Thoughts On Releasing The Aklato Prime And Dual Skana Prime [Please Be Civil And Constructive]

[The_Lunatic_]

Thinking that they sold the image of a gun doesn't make it true.  How many times should they have had to write the works "Lato prime" and "skana prime" to make it clear to you that they were selling you a package that included the lato prime and the skana prime?

 

Well, give DE Drew has stated he'd regard such action as "Sneaky" it's quite clear that you're on your own in thinking that. Sorry.

[Aggh]

Well, give DE Drew has stated he'd regard such action as "Sneaky" it's quite clear that you're on your own in thinking that. Sorry.

That's called being diplomatic.  He's acknowledging that he has heard the opinions of the community.  It's not the first time a dev has done that.

Edited June 10, 2014 by Aggh

[The_Lunatic_]

I just think that it's better to re-release all these items and find a way to refund Founders in a way that doesn't limit them. I think a platinum refund is very limiting. If you could put platinum towards the purchase of any warframe-related item, like Prime Access or something of that sort, then a platinum refund would be ok. It's the same reason I would never be for a reset - you only get a platinum refund, but you can't reacquire everything you once had because not everything is acquirable through plat.

 

It's impossible to put a price on an exclusive item.

 

It can't be obtained and it never will be again. It's valueless and and the most valuable thing at the same time.

 

The only proper refund would be more exclusive items.

[The_Lunatic_]

That's called being diplomatic.  He's acknowledging that he has heard the opinions of the community.  It's not the first time a dev has done that.

 

No, if you read his post, you'll he stated in his own opinion he thought that, and the other players of the community had told him that to.

 

 

So, for clarity, DE Drews thinks that abusing the technicality is "Sneaky".

 

Sneaky, rarely being a positive word in regards to business practices.

Edited June 10, 2014 by Cingal

[Aggh]

No, if you read his post, you'll he stated in his own opinion he thought that, and the other players of the community had told him that to.

 

 

So, for clarity, DE Drews thinks that abusing the technicality is "Sneaky".

 

Sneaky, rarely being a positive word in regards to business practices.

I suggest that you go back and read it again.

 

He's acknowledged "that those variants could/would feel like a sneaky way to get around exclusivity."

 

Acknowledging that people could feel that way is not the same as agreeing with them.

Edited June 10, 2014 by Aggh

[The_Lunatic_]

I suggest that you go back and read it again.

 

He's acknowledged "that those variants could/would feel like a sneaky way to get around exclusivity."

 

Acknowledging that people could feel that way is not the same as agreeing with them.

 

And are you of the opinion that DE would act in a way to make those whom help found the game feel like they had do something "Sneaky".

 

Is it not logical that they would want to avoid such things which make Founders whom made the game possible feel cheated?

[Aggh]

And are you of the opinion that DE would act in a way to make those whom help found the game feel like they had do something "Sneaky".

 

Is it not logical that they would want to avoid such things which make Founders whom made the game possible feel cheated?

No, I'm of the opinion that they would gauge it versus the possible benefits of releasing them.  Any business worth its salt would do so. 

 

Founders have been getting mad and threatening to quit over all sort of things for quite a while now.  At one point or another DE is going to have to put their foot down and assert their right to run their game as they see fit, especially if they're under no binding obligations to do otherwise.  Maybe now is the time.  Maybe it's not.  It's up to DE.

Edited June 10, 2014 by Aggh

[Mithie]

And are you of the opinion that DE would act in a way to make those whom help found the game feel like they had do something "Sneaky".

 

Is it not logical that they would want to avoid such things which make Founders whom made the game possible feel cheated?

Well, according to aggh, founders are:

 

1. Leeches who happened to hop on a really good deal

2. Make up for an insignificant portion of the player base

3. Contributed only enough funds to sustain DE for a short time and made little to no impact in the long run

 

So, I don't think founders feeling "cheated" is really something he'd mind very much.

[dragonkingdx]

 

 

 

But why would they?

 

And importantly, why would they with an item which founders paid money for?

 

Event items, sure, nobody spent money on those.

 

But a founder exclusive item which was sold for real money?

 

No, don't be silly.

 

Well in a logical standpoint if we are going by the set of making dual versions of exclusives it would make more sense to start with the first set then moving on. (ofc that only works with side weaps/melee since there isnt a dual main weap *yet*)

 

still on page 43 lol gotta catch up

[The_Lunatic_]

No, I'm of the opinion that they would gauge it versus the possible benefits of releasing them.  Any business worth its salt would do so.

 

Can you provide one benefit towards releasing these weapons specifically over a new set of dual weapons?

 

If so, does this reason outweigh the overwhelmingly negative response this idea has had?

