Anyone Else Wish They Could Buy Only The Targis Armour Set...

[Liminal]

Since u14 i got 5 75% discounts, 50% discount on prime access aint gonna win me since i got that every day.

Well I haven't gotten one in over two years :P

 

 

Anyway dude, I'm not trying to tell you that I like the way it is...I'm just making the point that this is how a monopoly works. Obviously DE has a monopoly of their own economy. Could they make more the other way? Clearly they don't think so...you've been around long enough to know the playerbase would crap a brick if DE tried to charge $30 "just" for a syndana...which was the only part of prime access they wanted anyway.

But perhaps they will notice that more people would buy prime accessories if they weren't bundled with something that is completely useless (ie: the same as paying for a whole bunch of nothing) or completely unwanted.

Edited October 7, 2014 by The_Doc

[Tyreuzs]

50 Dollars for a exclusive and beautifull armor set which won't be available after this prime access anymore? it was totaly worth it.

[Taranis49]

Those analogies don't work at all; you're comparing companies operating in a free market (real life) with one that has complete control over a closed market (warframe's virtual economy).

Firstly, cable companies have no exclusives of their own to sell typically. If you can't get the channel you want from them, you'll simply go elsewhere and get it. However, you can't buy a prime sugatra from Blizzard, or EA.

You can better equate this to collectors editions. They typically cost MORE than the sum of their parts, or at least reasonable price for those parts. How can we make people pay $79 for a $59 game? Simple, add a cloth map and an ingame pistol re-skin "exclusives".

Your argument would say "fine, I'll buy the pistol reskin and the cloth map for $20....and just buy the game used, or get it from a friend. Too bad, they won't sell it like that. If you want the exclusives, you buy the bundle.

Anyway dude, I'm not trying to tell you that I like the way it is...I'm just making the point that this is how a monopoly works. Obviously DE has a monopoly of their own economy. Could they make more the other way? Clearly they don't think so...you've been around long enough to know the playerbase would crap a brick if DE tried to charge $30 "just" for a syndana...which was the only part of prime access they wanted anyway.

Ahem, I'll note that you made the comparison to companies in a free market in "real life" before I did:

"Someone new asks this same question every week; apparently much of the world doesn't understand that combining a few exclusive shinys with mundane 'stuff' is how bundles have worked since the start of time."

Unless you're going to try and claim that the video game industry predates fast food or telecom, there's no way you can credibly claim your original statement precludes them. ;-)

Nevermind that the secondary point's only about half-true, e.g. quite a few major cities only have one cable provider in a given area which gives them a local monopoly (I've seen it cross-country, from the Southwest to Northeast). Comcast in particular gets a bad rap for it (look at the maps for coverage in say, Minneapolis-St Paul, there's no other cable provider in the urban parts of the city and that's not even accounting for the effects of the potential Time Warner acquisition)... and they still market it as a value to bundle the products/services in question because they're marketing a non-essential good.

This seems to be the key point you're missing, you're trying to talk in terms of gains instead of instead of avoiding losses; it don't work like that. Having a monopoly doesn't matter if your products/services aren't needed/desired enough to outweigh the loss incurred by the buyer when purchasing them - they'll just do without.

Even in your chosen example of Collector's Editions, they typically try to market it as a "value" alongside the exclusiveness of its parts (and even then there's a fair chance they'll part them out down the line), beyond that, they're also marketing the item to players that are generally new to the product and haven't played the game yet... so most of the items are likely to be desirable (additional weapons to help them start, skins, maps/missions, et al.).

By contrast, you can't really make the same claim with stuff like Prime Access accessories, since the people most inclined to buy it are likely established players for whom the bulk of the parts aren't appealing (as I noted in my first post in the thread, look how people reacted to getting a booster in Avalanche and they didn't lose anything getting it but time). Same applies to newer players that can actually make the most of them since there's likely not many that are going to dump $50 when the game's free and they may end up bailing... Particularly since many of the most powerful items in the game can be obtained on the cheap from trading (including the most prominently advertised ones in Prime Access).

