What do you think of Crown Crates? -- New Poll for PTS Implementation

nimander99

Negative: I have tested the crates, and I do not want this feature to be implemented in the game.

I wish ZoS followed the House Hlaalu Trade Philosophy, I posted the once before but I thought Id highlight the pertinent portions.

House Hlaalu Philosophy of Trade

If you want to understand the essential philosophy of House Hlaalu, examine its coat of arms. Behold the scale: it represents balance, trade, and compromise. These essential concepts influence everything the House seeks to accomplish and directs its activities.

Strive for balance in all things. When the scale tips to one side or the other, someone or something gets short-changed. When someone gets short-changed, unpredictability and strife unbalance the world around us. This idea must be embraced by every member of the House. To achieve freedom from greed, from want, and from strife, all parties in any exchange must find balance.

Trade is the House's weapon, its tool, and its way. The House (ZoS) thrives when value and profit flows between supply and demand. House Hlaalu (ZoS) seeks to maintain open trade with anyone who would engage in honest business. Not even a lowly Ashlander (Players) with gold or goods in hand would be turned away. This policy protects and empowers the House. The greatest defense remains a wall built of gold, and many foes have broken against the profitable walls of House Hlaalu.

The most honorable conclusion to any conflict is compromise. When two parties seeking balance come together in any exchange, compromise becomes the natural conclusion. Anything can be achieved if both the left hand and the right hand work together (ZoS and Players). Not everyone is reasonable, however (Current Crown Boxes). Sometimes others must be coaxed into compromise. For that, the House Hlaalu Guard stands ready (We the Forum Poster's).

My own summary: If the Marketing Team at Zenimax follow their own in game book, we could reach a compromise that doesn't take advantage via a bad system yet still enriches Zenimax. I said this in the original big thread about business but its worth repeating here, one of the first lessons I was taught in business was that for a good exchange to have taken place, both parties must walk away feeling a fair exchange was reached.

JimT722

Negative: I have NOT tested the crates, and I dislike the idea/direction and/or I dislike what I have read.

nimander99 wrote: »

I wish ZoS followed the House Hlaalu Trade Philosophy, I posted the once before but I thought Id highlight the pertinent portions.

House Hlaalu Philosophy of Trade

If you want to understand the essential philosophy of House Hlaalu, examine its coat of arms. Behold the scale: it represents balance, trade, and compromise. These essential concepts influence everything the House seeks to accomplish and directs its activities.

Strive for balance in all things. When the scale tips to one side or the other, someone or something gets short-changed. When someone gets short-changed, unpredictability and strife unbalance the world around us. This idea must be embraced by every member of the House. To achieve freedom from greed, from want, and from strife, all parties in any exchange must find balance.

Trade is the House's weapon, its tool, and its way. The House (ZoS) thrives when value and profit flows between supply and demand. House Hlaalu (ZoS) seeks to maintain open trade with anyone who would engage in honest business. Not even a lowly Ashlander (Players) with gold or goods in hand would be turned away. This policy protects and empowers the House. The greatest defense remains a wall built of gold, and many foes have broken against the profitable walls of House Hlaalu.

The most honorable conclusion to any conflict is compromise. When two parties seeking balance come together in any exchange, compromise becomes the natural conclusion. Anything can be achieved if both the left hand and the right hand work together (ZoS and Players). Not everyone is reasonable, however (Current Crown Boxes). Sometimes others must be coaxed into compromise. For that, the House Hlaalu Guard stands ready (We the Forum Poster's).

My own summary: If the Marketing Team at Zenimax follow their own in game book, we could reach a compromise that doesn't take advantage via a bad system yet still enriches Zenimax. I said this in the original big thread about business but its worth repeating here, one of the first lessons I was taught in business was that for a good exchange to have taken place, both parties must walk away feeling a fair exchange was reached.

That's the problem with crates. I want to spend my money on the cosmetics I want. The crates are not designed to be a fair trade, but a money sink to drain peoples wallets. A fair trade would be a cash for product transaction. Can't fix something designed to be an unfair system for the consumer.

As for compromise, everything from ZOS indicates that they are likely unwilling to make much compromise. The changes they suggest that will be made does little to make the transaction fair to both parties.

GhostwalkerLD

Negative: I have tested the crates, and I do not want this feature to be implemented in the game.

UrQuan wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

As for unsubscribing or leaving the game due to Crown Crates, I think this is the wrong thing to do. If you don't like Crown Crates, simply don't buy them. This is what I plan to do, and remind them from time to time that I am doing this. If I unsubscribe, it will be because of the game, not Crown Crates.

I can't agree with that at all. The wrong thing to do is to continue to give your money to a company that you know is acting in an unethical manner.

If I know a company is exploiting people (workers, customers, whoever) they don't get my money, period. I won't buy from them, I won't invest in them. For my entire adult life I've worked for a company that literally only exists to improve the lives of it's customers and the communities where it operates. I'm not about to let my money go to a company that I know is being actively predatory and exploitative.

My values and morals are a lot more important to me than any gameplay. I'd be a hypocrite if they weren't. If the implementation of crown crates on live isn't sufficiently changed from the implementation on PTS, I'm out of here because it would be wrong for me to continue to support ZOS.

I'm holding off on making that decision because crown crates don't necessarily have to be exploitative. They could be implemented in a manner that isn't predatory, while still being profitable for ZOS. If they do that then I'll be happy and I'll stick around. I still almost definitely wouldn't buy them, but if they don't make those changes it would be morally and ethically wrong for me to stay. My values dictate how I live every part of my life, if I won't compromise them when I'm making bigger and more important decisions, why would I compromise them for a game?

How, though would they implement these crates in a way that aren't exploitative? These RNG crates/lockboxes/whateveryouwanttocallthem are exploitative by their very nature, which is the reason why people are either against them or at best, apathetic towards them. Not one single person who has experienced these crates in games actually considers them a positive, especially versus just buying whatever "prize" exists in them for a flat price (which, again, renders the crates completely moot and shows them to be what they really are: exploitative).

nimander99

Negative: I have tested the crates, and I do not want this feature to be implemented in the game.

JimT722 wrote: »

nimander99 wrote: »

I wish ZoS followed the House Hlaalu Trade Philosophy, I posted the once before but I thought Id highlight the pertinent portions.

House Hlaalu Philosophy of Trade

If you want to understand the essential philosophy of House Hlaalu, examine its coat of arms. Behold the scale: it represents balance, trade, and compromise. These essential concepts influence everything the House seeks to accomplish and directs its activities.

Strive for balance in all things. When the scale tips to one side or the other, someone or something gets short-changed. When someone gets short-changed, unpredictability and strife unbalance the world around us. This idea must be embraced by every member of the House. To achieve freedom from greed, from want, and from strife, all parties in any exchange must find balance.

Trade is the House's weapon, its tool, and its way. The House (ZoS) thrives when value and profit flows between supply and demand. House Hlaalu (ZoS) seeks to maintain open trade with anyone who would engage in honest business. Not even a lowly Ashlander (Players) with gold or goods in hand would be turned away. This policy protects and empowers the House. The greatest defense remains a wall built of gold, and many foes have broken against the profitable walls of House Hlaalu.

