Memnir @ PAX: A Report with Artificer Info

[Chaos000]

I'll throw out my suggestions for what I would be content with.

Favored Soul required 2,500 favor to unlock. How about a 3,500 favor unlock for the Artificer during u11 (or 3800 favor - since current max is at 3767 favor) which will lock out when u12 will allow for a Cannith favor unlock.

or

It's easier to take away than to give more. Make Artificers a VIP exclusive purchase only at launch until such time Artificer can be unlocked with favor. It provides an incentive for f2p and premium players to try VIP if they didn't want to wait 3 months to buy Artificers.

or

Provide Artificer access to VIP until such time favor is available to unlock.

or

(This would kind of make sense) make the Artificer available for 500 tp for a VIP player at launch and raise it to what the premium and f2p players pay. A VIP player gets 500 a month anyway, and they can chose to use their months worth of free tp to unlock the Artificer.

[MartinusWyllt]

...A VIP player gets 500 a month anyway, and they can chose to use their months worth of free tp to unlock the Artificer.

I have to disagree that the 500/mo are actually "free tp". We are paying for it as part of the subscription fee.

The only "free tp" any of us get are the favor rewards.

[Chaos000]

I have to disagree that the 500/mo are actually "free tp". We are paying for it as part of the subscription fee.

The only "free tp" any of us get are the favor rewards.

I understand (and agree with) the sentiment I'm just going off of how VIP is advertised.

If having differing costs for Artificer at the DDO store would be too much work my suggestion would be to have a 1 time bonus of turbine points put in each active VIP account for the exact amount that Artificer costs to unlock upon release.

ok sidenote: I remember when DDO first converted over from the p2p to the VIP/Premium/f2p model. I recall an exchange between the concerned players and the devs where the players were assured that so long as they continued their subscription they could ignore the microtransaction model and their access to content in game would not be affected. I was a bit irked during the conversion that all the favor running I did throughout the years with multiple capped characters from beta head start to conversion didn't net any retro turbine pts. (The sting was that since I ran everything on elite on most of my toons I couldn't grind tp unless I deleted one and made a new character or switch servers)

[MartinusWyllt]

...I recall an exchange between the concerned players and the devs where the players were assured that so long as they continued their subscription they could ignore the microtransaction model and their access to content in game would not be affected...

This is interesting. Funny thing is, and I don't think I'm completely alone on this, is that if it were achievable by favor I'd probably buy it. I've bought a number of the server-specific account upgrades using TP purchased during bonus periods...so that I'd have it on all servers. (except drow, of course)

As it is now I don't think I'll rush to the DDO store for the artificer. Maybe my little cleric can earn the favor and the tokens to TR rather than buying either.

Turbine definitely has helped me rethink my spending habits.

[Chai]

ok sidenote: I remember when DDO first converted over from the p2p to the VIP/Premium/f2p model. I recall an exchange between the concerned players and the devs where the players were assured that so long as they continued their subscription they could ignore the microtransaction model and their access to content in game would not be affected. I was a bit irked during the conversion that all the favor running I did throughout the years with multiple capped characters from beta head start to conversion didn't net any retro turbine pts. (The sting was that since I ran everything on elite on most of my toons I couldn't grind tp unless I deleted one and made a new character or switch servers)

I remember that discussion too and I believe it was before the launch of the store. Ive been trying to dig that up, because its a pretty solid discussion point, considering the state of things today.

[Samadhi]

Maybe we should all just cancel VIP subs until the next update is available.

Because seriously, if I can't get ALL of my VIP perks, why should I be paying full price?

[smatt]

ok sidenote: I remember when DDO first converted over from the p2p to the VIP/Premium/f2p model. I recall an exchange between the concerned players and the devs where the players were assured that so long as they continued their subscription they could ignore the microtransaction model and their access to content in game would not be affected. I was a bit irked during the conversion that all the favor running I did throughout the years with multiple capped characters from beta head start to conversion didn't net any retro turbine pts. (The sting was that since I ran everything on elite on most of my toons I couldn't grind tp unless I deleted one and made a new character or switch servers)

I remember that as well.... But you know they count on people forgetting such things. Or they will say well that wasn't our "Official policy" That was just som employee giving their opinion etc...