I've rarely seen a company work so hard not to get payed. :-P

Edited October 7, 2014 by Taranis49

[Tyreuzs]

if DE make targis armor at 10$, bet more players will waste money for it (and i will probadly one of them) because it more tempting to buy the armor at 10$ rather than 50$ 

like:

50$ => only few would buy

10$ => almost 3/4 players in the game will buy.

there the profit DE would make.

(just my opinion)

The majority bought that armor set,syandanas etc from the prime access for the exclusivity. If everyone would run around with that armor set there would be nothing special anymore.

[Mesyra]

I am not sure why there is so much negativity towards an idea like this.

 

this is more profit for DE because more people will buy the items, theres a plus.

 

this is better for the player base that does not want certain items even on their accounts, theres another plus.

 

this is more reasonable as a business practice, think lunch combos at McDonalds, you can buy just the sandwich instead of a sandwich, drink, and fries. yet again, another plus.

 

this is worse for the people who want to feel special and dont want as many people to buy it because they cant be frivolous with their money and every purchase to them needs to be worth it. there is a minus... I guess.

 

I've never seen something fought this much when it is a win/win situation for both parties.

 

DE sells to more people=DE gets more money.

 

Players buy items they want=they dont have buyers remorse and regret purchasing the items therefore not buying again.

Edited October 8, 2014 by VYR3

[Davoodoo]

The majority bought that armor set,syandanas etc from the prime access for the exclusivity. If everyone would run around with that armor set there would be nothing special anymore.

Half year from now you would see barely anyone with it and to prove that i will point out how many excal primes are there, last one ive seen is mine from like a month ago.

[notionphil]

Ahem, I'll note that you made the comparison to companies in a free market in "real life" before I did:

"Someone new asks this same question every week; apparently much of the world doesn't understand that combining a few exclusive shinys with mundane 'stuff' is how bundles have worked since the start of time."

Unless you're going to try and claim that the video game industry predates fast food or telecom, there's no way you can credibly claim your original statement precludes them. ;-)

Nevermind that the secondary point's only about half-true, e.g. quite a few major cities only have one cable provider in a given area which gives them a local monopoly (I've seen it cross-country, from the Southwest to Northeast). Comcast in particular gets a bad rap for it (look at the maps for coverage in say, Minneapolis-St Paul, there's no other cable provider in the urban parts of the city and that's not even accounting for the effects of the potential Time Warner acquisition)... and they still market it as a value to bundle the products/services in question because they're marketing a non-essential good.

This seems to be the key point you're missing, you're trying to talk in terms of gains instead of instead of avoiding losses; it don't work like that. Having a monopoly doesn't matter if your products/services aren't needed/desired enough to outweigh the loss incurred by the buyer when purchasing them - they'll just do without.

Even in your chosen example of Collector's Editions, they typically try to market it as a "value" alongside the exclusiveness of its parts (and even then there's a fair chance they'll part them out down the line), beyond that, they're also marketing the item to players that are generally new to the product and haven't played the game yet... so most of the items are likely to be desirable (additional weapons to help them start, skins, maps/missions, et al.).

By contrast, you can't really make the same claim with stuff like Prime Access accessories, since the people most inclined to buy it are likely established players for whom the bulk of the parts aren't appealing (as I noted in my first post in the thread, look how people reacted to getting a booster in Avalanche and they didn't lose anything getting it but time). Same applies to newer players that can actually make the most of them since there's likely not many that are going to dump $50 when the game's free and they may end up bailing... Particularly since many of the most powerful items in the game can be obtained on the cheap from trading (including the most prominently advertised ones in Prime Access).

I've rarely seen a company work so hard not to get payed. :-P

 

Fair enough, I suppose I was implicitly referring to bundles of items that come with exclusive items. Not bundles of individually available items like fast food value packs. I do believe my point stands when regarding those such bundles, with the collectors pack example.