The most honorable conclusion to any conflict is compromise. When two parties seeking balance come together in any exchange, compromise becomes the natural conclusion. Anything can be achieved if both the left hand and the right hand work together (ZoS and Players). Not everyone is reasonable, however (Current Crown Boxes). Sometimes others must be coaxed into compromise. For that, the House Hlaalu Guard stands ready (We the Forum Poster's).

My own summary: If the Marketing Team at Zenimax follow their own in game book, we could reach a compromise that doesn't take advantage via a bad system yet still enriches Zenimax. I said this in the original big thread about business but its worth repeating here, one of the first lessons I was taught in business was that for a good exchange to have taken place, both parties must walk away feeling a fair exchange was reached.

That's the problem with crates. I want to spend my money on the cosmetics I want. The crates are not designed to be a fair trade, but a money sink to drain peoples wallets. A fair trade would be a cash for product transaction. Can't fix something designed to be an unfair system for the consumer.

As for compromise, everything from ZOS indicates that they are likely unwilling to make much compromise. The changes they suggest that will be made does little to make the transaction fair to both parties.

Just pointing out the irony that a roadmap for good business is literally in an in game book

GhostwalkerLD

Negative: I have tested the crates, and I do not want this feature to be implemented in the game.

nimander99 wrote: »

I wish ZoS followed the House Hlaalu Trade Philosophy, I posted the once before but I thought Id highlight the pertinent portions.

House Hlaalu Philosophy of Trade

If you want to understand the essential philosophy of House Hlaalu, examine its coat of arms. Behold the scale: it represents balance, trade, and compromise. These essential concepts influence everything the House seeks to accomplish and directs its activities.

Strive for balance in all things. When the scale tips to one side or the other, someone or something gets short-changed. When someone gets short-changed, unpredictability and strife unbalance the world around us. This idea must be embraced by every member of the House. To achieve freedom from greed, from want, and from strife, all parties in any exchange must find balance.

Trade is the House's weapon, its tool, and its way. The House (ZoS) thrives when value and profit flows between supply and demand. House Hlaalu (ZoS) seeks to maintain open trade with anyone who would engage in honest business. Not even a lowly Ashlander (Players) with gold or goods in hand would be turned away. This policy protects and empowers the House. The greatest defense remains a wall built of gold, and many foes have broken against the profitable walls of House Hlaalu.

The most honorable conclusion to any conflict is compromise. When two parties seeking balance come together in any exchange, compromise becomes the natural conclusion. Anything can be achieved if both the left hand and the right hand work together (ZoS and Players). Not everyone is reasonable, however (Current Crown Boxes). Sometimes others must be coaxed into compromise. For that, the House Hlaalu Guard stands ready (We the Forum Poster's).

My own summary: If the Marketing Team at Zenimax follow their own in game book, we could reach a compromise that doesn't take advantage via a bad system yet still enriches Zenimax. I said this in the original big thread about business but its worth repeating here, one of the first lessons I was taught in business was that for a good exchange to have taken place, both parties must walk away feeling a fair exchange was reached.

Well stated. The fact is, I spend crowns on what I want to spend them on, meaning, items. The crates don't give you that option, you only get a 'chance' at whatever item may or may not be in them. And there are a lot of things from the crown store that I haven't bought: Because I didn't want them to begin with. And you only get their pseudo-compromise of 'crown gems' from getting something you already have. If you got something you didn't want, and don't already have? Tough luck for you, you're stuck with it without any possibility of a refund.

How anyone could support this or claim that this is anything other than the blatant exploitative cash-grab that it is makes me tempted to question the intelligence or life experience of some of these people..

Danikat

Negative: I have tested the crates, and I do not want this feature to be implemented in the game.

GhostwalkerLD wrote: »

UrQuan wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

As for unsubscribing or leaving the game due to Crown Crates, I think this is the wrong thing to do. If you don't like Crown Crates, simply don't buy them. This is what I plan to do, and remind them from time to time that I am doing this. If I unsubscribe, it will be because of the game, not Crown Crates.

I can't agree with that at all. The wrong thing to do is to continue to give your money to a company that you know is acting in an unethical manner.

If I know a company is exploiting people (workers, customers, whoever) they don't get my money, period. I won't buy from them, I won't invest in them. For my entire adult life I've worked for a company that literally only exists to improve the lives of it's customers and the communities where it operates. I'm not about to let my money go to a company that I know is being actively predatory and exploitative.

My values and morals are a lot more important to me than any gameplay. I'd be a hypocrite if they weren't. If the implementation of crown crates on live isn't sufficiently changed from the implementation on PTS, I'm out of here because it would be wrong for me to continue to support ZOS.

I'm holding off on making that decision because crown crates don't necessarily have to be exploitative. They could be implemented in a manner that isn't predatory, while still being profitable for ZOS. If they do that then I'll be happy and I'll stick around. I still almost definitely wouldn't buy them, but if they don't make those changes it would be morally and ethically wrong for me to stay. My values dictate how I live every part of my life, if I won't compromise them when I'm making bigger and more important decisions, why would I compromise them for a game?

How, though would they implement these crates in a way that aren't exploitative? These RNG crates/lockboxes/whateveryouwanttocallthem are exploitative by their very nature, which is the reason why people are either against them or at best, apathetic towards them. Not one single person who has experienced these crates in games actually considers them a positive, especially versus just buying whatever "prize" exists in them for a flat price (which, again, renders the crates completely moot and shows them to be what they really are: exploitative).

I don't think there is a way to make them completely fair. But IMO a big step in the right direction would be to make the items which come from them tradable. Which would also require making the cosmetics into items that you can choose to unlock or trade.

That way if you want a specific item you have the option to buy it from another player rather than gambling for it, so you only need to buy the crates if you want to gamble. It would also help with the issue of getting lots of collectables you'll never use and having to unlock them before you can start getting gems in return for them. This way if you get something you don't want you can sell it, so even something you'll never use can be a good drop because it will get you a lot of gold.

It doesn't help at all with the issue of compulsive gamblers. I don't think there's any way to have a system like this which isn't predatory in that respect. But it would eliminate some of the issues.

UrQuan

Negative: I have tested the crates, and I do not want this feature to be implemented in the game.

GhostwalkerLD wrote: »

UrQuan wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

As for unsubscribing or leaving the game due to Crown Crates, I think this is the wrong thing to do. If you don't like Crown Crates, simply don't buy them. This is what I plan to do, and remind them from time to time that I am doing this. If I unsubscribe, it will be because of the game, not Crown Crates.

I can't agree with that at all. The wrong thing to do is to continue to give your money to a company that you know is acting in an unethical manner.

If I know a company is exploiting people (workers, customers, whoever) they don't get my money, period. I won't buy from them, I won't invest in them. For my entire adult life I've worked for a company that literally only exists to improve the lives of it's customers and the communities where it operates. I'm not about to let my money go to a company that I know is being actively predatory and exploitative.

