Please stop the FOMO cosmetic shop

I would like to ask you to bring back every cosmetic item from your monthly store, since the beginning.
All that effort into making these cosmetics and only a fraction of players are buying them.
Don't you want more players to enjoy your work.
Just to be clear I can afford these cosmetics even monthly, but I don't buy them on principle.
All I'm asking is that you bring them back and make them permanent additions to the store.
If you do this I will in time buy every single cosmetics you have made, making you thousands from myself alone.
I've been talking to alot of people about this and they agree.
You would make so much money, people aren't buying them because they hate FOMO.
But separate from the financial benefits of this, think of the players.
As gamers yourselves can you honestly say you'd be happy with this if you were a gamer/customer.
Ideally we would be able to earn everything, but at least let us buy it without a time limit.

Imagine you're a new player and you see someone on a cool mount, you ask them how they got and they explain that you need to clear a raid and in that raid there is a secret quest that leads to getting this mount.
Or.. " I bought it you can't it now"
Or " I logged in on this day and we all got one, you can't get it now".
The latter shuts the player down and gives them nothing to look forward to, nothing to trive towards.

Please consider it.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

truelyyy

JustVine wrote: »

The lack of sympathy towards people who just want to throw money at the company and hate the fact that they already missed out on great designs is both not shocking at all and should totally be expected of the community at this point.

'Not the merchants responsibility', sure. Steven is perfectly free to let money keep sitting on the table and lock content that would otherwise sell more units by a permanent time gate long term. On the other hand nothing is stopping him from dropping the current policy for future releases. It's a customers right to tell a company when they are being idiots leaving money on the table for literally no reason other than 'tradition'. Free trade and bad approaches to discourse go both ways in a customer/seller relationship.

Issue is not whether or not you believe one is wrong or right way to do it. The fact is they already committeed to the fact that they are exlusive. Once that's been said going backwards on it would be far worse hence the critism of OP post. It's not about whether it was good or bad , it's the fact they are asking to take away something from people that already bought in.

JustVine

Right but you could just, stop making new things exclusive and keep exclusivity for old stuff....

mcstackerson

JustVine wrote: »

Right but you could just, stop making new things exclusive and keep exclusivity for old stuff....

Then it loses all value and there is no reason to continue. Since you can't use the items, if it's not exclusive, then there is no reason to buy it. You would wait until you can play the game to buy what you want to play with.

Would you rather have the monthly option or no option at all?

truelyyy

JustVine wrote: »

Right but you could just, stop making new things exclusive and keep exclusivity for old stuff....

they could, but that's not what OP asked for and solves nothing they have asked for which is to buy the previous cosmetics.

Shoelid

The biggest argument I've heard (from Jahlon) for changing the shop model is that Intrepid stands to earn much more money by allowing more people to make smaller purchases

JustVine

mcstackerson wrote: »

JustVine wrote: »

Right but you could just, stop making new things exclusive and keep exclusivity for old stuff....

Then it loses all value and there is no reason to continue. Since you can't use the items, if it's not exclusive, then there is no reason to buy it. You would wait until you can play the game to buy what you want to play with.

Would you rather have the monthly option or no option at all?

I don't see how it has no value. You are preordering a product. You will receive a product. You will be supporting the game

FeralForlorn

i cant say a shop is unfair, but the fact that i cant get items simply cause i wasnt aware the game even existed or didnt have money years before the game even released is not a good concept.
and the people i know agree, hell even a few of em refuse to get into ashes cause of it.
the main argument being "why do i wanna play a game that has 50 of each cosmetic i cant even get anymore when it hasnt even launched? that just sounds like a waste of time.."

unknown

This content has been removed.

1sab3la

JustVine wrote: »

mcstackerson wrote: »

JustVine wrote: »

Right but you could just, stop making new things exclusive and keep exclusivity for old stuff....

Then it loses all value and there is no reason to continue. Since you can't use the items, if it's not exclusive, then there is no reason to buy it. You would wait until you can play the game to buy what you want to play with.

Would you rather have the monthly option or no option at all?

