Adding bonus to heroic raid boss

[Zenobia]

Who are those 1%ers?

Is that a rhetorical question? I'll answer anyway.
Those who give Gree more money than the other 99% of us.
A.K.A. The ones Gree jumps to makes changes to the game for when a few of them ask for, or rather demand it, even when the change makes it much worse a game for the other 99% of us. While meanwhile Gree does nothing at all that hundreds of 99%ers ask for (despite the fact that we surely account for much more than 50% of their total income).
Until FINALLY they did the right thing this time.

[Guido69]

Is that a rhetorical question? I'll answer anyway.
Those who give Gree more money than the other 99% of us.
A.K.A. The ones Gree jumps to makes changes to the game for when a few of them ask for, or rather demand it, even when the change makes it much worse a game for the other 99% of us. While meanwhile Gree does nothing at all that hundreds of 99%ers ask for (despite the fact that we surely account for much more than 50% of their total income).
Until FINALLY they did the right thing this time.

a few things Zenobia...

1) Gree does not jump for ANYONE; the one time they added a bonus was because they thought it might be a good idea and the right thing to do (which it was)

2) There is absolutely nothing, I mean NOTHING, wrong or surprising if a for-profit company tries to accommodate the customers that pay the most. Happens everywhere around you, all the time

3) I am sure you don't think that adding no bonus this time, which is totally fine with me as well, will change things or even level the playing field. That train has left a long time ago. I am not saying that is good or bad...

4) And, according to your definition of the 1%ers, those are most probably the 0.001%er or even less of all players

[Zenobia]

a few things Zenobia...

1) Gree does not jump for ANYONE; the one time they added a bonus was because they thought it might be a good idea and the right thing to do (which it was)

• Raid boss #2 the bonus was added because the 1%ers demanded it. Pure. And. Simple.
• Then there was the Top 3 prizes for last war which were deemed inadequate by the 1%ers and so Gree jumped to change them.
• Then there was the new war matching system implemented a few wars ago because the poor 1%ers had to wait too long to be matched, which then screwed a whole slew of guilds who should not have been matched with Top 3 guilds up to a dozen times while outside the Top 100.

These are just 3 examples off the top of my head from recent history. There are more but I already talk too much anyway I'm sure you will agree.

2) There is absolutely nothing, I mean NOTHING, wrong or surprising if a for-profit company tries to accommodate the customers that pay the most. Happens everywhere around you, all the time

Kowtowing to the demands of the 1%ers at the expense of the 99%ers is of course within a company's rights, and happens. But will only hurt them in the end unless the "1%" pay 99% of their bill which I feel sure they do not. A lot of players buy gems but are not 1%ers.

3) I am sure you don't think that adding no bonus this time, which is totally fine with me as well, will change things or even level the playing field. That train has left a long time ago. I am not saying that is good or bad...

I am merely choosing to believe them when they say "We're not changing it this late in the event because when we do that, it pisses people off" that this is the first step in no longer changing quests mid-stream any more. I may be wrong to think I can them in this but I choose to be an optimist until proven wrong. Of course the playing field can now never be level. But I don't care that those who spend tens of thousands of dollars will always have twice the stats I do. I care about making the game enjoyable for the 99%. A LOT of whom are fleeing in DROVES because of the changes Gree keeps making to make it perfect for 1%ers at the expense of the rest of us.

4) And, according to your definition of the 1%ers, those are most probably the 0.001%er or even less of all players

You are correct that the term 1%ers is imprecise to the point of most likely being very inaccurate. I use it as a term most people can identify with since it entered popular lingo during OWS.

[Guido69]

...

I simply wholeheartedly disagree with you on your notion that Gree changes the parameters of the game to make it perfect for the 1%ers. But for some reason you don't seem to see that or are not willing to see that.

And why do you and many others seem to think Gree cares about when someone leaves. For everyone who leaves there may be hundreds more who register that day and who will spend money on this app.

People play this game, get bored or fed up, leave and move on. Others start the cycle again. Nothing more, nothing less. Will happen to all of us.

[Zenobia]

I simply wholeheartedly disagree with you on your notion that Gree changes the parameters of the game to make it perfect for the 1%ers. But for some reason you don't seem to see that or are not willing to see that.

How about we just agree to disagree then?

It is clear you are not going to see things the way I do any more than I am going see things the way you do, no matter how much each of us attempts to elucidate why we have come to have the very strong opinions we have. I am content to just leave it at that and hope you can be too.

[Rastlin]

I simply wholeheartedly disagree with you on your notion that Gree changes the parameters of the game to make it perfect for the 1%ers. But for some reason you don't seem to see that or are not willing to see that.

One you are in FUN, and part of the 1%. LOL You really need to read http://www.gamasutra.com/view/featur...e_.php?print=1 if you you think GREE doesn't change the game for you...

[CJ54]

There's no 1% vs. 99%. Every time we make any sort of change (or *don't* make any sort of change) we have complaints that cut across all in-game economic levels. If we had changed this one during the event, we would have received complaints from players of *every* level of involvement who were upset that we moved the bar after they already decided to sit this one out. Likewise, complaints that came in via ticket about the item not having a bonus were not restricted to the ultra top guilds.