My values and morals are a lot more important to me than any gameplay. I'd be a hypocrite if they weren't. If the implementation of crown crates on live isn't sufficiently changed from the implementation on PTS, I'm out of here because it would be wrong for me to continue to support ZOS.

I'm holding off on making that decision because crown crates don't necessarily have to be exploitative. They could be implemented in a manner that isn't predatory, while still being profitable for ZOS. If they do that then I'll be happy and I'll stick around. I still almost definitely wouldn't buy them, but if they don't make those changes it would be morally and ethically wrong for me to stay. My values dictate how I live every part of my life, if I won't compromise them when I'm making bigger and more important decisions, why would I compromise them for a game?

How, though would they implement these crates in a way that aren't exploitative? These RNG crates/lockboxes/whateveryouwanttocallthem are exploitative by their very nature, which is the reason why people are either against them or at best, apathetic towards them. Not one single person who has experienced these crates in games actually considers them a positive, especially versus just buying whatever "prize" exists in them for a flat price (which, again, renders the crates completely moot and shows them to be what they really are: exploitative).

It's actually not that difficult, and how to do it has been laid out by people in this thread and the official feedback thread in the PTS forums, as well as probably a couple of other threads about them.

Step 1: you make it so that people can make an informed decision about whether to buy them. Lotteries and casinos tell you the odds, and if ZOS can't be as ethical as a casino, then there's a serious problem.

Step 2: you set an upper limit on the amount that someone would have to spend in order to get any given reward that they may be looking for. This can actually replace publishing the odds as long as it's made transparent to the buyer. Crown crates already include a mechanism that can be used to accomplish this: gems. What ZOS would need to do in order to achieve an upper limit using gems is to allow people to always have the option of redeeming their cards for gems regardless of whether they are duplicates or consumables. Then ZOS will know that if a player chooses to redeem them for gems the minimum amount of gems they will get from each crate is X and therefore the maximum number of crates that a person would need to buy in order to get any given reward can be calculated easily.

Step 3: you increase drop rates on the more rare items to a reasonable amount. This one can be tweaked - ZOS would want to put it somewhere so that on average people are spending more crowns than they would to buy items outright, but they'd have to increase it so that the average amount of crowns it takes to get an apex reward isn't several times higher than the most expensive mount that's been available for purchase outright so far. This goes hand-in-hand with step 2. If the average amount of crowns to get an apex reward is 7,000, and the upper limit if you're exchanging all of your cards for gems (which obviously not everyone will do) is 8,000 then that's still more profitable for ZOS than if they sold the items outright, but it's not as predatory as what we've seen so far where it's been taking people as much as 20K+ crowns to get a single apex reward, let alone one that they actually want.

There are lots of other things that can and should be adjusted, but those 3 steps are how you make it so that it's not exploitative, but still profitable for ZOS.

rootimus

Negative: I have NOT tested the crates, and I dislike the idea/direction and/or I dislike what I have read.

RAGUNAnoOne wrote: »

I feel that zenimax does not give a *** at all and will add them regardless of how people feel about them.

But only after someone (Usually Mrs Bruno) replies to show they've thoroughly mis-understood the feedback.

JimT722

Negative: I have NOT tested the crates, and I dislike the idea/direction and/or I dislike what I have read.

rootimus wrote: »

RAGUNAnoOne wrote: »

I feel that zenimax does not give a *** at all and will add them regardless of how people feel about them.

But only after someone (Usually Mrs Bruno) replies to show they've thoroughly mis-understood the feedback.

They didn't misunderstand the feedback. They are drooling over what they think will make them mountains of cash, and are doing as little as they can to diminish that dream regardless of what that feedback says.

GhostwalkerLD

Negative: I have tested the crates, and I do not want this feature to be implemented in the game.

JimT722 wrote: »

rootimus wrote: »

RAGUNAnoOne wrote: »

I feel that zenimax does not give a *** at all and will add them regardless of how people feel about them.

But only after someone (Usually Mrs Bruno) replies to show they've thoroughly mis-understood the feedback.

They didn't misunderstand the feedback. They are drooling over what they think will make them mountains of cash, and are doing as little as they can to diminish that dream regardless of what that feedback says.

Probably. Their goal is obvious, but that doesn't make it, or the effect it has on players, suck any less.

JKorr

Negative: I have tested the crates, and I do not want this feature to be implemented in the game.

GhostwalkerLD wrote: »

UrQuan wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

As for unsubscribing or leaving the game due to Crown Crates, I think this is the wrong thing to do. If you don't like Crown Crates, simply don't buy them. This is what I plan to do, and remind them from time to time that I am doing this. If I unsubscribe, it will be because of the game, not Crown Crates.

I can't agree with that at all. The wrong thing to do is to continue to give your money to a company that you know is acting in an unethical manner.

If I know a company is exploiting people (workers, customers, whoever) they don't get my money, period. I won't buy from them, I won't invest in them. For my entire adult life I've worked for a company that literally only exists to improve the lives of it's customers and the communities where it operates. I'm not about to let my money go to a company that I know is being actively predatory and exploitative.

My values and morals are a lot more important to me than any gameplay. I'd be a hypocrite if they weren't. If the implementation of crown crates on live isn't sufficiently changed from the implementation on PTS, I'm out of here because it would be wrong for me to continue to support ZOS.

I'm holding off on making that decision because crown crates don't necessarily have to be exploitative. They could be implemented in a manner that isn't predatory, while still being profitable for ZOS. If they do that then I'll be happy and I'll stick around. I still almost definitely wouldn't buy them, but if they don't make those changes it would be morally and ethically wrong for me to stay. My values dictate how I live every part of my life, if I won't compromise them when I'm making bigger and more important decisions, why would I compromise them for a game?

How, though would they implement these crates in a way that aren't exploitative? These RNG crates/lockboxes/whateveryouwanttocallthem are exploitative by their very nature, which is the reason why people are either against them or at best, apathetic towards them. Not one single person who has experienced these crates in games actually considers them a positive, especially versus just buying whatever "prize" exists in them for a flat price (which, again, renders the crates completely moot and shows them to be what they really are: exploitative).

Offer everything in the crates for outright sale in the crown store. At some point.

If someone wants to take a chance on getting a 1800 or 2500 or whatever crown mount for 400 crowns with added stuff in the bargain, great. If they offer a special mount/outfit/item in the crates exclusively for x number of weeks and people want to try for it with added stuff in the bargain to get it early, great.

If someone wants to know for sure they are going to get the mount/outfit/item they want, they can pay the higher "for sure" price, without the added stuff they didn't want. After X number of weeks, the special oufit/mount/item is up for sale at the "for sure" price without the added stuff, and people can decide if they want whatever it is enough to pay for it. Without gambling/sacrificing their firstborn to rngesus.

JimT722

Negative: I have NOT tested the crates, and I dislike the idea/direction and/or I dislike what I have read.