 

Yes, businesses do position a collectors pack as a value, and DE positions Prime Access as a value.

 

They make a huge point about the 'savings' and value. I'm not making the point that they are doing a great job selling Prime Access, however they did themselves recently state that its their primary revenue driver (can anyone remember when this slipped out?). Clearly DE believes this is the best way for them to monetize. You've probably seen me around enough to know that I speak my opinion (pro or con) about DE/WF and am not white-knighting.

 

In this case, I do believe that it's probably in DE's best financial interest to keep prime access as is. Remember for a moment that DE does sell regular accessories, all the time. Where is the uprising and clamor for those accessories? Show me the money; I see far more Tenno without them than with.

 

Now, you're telling me that if DE suddenly releases an accessory, calls it prime, and sells it for $20 or $30 instead of ~$5 (like the existing accessories), that's going to improve their cashflow? They are going to reliably sell so much more of that accessory that it replaces nearly their entire Prime Access revue?

 

Because that's what will happen. Nearly no one will buy Prime Access for $79 if you can get the exclusives for $20.

 

And people aren't exactly beating down the door to buy the $5 accessories, so I don't see the logic there that raising prices by  %400 on accessories (but still not enough to be an 'exclusive' price) will jump to a better return. What's really happening here is that people want the prime accessories BECAUSE they are expensive and exclusive.

 

The second you remove that exclusivity, the big spender "whale" players no longer buy the item, bc it doesn't show-off how exclusive they are. Like most businesses at scale, the pareto principle is likely in full effect here and DE makes ~80% of it's revenue from ~20% of its customers. Do you think those customers are the ones asking for cheaper packages? No. They are the customers who will no longer have a reason to spend like whales, if these changes happen.

 

Would stars clamour to wear gucci if it were $10 and sold at Walmart? I think we both know the answer, as it would lose all of its exclusivity. If they wanted to capitalize on the lower price point market, Gucci would release a 'lower tier' line at walmart, GucciToo. Which are the $5 accessories we already have.

 

 

 

 

 

I am not sure why there is so much negativity towards an idea like this.

 

I can't speak for others...but for me, I'm not "negative" to the request...I'm just trying to explain why it's not going to happen.

Edited October 8, 2014 by notionphil

[Taranis49]

Fair enough, I suppose I was implicitly referring to bundles of items that come with exclusive items. Not bundles of individually available items like fast food value packs. I do believe my point stands when regarding those such bundles, with the collectors pack example.

 

Yes, businesses do position a collectors pack as a value, and DE positions Prime Access as a value.

 

They make a huge point about the 'savings' and value. I'm not making the point that they are doing a great job selling Prime Access, however they did themselves recently state that its their primary revenue driver (can anyone remember when this slipped out?). Clearly DE believes this is the best way for them to monetize. You've probably seen me around enough to know that I speak my opinion (pro or con) about DE/WF and am not white-knighting.

 

In this case, I do believe that it's probably in DE's best financial interest to keep prime access as is. Remember for a moment that DE does sell regular accessories, all the time. Where is the uprising and clamor for those accessories? Show me the money; I see far more Tenno without them than with.

 

Now, you're telling me that if DE suddenly releases an accessory, calls it prime, and sells it for $20 or $30 instead of ~$5 (like the existing accessories), that's going to improve their cashflow? They are going to reliably sell so much more of that accessory that it replaces nearly their entire Prime Access revue?

 

Because that's what will happen. Nearly no one will buy Prime Access for $79 if you can get the exclusives for $20.

 

And people aren't exactly beating down the door to buy the $5 accessories, so I don't see the logic there that raising prices by  %400 on accessories (but still not enough to be an 'exclusive' price) will jump to a better return. What's really happening here is that people want the prime accessories BECAUSE they are expensive and exclusive.

