so. That and many people just seem unaware and lacking in knowledge over such of those other comparable examples. Even at the time of Heirlooms, and more than that, like... It takes effort to actually have to remember or find out a lot of that. So it makes sense a lot of people will be unaware and not know. Especially when DE will often update pages, offers, details on pages, if they change their mind. Its why I was thankful to a few people like PublikDomain who will actually go back, and take screenshots and do the leg work. I have a memory for some of them, but I understand why some people might not take mine or others recollection for fact.

Wording nuances aside, we already have actually had several people who felt induced to buy Supporter backs because of the language used, that were unhappy and critical when they were made available again. Specifically we had a thread about it on these forums. Whilst I sympathised with such users situations, I was personally overall pretty happy with that decision. Even as someone who had brought some Supporter Packs. In no way did I diminish the people who brought those packs, because of wording like "get them before they are gone" even if some may argue "well, get them before they are gone, doesn't mean, you won't possibly get a chance to get them again", but here's the thing... Hypothetically, if DE just decided to bring back Mag and Frost Heirlooms in 2 years time, you can also say "well just because they said you will never be able to get these again, doesn't mean that DE can't just change their mind and decide that actually, change of plans, you can now get them again" because to some who have brought Supporter packs, thats essentially what happened, and if someone wants to say "well legally speaking", thats complex and something I have already addressed many times. Short version is, that certain language that can be said to induce and pressure people into making purchases they might not otherwise, could mean that DE could already be liable based on past decisions. That also being said, there are a whole lot of other variables involved, like intent to deceive, the passage of time, and changes in marketing and plans (also the idea of physical limited goods VS digital goods), and a lot of this is just more on the theory side, since usually... well its not exactly a huge priority with law, with legal precedents available to the best of my knowledge, so you'd have to actually have someone, some group, actually have some money, and desire to see such issues sorted out legally, and whilst you might get some Forum complainers, would there actually be any people who would be that bothered to actually front money, legal fees, time, resources etc? 

Also speaking personally, strictly just personally, I am a bit burned out on the topic. I think most of us should be generally happy with how things turned out. DE listened Heirlooms are improved, will be improved. If people still feel or think critically and are annoyed over Mag and Frost, I also wouldn't blame them. I don't actually think bringing them up, a lot at this point will likely do too much... Not that I am trying to tell other people how or what they should criticise... Its more of a discretionary thing. We are also talking about DE here, they can take time to do stuff. They likely want people to be hyped over Ember Heirloom and the next Heirloom to be announced. In a a few years, it could actually be more topical to bring them back up, and it might be easier for DE to make a reversal or change. People who think they won't return, I can get, the people who strongly insist they shouldn't, ehhh... Eventually though, when we get more Heirlooms that are in rotation, I think the majority of people will think its weird that Frost and Mag are excluded and question it, and DE will be in a position to say their decision in hindsight was wrong, and so they will decide to make amends. I also don't think that refunds would be unrealistic, because I highly doubt many would actually take them up. Was a bundle pack, would they be fine with stuff they brought with Plat or Regal Aya being removed from their accounts as well, just so they could send a message of disapproval over other people getting access? Or would they just leave an angry forum message? Again though, to be clear, I don't say that mockingly, because thats already happened and been a thing with other Supporter packs, earlier this year. Though it could also be something DE could offer a partial refund over, and maybe more people might take that refund, if DE were to determine roughly how much the skins should be valued and offer that, as to separate it from other extras. Either way, the financial benefits could outweigh the costs, and I think would be a nice gesture, and the goodwill and general outcome would be consumer friendly as well. FOMO tactics, and shady manipulative wording in advertising disguised as acts and ideas of consumer friendliness, isn't actually consumer friendly. 

I like DE because they set the bar high, especially compared to other games companies. Even when they dip below the bar, it can be disappointing, but they also tend to bounce back and set the bar higher. They are also good at taking criticism and player frustration, without taking it too personally (DE Reb had a great talk about this a few years back. Think it was at GDC if anyone is interested. 2018 IIRC). 

[PublikDomain]

9 hours ago, (XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA said:

1) what i think is cherry picking is looking at the founders exclusivity promise and looking at the heirloom exclusivity promise and saying NO NO WE CANT COMPARE THOSE but at the same time trying to bring up other things happening, and ignoring differences or relying on things like ambiguity or semantics to make the comparison.

I really don't see how looking at Founders and Supporter packs and Twitch Prime content and CB/OB content and all these other pieces of "exclusive", "time limited", etc. content to see how all of them as a whole have been treated is "cherry picking". "We have 10 examples and 9 of them show X" is not "cherry picking". "Yeah well but those 9 don't matter because the wording is a little different only this 1 example matters" is "cherry picking". And getting there literally relies on ambiguity and semantics! "Oh well they didn't say it was exclusive exclusive". "Oh well they actually said it was limited time for a limited time". "Oh well with those you didn't pay DE directly". "Oh well those were given as gifts they're different". For example:

9 hours ago, (XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA said:

3) "last chance" "get it before its gone" "limited time" and even "exclusive" doesnt explicitly state that whatever item(s) in question are going to be sold for a limited time only and never coming back.