JKorr wrote: »

GhostwalkerLD wrote: »

UrQuan wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

As for unsubscribing or leaving the game due to Crown Crates, I think this is the wrong thing to do. If you don't like Crown Crates, simply don't buy them. This is what I plan to do, and remind them from time to time that I am doing this. If I unsubscribe, it will be because of the game, not Crown Crates.

I can't agree with that at all. The wrong thing to do is to continue to give your money to a company that you know is acting in an unethical manner.

If I know a company is exploiting people (workers, customers, whoever) they don't get my money, period. I won't buy from them, I won't invest in them. For my entire adult life I've worked for a company that literally only exists to improve the lives of it's customers and the communities where it operates. I'm not about to let my money go to a company that I know is being actively predatory and exploitative.

My values and morals are a lot more important to me than any gameplay. I'd be a hypocrite if they weren't. If the implementation of crown crates on live isn't sufficiently changed from the implementation on PTS, I'm out of here because it would be wrong for me to continue to support ZOS.

I'm holding off on making that decision because crown crates don't necessarily have to be exploitative. They could be implemented in a manner that isn't predatory, while still being profitable for ZOS. If they do that then I'll be happy and I'll stick around. I still almost definitely wouldn't buy them, but if they don't make those changes it would be morally and ethically wrong for me to stay. My values dictate how I live every part of my life, if I won't compromise them when I'm making bigger and more important decisions, why would I compromise them for a game?

How, though would they implement these crates in a way that aren't exploitative? These RNG crates/lockboxes/whateveryouwanttocallthem are exploitative by their very nature, which is the reason why people are either against them or at best, apathetic towards them. Not one single person who has experienced these crates in games actually considers them a positive, especially versus just buying whatever "prize" exists in them for a flat price (which, again, renders the crates completely moot and shows them to be what they really are: exploitative).

Offer everything in the crates for outright sale in the crown store. At some point.

If someone wants to take a chance on getting a 1800 or 2500 or whatever crown mount for 400 crowns with added stuff in the bargain, great. If they offer a special mount/outfit/item in the crates exclusively for x number of weeks and people want to try for it with added stuff in the bargain to get it early, great.

If someone wants to know for sure they are going to get the mount/outfit/item they want, they can pay the higher "for sure" price, without the added stuff they didn't want. After X number of weeks, the special oufit/mount/item is up for sale at the "for sure" price without the added stuff, and people can decide if they want whatever it is enough to pay for it. Without gambling/sacrificing their firstborn to rngesus.

The only way they can get people to dump hundreds of dollars into this is if it's the only way to get what they want. The absurd cost on the pts is what they would like to get people to spend trying to obtain the specific cosmetics the person would like to achieve. ZOS will reduce it some but the goal will be the same. I hope everyone is wise enough to avoid these.

DYSEQTA

Negative: I have NOT tested the crates, and I dislike the idea/direction and/or I dislike what I have read.

I know they would never be allowed to say anything to the affect but I would love to know if the developers actually hate this as much as most of us do. I will continue to believe that they do care and it is being forced upon them by others. Naive probably, but I need this denial to keep playing.

CombatPrayer

All I have to say is : A fool and his money are soon parted.

starkerealm

Negative: I have NOT tested the crates, and I dislike the idea/direction and/or I dislike what I have read.

autumnsongbird wrote: »

All I have to say is : A fool and his money are soon parted.

By which you mean, ZOS, as the population rapidly depletes on the twin prongs of people feeling burnt by playing the crates for scraps, and people looking for new content, and getting bored while ZOS touts this month's new gamblebox?

starkerealm

Negative: I have NOT tested the crates, and I dislike the idea/direction and/or I dislike what I have read.

UrQuan wrote: »

GhostwalkerLD wrote: »

UrQuan wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

As for unsubscribing or leaving the game due to Crown Crates, I think this is the wrong thing to do. If you don't like Crown Crates, simply don't buy them. This is what I plan to do, and remind them from time to time that I am doing this. If I unsubscribe, it will be because of the game, not Crown Crates.

I can't agree with that at all. The wrong thing to do is to continue to give your money to a company that you know is acting in an unethical manner.

If I know a company is exploiting people (workers, customers, whoever) they don't get my money, period. I won't buy from them, I won't invest in them. For my entire adult life I've worked for a company that literally only exists to improve the lives of it's customers and the communities where it operates. I'm not about to let my money go to a company that I know is being actively predatory and exploitative.

My values and morals are a lot more important to me than any gameplay. I'd be a hypocrite if they weren't. If the implementation of crown crates on live isn't sufficiently changed from the implementation on PTS, I'm out of here because it would be wrong for me to continue to support ZOS.

I'm holding off on making that decision because crown crates don't necessarily have to be exploitative. They could be implemented in a manner that isn't predatory, while still being profitable for ZOS. If they do that then I'll be happy and I'll stick around. I still almost definitely wouldn't buy them, but if they don't make those changes it would be morally and ethically wrong for me to stay. My values dictate how I live every part of my life, if I won't compromise them when I'm making bigger and more important decisions, why would I compromise them for a game?

How, though would they implement these crates in a way that aren't exploitative? These RNG crates/lockboxes/whateveryouwanttocallthem are exploitative by their very nature, which is the reason why people are either against them or at best, apathetic towards them. Not one single person who has experienced these crates in games actually considers them a positive, especially versus just buying whatever "prize" exists in them for a flat price (which, again, renders the crates completely moot and shows them to be what they really are: exploitative).

It's actually not that difficult, and how to do it has been laid out by people in this thread and the official feedback thread in the PTS forums, as well as probably a couple of other threads about them.

Step 1: you make it so that people can make an informed decision about whether to buy them. Lotteries and casinos tell you the odds, and if ZOS can't be as ethical as a casino, then there's a serious problem.

Step 2: you set an upper limit on the amount that someone would have to spend in order to get any given reward that they may be looking for. This can actually replace publishing the odds as long as it's made transparent to the buyer. Crown crates already include a mechanism that can be used to accomplish this: gems. What ZOS would need to do in order to achieve an upper limit using gems is to allow people to always have the option of redeeming their cards for gems regardless of whether they are duplicates or consumables. Then ZOS will know that if a player chooses to redeem them for gems the minimum amount of gems they will get from each crate is X and therefore the maximum number of crates that a person would need to buy in order to get any given reward can be calculated easily.

Step 3: you increase drop rates on the more rare items to a reasonable amount. This one can be tweaked - ZOS would want to put it somewhere so that on average people are spending more crowns than they would to buy items outright, but they'd have to increase it so that the average amount of crowns it takes to get an apex reward isn't several times higher than the most expensive mount that's been available for purchase outright so far. This goes hand-in-hand with step 2. If the average amount of crowns to get an apex reward is 7,000, and the upper limit if you're exchanging all of your cards for gems (which obviously not everyone will do) is 8,000 then that's still more profitable for ZOS than if they sold the items outright, but it's not as predatory as what we've seen so far where it's been taking people as much as 20K+ crowns to get a single apex reward, let alone one that they actually want.