 

If not, is it not logical to assume DE has found the same conclusion?

[Mesyra]

Well, according to aggh, founders are:

 

1. Leeches who happened to hop on a really good deal

2. Make up for an insignificant portion of the player base

3. Contributed only enough funds to sustain DE for a short time and made little to no impact in the long run

 

So, I don't think founders feeling "cheated" is really something he'd mind very much.

 

 

And are you of the opinion that DE would act in a way to make those whom help found the game feel like they had do something "Sneaky".

 

Is it not logical that they would want to avoid such things which make Founders whom made the game possible feel cheated?

 

 

I suggest that you go back and read it again.

 

He's acknowledged "that those variants could/would feel like a sneaky way to get around exclusivity."

 

Acknowledging that people could feel that way is not the same as agreeing with them.

 

 

No, if you read his post, you'll he stated in his own opinion he thought that, and the other players of the community had told him that to.

 

 

So, for clarity, DE Drews thinks that abusing the technicality is "Sneaky".

 

Sneaky, rarely being a positive word in regards to business practices.

 

 

No, I'm of the opinion that they would gauge it versus the possible benefits of releasing them.  Any business worth its salt would do so. 

 

Founders have been getting mad and threatening to quit over all sort of things for quite a while now.  At one point DE is going to have to put their foot down and assert their right to run their game as they see fit, especially if they're under no binding obligations to do otherwise.

too much hostility between you too, cool it down or get off of this thread, I will not have you two jeopardizing my discussion. stop twisting words and stop biting each others necks. we are humans, not dogs.

[Aggh]

Can you provide one benefit towards releasing these weapons specifically over a new set of dual weapons?

 

If so, does this reason outweigh the overwhelmingly negative response this idea has had?

 

If not, is it not logical to assume DE has found the same conclusion?

Money.  Lots of it.

 

DE has a full schedule right now.  Assuming anything about content releases beyond what they themselves have explicitly revealed isn't realistic.

[OniDax]

The fact that DEDrew mentioned that other players feel like it'd be a sneaky way of getting around exclusivity means that those feelings aren't being ignored.

 

Either way, whatever decision is made, it isn't going to happen soon. So, I'm gonna just look forward to Loki Prime and Wyrm Prime tomorrow.

Edited June 10, 2014 by AntoineFlemming

[Mithie]

too much hostility between you too, cool it down or get off of this thread, I will not have you two jeopardizing my discussion. stop twisting words and stop biting each others necks. we are humans, not dogs.

No, you can't do that.

 

We've already established that the dual/ak versions of the weapons are not part of the founder's exclusive set. We have word of mouth from DE confirming that.

 

The discussion now is how much respect the community/DE should give the founders and whether it makes sense to release these variants despite how "sneaky" the action may be perceived.

 

It's clear to me that aggh is taking the position of founders deserving no such respect, and DE should release the variants regardless. This is a valid position, but it's one that I disagree with. We're having a civil discussion about these differences.

 

So if you want to moderate this discussion, you either have to take a side, and moderate that side only, or be fair, in which case you can't jump into a tail end of a conversation and accuse one side of twisting words when just a few pages ago, the other side was calling us "entitled children" and you let them proceed without a word.

Edited June 10, 2014 by mithie2

[Noobstein]

Didn't even bother with 47 pages of replies but, in my opinion, founders exclusives should remain exclusives. They did something few people do: give money to a complete stranger hoping he will make something good with it. In this case, it happen, but it was a gamble, don't you think? For this trust and this kind of support, they deserve something... well, exclusive. Please stop inventing ways to steal that from them, it's not fair. What will you want next, their profile icon? Their badges? Treat them with a little more respect. Thank you.

[Aggh]

The fact that DEDrew mentioned that other players feel like it'd be a sneaky way of getting around exclusivity means that those feelings aren't being ignored.

 

Either way, whatever decision is made, it isn't going to happen soon. So, I'm gonna just look forward to Loki Prime and Wyrm Prime tomorrow.

Exactly.  They aren't being ignored.   It's common practice to acknowledge customer complaints, even if you aren't necessarily going to follow them to the letter. 

 

I'm not saying that they will,  but all they've said is that dual variants wouldn't necessarily violate exclusivity promises and that they acknowledge that some people feel releasing them would be sneaky.  Reading beyond that isn't really productive since the statement doesn't really make any promises. 

 

It's an acknowledgement of the discussion and not much more than that.

Edited June 10, 2014 by Aggh

[Zagrax]

I've suggested this in the past, regarding the mastery thing. Just make it so that "unobtainable" mastery is granted at certain rank milestones automatically so everyone is on even footing regarding that

[OniDax]

True. It doesn't make promises either way.

