So what's the E.T.A on prestige & devotion rewards
Since the front page of the in-game store is filled to the brim with time limited outfits, I think it's safe to assume there has been a change of heart regarding the "locking content behind a wall" thing.
I can't imagine the prestige rewards coming out anytime soon, because that'll be a lot of content for a lot of characters.
But the devotion rewards should be on the horizon right?🤔
Comments
-
BHVR is fine with FOMO now, so this should be fine. Right?
1 -
Why do people keep insisting their answer about prestige rewards has anything to do with FOMO...
They literally just used the words "missing out", they weren't actually talking about the FOMO marketing tactic when they gave that answer.
2 -
wrong
4 -
People do realize what they were talking about, it's more they're pointing out the hypocrisy of the statement.
6 -
Care to elaborate?
2 -
If they understood what BHVR were talking about, they'd understand there is no hypocrisy to point out. They're completely different concepts that don't overlap or contradict.
3 -
wrong
4 -
Its not hypocritical, take it any English linguist and they will teach you about what qualifying statements are, statements that change the meaning of related statements. People literally have to ignore 2 qualifying statements on EITHER side of the main one in order to call the statement hypocritical, bHVR has the nicest and most carefully crafted messages and yet you people figuratively spit in their face. Here I have highlighted the Qualifying Statements in red.
The Community is incredibly dishonest to read bHVR explaining themselves, and then the Community ignore half the message and then call bHVR hypocritical. I have read so many replies from the Community not even acknowledge the clarifications bHVR made.
The Community deserves nothing for this dishonesty, but bHVR might implement 72 cosmetics for free just so people can feel happy.
5 -
Yeah, I can read their explaination just fine, don't be patronising. However, the clarifications don't really mean much of anything.
It's the fact that they're perfectly fine having players feel like "missing out" when it nets them cash, but not when it comes to rewarding players for dedication to a character.
I personally don't care if there's a p100 reward or not, I care that they're using an exploitative marketing tactic to boost sales, and then turning around and acting like they care about players "missing out" when it comes to something else. That is where the hypocrisy lies.
8 -
I feel the same.
0 -
However, the clarifications don't really mean much of anything.
They mean everything, this is what I mean. When I don't understand something I look it up and come back with questions, while you seem to just ignore it and then tell me the clarification don't mean anything. If a sentence does not mean anything to you, would your not question it and investigate it`? You may disagree that "time progress for unlocks" and "original intentions prestige system" are not worthy reasons to not develop a reward, but your personal opinion and value set does not make bHVR a hypocrite, it just does not check out.
You may feel like you have been let down, but ignoring what bHVR actually says and falsely pronouncing them hypocrites isnt the way.
4 -
It really feels like you're strawmanning my arguments here.
At the end of the day, it doesn't actually bother me if they implement a p100 reward or not. It would be something nice to have, but I don't feel let down or angry for not having one.
My issue is that their reasoning directly contradicts their actions. They say they don't want people missing out, but then implement limited-time store cosmetics to specifically take advantage of the feeling of missing out. Their actions through marketing directly contradict what they have said. That is the textbook definition of hypocrisy.
The qualifying statements only change the context slightly. They're still saying one thing and doing another.
Anyway, I literally said I didn't care about if there was a p100 reward in the post you replied to, it seems like you're very much ignoring that bit to prop up your argument.
4 -
"On auric cosmetics at least, that's always a tough choice. It'd be really cool to have a fancy reward for purchasing 100€/$ worth of aurics, but at the same time that's an insane amount of money and we don't want people to feel like they're missing out by not spending it. Auric cosmetics is ultimately something for people who already got everything else, so we don't want to lock too much content behind it."
Yes, I'm aware non licensed cosmetics will be available for shards eventually. Though in that case it becomes all about time invested and by the time you have a) waited for them to become available for shards and b) have collected the shards you can probably hit P100 as well.
0 -
Devotion doesn't even need a cosmetic reward, it can just be something simple like a 1% extra XP gain for each devotion level
0 -
Anyway, I literally said I didn't care about if there was a p100 reward in the post you replied to, it seems like you're very much ignoring that bit to prop up your argument.
Thanks for the clarification, I see you don't care about a reward, this is why we shall only focus on reasoning for the hypocrisy.
My issue is that their reasoning directly contradicts their actions. They say they don't want people missing out, but then implement limited-time store cosmetics to specifically take advantage of the feeling of missing out. Their actions through marketing directly contradict what they have said.
You are ignoring the first clarifying statement again, it literally changes the meaning of the words being said by bHVR.
Its an insane amount of progress, could it be progress has an impact on what is reasonable for people to miss out on in bHVR's view? Lets go through this nice and slow. So bHVR considers progression time for new players when looking out for where to put the carrot on a stick for lack of a better term. But they also have a store, with themed events and cosmetics that only show up once a year.
There is literally a reason why they are different, when one has to do with progression and the other is a store strategy. Context matters- but you dont seem to believe that?
The qualifying statements only change the context slightly. They're still saying one thing and doing another.