There are lots of other things that can and should be adjusted, but those 3 steps are how you make it so that it's not exploitative, but still profitable for ZOS.

The sad irony here is, step 2 actually works against their (perceived) interests. Someone in marketing is sitting around drooling at the idea that we'll cough up 400 bucks for the apex tier items.

If you had a 10% drop rate for Apex mounts, that would put them roughly at the cost of the existing example, the Dro'm-athra senche.

Even if you drop that to 5% drop rates, given the cost of the boxes, that would still make sure the prizes were common enough to keep the boxes from feeling like a scam.

But, there's two big problems here. ZOS seems to have taken the drop rates from other MMOS, like Neverwinter, and then applied them to their game unchanged. Problem is, most MMOs charge between eighty cents and a buck-twenty-five for their keys. And they're expecting four dollars per play. Which is, frankly, insane.

I say "seem to," because I was in the middle of moving while these things were on the PTS, and didn't have internet service to check them, even if I'd wanted.

Knootewoot

Neutral: I have NOT tested the crates, and my feelings are neutral, noncommital, or do not apply.

SWTOR had it's gambling crates with unique stuff with low droprate in it. It never bothered me. I didn't buy it, nor did I buy it from the auction house for steep prices.

I am neutral about this. I sub, but won't spend money on crates. I already have a few mounts so don't need more.

It does not contain pay to win features (yet). But even if it would be put in there I would not buy it nor quit because of it.

wayfarerx

Negative: I have NOT tested the crates, and I dislike the idea/direction and/or I dislike what I have read.

UrQuan wrote: »

GhostwalkerLD wrote: »

UrQuan wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

As for unsubscribing or leaving the game due to Crown Crates, I think this is the wrong thing to do. If you don't like Crown Crates, simply don't buy them. This is what I plan to do, and remind them from time to time that I am doing this. If I unsubscribe, it will be because of the game, not Crown Crates.

I can't agree with that at all. The wrong thing to do is to continue to give your money to a company that you know is acting in an unethical manner.

If I know a company is exploiting people (workers, customers, whoever) they don't get my money, period. I won't buy from them, I won't invest in them. For my entire adult life I've worked for a company that literally only exists to improve the lives of it's customers and the communities where it operates. I'm not about to let my money go to a company that I know is being actively predatory and exploitative.

My values and morals are a lot more important to me than any gameplay. I'd be a hypocrite if they weren't. If the implementation of crown crates on live isn't sufficiently changed from the implementation on PTS, I'm out of here because it would be wrong for me to continue to support ZOS.

I'm holding off on making that decision because crown crates don't necessarily have to be exploitative. They could be implemented in a manner that isn't predatory, while still being profitable for ZOS. If they do that then I'll be happy and I'll stick around. I still almost definitely wouldn't buy them, but if they don't make those changes it would be morally and ethically wrong for me to stay. My values dictate how I live every part of my life, if I won't compromise them when I'm making bigger and more important decisions, why would I compromise them for a game?

How, though would they implement these crates in a way that aren't exploitative? These RNG crates/lockboxes/whateveryouwanttocallthem are exploitative by their very nature, which is the reason why people are either against them or at best, apathetic towards them. Not one single person who has experienced these crates in games actually considers them a positive, especially versus just buying whatever "prize" exists in them for a flat price (which, again, renders the crates completely moot and shows them to be what they really are: exploitative).

It's actually not that difficult, and how to do it has been laid out by people in this thread and the official feedback thread in the PTS forums, as well as probably a couple of other threads about them.

Step 1: you make it so that people can make an informed decision about whether to buy them. Lotteries and casinos tell you the odds, and if ZOS can't be as ethical as a casino, then there's a serious problem.

Step 2: you set an upper limit on the amount that someone would have to spend in order to get any given reward that they may be looking for. This can actually replace publishing the odds as long as it's made transparent to the buyer. Crown crates already include a mechanism that can be used to accomplish this: gems. What ZOS would need to do in order to achieve an upper limit using gems is to allow people to always have the option of redeeming their cards for gems regardless of whether they are duplicates or consumables. Then ZOS will know that if a player chooses to redeem them for gems the minimum amount of gems they will get from each crate is X and therefore the maximum number of crates that a person would need to buy in order to get any given reward can be calculated easily.

Step 3: you increase drop rates on the more rare items to a reasonable amount. This one can be tweaked - ZOS would want to put it somewhere so that on average people are spending more crowns than they would to buy items outright, but they'd have to increase it so that the average amount of crowns it takes to get an apex reward isn't several times higher than the most expensive mount that's been available for purchase outright so far. This goes hand-in-hand with step 2. If the average amount of crowns to get an apex reward is 7,000, and the upper limit if you're exchanging all of your cards for gems (which obviously not everyone will do) is 8,000 then that's still more profitable for ZOS than if they sold the items outright, but it's not as predatory as what we've seen so far where it's been taking people as much as 20K+ crowns to get a single apex reward, let alone one that they actually want.

There are lots of other things that can and should be adjusted, but those 3 steps are how you make it so that it's not exploitative, but still profitable for ZOS.

Please @ZOS_GinaBruno, @ZOS_JessicaFolsom, @ZOS_KaiSchober, @ZOS_RichLambert, @ZOS_MattFiror. It would be so easy to make a couple small changes and not treat us like ignominious walking wallets.

Kodrac

Negative: I have NOT tested the crates, and I dislike the idea/direction and/or I dislike what I have read.

The biggest issue for me is what will be crate exclusives and what won't - we don' t know yet. I think the only things that should be exclusive are the Apex rewards. Making things like the red wolf mount and pet just doesn't fit with the theme of Atronauch. if there's going to be a theme to the crate releases it should be consistent. And making the other items like that exclusive just makes them a crown gem grind - grind with real money - and that to me is what makes this whole concept a bad idea to me.

I mean it's one thing to buy a box and try to get the big Apex reward and not get it so buy another and try again, but its totally another thing to have to keep getting useless junk or items we don't want over and over to be able to purchase what you do want. That's stupid in my opinion. I'll gamble on the flashy unique stuff but otherwise just let me buy what I want.

Elsonso

Negative: I have tested the crates, and I do not want this feature to be implemented in the game.

wayfarerx wrote: »

Please @ZOS_GinaBruno, @ZOS_JessicaFolsom, @ZOS_KaiSchober, @ZOS_RichLambert, @ZOS_MattFiror. It would be so easy to make a couple small changes and not treat us like ignominious walking wallets.

I get the idea of changes, and I get that we are walking wallets (see signature), but how are we disgraced because of it?

Ignominious seems to apply to them.

wayfarerx

Negative: I have NOT tested the crates, and I dislike the idea/direction and/or I dislike what I have read.

lordrichter wrote: »

wayfarerx wrote: »

Please @ZOS_GinaBruno, @ZOS_JessicaFolsom, @ZOS_KaiSchober, @ZOS_RichLambert, @ZOS_MattFiror. It would be so easy to make a couple small changes and not treat us like ignominious walking wallets.

