A currency I can't spend?

Evening all, curious as to your thoughts on this one.

To keep this short, I subscribed to the summoner's sigil for a while, now I don't. I've accrued a not insignificant amount of Sigil credits which I am unable to spend because you need to have an active subscription to be able to use the store at all - that doesn't sit well with me.

The store is divided into two, the "Sigil store" and the "Black ISO market", the first is where you spend your Sigil Tokens, and the second is a bunch of special offers where you can trade Sig stones, crystal shards, etc. I understand that Kabam would paywall the privilege of accessing the Black ISO market, so in my eyes, keep that locked away for those paying for the subscription, but why in my position, should I have to pay for access to a store when I've had to pay for the relevant currency in the first place? Surely there's no harm in unlocking the Sigil store items as anyone without the required amounts of Sigil Tokens would be declined on a purchase then redirected to a page where they could purchase the subscription..? Am I out of line here?

It feels like I've been given keys to a car but I can't into the garage where it's kept.

Cheers.

Comments

unknown

This content has been removed.

Masquirade

For clarity;

SirGamesBond

Fair complain/suggestion.
Kabam is not unfair on this one.
You were aware of the conditions before you bought the subscribtion.
They are not accountable after your subscription ended.

Repto23

Sounds like buy one more month and spend it all

unknown

This content has been removed.

BringPopcorn

Yeah it sucks, you have to buy it to spend something you earned in the past.
Sucker me bought it for 2 months cause I eas too close on credits for 1 more item; but I am done after the 27th.

Doug555

Yeah it`s like 401k..

Masquirade

Fair complain/suggestion.
Kabam is not unfair on this one.
You were aware of the conditions before you bought the subscribtion.
They are not accountable after your subscription ended.

Appreciate your point, it does say "access to the Sigil Store" as one of the benefits, but think I reasonably assumed I could buy something from the store once I had the right currency, they don't treat any other store in the game like this - it feels scummy.

DNA3000

Fair complain/suggestion.
Kabam is not unfair on this one.
You were aware of the conditions before you bought the subscribtion.
They are not accountable after your subscription ended.
Appreciate your point, it does say "access to the Sigil Store" as one of the benefits, but think I reasonably assumed I could buy something from the store once I had the right currency, they don't treat any other store in the game like this - it feels scummy.

Well of course they don't treat any other store like this, because the Sigil program itself is unique. However, if you mean there is never a time where a player can do something that causes them to lose access to a store, that's not true. Sometimes stores are locked by progression, and when you change progression you will sometimes lose access to the store of your previous progression and gain access to a store of the new progression. Which you would think doesn't matter because the new store has to be better, right? But not always. In fact, this was an issue with some of the sale day stores where you needed to buy a set of items in a sequence. If you bought *some* of the items in the sequence and then moved up a progression tier, you'd lose access to that store and gain access to the new store, which would start you over. Players had to be careful about that or they could actually lose rewards. You may not like it, but it is not unprecedented.

There are lots of scenarios where you might spend money to get access to things that only have value while you are in a particular situation, and then have no value if you leave that situation. Carnival tickets. Casino chips. Many credit cards have points systems where if you decide to stop paying for the card and essentially cancel your account you lose all of those points and cannot spend them. This isn't a "scummy" situation however it feels, this is simply normal.

To put it another way, you're suggesting here that if you stop paying for a membership, you should get to decide which membership benefits you lose and which you should be allowed to keep even though you are no longer paying for membership. From the perspective of literally any company in the world, who would think that was a reasonable right to give to people who were no longer paying for a service?