I don't see how it has no value. You are preordering a product. You will receive a product. You will be supporting the game

Some people buy an item because it is exclusive. They want something no one else has so they purchase it. If they were to just resell it and let everyone have access to that exclusive item ot will feel bad for the person who bought it thinking it was exclusive.

Making something exclusive gives it that value. If you remove the value of it being exclusive then it will devalue that item.

I get both sides but it was the choice for model. If you really like something then probably buy it. It's been a business model for a lot of games over a long time. Pros and Cons of any business and they already decided. It would not look good for them to go back on that.

All I can suggest is buy it if you really want it

unknown

This content has been removed.

CROW3

@JustVine - send an email to Ford explaining to them how unfair it is that they won’t make you a 1966 Mustang convertible because you weren’t there to buy one.

Maybe go to Best Buy to demand they give you the 2019 Black Friday discount in April 2022.

How about calling out ESPN’s predatory practices for not letting you watch the 1988 Olympic ping pong championship since others were able to watch it, and you couldn’t and can’t now?

The merchant provided goods on a limited time basis. It’s not their responsibility to manage your disappointment for not participating.

Honestly, why is this such an issue to digest?

Roko

Most games make a ton of NPC assets that the players can never wear or ride on. At least intrepid is making it possible for some players to use some of the assets intended for NPC and quest content.

Would I prefer if they were all achievable in game and not purchased? Yes.

But unfortunately the world we live in allows them to monetize it. And like many here (this topic has been beaten to death and back for years) I am willing to put up with it because it's the better alternative to not having a game like ashes in the world.

Life is about compromise.

Caeryl

CROW3 wrote: »

@JustVine - send an email to Ford explaining to them how unfair it is that they won’t make you a 1966 Mustang convertible because you weren’t there to buy one.

Maybe go to Best Buy to demand they give you the 2019 Black Friday discount in April 2022.

How about calling out ESPN’s predatory practices for not letting you watch the 1988 Olympic ping pong championship since others were able to watch it, and you couldn’t and can’t now?

The merchant provided goods on a limited time basis. It’s not their responsibility to manage your disappointment for not participating.

Honestly, why is this such an issue to digest?

Physical products and in person activities are so starkly different from digital products I have trouble taking this comment seriously.

OP is pretty reasonably frustrated that a digital item they would have bought is no longer being sold, not because Intrepid ran out of it or because it was genuinely constricted via time, but because they simply chose to retire cosmetics monthly.

Ford can’t pop out a 1966 Mustang at will, mostly because manufacturers just don’t make those parts anymore.

Sales aren’t products so I don’t know where you’re going with that one.

Events only happen on certain days. We don’t have time machines, so there’s no way to offer the same experience again no matter how much they try.

If I sell a digital product, I still have all the “parts” aka files. The product does not go bad, barring data corruption which is rare these days given how many backup files you can store on just a portable HD from the store. There’s nothing stopping me from offering the product again exactly as it was the day I first sold it, with no additional cost to me besides time spent sending out the files. With a delivery system set up, I don’t even have to lose that time.

So yes, it’s fine to like exclusivity and be willing to pay more than the item’s actually worth for that exclusivity, but let’s all stop pretending it’s an attack on Intrepid’s whole business when someone says it kind of sucks they’re limiting these items when there’s nothing to necessitate it.

Again, my primary assumption for why they’re limited is because they don’t want many people to have these otherwise-NPC-only looks. For me that’s enough justification. It’s not enough for everyone, nor would I expect it to be.

CROW3

You can absolutely apply the same product practices between physical and digital products. Here’s the break down of my three examples:

1) you missed out on the production and sales timeframe of a product, yet you want that product because

2) you missed out on qualifying for the sale terms of a product, yet you want that product with those terms because

3) you missed out on a limited time service that can’t be resold by those that didn’t miss out (just in case that was a variable), yet you want that experience because

All of these are applicable to a digital product, and the terms by which that product is sold, marketed, distributed, or experienced. Furthermore, the merchant is not obligated, or responsible to meet any of the ‘yet’ demands in any way.