I get the idea of changes, and I get that we are walking wallets (see signature), but how are we disgraced because of it?

Ignominious seems to apply to them.

They are treating us like we are stupid with the way they put these things together, that's not to say that we actually are. Well, as long as you don't buy any that is...

Mandragora

Negative: I have NOT tested the crates, and I dislike the idea/direction and/or I dislike what I have read.

I logged on Secret World after long time just to find out, they introduced already cosmetic bundles like 1 year ago already.

But they have half of ZOS price and only cosmetic + a lucky coin, which you can exchange at a shopkeeper for another piece of cosmetic from the same set. The cosmetic bundles are themed - not like in ZOS 1/4 of year spring theme or something, but really cool, and they have like 1 set - hat/shoes/pants/backpack/shoulderpads/pet/etc and in those crates you have a chance to get 1 piece and if it is not what you wanted, you can exchange it in the end. They have also a bulk of 5 bundles, which you can have for lower price.

This looks like something that could work - no unique overpriced cosmetic, only themed - the same way like players wanted to have in ESO for a long time, but ZOS offered in that way only crafted armor - is that enough? No pirate bundle, no bounty hunter bundle, no other additional cosmetic bundle, only overpriced costumes.

So Secret World do have 1 year already what players proposed to Zenimax as a light version of crown crates and a better version of their content of crown store.

Do you think that it is still bad? I'm not sure.

BTW they also had a unicorn horse for 200 dolars - that is a joke I guess


EDIT:
OK, I can see from their forum, that during the year it went the worse way, so the reality is much worse now - the exchange ratio is I think 1:10 - they said for a jacket you would pay 20 dolars, and also not all the cosmetics from that bundle are unique. Still better version, but I wish there would be a way without this boxes.

EDIT:

I logged in and it is repaired - now only to have lower numbers in groups of mobs and lower numbers in quests and it would be OK. Then I would even buy that 200 dolar unicorn!

GhostwalkerLD

Negative: I have tested the crates, and I do not want this feature to be implemented in the game.

Mandragora wrote: »

I logged on Secret World after long time just to find out, they introduced already cosmetic bundles like 1 year ago already.

But they have half of ZOS price and only cosmetic + a lucky coin, which you can exchange at a shopkeeper for another piece of cosmetic from the same set. The cosmetic bundles are themed - not like in ZOS 1/4 of year spring theme or something, but really cool, and they have like 1 set - hat/shoes/pants/backpack/shoulderpads/pet/etc and in those crates you have a chance to get 1 piece and if it is not what you wanted, you can exchange it in the end. They have also a bulk of 5 bundles, which you can have for lower price.

This looks like something that could work - no unique overpriced cosmetic, only themed - the same way like players wanted to have in ESO for a long time, but ZOS offered in that way only crafted armor - is that enough? No pirate bundle, no bounty hunter bundle, no other additional cosmetic bundle, only overpriced costumes.

So Secret World do have 1 year already what players proposed to Zenimax as a light version of crown crates and a better version of their content of crown store.

Do you think that it is still bad? I'm not sure.

BTW they also had a unicorn horse for 200 dolars - that is a joke I guess


EDIT:
OK, I can see from their forum, that during the year it went the worse way, so the reality is much worse now - the exchange ratio is I think 1:10 - they said for a jacket you would pay 20 dolars, and also not all the cosmetics from that bundle are unique. Still better version, but I wish there would be a way without this boxes.

That's the recurring theme: We would be happy to buy all this stuff (which a lot of it IS rather cool) - WITHOUT HAVING TO GAMBLE WITH IT. Just stop with the crown crates and let us purchase it 'normally' on the crown store. They have no reason to do otherwise that isn't just a blatant attempt to cash-grab and potentially alienate their playerbase, because all can see it for what it really is.

starkerealm

Negative: I have NOT tested the crates, and I dislike the idea/direction and/or I dislike what I have read.

Mandragora wrote: »

I logged on Secret World after long time just to find out, they introduced already cosmetic bundles like 1 year ago already.

But they have half of ZOS price and only cosmetic + a lucky coin, which you can exchange at a shopkeeper for another piece of cosmetic from the same set. The cosmetic bundles are themed - not like in ZOS 1/4 of year spring theme or something, but really cool, and they have like 1 set - hat/shoes/pants/backpack/shoulderpads/pet/etc and in those crates you have a chance to get 1 piece and if it is not what you wanted, you can exchange it in the end. They have also a bulk of 5 bundles, which you can have for lower price.

This looks like something that could work - no unique overpriced cosmetic, only themed - the same way like players wanted to have in ESO for a long time, but ZOS offered in that way only crafted armor - is that enough? No pirate bundle, no bounty hunter bundle, no other additional cosmetic bundle, only overpriced costumes.

So Secret World do have 1 year already what players proposed to Zenimax as a light version of crown crates and a better version of their content of crown store.

Do you think that it is still bad? I'm not sure.

BTW they also had a unicorn horse for 200 dolars - that is a joke I guess


EDIT:
OK, I can see from their forum, that during the year it went the worse way, so the reality is much worse now - the exchange ratio is I think 1:10 - they said for a jacket you would pay 20 dolars, and also not all the cosmetics from that bundle are unique. Still better version, but I wish there would be a way without this boxes.

TSW does that though. They started sticking in $100 costumes, and then temporarily putting them on 90% off about three years ago. There's at least two of those.

That said, TSW's gambleboxes have one serious issue, they actually include (or used to include) augments. These are straight up stat bonuses that you can attack to your skills. It's possible to obtain them through a tedious process... or just cough up cash.

starkerealm

Negative: I have NOT tested the crates, and I dislike the idea/direction and/or I dislike what I have read.

GhostwalkerLD wrote: »

Mandragora wrote: »

I logged on Secret World after long time just to find out, they introduced already cosmetic bundles like 1 year ago already.

But they have half of ZOS price and only cosmetic + a lucky coin, which you can exchange at a shopkeeper for another piece of cosmetic from the same set. The cosmetic bundles are themed - not like in ZOS 1/4 of year spring theme or something, but really cool, and they have like 1 set - hat/shoes/pants/backpack/shoulderpads/pet/etc and in those crates you have a chance to get 1 piece and if it is not what you wanted, you can exchange it in the end. They have also a bulk of 5 bundles, which you can have for lower price.

This looks like something that could work - no unique overpriced cosmetic, only themed - the same way like players wanted to have in ESO for a long time, but ZOS offered in that way only crafted armor - is that enough? No pirate bundle, no bounty hunter bundle, no other additional cosmetic bundle, only overpriced costumes.

So Secret World do have 1 year already what players proposed to Zenimax as a light version of crown crates and a better version of their content of crown store.

Do you think that it is still bad? I'm not sure.

BTW they also had a unicorn horse for 200 dolars - that is a joke I guess


EDIT:
OK, I can see from their forum, that during the year it went the worse way, so the reality is much worse now - the exchange ratio is I think 1:10 - they said for a jacket you would pay 20 dolars, and also not all the cosmetics from that bundle are unique. Still better version, but I wish there would be a way without this boxes.