[5Billion]

That's sensible of course.  In the event of a refund upon a sale/specialty item (which is somewhat rare) the person receiving the refund doesn't acquire the full value, they get back their purchasing price.  I suppose the only reason I did the break down was because there was a bit of a back and forth about the value of things and I felt like being the nerd I am.

Here are some founders trying to bring p more arguments to shoot down this proposal 

 

First of all, founders got a discount on platinum, which means they actually got the better end of the deal. Just becuase youre a founder doesnt mean youve put any more money into this game than anyone else, it actually means u put less in (initially)

 

Second of all, the argument about AkLato Prime and Dual Skana Prime being "different but the same" (another founders argument) is complete bullS#&$ and makes no sense WHATSOEVER. Viper isnt the same as twin vipers, vasto isnt the same as akvasto, magnus as akmagnus, etc..

Dual weapons are separate from their single variant counterparts.

 

So if there arent anymore legitimate arguments, then let's try to get DE's opinion on releasing AkLato Prime and Dual Skana Prime for BOTH founders and non-founders as compensation for non-founders missing the chance to buy the single variants (basically the proposal of the OP and the community moderator).

 

 AND PLEASE stop with all the attacking each other and S#&$, gets no one anywhere.

Edited June 10, 2014 by TitNinja

[Mithie]

Here are some dumbass founders trying to bring p more arguments to shoot down this proposal 

 

First of all, founders got a discount on platinum, which means they actually got the better end of the deal. Just becuase youre a founder doesnt mean youve put any more money into this game than anyone else, it actually means u put less in (initially)

 

Second of all, the argument about AkLato Prime and Dual Skana Prime being "different but the same" (another founders argument) is complete bullS#&$ and makes no sense WHATSOEVER. Viper isnt the same as twin vipers, vasto isnt the same as akvasto, magnus as akmagnus, etc..

Dual weapons are separate from their single variant counterparts.

 

So if there arent anymore legitimate arguments, then let's try to get DE's opinion on releasing AkLato Prime and Dual Skana Prime for BOTH founders and non-founders as compensation for non-founders missing the chance to buy the single variants (basically the proposal of the OP and the community moderator).

 

 AND PLEASE stop with all the attacking each other and S#&$, gets no one anywhere.

 

This is crazy. You can't tell us to stop "attacking each other" right after calling founders who disagree with you "dumbass founders".

[NightBeats]

AND PLEASE stop with all the attacking each other and S#&$, gets no one anywhere.

 

I would remove the "dumbass founders" part of your post, otherwise this seems redundant. Thank you for insulting me, by the way.

[5Billion]

I would remove the "dumbass founders" part of your post, otherwise this seems redundant. Thank you for insulting me, by the way.

ok other than that for which i apologize, this is the best suggestion thats come about so far

 

and i was saying that people keep trying to bring up new arguments about pricing, exclusivity, the legal S#&$ and different but the same which was even MORE redundant than me telling you guys to stop

[Mesyra]

ok other than that for which i apologize, this is the best suggestion thats come about so far

 

and i was saying that people keep trying to bring up new arguments about pricing, exclusivity, the legal S#&$ and different but the same which was even MORE redundant than me telling you guys to stop

thank you for fixing your post.

[Blatantfool]

 Lets try to remember that we're talking about the game and not trying to attack each other for having opinions. It is one thing to think someone's opinion is wrong or bring up why you think their thinking isn't quite right - it is a whole other thing to start taking potshots with insults.

[Mithie]

ok other than that for which i apologize, this is the best suggestion thats come about so far

 

and i was saying that people keep trying to bring up new arguments about pricing, exclusivity, the legal S#&$ and different but the same which was even MORE redundant than me telling you guys to stop

 

So let me get this straight. You come into this discussion AFTER we've come to a conclusion about exclusivity, with DE confirming it (that conclusion being the ak/dual variants are not part of the founder's package), tell us that our discussion is complete bullS#&$ and redundant, and that we should stop.

I think I've played with you before.

 

You're the rhino prime that charges into a room after everything is dead, stomp the ground, and tell us all the chill out because you just saved the day.

 

So let me fill you in on where we are.

 

We've established that:

 

1. Ak/Dual variants are not part of the founder's package

2. Any release, including OP's suggestion, is technically feasible

3. Certain members of the community would feel that this is a sneaky way to go about it regardless

4. DE_Drew expressed he is aware of points 1,2, and 3.

 

The direction of the discussion now, I believe, is gauging just how much of this community feels that way, and whether point 3 is significant enough to override points 1 and 2.

Edited June 10, 2014 by mithie2