A slight change in context is still important, its the difference between buying a plush tiger and an actual tiger. Its just a slight change in context, must mean the same thing, Nope it does not, they are literally in a different category of objects.
bHVR even have different departments for each of those, a Game Designer deals with considering progression for a player and the Monetization designer deals with commercial strategies and how store is designed. It its just a meaningless little slight change in context, why does the change the entire team of people working on it? Maybe its a clue, that its entirely different things. MAYBE.
To sum up, your explained reasoning for calling bHVR hypocrites is ridden with flaws, the reason being like you stated yourself. You don't think a slight change in the written context can change the meaning of this particular statement, to suggest that is a bold and obvious falsehood. Indeed, a single word in a sentence can change the meaning extremely much. (a linguist told me that.)
1 -
I remember back when BHVR's excuse for removing the seasonal cosmetics was to declutter the store so new players don't get choice fatigue. Somebody recommended making a seasonal store and then locking that behind devotion level 1.
I find it strange that whenever people talk about prestige & devotion rewards they immediately go straight to full outfits.
Something simple like, Devotion 5: Whenever the bloodpoint incentive is +100% on one role the other will have +25%.
2 -
I don't have a source on this but I seem to vaguely remember a Survey that asked if we wanted to have a seasonal store.
I only remember it cause I remember someone saying I should vote no, so I voted yes, cause I like seasons.
0 -
Can you make one single post without being patronising?
If you think the difference between a bonus progression cosmetic and a store cosmetic is the same as the difference between a plush tiger and a real one, I don't know what to tell you.
You can talk all you want about linguistics or whatever, but that really doesn't change that they're still saying one thing and doing another. The context change is pretty irrelevant in this case. They're happy to exploit the fear of missing out when it nets them cash, but then deny something else while claiming they care about it. Do both or none, stick with your reasoning. Saying it's "too much progression" is a bit of a cop out, they're not worried about people spending "too much money" on limited time cosmetics.
I don't know what using your free time to defend a company's ######### marketing practices gives you, but go off I guess.
Ah, I see, this makes a lot more sense now. Weird hill to die on though.
1 -
If you think the difference between a bonus progression cosmetic and a store cosmetic is the same as the difference between a plush tiger and a real one, I don't know what to tell you.
I never said it was the same difference, I said it was a slight change in context, which would not change meaning, which was your argument. We don't look at words and count how much context has changed, we read it and see how meaning of phrases shift by the words-
You can talk all you want about linguistics or whatever, but that really doesn't change that they're still saying one thing and doing another. The context change is pretty irrelevant in this case.
Ask an independent linguist if you don't believe me. qualifying statements matter and they two the bHVR employee used 100% change the meaning of the whole in a meaningful way. That is perfectly reasonable thing to do, what isn't reasonable is to deny that meaning and call them a hypocrite. I even asked one myself, meaning of words are important.
Saying it's "too much progression" is a bit of a cop out, they're not worried about people spending "too much money" on limited time cosmetics.
That isn't a cop out, those are also two unrelated things.
I don't know what using your free time to defend a company's ######### marketing practices gives you, but go off I guess.
I don't defend their marketing practise, you are free to take issue with the marketing practices. But I will step up when I see people not know how meanings of word and context change works and accuse bHVR of being things they are not. I was honestly curious, like if your argument was reasonable I would have wanted to agree with you, but I cant deny the meaning bHVR literally write in their responses. But I had to hear you out.
Ah, I see, this makes a lot more sense now. Weird hill to die on though.
I don't think I'm going to die on the Hill of being fine with seasonal content in a store. Its perfectly reasonable to be.
Post edited by Emeal on0 -
Yeah I agree. Reading their statement, they're simply saying that adding a reward to prestiging would make it a more desirable objective that requires lots and lots of time investment (I'll add, this would exclude casual players). BHVR don't want prestiging to be seen that way, they want it to just be something can work towards slowly when players have nothing else to do. I think that's fair enough.
At least with seasonal cosmetics, you know what dates they're available every year and you can start saving in advance. Time doesn't work that way.
2 -
That nulls the point of the BP incentive though..
0 -
It's just a spit ball of what a non-cosmetic devotion reward can be, it doesn't have to be bloodpoints.
0 -
i agree with you, i think its kind of ridiculous to say that don't want to lock things behind prestige but then proceed to give you 2 weeks to buy some cosmetics. i personally don't see why it would be an issue (maybe other than a licensing issue) to just give each character one simple cosmetic, even if it was just a cooler recolour of the default or something along those lines. it would be a permanent cosmetic anyway? people aren't missing out because the cosmetics would always be there regardless of how slowly they are working towards it anyway.
i'm not super fussed on whether or not we end up getting a cosmetic, and personally i don't particularly mind the seasonal shop either. i just think they should've used a different excuse rather than 'we don't want ppl to have fomo' when fomo is basically their whole marketing tactic all year round, i think its scummy tbh. people put thousands of hours into their game and all they do is pander to brand new players, trying to suck as much money out of them as possible. saying the licensing would be too difficult or they couldn't be bothered would've been a better and more acceptable excuse imo.
3