That's the recurring theme: We would be happy to buy all this stuff (which a lot of it IS rather cool) - WITHOUT HAVING TO GAMBLE WITH IT. Just stop with the crown crates and let us purchase it 'normally' on the crown store. They have no reason to do otherwise that isn't just a blatant attempt to cash-grab and potentially alienate their playerbase, because all can see it for what it really is.

And the irony is, they could make this work by sticking a guaranteed gem drop quantity in each box. You wouldn't here me complaining if every box had 40 gems, because if you wanted an Apex drop off the store, you could just spend your $40, like with the Dro'M-athra, buy 10 boxes, and pick it off the menu.

And, it isn't a situation where they'd see their income drop, because they're turning out a bunch of aspect tier rewards. There would still be the people who dropped $200 or $300 for everything in there, every time the crates rotated over.

jeevin

Negative: I have NOT tested the crates, and I dislike the idea/direction and/or I dislike what I have read.

GhostwalkerLD wrote: »

Mandragora wrote: »

I logged on Secret World after long time just to find out, they introduced already cosmetic bundles like 1 year ago already.

But they have half of ZOS price and only cosmetic + a lucky coin, which you can exchange at a shopkeeper for another piece of cosmetic from the same set. The cosmetic bundles are themed - not like in ZOS 1/4 of year spring theme or something, but really cool, and they have like 1 set - hat/shoes/pants/backpack/shoulderpads/pet/etc and in those crates you have a chance to get 1 piece and if it is not what you wanted, you can exchange it in the end. They have also a bulk of 5 bundles, which you can have for lower price.

This looks like something that could work - no unique overpriced cosmetic, only themed - the same way like players wanted to have in ESO for a long time, but ZOS offered in that way only crafted armor - is that enough? No pirate bundle, no bounty hunter bundle, no other additional cosmetic bundle, only overpriced costumes.

So Secret World do have 1 year already what players proposed to Zenimax as a light version of crown crates and a better version of their content of crown store.

Do you think that it is still bad? I'm not sure.

BTW they also had a unicorn horse for 200 dolars - that is a joke I guess


EDIT:
OK, I can see from their forum, that during the year it went the worse way, so the reality is much worse now - the exchange ratio is I think 1:10 - they said for a jacket you would pay 20 dolars, and also not all the cosmetics from that bundle are unique. Still better version, but I wish there would be a way without this boxes.

That's the recurring theme: We would be happy to buy all this stuff (which a lot of it IS rather cool) - WITHOUT HAVING TO GAMBLE WITH IT. Just stop with the crown crates and let us purchase it 'normally' on the crown store. They have no reason to do otherwise that isn't just a blatant attempt to cash-grab and potentially alienate their playerbase, because all can see it for what it really is.

Hey I'm all for gambling for the Crown Crates just as they are, but only with in game gold. Regardless of how the Crates come I'm keeping my cash. The only thing that will change is how I feel about Zos and how dirty I'll feel playing and supporting a game that's trying to scam it's players.

starkerealm

Negative: I have NOT tested the crates, and I dislike the idea/direction and/or I dislike what I have read.

jeevin wrote: »

GhostwalkerLD wrote: »

Mandragora wrote: »

I logged on Secret World after long time just to find out, they introduced already cosmetic bundles like 1 year ago already.

But they have half of ZOS price and only cosmetic + a lucky coin, which you can exchange at a shopkeeper for another piece of cosmetic from the same set. The cosmetic bundles are themed - not like in ZOS 1/4 of year spring theme or something, but really cool, and they have like 1 set - hat/shoes/pants/backpack/shoulderpads/pet/etc and in those crates you have a chance to get 1 piece and if it is not what you wanted, you can exchange it in the end. They have also a bulk of 5 bundles, which you can have for lower price.

This looks like something that could work - no unique overpriced cosmetic, only themed - the same way like players wanted to have in ESO for a long time, but ZOS offered in that way only crafted armor - is that enough? No pirate bundle, no bounty hunter bundle, no other additional cosmetic bundle, only overpriced costumes.

So Secret World do have 1 year already what players proposed to Zenimax as a light version of crown crates and a better version of their content of crown store.

Do you think that it is still bad? I'm not sure.

BTW they also had a unicorn horse for 200 dolars - that is a joke I guess


EDIT:
OK, I can see from their forum, that during the year it went the worse way, so the reality is much worse now - the exchange ratio is I think 1:10 - they said for a jacket you would pay 20 dolars, and also not all the cosmetics from that bundle are unique. Still better version, but I wish there would be a way without this boxes.

That's the recurring theme: We would be happy to buy all this stuff (which a lot of it IS rather cool) - WITHOUT HAVING TO GAMBLE WITH IT. Just stop with the crown crates and let us purchase it 'normally' on the crown store. They have no reason to do otherwise that isn't just a blatant attempt to cash-grab and potentially alienate their playerbase, because all can see it for what it really is.

Hey I'm all for gambling for the Crown Crates just as they are, but only with in game gold. Regardless of how the Crates come I'm keeping my cash. The only thing that will change is how I feel about Zos and how dirty I'll feel playing and supporting a game that's trying to scam it's players.

What's funny is, there actually were gamble boxes in the game. You could buy them with gold, with tel-var stones, or by running content, and each group had a different collection of things to do. We never complained about those because ZOS wasn't charging cash for those directly.

Mandragora

Negative: I have NOT tested the crates, and I dislike the idea/direction and/or I dislike what I have read.

I think that there is more sad thing about TSW, that are such typical example of todays quite good MMOs, but still not as successful as they could be:

Why fancom do it? Because they are not successful.
Why they are not successful? Because they decided not to change a few PVE features players complained about.
(I know players do complain about a lot of things, but between all of that in those empty MMOs, there is always some unpopular features everyone knows about)

What was that feature?
You were not able to get help from players around you without being in a group, they had no distributed xps for sharing damage on 1 mob, not only that, but also by hitting a mob, someone else was fighting with, you cancelled the possibility to get quest required drop from that mob - so you actually really could get players angry by hitting their mobs. Did you say multiplayer? I guess this is a multiplayer for Fancom. If they would have shared xps for non grouped players (as it quite often could happen that they stumbled on each other, hitting 1 mob from different sides), they could lower the numbers of mobs in countryside, so it would be less annoying to move around, they could have made more easy their boring quests of kill 15 mobs, or even lower the numbers required to kill in those simple quests for players who don't fancy them, or atleast to have more of those interactive objects with mechanics for killing more of mobs (like bombs, flame-thrower), consumable for 1 use. Btw they did lower the damage and difficulty like 1,5 years ago (when I tried the game), but I don't think, that was the only problem or the main problem. It is better to fight with 1 hard mob with no other mobs around than to fight with 5 mobs with the possibility to get into another 5 mobs, so you will have to fight with 10 mobs at once, without the possibility to get help from players around, who are not in a group with you, share xps with someone, so you know, you have to really kill 15, sometimes 20 mobs, with like 10-15 quests in each zone.