 

The second you remove that exclusivity, the big spender "whale" players no longer buy the item, bc it doesn't show-off how exclusive they are. Like most businesses at scale, the pareto principle is likely in full effect here and DE makes ~80% of it's revenue from ~20% of its customers. Do you think those customers are the ones asking for cheaper packages? No. They are the customers who will no longer have a reason to spend like whales, if these changes happen.

 

Would stars clamour to wear gucci if it were $10 and sold at Walmart? I think we both know the answer, as it would lose all of its exclusivity. If they wanted to capitalize on the lower price point market, Gucci would release a 'lower tier' line at walmart, GucciToo. Which are the $5 accessories we already have.

 

As noted in my last paragraph, the issue with trying to market the Prime Access accessories as such is that they're packaged with "functional" invisible ones, e.g. boosters.

 

Veblen goods are a thing, sure... however, to adapt your analogy, far as I know, nobody bundles a pair of electrical-hazard rated Gucci shoes with puncture-resistant soles and safety toes along with a pair of thick, heavy work socks. It tries to appeal to two markets when it provides a reason to either audience not to buy it - the amount of overlap between people who'd want both items and are willing to shell out for them is likely pretty small; there's probably not that many Gucci-wearing construction workers. :-P

 

Same applies here, you can't "show off" a booster. so it's useless as a Veblen good, and the cosmetics are useless as a "functional" one. If the perception is that the customer's primarily paying for something they don't want (either the boosters or the cosmetic), most people are going to walk.

Edited October 9, 2014 by Taranis49

[Phatose]

I'd argue that your average Ferrari is both a status symbol and a functional good.  It's certainly good for showing off, but you can absolutely drive it and get where you're going as well.  Being tied with a functional use doesn't remove something from the category of Veblan goods.

[Boese]

Really the big problem isn't even that it's bundled, but that it's bundled with something SO useless to veteran players.  I'm MR 17, an affinity booster is useless for me, and a credit booster is nearly useless.  I would buy the Targis armor if it were available by itself, with platinum, or in a pack with other prime accessories, just not with boosters that I would never buy or even want, as they defeat the purpose of even playing the game.

[Taranis49]

I'd argue that your average Ferrari is both a status symbol and a functional good.  It's certainly good for showing off, but you can absolutely drive it and get where you're going as well.  Being tied with a functional use doesn't remove something from the category of Veblan goods.

 

However, that's necessary... it's just a tad difficult to show off the status of the prancing horse on your car and how you travel around town in style if it can't leave your driveway.

 

By contrast, Ferraris are very rarely marketed on the basis of their cargo capacity, passenger space, fuel economy, etc. - not many people buy one because they think it's going to be good for hauling a trailer offroad, grocery shopping, getting their kids to school or band practice. Indeed, the least expensive/collectible models have tended to be the more practical four-seater ones such as the 400i, which have depreciated in value enough that you can pick a used one up for less than 20,000 bucks, a typical 456 can be had for a little more than that.

Edited October 9, 2014 by Taranis49

[Phatose]

A not unfair point.

 

There's a greater problem in your approach though, one of simple psychology.  You're interpreting the pack as a forced bundle, but that's strictly speaking, an interpretation.  It's clearly a common one, but it's not necessarily accurate.  It's a very common business practice to use value added in lieu of lowering prices, especially when the business in question can acquire the value added portions at a very low cost.

 

The boosters may be just that - similar to a hotel offering free guest passes to Disney with a $1200 booking or the like.  The person doing the booking may interpret it as $600 for booking and $600 for the passes, but the hotel will likely have an arrangement with Disney so the actual cost to the hotel of those passes is far lower.  It's unreasonable to expect you'd be able get the hotel room without the passes for $600 even if the retail cost of the passes was $600.

 

The package is called the Prime Accessories package, after all.  Have you considered the possibility that you're just paying $50 for the accessories and the boosters are free add on, and not a bundle where they're part of the cost you're paying?

 

Or, more simply, are you still going to be interested in buying the accessories without the boosters if the boosters are only valued at $5, so the pack without them is $45, not $25?

