UPDATE!! We Are Getting Accessories Only For Unvaulted Packs Starting This Pack. THANK YOU [DE]!

[(PSN)jonnyblaze1976]

16 minutes ago, (PS4)BLOOD-LINE-01 said:

That argument has been debunked many times.

You cant debunk a fact. Unless this is one of those "alternative facts" situations. 

[Lanadra]

1 minute ago, Zephyr_TheMLGPro said:

Because the game needs funding and cosmetic only items are the best choice as they dont affect gameplay. Take CSGO as an example, you can buy whatever skin you want but its cosmetic only which is a good thing, and the money valve makes goes towards the growth of the game(Funding majors, new content)

It's better then exclusive guns for sale, that's for sure. While I don't believe for a second that cosmetics are meaningless in a game like Warframe, I will agree they're the best avenue of monetization by a long shot. You need only look as far as EA to see how bad the other end of the stick is.

Anyhow, I will stand by the points I've made for myself in this thread. If that comes off as entitled, then so be it I guess..? I mean, just as DE is largely concerned with their overall big wallet, I too am concerned with my significantly smaller one, and any pack that is filled largely with product I have already.. is not of an ideal value to me.

How much cheaper it is compared to the original PA, I don't doubt that it's true, but it means nothing to me, nor how awesome a deal it is to someone that doesn't have anything from that bundle, I am thinking of me, the value it has to me.

For me that means I simply won't buy it, and that's no silly threat or making a statement, that's just me being conscious of my wallet/budget.

[AEP8FlyBoy]

This thread is quickly starting to go downhill. I can understand both sides of the argument here, however.
Just want to say that I think there is a reason DE is doing it this way. Technically players are getting a bit more than just cosmetics for less money.

I really don't see the issue, after reading through this thread.

Just don't associate DE with the BS that Bungie has pulled on their playerbase over the short 5 months since D2's release. DE is far from that, and I'm thankful they're so forthright and honest with us. Sure they're not perfect, but they've always been open to feedback. I think just relating to this topic, they're choosing to remain steadfast in their decision to keep it as is.

All power to them.

Edited February 7, 2018 by AEP8FlyBoy

[(PSN)BLOOD-LINE-01]

4 minutes ago, Zephyr_TheMLGPro said:

Because the game needs funding and cosmetic only items are the best choice as they dont affect gameplay. 

They do affect gameplay. They affect your enjoyment of the game, same as weapon or frame. If they didn’t DE would not charge for them as they have no worth and people would not willingly spend up on $50 for them.

 

9 minutes ago, (PS4)abbacephas said:

For the benefit of people here who don't seem to understand what the word "entitled" means:

 

A paying customer is entitled to whatever they want. You as a business owner have to convince me to fork over me money. Standing there and sayinf “Give me your money, but I’m not giving you what you want” is a sure way to loose customers.

Nursery lesson 1:02

[(PSN)BLOOD-LINE-01]

1 minute ago, (PS4)jonnyblaze1976 said:

You cant debunk a fact. Unless this is one of those "alternative facts" situations. 

Cosmetics do affect gameplay, that is the true fact. The “just cosmetic” argument is false. Again, if they didn’t, why do people charge for them? And would be okay if DE suddenly took all cosmetics and cusomtisation options out of WF? After all they apparantly don’t affect gameplay.

[aligatorno]

3 minutes ago, (PS4)BLOOD-LINE-01 said:

They do affect gameplay. They affect your enjoyment of the game, same as weapon or frame.

They really don't. You`ll perform exactly the same no matter what accessories you wear. Enjoyment =/= gameplay.

Edited February 7, 2018 by aligatorno

[LupisV0lk]

3 minutes ago, (PS4)BLOOD-LINE-01 said:

A paying customer is entitled to whatever they want. You as a business owner have to convince me to fork over me money. Standing there and sayinf “Give me your money, but I’m not giving you what you want” is a sure way to loose customers.

Nursery lesson 1:02

A customer is only entitled to the goods and services that the business is selling and the purchases you make. Your attitude is overflowing with self entitlement. DE doesn't owe you world peace just because you give them money for their goods and services.

