I don't mind the RNG aspect necessarily, but the way it is implemented with these rifts is ridiculous. Meaning, the vast gap in the reward structure based on RNG. It's crazy that someone can get lucky and win an entire feature 5*, or 5* AG, or an entire t2A while the unlucky ones are getting useless sig stones.
The top rewards are potentially game changing type of rewards while the bottom rewards are essentially worthless. That's not right.
a featured 5* crystal or even an AG are not game changing in and of themselves..
I don't mind the RNG aspect necessarily, but the way it is implemented with these rifts is ridiculous. Meaning, the vast gap in the reward structure based on RNG. It's crazy that someone can get lucky and win an entire feature 5*, or 5* AG, or an entire t2A while the unlucky ones are getting useless sig stones.
The top rewards are potentially game changing type of rewards while the bottom rewards are essentially worthless. That's not right.
a featured 5* crystal or even an AG are not game changing in and of themselves..
I think you've played this game long enough to know AG is surely a game changing resource. That's why it is so rare
The Gems in and of themselves are not game-changing. Rolling that particular Gem for that particular game-changing Champ can be, but even the Champ is based on RNG.
That is why we have inventory to save items we don't use now. So to you, when full t5cc crystals are out, they are not game changing resources either. Because you have to spin the right class for your game changing champs? And do you think an AG and several sig stones have same values?
The Gems themselves aren't game-changing. They're definitely rare, and were much more rare earlier on. While still rare, they are only really game-changing when used in a way that's game-changing. I can roll a Tech. Not game-changing. I can use it on HB. See what I'm saying?
That is why we have inventory to save items we don't use now. So to you, when full t5cc crystals are out, they are not game changing resources either. Because you have to spin the right class for your game changing champs? And do you think an AG and several sig stones have same values?
The Gems themselves aren't game-changing. They're definitely rare, and were much more rare earlier on. While still rare, they are only really game-changing when used in a way that's game-changing. I can roll a Tech. Not game-changing. I can use it on HB. See what I'm saying?
That's like saying ghost or omega red aren't good champs because I could play them terribly.
That is why we have inventory to save items we don't use now. So to you, when full t5cc crystals are out, they are not game changing resources either. Because you have to spin the right class for your game changing champs? And do you think an AG and several sig stones have same values?
The Gems themselves aren't game-changing. They're definitely rare, and were much more rare earlier on. While still rare, they are only really game-changing when used in a way that's game-changing. I can roll a Tech. Not game-changing. I can use it on HB. See what I'm saying?
That is why we have inventory to save items we don't use now. So to you, when full t5cc crystals are out, they are not game changing resources either. Because you have to spin the right class for your game changing champs? And do you think an AG and several sig stones have same values?
The Gems themselves aren't game-changing. They're definitely rare, and were much more rare earlier on. While still rare, they are only really game-changing when used in a way that's game-changing. I can roll a Tech. Not game-changing. I can use it on HB. See what I'm saying?
Please tell me you didn't use a gem on HB
No. LOL. Displaying a point. I did use one on Hawkeye, though. I stand by it. XD
That is why we have inventory to save items we don't use now. So to you, when full t5cc crystals are out, they are not game changing resources either. Because you have to spin the right class for your game changing champs? And do you think an AG and several sig stones have same values?
The Gems themselves aren't game-changing. They're definitely rare, and were much more rare earlier on. While still rare, they are only really game-changing when used in a way that's game-changing. I can roll a Tech. Not game-changing. I can use it on HB. See what I'm saying?
That's like saying ghost or omega red aren't good champs because I could play them terribly.
That's not like saying that at all. A Gem is not a game-changing element unless you apply it to a game-changing Champ. Otherwise, it's just a rare Resource that sits in our Stash until we use it. A Champ is a different story. The point I am trying to make is the Gems are only as good as we apply them. At one point in the game, the acquisition of them was an amazing feat. They're still rare, not to devalue them, just not as rare as they used to be. As I illustrated in my previous point, the Gem itself isn't game-altering unless you have a game-altering Champ to apply it to. Without that, it's not game-changing at all.