Edited October 9, 2014 by Phatose

[Arabaxus]

Long story short both selling individual and bundles are a good idea. It's only a bad idea when the other bundled items are complete tosh and turn off the bundle's targeted demographic, which consists of mostly long-time players who likely have no use for boosters anyhow. You shoot yourself in the foot when you do something that the demographic you are trying to appeal to doesn't like and no one else will buy the object in question.

[Taranis49]

A not unfair point.

 

There's a greater problem in your approach though, one of simple psychology.  You're interpreting the pack as a forced bundle, but that's strictly speaking, an interpretation.  It's clearly a common one, but it's not necessarily accurate.  It's a very common business practice to use value added in lieu of lowering prices, especially when the business in question can acquire the value added portions at a very low cost.

 

The boosters may be just that - similar to a hotel offering free guest passes to Disney with a $1200 booking or the like.  The person doing the booking may interpret it as $600 for booking and $600 for the passes, but the hotel will likely have an arrangement with Disney so the actual cost to the hotel of those passes is far lower.  It's unreasonable to expect you'd be able get the hotel room without the passes for $600 even if the retail cost of the passes was $600.

 

The package is called the Prime Accessories package, after all.  Have you considered the possibility that you're just paying $50 for the accessories and the boosters are free add on, and not a bundle where they're part of the cost you're paying?

 

Or, more simply, are you still going to be interested in buying the accessories without the boosters if the boosters are only valued at $5, so the pack without them is $45, not $25?

 

Problem being, as you noted, the common perception is that it's a forced bundle - indeed, that's basically how it's marketed. In truth, the claim could be made that the boosters are effectively marketed as being "Exclusive Prime Accessories" themselves (which anybody who's been around for more than one offering of Prime Access knows isn't true, but that's beside the point), not a "gift"... Afterall, they're only sold with either the standalone (and least expensive) "Exclusive Accessories Pack", or the most expensive pack which only describes them as "prime accessories", not the other two.

 

Anyhoo... As I noted in my previous posts, psychology tells us that generally people would much rather avoid a loss (in this case, money perceived to be spent on something they don't really want) as opposed to a "gain", even if they're of equal value (indeed, depending on which studies you look at, losses can carry up to twice the psychological "weight" as gains do). Incidentally... the boosters account for half the items in the pack.

 

And to answer your question, as much as I may not like to admit it... speaking for myself, yeah, I'd atleast find it more appealing: you'll note that nowhere have I mentioned having an issue with the price itself, simply the fact that it basically requires purchasing an unwanted item.

[manub]

Notwithstanding the ongoing discussion about what bundles are, a 2nd slightly less expensive (around 20-30€) prime access option with just the accessories & not the boosters (for long time players who don t need it or those who dont want it) would be sufficient to lighten complaints i think, even if there s no plat coming with it.

It would be as popular if not more, resulting in happy players & money for DE

[Mesyra]

they could always remove the boosters and put in an equal value of platinum.

 

but I would still prefer a shopping cart style prime access or at least a way to get the items I really want.

[scavenge]

they could always remove the boosters and put in an equal value of platinum.

 

but I would still prefer a shopping cart style prime access or at least a way to get the items I really want.

 

 

You can't always have what you want, I missed out on some events and thus some wraith weaponry and I accept never having them because I missed out.

[Liminal]

 

The package is called the Prime Accessories package, after all.  Have you considered the possibility that you're just paying $50 for the accessories and the boosters are free add on, and not a bundle where they're part of the cost you're paying?

I would, if they said "the package contains free 90-day boosters". Considering they add everything up and say "it's worth X", no, I don't consider the cosmetics cost $50.

 

Or, more simply, are you still going to be interested in buying the accessories without the boosters if the boosters are only valued at $5, so the pack without them is $45, not $25?

No, but at least I my thought process would be different: "Nah, too expensive for me."

But personally, I don't want it cheaper, I want to get something useful out of it.