Edited February 7, 2018 by LupisV0lk

[AEP8FlyBoy]

4 minutes ago, (PS4)BLOOD-LINE-01 said:

Cosmetics do affect gameplay, that is the true fact. The “just cosmetic” argument is false. Again, if they didn’t, why do people charge for them? And would be okay if DE suddenly took all cosmetics and cusomtisation options out of WF? After all they apparantly don’t affect gameplay.

Cosmetics don't affect gameplay at all (the ones that did have been long since discontinued), but they do affect your enjoyment of the game.
It allows for a huge amount of player diversity and customization options, without changing any game mechanics or skewing things to their favor.

That'd be P2W.

Edited February 7, 2018 by AEP8FlyBoy

[(PSN)jonnyblaze1976]

Just now, (PS4)BLOOD-LINE-01 said:

Cosmetics do affect gameplay

Ok I'll bite. How do cosmetics effect your gameplay? What about them makes you any better or worse as a player?

[AEP8FlyBoy]

3 minutes ago, (PS4)jonnyblaze1976 said:

Ok I'll bite. How do cosmetics effect your gameplay? What about them makes you any better or worse as a player?

If anything, the Repala Syandana makes you a worse player...

because you can't see where you're shooting half the time.

Edited February 7, 2018 by AEP8FlyBoy

[Ascarith]

This thread is absolutely bonkers. And of course I read all ten pages of it because it's like a train wreck you can't stop watching...

Full disclosure - I don't particularly care how DE chooses to monetize cosmetics. Most of their choices make sense to me if I think about it from their perspective.

A couple comments (that will probably be buried in the crossfire of barbs being traded) that might be food for thought:

1. At least try to maintain some semblance of civility. At this point, I feel like some of you are arguing with each other because you just don't like the way the other person comes off in their posts. This then leads to the assumption those people are "bad" and for some reason "bad" people say things that are "wrong."
2. DE's silence or decision to keep doing what they're doing might not have anything to do with sales. DE's financials success depends on more than just DE and the consumer base. It makes total sense to me that DE doesn't want to talk about their business strategy, especially on a public discussion board.
3. This whole "cosmetic" argument is really just about semantics. One side is saying that cosmetics don't affect game play, where they define "game play" as strictly mechanics. The other side defines "game play" as "enjoyment of the game," so they can argue that "its just cosmetic" isn't true. You guys aren't on the same page and I suspect some of you know this simply don't care (back to #1...). 

Edited February 7, 2018 by Ascarith

[Glavenusaur]

2 minutes ago, (PS4)BLOOD-LINE-01 said:

Cosmetics do affect gameplay, that is the true fact. The “just cosmetic” argument is false. Again, if they didn’t, why do people charge for them? And would be okay if DE suddenly took all cosmetics and cusomtisation options out of WF? After all they apparantly don’t affect gameplay.

Enough already, this is getting embarrassing, This the product of Digital Extremes hard work, not yours, if you don't like what they're selling don't buy it, you can vote with your wallet as they say, but acting this entitled is just embarrassing, you have no right to dictate how DE wish to sell their products.

[(PSN)abbacephas]

6 minutes ago, (PS4)BLOOD-LINE-01 said:

A paying customer is entitled to whatever they want. You as a business owner have to convince me to fork over me money. Standing there and sayinf “Give me your money, but I’m not giving you what you want” is a sure way to loose customers.

No, they aren't. A business provides goods and services at a cost. You may either choose to pay or not. If a business does not offer you a particular good or service that you like, you are free to shop around. You are free to provide feedback if you feel the need, but the business is equally free to disregard it as it sees fit.

7 minutes ago, (PS4)BLOOD-LINE-01 said:

Nursery lesson 1:02

You're doing it wrong.

[Lanadra]

1 minute ago, AEP8FlyBoy said:

Cosmetics don't affect gameplay at all (the ones that did have been long since discontinued), but they do affect your enjoyment of the game.
It allows for a huge amount of player diversity, without changing any game mechanics or skewing things to their favor.

