Downtime Compensation [Merged Threads]

1111214161722

Comments

  • Mana_PotMana_Pot Posts: 235 ★★
    The verdict has been passed. They're probably done responding to the this thread now.
  • mum_m2mum_m2 Posts: 1,774 ★★★★
    dcw_ wrote: »
    I struggle to understand the business logic behind Kabam’s approach. There will come a point when the people that have been so vocal will go silent and start showing there displeasure with their wallets instead of just words.

    Doing bare minimum compensation calculations then attempting to justify them is a very poor business and customer relations decision. If you already feel the need to justify your compensation packages then you have most likely already realized before even presenting them that the customers are not going to be happy with it. Look at what you stand to lose here, it is a lot more then what the digital goods are worth.

    What is the thought process that leads you to moving forward with a decision that you know will be received badly? Do you think that ppl will stop playing or not spend as much on the game if you give them compensation they will be happy with? I would argue that you would be more likely to see spending go up from creating happy customers as well as all the time and resources the customer would have to spend ranking up a new champion (if received from compensation in some way ie. shards as an example).

    As a business you are far better off just making a hard fast decision without the explanation. You see your explanations and calculations fail to take everything into consideration. A few major things you neglected to discuss are things like units, resources, time and energy spent. These are major concerns to your customers and as such should be a major concern to you. Instead you leave the customers believing that none of this mattered too you (or it would have been considered).

    This leaves a very bad taste in a lot of your customers mouths and I would wager to say you will end up paying for it in the long run. Whoever is making these decisions should strongly consider changing their mind set towards customer relations.

    They've given us the equivalent of at least 1,000 units worth of stuff here. That's about more than $35. I fail to recognize your point as this being bare minimum. It sounds to me that you have nothing to complain about in your first world problem peter pan dream land.
  • pfm007pfm007 Posts: 12
    mum_m2 wrote: »
    dcw_ wrote: »
    I struggle to understand the business logic behind Kabam’s approach. There will come a point when the people that have been so vocal will go silent and start showing there displeasure with their wallets instead of just words.

    Doing bare minimum compensation calculations then attempting to justify them is a very poor business and customer relations decision. If you already feel the need to justify your compensation packages then you have most likely already realized before even presenting them that the customers are not going to be happy with it. Look at what you stand to lose here, it is a lot more then what the digital goods are worth.

    What is the thought process that leads you to moving forward with a decision that you know will be received badly? Do you think that ppl will stop playing or not spend as much on the game if you give them compensation they will be happy with? I would argue that you would be more likely to see spending go up from creating happy customers as well as all the time and resources the customer would have to spend ranking up a new champion (if received from compensation in some way ie. shards as an example).

    As a business you are far better off just making a hard fast decision without the explanation. You see your explanations and calculations fail to take everything into consideration. A few major things you neglected to discuss are things like units, resources, time and energy spent. These are major concerns to your customers and as such should be a major concern to you. Instead you leave the customers believing that none of this mattered too you (or it would have been considered).

    This leaves a very bad taste in a lot of your customers mouths and I would wager to say you will end up paying for it in the long run. Whoever is making these decisions should strongly consider changing their mind set towards customer relations.

    They've given us the equivalent of at least 1,000 units worth of stuff here. That's about more than $35. I fail to recognize your point as this being bare minimum. It sounds to me that you have nothing to complain about in your first world problem peter pan dream land.

    I am sorry, but what are you talking about? When did you receive anything to compensate for the downtime?
  • teekqteekq Posts: 186
    Since you equivalent it of $35 I rather take 35 dollars
  • RaganatorRaganator Posts: 1,926 ★★★★★
    teekq wrote: »
    Since you equivalent it of $35 I rather take 35 dollars

    Sure, but what is your hourly rate? Think about how many hours of your life Kabam gave you back on Friday/Saturday.

    So the calculation would be: $35 - (hourly rate x number of hours you didn't play because of the downtime).
  • dcw_dcw_ Posts: 130
    edited July 2018
    mum_m2 wrote: »
    dcw_ wrote: »
    I struggle to understand the business logic behind Kabam’s approach. There will come a point when the people that have been so vocal will go silent and start showing there displeasure with their wallets instead of just words.