[Sifu]

You can't always have what you want, I missed out on some events and thus some wraith weaponry and I accept never having them because I missed out.

 

Totally agree. I got Tagris armor and know what? Its awesome! Worth every cent. And its even more worth, since kidz cant buy it and will die from rage and envy. 

 

Making a statement like "it MUST be 1$ for diz armor, because I want it so" is the same as saying "Porsche should sell its cars for 100$, because only in that case I`ll buy them"

 

What Porsche owners will answer? They`ll laugh and say - go get a job! 

[notionphil]

As noted in my last paragraph, the issue with trying to market the Prime Access accessories as such is that they're packaged with "functional" invisible ones, e.g. boosters.

 

Veblen goods are a thing, sure... however, to adapt your analogy, far as I know, nobody bundles a pair of electrical-hazard rated Gucci shoes with puncture-resistant soles and safety toes along with a pair of thick, heavy work socks. It tries to appeal to two markets when it provides a reason to either audience not to buy it - the amount of overlap between people who'd want both items and are willing to shell out for them is likely pretty small; there's probably not that many Gucci-wearing construction workers. :-P

 

Same applies here, you can't "show off" a booster. so it's useless as a Veblen good, and the cosmetics are useless as a "functional" one. If the perception is that the customer's primarily paying for something they don't want (either the boosters or the cosmetic), most people are going to walk.

 

I agree with this point 100% however I'm not sure it applies to prime access that well.

 

I don't agree that prime access is purely targeted to vets; and the MR2 and MR3 rhino/loki primes I saw running around right after those launches verifies this.

 

However, you are correct, the boosters have absolutely no value to me (and probably you). I'd agree that prime access would sell better if they replaced boosters with other swaggy (or at least relevant to vets) items.

[Onisa]

Totally agree. I got Tagris armor and know what? Its awesome! Worth every cent. And its even more worth, since kidz cant buy it and will die from rage and envy. 

 

Making a statement like "it MUST be 1$ for diz armor, because I want it so" is the same as saying "Porsche should sell its cars for 100$, because only in that case I`ll buy them"

 

What Porsche owners will answer? They`ll laugh and say - go get a job! 

A better example would be the Porche dealer refusing to sell someone the $200 floor mats without them buying a car to go with them.

 

Ironicly it was the last access I wished they would have broken up. Ever since I started back in January I've wanted the sentinel accesories from the Mag Prime wallpaper. So when I heard about their release I was down with dropping $50 for the accesory pack, since it would probably come with a syndana or something and dat loki p icon. At that point it I could look past the long term boosters that scream 'wallet warrior' to me and still put in my roughly 30 hours a week. Focus will be out some day and I guess all that extra XP could be usefull then. Untill then I'd only feel stupid about wasting money on boosters while they counted down. But guess what? Someone decided to take the icon out of the accessory pack. The litteral tipping point for me, and now if I wanted those two things I'd have to buy the $140 bundle. One hundred and fourty dollars, now why does that number sond so familiar?

 

Now I did ask support if it was possible to forgoe the discount and purchase what I wanted at full, or even double value. Pehaps they simply hadn't updated the FAQ page, it does still state the the accesory packs come with prime extractors, after all. But no. I realize it's probably because they don't have a system for it, but the tone of the replys made me feel like my money wasn't good enough for them. So I haven't spent anything since. Not with the 75% discount or the 2 or 3 50% discounts I've gotten. One thing I can say about the section of support that deals with real money, is that it didn't take them two weeks to get back to me on the issue.

[optyk]

I support the request of making the Prime armor a separate fair cash(not Plat) purchase. Free? No of course not. Possibly earnable via void or questing? Hmm maybe down the road...

 

The other players who say no to the idea just obviously wish to remain 'exclusive' and stand out in the crowd, I get that, but in today's gaming world, its very hard to do anymore since money talks. Really guys, if you bought the Accessories package, awesome, DE thanks you as do the other players for supporting the game. But that does not give you the justification to come into threads and bully/guilt trip/roadblock others from asking for something different on the basis of 'because I did so you have to'. Mind your own business and stop lurking the forums posing as a armchair F2P marketing rep.

