**Mastery Loadouts**
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Comments
No way I’d do this deal.
Personally, I would like a 5* OGV for nothing more than nostalgia and synergies. But bundling him with the 6* offer feels like a wildly off-base value proposition.
Dr. Zola
Regarding this Vision offer, I agree with other players:
- I am interested in the 6* version, but not the 5* (that I already have duped)
- Why a player would need the 5* when he gets the 6*?
- 6k units for the 6* is too expensive for a champion that is not that good (the random power increase...). Moreover, 19,5k units to get it as 6r2 and awakened 20...
The bigger problem is that most offers are targeted in a way that I think is obvious, but I've come to discover most people don't think this is obvious. Suppose you have a widget to sell. Five people are willing to pay ten bucks for it, but one guy is willing to pay fifty bucks for it. So you sell it to that guy. That makes sense: you want to sell it to whomever offers you the most for it. But now five guys are mad because not only did they not get the widget, they feel like they've been completely priced out of ever having widgets.
So why not just make more widgets? Well, you can't sell one of them for fifty bucks and then sell five more for ten bucks. The guy who spend fifty will never buy anything from you again. You have to sell all six for ten bucks.
But hey, this is a video game, widgets cost nothing. I mean, it might cost development time to make the first widget, but certainly the next five cost nothing to copy. So why not sell six for ten bucks a piece and make sixty bucks rather than sell one and make fifty bucks? Isn't sixty better than fifty?
It is, if you assume selling those widgets has no negative impact on the game. But they do have a potentially negative impact on the game. Everything you sell dilutes the value of gameplay. If you can just buy it rather than play to earn it, a lot of people will do just that. And then they have a competitive advantage over the people who don't. And if that competitive advantage becomes large enough, the people who don't want to spend, or even those that just want to spend less, will start to decide your game is not worth playing.
Ideally, you would want *everything* to only come from game play, so you encourage people to play the game. But if everything was free, you couldn't make money and the game would fold. You need to sell things to make money, but ideally you want to sell as few things as possible while making as much money as possible.
So if you can sell one thing for fifty bucks or six things for ten bucks, selling one thing for fifty bucks can be a lot better for the game as a whole. Now, this might make those five people mad. But it could also make them happy. Each of those five people looks around and they see four peers who are all in the same boat and one whale. Most of the people in the game look like them, and the rare whale can be ignored. And they see that if they play the game, their peers are unlikely to be able to just drop a couple bucks and gain an advantage over them. Because it takes fifty bucks to gain that advantage, and none of them are willing to spend it. They can all tell themselves that if they play for free and don't spend, *mostly* it is fine, compared to *most* of the people around them.
That's why offers might seem overpriced. They are, to you, because they probably aren't targeted at you. They are targeted at the players willing to spend the most on those things. Offers are like invisible auctions. The players are bidding on those items, and the offers are testing the waters to see how many people are willing to pay that much. If not enough people are, the price comes down. If too many people are, the price goes up (although in practice the price almost never goes up).
Another way to look at this is, if they price things to get your ten bucks, then they are leaving forty bucks on the table from the guy willing to spend fifty, and now only has to spend ten. You are shifting revenue away from the people with presumably a lot of money to spend, and towards the players with less money to spend. Would you rather have rich people spending a lot and poor people playing for free, or rich people and poor people all spending similar amounts of money in the game, because the offers are all designed to be "in reach" of all of them?
There are other concerns, balance concerns, progress concerns, marketing concerns, but this is actually the *primary* driver of how offers are valued. Everything is supposed to look overpriced to some people and underpriced to other people, and generally speaking the offers tend to skew upward to minimize the amount of stuff that floods into the game from spending, and to shift spending towards the people willing to spend the most.
(I still wouldn’t buy it—rather spend on other things in game).
Dr. Zola
The 5-Star version was key to my IG progression and I was really glad to get him then.