I’m in the camp against RNG rewards. I would much prefer to do the same work as everyone else and get a fixed reward OR do the same work as everyone else for some type of currency I can spend on the reward of my choosing so you know...I can feel rewarded. Not that I need a 5*awakening gem from an Epic rift, I still much prefer that over sig stones. Crappy RNG time after time is deflating and would not seem to motivate anyone to remain a customer (that’s Kabam’s goal right?). I have a decent enough account where none of the current Epic rift rewards are “game changing”, but there are some I would prefer. Don’t we all want the best rewards for our particular situation so we can get through content with as few resources as possible? I don’t see how RNG rewards help the player do that or benefit Kabam. I’m OK with random champ pulls but I’m feeling the OPs frustration with the RNG rewards.
Crappy RNG time after time is deflating and would not seem to motivate anyone to remain a customer (that’s Kabam’s goal right?).
Actually, it isn't, at least not in the sense I think you mean. The goal isn't to retain any one specific customer, it is to manage turnover and target the most lucrative customers.
In a free to play game, most people don't pay. That's basically always true. So the people who do pay must subsidize a lot of others. In the old days of subscription MMOs players might average paying about $200 a year to subscribe to an MMO. If 20% of the players of a F2P game are subsidizing the rest, that suggests the average paying player has to be paying a lot more than $200 a year.
If you target players who demand a lot of value for that cash, your game quickly becomes pay to win, then even pay to play which is detrimental to the long term health of the game. Instead you have to target players willing to spend a lot for relatively little value in the game. That way those players subsidize the free players with the lowest possible impact on the game as a whole.
The question becomes: which kind of rewards target those kinds of players. And we don't have to debate the question academically, because the games industry has conducted this experiment over and over, borrowing from the gaming industry and elsewhere. Random rewards do that far better than non-random rewards. Non-random rewards become boring, random rewards become frustrating, but frustrating is manageable and boring is lethal.
The goal is to make a game that is interesting enough that many will play and some fraction will pay. It is not to try to keep as many customers as possible by catering to their desires. That's what a lot of armchair economists keep failing to understand about the F2P game industry. Their goal is not to convince as many people as possible to be paying customers, it is almost the opposite. And it is not to make a game that is as satisfying as possible to as many people as possible, it is to make it not boring to enough people to keep the lights on, and to counter inevitable turnover.
I’m sure there’s plenty of smart marketing folks optimizing Kabam’s business model. For me personally, I have and would continue to give Kabam a bit of my money for resources to get through some of the highest level of end game content. I much prefer some control over my rewards once getting there. Maybe I’m just transitioning to the group destined for inevitable turnover as you describe above. I agree it happens and Kabam must manage for a longer term than maybe I’m willing to endure.
Comments
In a free to play game, most people don't pay. That's basically always true. So the people who do pay must subsidize a lot of others. In the old days of subscription MMOs players might average paying about $200 a year to subscribe to an MMO. If 20% of the players of a F2P game are subsidizing the rest, that suggests the average paying player has to be paying a lot more than $200 a year.
If you target players who demand a lot of value for that cash, your game quickly becomes pay to win, then even pay to play which is detrimental to the long term health of the game. Instead you have to target players willing to spend a lot for relatively little value in the game. That way those players subsidize the free players with the lowest possible impact on the game as a whole.
The question becomes: which kind of rewards target those kinds of players. And we don't have to debate the question academically, because the games industry has conducted this experiment over and over, borrowing from the gaming industry and elsewhere. Random rewards do that far better than non-random rewards. Non-random rewards become boring, random rewards become frustrating, but frustrating is manageable and boring is lethal.
The goal is to make a game that is interesting enough that many will play and some fraction will pay. It is not to try to keep as many customers as possible by catering to their desires. That's what a lot of armchair economists keep failing to understand about the F2P game industry. Their goal is not to convince as many people as possible to be paying customers, it is almost the opposite. And it is not to make a game that is as satisfying as possible to as many people as possible, it is to make it not boring to enough people to keep the lights on, and to counter inevitable turnover.