I wonder though, since I'm of the opinion htat the Artificer calss class at least LOOKS to be very powerful, and a huge addition to a party and thus is very desirable.... They've made it that way to entice the minion "Powergamers" to pay up for it..... Well what if it was made LESS powerful and given for free.. How woudl peopel feel about that scenario? I know I know... That's not happening...But still....

[mystafyi]

Well what if it was made LESS powerful and given for free.. How woudl peopel feel about that scenario? I know I know... That's not happening...But still....

dont worry they will nerf artificers in U12... they just have to give players enough time to purchase the class first.

[Calebro]

ok sidenote: I remember when DDO first converted over from the p2p to the VIP/Premium/f2p model. I recall an exchange between the concerned players and the devs where the players were assured that so long as they continued their subscription they could ignore the microtransaction model and their access to content in game would not be affected.

It still hasn't been affected. Nothing has changed.
Drow, and the fact that you needed favor to unlock them, were released long before the f2p model. This is the same mechanic. So the precedent existed long before that conversation ever took place, hence "<your> access to content in game <has> not <been> affected."

This isn't the concern.
The concern is that the favor to earn them isn't available on day one of it's release.
While I agree that offering them for a fee before that point is even able to be reached is counter to the spirit of that claim, it is not counter to the word of it.
The word of the contract has been upheld. It's the spirit of the contract that is being breached in many people's eyes.

[Chai]

It still hasn't been affected. Nothing has changed.
Drow, and the fact that you needed favor to unlock them, were released long before the f2p model. This is the same mechanic. So the precedent existed long before that conversation ever took place, hence "<your> access to content in game <has> not <been> affected."

This isn't the concern.
The concern is that the favor to earn them isn't available on day one of it's release.
While I agree that offering them for a fee before that point is even able to be reached is counter to the spirit of that claim, it is not counter to the word of it.
The word of the contract has been upheld. It's the spirit of the contract that is being breached in many people's eyes.

Any time a company does something the same way a precedent is set. This shows customers what to expect in the future. In this case, the precedent has not been upheld. Customers are showing that they notice this and are voicing concern over it, and they are also voicing that they remember the discussions and what was said in those discussions by Turbine employees, which can and will have influence on choices customers will make.

Talking about the difference between spirit and actual word is semantics at this point. Ripped off customer is ripped off. We can choose to euphamize this til the cows come home, but in the end it doesnt change anyones opinion on the matter if the rules lawyers can show that this would hold up in a court of law, becaus we arent in a court of law. We were told that A would happen and received B instead. When the customer is judge, no one ever wins an arguement with a customer, not even another customer. In the world of business, the customer is not only judge, but jury and executioner as well.

Customers WILL base their decisions on companies maintaining their trust, or violating the same trust. We can rules lawyer this how we will, but this fact will not change regardless of the outcome of the rules lawyering. The reason again, is because this is not an arguement of absolutes, if some odd rule was violated or not, but it IS an arguement of degree. What is VIP worth now compared to what is worth then? What was told to us then -vs- what is happening now? There is a clear difference for those who are affected, and though different customers will draw that line in different places, all customers WILL draw that line somewhere. People claiming this is a non issue simply havent had THEIR line crossed yet. When that happens, I hope they are reminded of this discussion.

[dkyle]

While I agree that offering them for a fee before that point is even able to be reached is counter to the spirit of that claim, it is not counter to the word of it.
The word of the contract has been upheld. It's the spirit of the contract that is being breached in many people's eyes.

It is absolutely counter to the word of it. The word is that VIPs get all classes, except those that are favor unlockable. Artificer will not be favor unlockable in U11. Calling something a "favor unlockable class", but not actually providing the favor to do it, is meaningless. Simply put, it would be a lie.

[Callavan]

People claiming this is a non issue simply noticed that the line was already crossed years ago and are wondering why some people are just now getting around to complaining incessantly about it.

ftfy

[Calebro]

Chai, why do you always respond as if I were arguing with you?
I think I made my position that it was indeed a matter of degree fairly clear. I was simply pointing out that they did uphold the letter, while not upholding the spirit. That is almost the definition of a matter of degree. But it's also keeping their word, in a technical sense. You can say it's semantics all you like, just like you always do. Except it isn't semantics.