We are still going to adjust things based on player feedback, but we want to try to do it early or before an event if it is necessary. There's nothing wrong in a scenario where a bunch of people from, say, consistently top-1000 guilds let us know that they feel the next top-1000 prize is weak, and as we're getting close to the event the prize is tweaked to be better. And if something is just flat-out broken or typo'd in the data, we're still going to have to fix that.

Every single case that we've ever had was different in terms of potential impact. There IS NO one-size-fits-all answer, and if there was such an answer it would STILL upset some people every time we used it.

In this case, there wasn't anything broken, the item just did not have a bonus and wasn't advertised as having one.

[Euchred]

In this case, there wasn't anything broken, the item just did not have a bonus and wasn't advertised as having one.

This makes me feel better about it. I got caught in the cookie cutter way of thinking, but can you blame me? Usually if a specific event provides a grand prize with a bonus the next one of the same type will follow suit. It's an easier to accept fact knowing it was intended from the start and not an oversight.

[Guido69]

There's no 1% vs. 99%. Every time we make any sort of change (or *don't* make any sort of change) we have complaints that cut across all in-game economic levels. If we had changed this one during the event, we would have received complaints from players of *every* level of involvement who were upset that we moved the bar after they already decided to sit this one out. Likewise, complaints that came in via ticket about the item not having a bonus were not restricted to the ultra top guilds.

We are still going to adjust things based on player feedback, but we want to try to do it early or before an event if it is necessary. There's nothing wrong in a scenario where a bunch of people from, say, consistently top-1000 guilds let us know that they feel the next top-1000 prize is weak, and as we're getting close to the event the prize is tweaked to be better. And if something is just flat-out broken or typo'd in the data, we're still going to have to fix that.

Every single case that we've ever had was different in terms of potential impact. There IS NO one-size-fits-all answer, and if there was such an answer it would STILL upset some people every time we used it.

In this case, there wasn't anything broken, the item just did not have a bonus and wasn't advertised as having one.

Thanks CJ 👍

[Guido69]

One you are in FUN, and part of the 1%. LOL You really need to read http://www.gamasutra.com/view/featur...e_.php?print=1 if you you think GREE doesn't change the game for you...

I don't even bother to reply (other than that)

[Guido69]

How about we just agree to disagree then?

No problem here. Nothing wrong with disagreement

[Darth Randy]

There's no 1% vs. 99%. Every time we make any sort of change (or *don't* make any sort of change) we have complaints that cut across all in-game economic levels. If we had changed this one during the event, we would have received complaints from players of *every* level of involvement who were upset that we moved the bar after they already decided to sit this one out. Likewise, complaints that came in via ticket about the item not having a bonus were not restricted to the ultra top guilds.

We are still going to adjust things based on player feedback, but we want to try to do it early or before an event if it is necessary. There's nothing wrong in a scenario where a bunch of people from, say, consistently top-1000 guilds let us know that they feel the next top-1000 prize is weak, and as we're getting close to the event the prize is tweaked to be better. And if something is just flat-out broken or typo'd in the data, we're still going to have to fix that.

Every single case that we've ever had was different in terms of potential impact. There IS NO one-size-fits-all answer, and if there was such an answer it would STILL upset some people every time we used it.

In this case, there wasn't anything broken, the item just did not have a bonus and wasn't advertised as having one.

Actions speak louder than words, and those these are nice words, but from my position up here in the cheap seats you guys(Gree) got called out for catering to your biggest spenders by the 99%ers and that's why you are holding your ground now.

When your mods decided to sticky one of the dumbest threads ever, one that was posted by a FUN member, it pretty much betrayed your hand. Things may be different now, and I hope so, but don't expect the vast majority of people who post here, which by and large are very bright, to not see the obvious and understand the motivation behind it. Not one single person here is ignorant that Gree is a business and has a bottom line that it constantly tries to look out for.

[Dirt road Joe]

And if something is just flat-out broken or typo'd in the data, we're still going to have to fix that.

Every single case that we've ever had was different in terms of potential impact. There IS NO one-size-fits-all answer, and if there was such an answer it would STILL upset some people every time we used it.

SO I guess miscommunication between Gree employees counts as something that isn't a mistake and doesn't get fixed?... eerrmhrm... Sky Pirate... mmmrmmh... cough....

[Person]

a few things Zenobia...

1) Gree does not jump for ANYONE; the one time they added a bonus was because they thought it might be a good idea and the right thing to do (which it was)

2) There is absolutely nothing, I mean NOTHING, wrong or surprising if a for-profit company tries to accommodate the customers that pay the most. Happens everywhere around you, all the time

3) I am sure you don't think that adding no bonus this time, which is totally fine with me as well, will change things or even level the playing field. That train has left a long time ago. I am not saying that is good or bad...

4) And, according to your definition of the 1%ers, those are most probably the 0.001%er or even less of all players

this tells me all i need to know about you.

welcome to my ignore list.

[Cxxxmm]

CJ - just a short cut and paste from your reponse

let us know that they feel the next top-1000 prize is weak, and as we're getting close to the event the prize is tweaked to be better.

so based on your explanation and even without the complaints do you think that this raid boss event prize as compared to the other raid boss prizes is:

a.) stronger
b.) the same
c.) weaker
d.) much weaker
e.) so weak that no one would think that this was correct on the first splash screen

I would assume if you answer honestly it would be either d or e. Thus, a stat boost should be given even after the event.