That'd be P2W.

There's people, like Jim Sterling, that view cosmetics, at least in a game like Warframe or Overwatch where literally.. it's everywhere you go, not as something that ''affects'' or based on your view, doesn't affect gameplay, but as -part of- the gameplay. That is often why someone like Jim argues against the ''it's just cosmetics'' line. That is also a view I agree with, and why it is relevant to me personally. You won't however hear me argue that it affects your ability to perform in battle, because it doesn't.

[Zephyr_TheMLGPro]

8 minutes ago, (PS4)BLOOD-LINE-01 said:

They do affect gameplay. They affect your enjoyment of the game, same as weapon or frame. If they didn’t DE would not charge for them as they have no worth and people would not willingly spend up on $50 for them.

Tell me how DE can make money if they cant even sell cosmetic only items, next thing you ask is that plat needs to be even cheaper because it affects gameplay.

Your argument doesn't make any sense.(Not being rude here)

[AEP8FlyBoy]

2 minutes ago, Artorius-Alter said:

There's people, like Jim Sterling, that view cosmetics, at least in a game like Warframe or Overwatch where literally.. it's everywhere you go, not as something that ''affects'' or based on your view, doesn't affect gameplay, but as -part of- the gameplay. That is often why someone like Jim argues against the ''it's just cosmetics'' line. That is also a view I agree with, and why it is relevant to me personally. You won't however hear me argue that it affects your ability to perform in battle, because it doesn't.

Fair enough.
I agree with that too then. I can't imagine all the resources I've poured into cosmetics and the way I look magically being taken away.
I'd feel like a part of the game was missing.

So you're right. In that regard. :)

[(PSN)BLOOD-LINE-01]

4 minutes ago, aligatorno said:

You`ll perform exactly the same no matter what accessories you wear. Enjoyment =/= gameplay.

Enjoyment is a part of gameplay. Sorry you needed to be told that. A video game is designed to amuse you in a variety of ways other than shooting things. Looking cool is part of the enjoyment expereince.

3 minutes ago, (PS4)jonnyblaze1976 said:

Ok I'll bite. How do cosmetics effect your gameplay?

They affect the enjoyment of the game. The same way a Tigris Prime killing ten enemies in a line does. Or having an unmodded Kraken does. 

3 minutes ago, (PS4)abbacephas said:

No, they aren't

Yes they are. You have heard of such a thing as Customer Satisfaction and Public Relations yes?

4 minutes ago, (PS4)abbacephas said:

but the business is equally free to disregard it as it sees fit.

And if your business is foolish enough to disregard someone who is simply asking them for a seperate way to get something they offer, then that business is a poor one.

[Lanadra]

1 minute ago, AEP8FlyBoy said:

Fair enough.
I agree with that too then. I can't imagine all the resources I've poured into cosmetics and the way I look magically being taken away.
I'd feel like a part of the game was missing.

So you're right. In that regard. :)

And I imagine, especially with what you just indicated resources wise.. that such is something a lot might agree with. It just depends on how one views the definitions of ''cosmetics'' and ''gameplay''. Plenty here have a very strict view of ''if it doesn't affect stats or battle performance, it's meaningless and not ever worth raising an issue over''.

I don't view it that way, as I have explained.

[(PSN)abbacephas]

1 minute ago, (PS4)BLOOD-LINE-01 said:

And if your business is foolish enough to disregard someone who is simply asking them for a seperate way to get something they offer, then that business is a poor one.

Not if my business is still making a profit.

[Glavenusaur]

2 minutes ago, Artorius-Alter said:

There's people, like Jim Sterling, that view cosmetics, at least in a game like Warframe or Overwatch where literally.. it's everywhere you go, not as something that ''affects'' or based on your view, doesn't affect gameplay, but as -part of- the gameplay. That is often why someone like Jim argues against the ''it's just cosmetics'' line. That is also a view I agree with, and why it is relevant to me personally. You won't however hear me argue that it affects your ability to perform in battle, because it doesn't.