 

In the end and in reality, no one really cares about someone elses digital collection of things and stuffs, so no one is impressing anyone else with our exclusive cash items -sorry! Zero poops are given, right? With that being said...

 

Digital Extremes: Going Free-to-Play with Warframe

 

"..We try to make it a great experience across the board for everybody, from the people who like to buy with pay more or the people who dont want to pay at all. Because I think it used to be and still is in some groups, people play some of those iPhone games that are Free 2 Play, that are a little too aggressive in wanting your money. But then they play on the PC, games like LoL or DOTA. Which kinda walks that fine line between wanting to be successful and earning enough money to support the development team, but still giving you a great free experience or an experience that you get into and feel good about the amount you've paid in for the amount of joy that you're getting from that experience so far. It's a perfect win/win for both sides. You're making enough money to support the game, the fan is never paying more than what they are comfortable paying and they are feeling good about how much they've paid. It's perfect, it's a perfect scenario." - James Schmalz, DE CEO

 

Digital Extremes: Making Warframe

 

"Now we have this development cycle where we receive the concepts, create the characters, we do quick testing on them, we put them out to the market and we see the reactions from the people that are actually playing the game and we adjust, to the feedback that we receive.." - Denis Cawson, Lead Character Artist

 

With that out of the way. Players have spoken out saying that $50 for the Prime armor is not a comfortable amount to pay and feels aggressive. And while the bundle comes with other items, the overall personal total value is still not worth it and does not generate a good feeling after purchase. 

[aoguro]

targis prime as a pack for everyone ?

 

ok, then i want the excalibur prime and all event-weapons which i miss and all stuff which i miss in general since warframe was started for everyone

 

yes, no, yes, no ...

 

everything else is useless and faar off every intelligent thought or idea :-)

 

just for the common sense ...

 

ps: i for myself scratching my head since i started playing also about the matter of fact that - for example - i can get a rhino prime for less then 100 plat ...

 

so, what should i say more, i can explain a bit:

 

the time that a f2p-player needs to get a accessable warframe to farm deep into t4 missions is related to the market-prices BLOODMONEY, nobody will give you your time back ... there will come the moment where you have to find excuses for yourself doing that, friends :-)

 

the day will come ... )))))))))))

 

my posting is according to this thread and all the discussions about the tagris and excalibur prime and ... and ... and ... :-)

Edited October 9, 2014 by RVNN3R

[Davoodoo]

You can't always have what you want, I missed out on some events and thus some wraith weaponry and I accept never having them because I missed out.

Difference is that you missed these because you werent there during events/release date.

 

I missed vandaltron and im not gonna lament about that, i wont even go into details but i missed it due to some questionable practices.

 

But i havent missed any prime access, DE simply didnt put anything worth 50$ into pack and thus i havent bought it.

 

Are 2 cosmetics worth 50$?? 50$ allows me to buy food and drink for 2-3 weeks, even if we consider work being put there it simply isnt worth that much.

Boosters have relative value of 0$ for me since i dont lvl anything except these new primes once access comes out.

 

 

Boosters cover up around 90% of this pack price, if removing booster would drop its price even while removing discount it would still be a better deal for me.

 

Also if you think that they dont need to and "this price works for them" then think why they decided to put extra advertising within game with link going into prime access page, clearly not because they sold enough copies.

Edited October 9, 2014 by Davoodoo

[optyk]

they could always remove the boosters and put in an equal value of platinum.

 

but I would still prefer a shopping cart style prime access or at least a way to get the items I really want.

 

Love that Idea and not sure why that could not be implemented? Just make sure that a minimum cash amount has to be spent, but let us choose the items.

 

Build your own custom Prime Access Bundle Packages (from a pre-chosen selection of items), coming Update 15! :)

 

Off topic:

Would work great with the color packs too btw!