You're literally relying on ambiguity and semantics!

9 hours ago, (XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA said:

2) we can debate whether the promise is stupid and DE should forget it exists, or not, that's one thing. But using the basis of other "promises being broken" to justify breaking this one doesnt hold water with me for reasons already stated. At this point that becomes a completely different argument. 

I would happily talk about their promises being stupid and not worth upholding, but if what you're saying boils down to "well DE made a promise", well, DE's made a lot of promises. And those promises are regularly broken. Why should their promise matter here if it hasn't ever mattered anywhere else - except for one other (cherry-picked) thing?

9 hours ago, (XBOX)ECCHO SIERRA said:

7) the issue is the plat that came with the bundle was already spent. And a decent amount of it was spent on trades with other players, not the market. Then theres the regal aya to consider. 

So DE would either have to put me at negative plat balance or take "the high road" and say okay we're refunding you AND the plat in question is on us.

That's a big ask my guy.

Yes, that is how refunds and chargebacks work. When you refund a game, you do not get to keep the game. When you refund plat, you do not get to keep the plat. When you refund a PA, you do not get to keep the items in the PA. When you refund a shirt, you do not get to keep the shirt. This is normal - what's the problem? When you break down the pricing, refunding an original pack to then buy everything back would cost quite a bit more than if you didn't refund. So if you've already spent the contents of the packs and still like the skins, why refund? The only reasons to seek a refund are if A) you didn't want something you got in the packs, like if you only wanted Mag but not Frost or you only wanted the Signas but not the skins or you only wanted the skins but not the plat and RA, and had to overpay for things you didn't want and would rather have paid less for the things you actually wanted or B) you're upset at the change in exclusivity and are refunding out of principle. In either case you don't get to keep what you bought, why would you? When I refunded my artbook order out of principle, I assure you DE didn't say "oh ok here's your $200 back but hey we'll ship you the book anyways".

Edited June 13 by PublikDomain

[OneOmniverse]

They still haven't fully corrected it though, as people still missed out on Mag and Frost because of greed and fear of missing out. 

[waikang414]

On 2024-06-02 at 1:07 AM, PollexMessier said:

Limited time only on hierlooms was such and unbelievably stupid decision. It completely killed so much good will they built up and made a ton of players drop off the game during what should have been one of the most hype times in the game's history. All because they got too greedy for their own good.

I'm glad the backlash has made them backpetal on the exclusivity of supporter packs. and new hierlooms will now be permanently available for platinum (but on a rotation) But the timed exclusivity never should have happened. They probably lost at least 5x as much future revenue as they gained short term from that idiotic decision. They definitely lost several hundred dollars from me. I was planning on actually dumping a lot of money into this game once I finally got a job. Now I have a job, and because Heirloom happened I'm never going to give them another dime. In fact now that I have the money to buy other games I scarcely boot up warframe at all anymore. Once I get a new computer and have access to all the more recent games I've been wanting to play I might drop the game entirely. And believe me I would still be going back to it if they didn't pull that crap. I hope whatever marketing exec made that decision was fired. Genuinely.

Funny that I dumped a lot of money in this game when I was in secondary and uni. Now I have a job and doesn't give a f about the game and simply spend money to buy cosmetic that I like, I bought the mag and frost heirloom simply because those 2 were my main Warframe back in 2016 and I'm glad I bought it

[PollexMessier]

6 hours ago, waikang414 said:

Funny that I dumped a lot of money in this game when I was in secondary and uni. Now I have a job and doesn't give a f about the game and simply spend money to buy cosmetic that I like, I bought the mag and frost heirloom simply because those 2 were my main Warframe back in 2016 and I'm glad I bought it

Your only post on the forums is defending DE's scummy anti-consumer business decisions?

Congratulations you're part of the problem. Glad you feel good about yourself.

[Zandatsu1207]

On 2024-06-01 at 1:57 PM, _Anise_ said:

maybe they should revisit this and give mag a second heirloom skin if they aren't willing to rotate the first again?

Finally someone who speaks with some common sense without the blinders on.

If for some reason DE decides to revisit the concept of Mag and Frost Heirlooms, giving them entirely new heirloom skins at the current release style for Ember and future Heirlooms would be the best outcome for both parties in the whole debate of "Bring back Mag/Frost Heirloom!" And "They shouldn't bring them back ever and keep their word." Move the glowing crystal parts of the original heirlooms to make the second heirlooms unique in their own right to keep the people who bought the originals from raging and requesting a refund happy to keep their "flex" cosmetics while allowing everyone else to have a cosmetic that lives up to the design/hype/etc. of the originals.

It's the most "middle of the road" solution to this whole debate. Can't bring back Mag/Frost heirlooms as much as people beg for it? Make new ones for the people who didn't get the first ones.