But it doesnt work like that, Gameplay is specifically about how you "play" the game within the rules set by the developers, not what your character looks like when you play the game, that's basically just graphics a few bloody pixels on the screen, look how bland "ultrahot" looks, yet it still garnered some attention. And that's because of game play.

[rune_me]

3 minutes ago, Artorius-Alter said:

There's people, like Jim Sterling, that view cosmetics, at least in a game like Warframe or Overwatch where literally.. it's everywhere you go, not as something that ''affects'' or based on your view, doesn't affect gameplay, but as -part of- the gameplay. That is often why someone like Jim argues against the ''it's just cosmetics'' line. That is also a view I agree with, and why it is relevant to me personally. You won't however hear me argue that it affects your ability to perform in battle, because it doesn't.

But you also can't deny that cosmetics in Warframe is not AS important as a lot of other things. There's a reason every new player is advised to spend his or her starter plat on weapon and warframe slots, and not on color palettes or a syandana. Because the slots are considered far more important. If I only had 20 plat left, I would spend them on a potato long before I would use them on a cosmetic. 

At the end, cosmetics are a luxury we start purchasing when we are well into the game, or when we feel we can afford it. I wouldn't say they are pointless at all, but they are less important than a most of the things you can otherwise spend plat on, like slots and potatoes and exilus adapters. 

[Lanadra]

3 minutes ago, Glavenusaur said:

But it doesnt work like that, Gameplay is specifically about how you "play" the game within the rules set by the developers, not what your character looks like when you play the game, that's basically just graphics a few bloody pixels on the screen, look how bland "ultrahot" looks, yet it still garnered some attention. And that's because of game play.

And the way my Warframes and weapons look are to me an integral part of ''how I play'' Warframe. And thus, to me, part of the gameplay, again, it at least somewhat depends on how you as a player define these hotly contested words ''cosmetics'' and ''gameplay''.

2 minutes ago, rune_me said:

But you also can't deny that cosmetics in Warframe is not AS important as a lot of other things. There's a reason every new player is advised to spend his or her starter plat on weapon and warframe slots, and not on color palettes or a syandana. Because the slots are considered far more important. If I only had 20 plat left, I would spend them on a potato long before I would use them on a cosmetic. 

At the end, cosmetics are a luxury we start purchasing when we are well into the game, or when we feel we can afford it. I wouldn't say they are pointless at all, but they are less important than a most of the things you can otherwise spend plat on, like slots and potatoes and exilus adapters. 

I don't deny it. In fact, I agree with it. I too will sooner get a potato if I need one, then some weapon skin.

Edited February 7, 2018 by Artorius-Alter

[(PSN)BLOOD-LINE-01]

7 minutes ago, Zephyr_TheMLGPro said:

Tell me how DE can make money if they cant even sell cosmetic only items

A monthly subscription. Paid updates. But they won’t do that. They’ll go with cosmetics because people with your mindset thinks gameplay is limited to what you can physically do in a game.

7 minutes ago, Zephyr_TheMLGPro said:

Your argument doesn't make any sense.

Explain then how it doesn’t? They could make money a variety of other ways. But cosmetics are a rich industry. Why? Because they affect your gameplay. People buy them to look good. Looking good, feeling good.

Edited February 7, 2018 by (PS4)BLOOD-LINE-01

[(PSN)BLOOD-LINE-01]

2 minutes ago, (PS4)abbacephas said:

Not if my business is still making a profit.

Tell me, if a customer walks out in disgust, do you still make a profit?

[rune_me]

3 minutes ago, (PS4)BLOOD-LINE-01 said:

And if your business is foolish enough to disregard someone who is simply asking them for a seperate way to get something they offer, then that business is a poor one.

It's not a poor one at all. Lots of businesses sells a bag with 10 oranges in it and also sells individual oranges. But lots of smaller businesses only have the bag of 10 oranges. In no way could I walk into that business and demand to just buy a single orange, because hey, I'm a customer and I am always right. They would just show you the door and ask you not to come back.