    Doing bare minimum compensation calculations then attempting to justify them is a very poor business and customer relations decision. If you already feel the need to justify your compensation packages then you have most likely already realized before even presenting them that the customers are not going to be happy with it. Look at what you stand to lose here, it is a lot more then what the digital goods are worth.

    What is the thought process that leads you to moving forward with a decision that you know will be received badly? Do you think that ppl will stop playing or not spend as much on the game if you give them compensation they will be happy with? I would argue that you would be more likely to see spending go up from creating happy customers as well as all the time and resources the customer would have to spend ranking up a new champion (if received from compensation in some way ie. shards as an example).

    As a business you are far better off just making a hard fast decision without the explanation. You see your explanations and calculations fail to take everything into consideration. A few major things you neglected to discuss are things like units, resources, time and energy spent. These are major concerns to your customers and as such should be a major concern to you. Instead you leave the customers believing that none of this mattered too you (or it would have been considered).

    This leaves a very bad taste in a lot of your customers mouths and I would wager to say you will end up paying for it in the long run. Whoever is making these decisions should strongly consider changing their mind set towards customer relations.

    They've given us the equivalent of at least 1,000 units worth of stuff here. That's about more than $35. I fail to recognize your point as this being bare minimum. It sounds to me that you have nothing to complain about in your first world problem peter pan dream land.

    People’s time and effort has value to them and as such should be a consideration if they wish to retain happy customers. You are also making the assumption that people did not pay or use over $35 in resources (that’s before u even talk about time). I know what I spent in time and what my time is worth. This will be different for everyone.

    This is basic business principles, they are not even returning the resources used that failed to achieve the results there were intended for. That’s not even compensation that’s basic common sense. After all that is returned anything over and above is compensation. I would also suggest you keep your post to the point without the little digs as they only serve to weaken your statements.

    Edit they also presented it as what could be achieved which is the minimum that could be considered and they failed to look at what was spent.
  • Nick_Caine_32Nick_Caine_32 Posts: 577 ★★★★
    "They've given us the equivalent of at least 1,000 units worth of stuff here. That's about more than $35. I fail to recognize your point as this being bare minimum. It sounds to me that you have nothing to complain about in your first world problem peter pan dream land."

    Speaking of dream land, in what alternate reality does anything in this weak "compensation" package equal 1000 units? Even together? The refills are less than 100 units worth, gold you can earn for free in event quests, arena as well as five star shards from free arena grinding and rewards from events, and even the special pym rift rewards (which are free when you complete the events this month at least one run) reward more 5 star shards? All of that can be done for free. And easily. Please show your math buddy, cuz you clearly are playing a different game than the rest of us LOL or you are one of those newbie players who buy the bad grab deals and would SPEND 1000 units for this stuff, which is what I think you meant. Cuz yeah...no.

    Clearly, it seems this package isn't going over well with the player base, I wonder if Kabam is reading still or just decided it was fixed/working as intended.
  • teekqteekq Posts: 186
    I’m saying I rather take $35 over that bs compensation they came up with!
  • Neroa65Neroa65 Posts: 302 ★★
    I'm honestly surprised we're still talking about this. Let's all just pat ourselves on the back. We tried right? We tried to reason with them, thinking they'd put themselves is our shoes but aye that didn't work. I wonder why it took them all week to "discuss" this meager compensation. What the hell is a bunch of shards and revives worth? It's alright though. There's no point in commenting again once you realize they don't really care. At the end of the day, it's their game and they're not forcing us to play I guess, so let's all drop it and take what we got. That's all I've got to say tbh.
  • TheKiryuTheKiryu Posts: 196 ★★★
    @Kabam Miike hope you are forwarding the feedback from here. :)

    I honestly don’t understand how yall failed to see this coming, or u did and simply embracing in now , with you on damage control yet again.

    P.s. - not having a dig at you but your superiors, I think u have one of the most demanding jobs in the world thanks to Kabam policies lol
  • dcw_dcw_ Posts: 130
    mum_m2 wrote: »
    dcw_ wrote: »
    mum_m2 wrote: »
    dcw_ wrote: »
    I struggle to understand the business logic behind Kabam’s approach. There will come a point when the people that have been so vocal will go silent and start showing there displeasure with their wallets instead of just words.