Let me say it again, in case you missed it before:
I agree with you. VIPs should have access to Artys the day of their release, or at the very least have the means necessary to earn that access on the day of their release.
None of that changes that they did not break their word in a technical sense, and that there has been precedent for classes only unlocked by favor.

[dkyle]

there has been precedent for this.

There has been no precedent for this. Drow and FvS were fundamentally different situations. A favor unlock that is actually unlockable is entirely within the letter of the promises they made. A favor unlock that doesn't actually exist is entirely contradictory.

[Calebro]

There has been no precedent for this. Drow and FvS were fundamentally different situations. A favor unlock that is actually unlockable is entirely within the letter of the promises they made. A favor unlock that doesn't actually exist is entirely contradictory.

That the favor to unlock them isn't yet available is what is unprecedented. That they will need to be unlocked by favor has precedent.

"so long as they continued their subscription they could ignore the microtransaction model and their access to content in game would not be affected."

Which part of that is broken?
They can ignore the microtransaction model and they will gain access to the class just like they would be able to if it weren't in the store. Their access to content in game would not be affected. Both of these hold true.
It's the *spirit* of that claim that's being violated, not the letter of it.

[Jandric]

While the calendar can always change based on a variety of factors, the plan is to have Artificers available to unlock through favor by the end of the year.

Look at the bright side- this seems to indicate that U12 will roll out by the end of the year

[Cordovan]

Look at the bright side- this seems to indicate that U12 will roll out by the end of the year

Yup! The plan is to get out U12 by the end of the year.

[Chai]

Chai, why do you always respond as if I were arguing with you?
I think I made my position that it was indeed a matter of degree fairly clear. I was simply pointing out that they did uphold the letter, while not upholding the spirit. That is almost the definition of a matter of degree. But it's also keeping their word, in a technical sense. You can say it's semantics all you like, just like you always do. Except it isn't semantics.

Because the whole rules lawyer aspect of this is irrelevant. Spirit of the contract -vs- word of the contract? Customer expectation is customer expectation.

Let me say it again, in case you missed it before:
I agree with you. VIPs should have access to Artys the day of their release, or at the very least have the means necessary to earn that access on the day of their release.
None of that changes that they did not break their word in a technical sense, and that there has been precedent for classes only unlocked by favor.

Technical schmechnical, heh. You are rules lawyering the actual parts of the rules you find convenient to rules lawyer, like theres a trial in session or something, which is not the case. What is the case, is that customers expected one thing through past experience and were informed this isnt going to happen. Many of us took those kinds of things into account when we made the decision on which plan to participate in.

Youd make a great lawyer for protecting company assets in this case, but the company retaining you would still go broke due to not being able to maintain positive customer relationships. Unless of course its DDO where we all complain up a storm from time to time but never leave, LOL.

[dkyle]

That the favor to unlock them isn't yet available is what is unprecedented. That they will need to be unlocked by favor has precedent.

Yes, but that's besides the point. There's no precedent for the part of this that actually breaks their word.

"so long as they continued their subscription they could ignore the microtransaction model and their access to content in game would not be affected."

Which part of that is broken?

Have I claimed that any part of that is broken? That is, indeed, a thoroughly ambiguous statement.

http://www.ddo.com/vip, and the ad on the frontpage at this very moment, clearly spell out the VIP benefits, including free access to all classes that are not favor unlockable. Artificers are not planned to be favor unlockable in U11. Therefore, not making them free to VIPs is breaking their word.

Now, if they made them a global favor unlock at the max attainable favor, that would be technically keeping their word. But, I would consider that a breach of the spirit of VIP. I'd have to question whether I felt comfortable spending money on something that apparently gets me such negligible value. If I wanted to farm tons of favor, I'd be F2P.

[dkyle]

Yup! The plan is to get out U12 by the end of the year.

Really, that's all we get?

Can you at least confirm (or deny) that:

* Artificers will not be free-to-VIPs in U11.
* Artificers will not be unlockable via favor in U11.

Or, alternatively, tell us that the above is still undecided?