Songcaller

Game societal acquisitions went from uniformed bis gear, to uniformed costumes, to nfts. The uniformed bis gear was western but repetitive. Uniformed costumes were eastern and limited.

We should have uniformed bis gear (unique items) and varied costumes both limited (purchased) and unlimited (In game) in AoC. Be thankful we have western devs who love eastern creations, rather than eastern devs who love western money.

P.s. be thankful for no nfts too.

JamesSunderland

It's sad to see that for OP and for some people, the price of exclusivity can be so unbearable.

1sab3la

JamesSunderland wrote: »

It's sad to see that for OP and for some people, the price of exclusivity can be so unbearable.

I get it. I just found out about this game not long ago. I missed out on some stuff. Stinks but it is what it is. Not the first game to sell exclusive items for pre-purchase or deluxe or ultimate editions and so on. While "exclusive" has not value to me in a game I cannot ask a company to devalue items some other person values because it is exclusive.

Not a big deal in long term. They will have to keep making stuff to sell so I want to buy.

Caeryl

CROW3 wrote: »

You can absolutely apply the same product practices between physical and digital products. Here’s the break down of my three examples:

1) you missed out on the production and sales timeframe of a product, yet you want that product because

2) you missed out on qualifying for the sale terms of a product, yet you want that product with those terms because

3) you missed out on a limited time service that can’t be resold by those that didn’t miss out (just in case that was a variable), yet you want that experience because

All of these are applicable to a digital product, and the terms by which that product is sold, marketed, distributed, or experienced. Furthermore, the merchant is not obligated, or responsible to meet any of the ‘yet’ demands in any way.

Yeah if you ignore everything about the production of a tangible good verses a digital good, then sure you can pretend they’re identical.

But most people know you can’t do that, so you still haven’t made any kind of point. Physical items may be scarce due to tangible, non-arbitrary reason. Digital items are made to be scarce arbitrarily. There’s no genuine reason aside from rare instances where every copy of the data files have been corrupted.

Sylvanar

JamesSunderland wrote: »

It's sad to see that for OP and for some people, the price of exclusivity can be so unbearable.

The main reason its hard to reconcile with OP is that he said he purposefully dint buy stuff because of something he imagined Intrepid is propagating, dint consult anyone, decided he was correct and now is complaining that he cant buy all that stuff. With this kind of backward ass logic how can you expect the community to take him seriously?

Grimseethe wrote: »

Just to be clear I can afford these cosmetics even monthly, but I don't buy them on principle.
...
Imagine you're a new player

If there is a new player, then ofc that new player has missed out on all the content since the start of the game till when he/she starts playing. Or does he expect Intrepid to reset the servers as well whenever a new player joins the server so that they can help build the world or spawn all the world bosses so that new players can participate in those events? There is no FOMO. It is all in his head.

@Caeryl MMOs are about world building. So @CROW3 arguments are perfectly valid. You cant go back in time and experience some event you would have like to, now can you? There is a reason MMO is a completely different genre than all the other genre of gaming. You cant just say "Oh, I want to do this!", restart the game and expect things to change just because.

CROW3

Caeryl wrote: »

Physical items may be scarce due to tangible, non-arbitrary reason. Digital items are made to be scarce arbitrarily.

It’s amusing when you attempt to say something axiomatically, but clearly have no knowledge about the subject.

Yes, you’re right - no tangible product has ever arbitrarily been made scarce and no digital product has ever been intentionally made scarce….

Well except any product anywhere at anytime with a supply chain impacted by weather, war, supplier capacity, carrier dysfunction, local politics, international politics, jurisdictional conflicts, proximity to a hack, or maybe random two week long traffic jams at major international ports.

Digital content is frequently intentionally limited in quantity. Think about digital books licensed to public libraries with limited check out inventory based on those contracts, digital music limited by tiered subscriptions, digital tickets purchase able by a single party, digital services that have fixed expirations like streams, rentals etc - intentional expirations - to govern their supply to manage demand and revenue…

Child Item