    Doing bare minimum compensation calculations then attempting to justify them is a very poor business and customer relations decision. If you already feel the need to justify your compensation packages then you have most likely already realized before even presenting them that the customers are not going to be happy with it. Look at what you stand to lose here, it is a lot more then what the digital goods are worth.

    What is the thought process that leads you to moving forward with a decision that you know will be received badly? Do you think that ppl will stop playing or not spend as much on the game if you give them compensation they will be happy with? I would argue that you would be more likely to see spending go up from creating happy customers as well as all the time and resources the customer would have to spend ranking up a new champion (if received from compensation in some way ie. shards as an example).

    As a business you are far better off just making a hard fast decision without the explanation. You see your explanations and calculations fail to take everything into consideration. A few major things you neglected to discuss are things like units, resources, time and energy spent. These are major concerns to your customers and as such should be a major concern to you. Instead you leave the customers believing that none of this mattered too you (or it would have been considered).

    This leaves a very bad taste in a lot of your customers mouths and I would wager to say you will end up paying for it in the long run. Whoever is making these decisions should strongly consider changing their mind set towards customer relations.

    They've given us the equivalent of at least 1,000 units worth of stuff here. That's about more than $35. I fail to recognize your point as this being bare minimum. It sounds to me that you have nothing to complain about in your first world problem peter pan dream land.

    People’s time and effort has value to them and as such should be a consideration if they wish to retain happy customers. You are also making the assumption that people did not pay or use over $35 in resources (that’s before u even talk about time). I know what I spent in time and what my time is worth. This will be different for everyone.

    This is basic business principles, they are not even returning the resources used that failed to achieve the results there were intended for. That’s not even compensation that’s basic common sense. After all that is returned anything over and above is compensation. I would also suggest you keep your post to the point without the little digs as they only serve to weaken your statements.

    I happen to think it vastly increased the value of the statement Peter Pan. I mean seriously go outside and find a cow to tip or something. Want to be helpful? then go help an old woman cross the street

    I can’t force you to be civil or speak in an intelligent manner. I will say there is little use talking or responding to posts of your caliber.
  • Fredhorst23Fredhorst23 Posts: 740 ★★★
    Even if you don't pay money, the player base is responsible for all aspects of gameplay besides story mode. Without ftp players there's no arena no aq or aw, and in turn no profit machine for those who do pay. Each member of the community is responsible for kabams revenue stream, be it directly or indirectly.
  • CFreeCFree Posts: 491 ★★
    Well i looked into it a Kabam is not accredited by the Better Business Bureu. No surprise there. BBB must determine that the business meets BBB accreditation standards, which include a commitment to make a good faith effort to resolve any consumer complaints.

    Lol

  • LowecomotiveLowecomotive Posts: 16
    This proposed compensation is unsatisfactory.
    We dropped nearly 1000 places in AQ as we couldn't finish the maps on day 1.
    This didn't just mean we missed out on our map 5 crystals. We also took a massive prestige hit over the remaining days.
    We missed at least 2 map 6 crystals plus glory. Plus whatever rank rewards we miss.

    While Kabam normally does a decent job of providing compensation, I feel this time you have really missed the mark.

    I'm not mad I'm just disappointed.
  • Ccannon5Ccannon5 Posts: 25
    So a little disappointed by the package but regardless when can we poor peasants expect to receive the scraps?
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 11,766 Guardian
    This proposed compensation is unsatisfactory.
    We dropped nearly 1000 places in AQ as we couldn't finish the maps on day 1.
    This didn't just mean we missed out on our map 5 crystals. We also took a massive prestige hit over the remaining days.
    We missed at least 2 map 6 crystals plus glory. Plus whatever rank rewards we miss.

    My suspicion is that alliance were hit significantly by the downtime events during that week. Although we also experienced downtime, our alliance was able to compensate for that by playing more aggressively and taking advantage of reduced timers, so we ended the week actually slightly higher in points. However, we ended up over four hundred rating places higher, which seemed disproportionately high for our point total to me. My very rough guess is that we placed around three hundred places higher than we would have on a non-downtime week, which suggests many alliances in the 1-1500 expert tier range placed significantly lower than they normally do.

    It is only one data point and it involves mostly judgment on my part, but I don't think it is an insignificant data point.
Sign In or Register to comment.