So I can imagine one day some sleeky dude told them they could make a lot of money by gamble boxes (or did anyone were thinking that what could work for MOBA can work for RPG?), they agreed and did all the work to implement that, instead of repairing their game. Or did they change investor?

Is that still cheaper? Or is the job of graphics more cheaper, than to reprogram this feature? (btw common feature for every Fancom MMO) If they would be able to locate the main problem of their game and repair it, they would have bigger player base and thus more money. But with the gamble boxes decision, they will only make the remaining fans angry. Btw I don't think they have more of money from those bundles, only more of upset customers.

Btw their shop was always full of such really ugly ordinary cosmetics - they had a bit the opposite problem from ESO. They could remove those ugly pieces and let stay those cool bundles, it would be atleast pleasant to scroll through it.

Why they didn't remove that feature?
Maybe because a lot of that can see only a player, so they cannot understand that? I don't know
Or maybe they did repair that 1 year ago, I just don't know about it - I think that with those gambling boxes I don't have really desire to return to the game and without changing those boring PVE features I will never get through the desert zone and finish the game.

On the other hand I saw a lot of new PvP features, so maybe they will get more of players from that direction.

But ESO was doing good, listening to players, after those DLCs they were on the way to get more of players. So it wasn't really needed to have boxes? Now every mistake they will make will make everyone angry - nobody will forget them anything.

GhostwalkerLD

Negative: I have tested the crates, and I do not want this feature to be implemented in the game.

starkerealm wrote: »

jeevin wrote: »

GhostwalkerLD wrote: »

Mandragora wrote: »

I logged on Secret World after long time just to find out, they introduced already cosmetic bundles like 1 year ago already.

But they have half of ZOS price and only cosmetic + a lucky coin, which you can exchange at a shopkeeper for another piece of cosmetic from the same set. The cosmetic bundles are themed - not like in ZOS 1/4 of year spring theme or something, but really cool, and they have like 1 set - hat/shoes/pants/backpack/shoulderpads/pet/etc and in those crates you have a chance to get 1 piece and if it is not what you wanted, you can exchange it in the end. They have also a bulk of 5 bundles, which you can have for lower price.

This looks like something that could work - no unique overpriced cosmetic, only themed - the same way like players wanted to have in ESO for a long time, but ZOS offered in that way only crafted armor - is that enough? No pirate bundle, no bounty hunter bundle, no other additional cosmetic bundle, only overpriced costumes.

So Secret World do have 1 year already what players proposed to Zenimax as a light version of crown crates and a better version of their content of crown store.

Do you think that it is still bad? I'm not sure.

BTW they also had a unicorn horse for 200 dolars - that is a joke I guess


EDIT:
OK, I can see from their forum, that during the year it went the worse way, so the reality is much worse now - the exchange ratio is I think 1:10 - they said for a jacket you would pay 20 dolars, and also not all the cosmetics from that bundle are unique. Still better version, but I wish there would be a way without this boxes.

That's the recurring theme: We would be happy to buy all this stuff (which a lot of it IS rather cool) - WITHOUT HAVING TO GAMBLE WITH IT. Just stop with the crown crates and let us purchase it 'normally' on the crown store. They have no reason to do otherwise that isn't just a blatant attempt to cash-grab and potentially alienate their playerbase, because all can see it for what it really is.

Hey I'm all for gambling for the Crown Crates just as they are, but only with in game gold. Regardless of how the Crates come I'm keeping my cash. The only thing that will change is how I feel about Zos and how dirty I'll feel playing and supporting a game that's trying to scam it's players.

What's funny is, there actually were gamble boxes in the game. You could buy them with gold, with tel-var stones, or by running content, and each group had a different collection of things to do. We never complained about those because ZOS wasn't charging cash for those directly.

I was going to mention this, and that is another reason why nobody trusts ZOS's idea of "RNG" anyway, given how horrible the boxes that already exist in the game are, to say nothing about other RNG scenarios (Maelstrom Arena, anyone?).

GhostwalkerLD

Negative: I have tested the crates, and I do not want this feature to be implemented in the game.

Mandragora wrote: »

I think that there is more sad thing about TSW, that are such typical example of todays quite good MMOs, but still not as successful as they could be:

Why fancom do it? Because they are not successful.
Why they are not successful? Because they decided not to change a few PVE features players complained about.
(I know players do complain about a lot of things, but between all of that in those empty MMOs, there is always some unpopular features everyone knows about)

What was that feature?
You were not able to get help from players around you without being in a group, they had no distributed xps for sharing damage on 1 mob, not only that, but also by hitting a mob, someone else was fighting with, you cancelled the possibility to get quest required drop from that mob - so you actually really could get players angry by hitting their mobs. Did you say multiplayer? I guess this is a multiplayer for Fancom. If they would have shared xps for non grouped players (as it quite often could happen that they stumbled on each other, hitting 1 mob from different sides), they could lower the numbers of mobs in countryside, so it would be less annoying to move around, they could have made more easy their boring quests of kill 15 mobs, or even lower the numbers required to kill in those simple quests for players who don't fancy them, or atleast to have more of those interactive objects with mechanics for killing more of mobs (like bombs, flame-thrower), consumable for 1 use. Btw they did lower the damage and difficulty like 1,5 years ago (when I tried the game), but I don't think, that was the only problem or the main problem. It is better to fight with 1 hard mob with no other mobs around than to fight with 5 mobs with the possibility to get into another 5 mobs, so you will have to fight with 10 mobs at once, without the possibility to get help from players around, who are not in a group with you, share xps with someone, so you know, you have to really kill 15, sometimes 20 mobs, with like 10-15 quests in each zone.

So I can imagine one day some sleeky dude told them they could make a lot of money by gamble boxes (or did anyone were thinking that what could work for MOBA can work for RPG?), they agreed and did all the work to implement that, instead of repairing their game. Or did they change investor?

Is that still cheaper? Or is the job of graphics more cheaper, than to reprogram this feature? (btw common feature for every Fancom MMO) If they would be able to locate the main problem of their game and repair it, they would have bigger player base and thus more money. But with the gamble boxes decision, they will only make the remaining fans angry. Btw I don't think they have more of money from those bundles, only more of upset customers.

Btw their shop was always full of such really ugly ordinary cosmetics - they had a bit the opposite problem from ESO. They could remove those ugly pieces and let stay those cool bundles, it would be atleast pleasant to scroll through it.

Why they didn't remove that feature?
Maybe because a lot of that can see only a player, so they cannot understand that? I don't know
Or maybe they did repair that 1 year ago, I just don't know about it - I think that with those gambling boxes I don't have really desire to return to the game and without changing those boring PVE features I will never get through the desert zone and finish the game.

On the other hand I saw a lot of new PvP features, so maybe they will get more of players from that direction.

But ESO was doing good, listening to players, after those DLCs they were on the way to get more of players. So it wasn't really needed to have boxes? Now every mistake they will make will make everyone angry - nobody will forget them anything.

Well said, it's really rather sad.