Summoner Appreciation Week Discussion

1192022242551

Comments

  • BttraditionBttradition Posts: 40
    Just want to put some extra emphasis on "ANNUAL" summoner appreciation. That means its every year and this one is shabby in comparison to others.
  • RafikiiRafikii Posts: 239
    Shaun01 wrote: »
    Here's what I don't understand, In the Official post they called it a Summoner Appreciation Gift. Not compensation, a gift. That gift has somehow turned into compensation.
    it was confirmed by a mod in this thread. about page 10 iirc
  • Wozzy101Wozzy101 Posts: 361 ★★★
    Whilst the game has a rating a 4.6 in the App Store this will all fall in death ears. Kabam don’t care about the frustrations of the player base. Even as a company they can’t seem to link increased customer satisfaction leads to more spending and business. The company is dense beyond belief.
  • SparkAlotSparkAlot Posts: 688 ★★★
    I think Kabam is confused again.

    gift
    NOUN: a thing given willingly to someone without payment; a present.

    com·pen·sa·tion
    NOUN: something that counterbalances or makes up for an undesirable or unwelcome state of affairs.

    Kabam is trying to say that the gift is actually compensation, which means that it was never a gift in the first place.
    They are trying to kill two birds with one stone.
  • Jestr54Jestr54 Posts: 345
    so a month of kabam not doing their job turns to kabam giving us an appreciation week? That makes no sense. We get that on a yearly base. It’s like putting a bow on a piece of ish and telling us this is for us messing up. And the cherry on top is the dungeons. Bruuhhh can y’all get one thing right? Some self reflection is really needed in those kabam offices.
  • Kobster84Kobster84 Posts: 2,898 ★★★★★
    But in kabams eyes this is overcompensating
  • Jestr54Jestr54 Posts: 345
    Nope, but what hope have we got of reaching out to the decision makers when they disable content before its released. Can just see them right now with their heads in their hands

    And to think of how long they’ve had to prepare
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 22,642 ★★★★★
    Are you talking about the amount they Test, or the success of the Beta itself. You can't say the Program itself has been horrible.
  • Zuko_ILCZuko_ILC Posts: 1,162 ★★★★
    Are you talking about the amount they Test, or the success of the Beta itself. You can't say the Program itself has been horrible.

    Well it did allow people to exploit unit purchases and some got away with it for months so I guess you could say the Beta itself was horrible.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 22,642 ★★★★★
    edited August 2018
    Zuko_ILC wrote: »
    Are you talking about the amount they Test, or the success of the Beta itself. You can't say the Program itself has been horrible.

    Well it did allow people to exploit unit purchases and some got away with it for months so I guess you could say the Beta itself was horrible.

    Okay, this is getting off-topic, so I'm not going to delve too much. I will say this. People are responsible for their own choices. They didn't "allow" people to exploit. That was a choice. A poor one at that. They volunteered to help with the overheating issue and they took advantage of that trust. It was also not months.
  • Kobster84Kobster84 Posts: 2,898 ★★★★★
    Are you talking about the amount they Test, or the success of the Beta itself. You can't say the Program itself has been horrible.
    I meant the amount they test but this is off topic
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 10,271 Guardian
    Zuko_ILC wrote: »
    Are you talking about the amount they Test, or the success of the Beta itself. You can't say the Program itself has been horrible.

    Well it did allow people to exploit unit purchases and some got away with it for months so I guess you could say the Beta itself was horrible.

    Closed beta tests are by their very nature exploitable: they are unfinished and untested content. Most closed beta test programs I've been in generally make it clear to the beta testers that they are being allowed early access to content under very specific and limited conditions, and their conduct within that program is generally held to a higher standard than normal, and deliberate attempts to compromise the game while in the beta program will tend to have harsher penalties than otherwise.

    When someone deliberately and explicitly compromises a closed beta test to exploit the conditions of the beta test program for personal or otherwise gain, the sole responsibility and fault for that is with the player. Period. If you think this is fair game, don't join closed beta tests.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 10,271 Guardian
    I don’t think the majority are questioning the beta process in itself - but talking about it in reference to this particular issue. It was already hard to swallow that they are a multi million dollar company who didn’t outsource this overheating issue to a competent company to run the beta, and instead asked the player base who actually was harmed or at potential harm to run the beta instead.

    That would be ridiculous if they asked the playerbase to run the beta test program. However, I have no knowledge of that occurring.
This discussion has been closed.