harrasser proves dedicated driver is great

[omega four]

Shareholders don't look to fondly upon publicly traded for-profit companies that are in the habit of offering refunds when it can be avoided.

Originally Posted by Ghodere

I've been in the threads on this topic for quite some time, and have yet to see a half decent argument posted in favor of the status quo, so I'll go ahead and posit one:

SOE is, for some reason, terrified of offering refunds.

When they were going to change G2A launchers to not have a dumbfire, they chose to back down on the change rather than offer refunds. When they completely changed the role of the Saron and to a lesser extent the Enforcer, not so much as a peep as to compensation. The Cosmos (VS MAX AI) went from the very best option available to the very worst and, regardless if you think that deserves a refund or not, nothing was mentioned.

Solo MBTs cannot be replaced with crewed MBTs without compensation. It just cannot work; the shitstorm would kill the game all over again. So, there, one more barrier standing in the way of crewed tonks.

[Figment]

Originally Posted by Ghodere

Solo MBTs cannot be replaced with crewed MBTs without compensation. It just cannot work;

World of Tanks does this pretty much every patch: free slot, free premium time, free extra exp, free researched experience when they replace something, etc. There's tons of ways to do this.


Just refund the certification points and station cash invested in the MBT. If people whine, next time give them a bonus 100 SC or a 5% cert point bonus.

Nobody can complain they spend money if they get a full return of their investment (and perhaps even a small bonus).


They should simply track purchase history (SC), which will always tell if a player used station cash or certification points to unlock something. If you adjust a weapon or in this case a vehicle, simply refund everything to do with that weapon, or in this case, the vehicle.


Nobody has the right to complain then, because they have been compensated and they have been able to get certs out of the time where they used an OP weapon version.

If they still whine even when compensated, let the immature selfish bastards quit. Good riddance tbh if you can't handle being compensated in full and then some, because you want to continue to exploit OP stuff.



And Omega Four, you're full of it. Shareholders don't care AT ALL about SERVICE REFUNDS. If people have to be compensated FOR ALL THE MONEY THEY INVESTED, yeah that would be felt. But refunding STATION CASH, AN ALREADY BOUGHT IN GAME CURRENCY, DOESN'T ACTUALLY AFFECT SOE'S FINANCIAL POSITION, AT ALL, BECAUSE THE MONEY IS ALREADY OBTAINED.

A refund doesn't mean it costs SOE any money in this regards.

Shareholders wouldn't give a flying fuck about station cash OR certification point returns! So much for your stupid argument.

[Dougnifico]

[omega four]

You're not looking at the big picture. Or perhaps you don't have experience working at Japanese multinational corporations. Whichever it is, your ignorance is readily apparent.

Shareholders will frown up any company that refunds services rendered when more services can be sold for money. SOE doesn't need to refund SC for services rendered when it can sell MORE SC.

Whether you care to admit it or are incapable of understanding the concept, refunds for services rendered represent a loss to a company.

But given your immature response and post, I don't think you've ever worked in Finance or Corporate Planning for a Fortune 100 corporation before. Nor do you ever have plans on doing so. If you did, you'd find your penchant for childish, immature prose would do little to sway others to your point of view.

Originally Posted by Figment

Shareholders don't care AT ALL about SERVICE REFUNDS. If people have to be compensated FOR ALL THE MONEY THEY INVESTED, yeah that would be felt. But refunding STATION CASH, AN ALREADY BOUGHT IN GAME CURRENCY, DOESN'T ACTUALLY AFFECT SOE'S FINANCIAL POSITION, AT ALL, BECAUSE THE MONEY IS ALREADY OBTAINED.

A refund doesn't mean it costs SOE any money in this regards.

Shareholders wouldn't give a flying fuck about station cash OR certification point returns! So much for your stupid argument.

[omega four]

This thread won't die because some gamers are exercising their rights to free speech and demanding certain game aspects ad nauseum.

Originally Posted by Dougnifico

[PredatorFour]

But this free speech may come at a cost..

[Figment]

Originally Posted by omega four

You're not looking at the big picture. Or perhaps you don't have experience working at Japanese multinational corporations. Whichever it is, your ignorance is readily apparent.

Shareholders will frown up any company that refunds services rendered when more services can be sold for money. SOE doesn't need to refund SC for services rendered when it can sell MORE SC.

1. SOE is an AMERICAN company, regardless of its ties to Sony.
2. Irrelevant statement. Shareholders care not for individual transactions and service refunds.

If you think so, you have not been paying attention to Wargaming, which is selling like hot buns to both consumers and shareholders, while having a more than decent customer service scheme because it actually makes customers come back.

A refund like this would retain the customer and the investment is not under threat. In fact, it encourages future investments by that consumer.

You know that good consumer pleasing policies on such small scales actually stimulate consumers, thus please shareholders? Right? Right? You do realise that shareholders that actually are capable of understanding that SOE doesn't lose money, but makes money out of such a refund and thus wouldn't be upset, at all?

Whether you care to admit it or are incapable of understanding the concept, refunds for services rendered represent a loss to a company.

Seems like you don't understand the concept of selling station cash: once sold, it is sold. The company does not care what you do with it or what game you spend it on: you already bought whatever.

Virtual currency refunds are NOT THE SAME AS AN ACTUAL REFUND (where you'd have had a point). You ensure that the consumer does not take the money elsewhere.

But given your immature response and post, I don't think you've ever worked in Finance or Corporate Planning for a Fortune 100 corporation before. Nor do you ever have plans on doing so. If you did, you'd find your penchant for childish, immature prose would do little to sway others to your point of view.

Immature? "BUT MOMMY I WANT IT". That is immature. If you can't make a case on why it's good for the game rather than why it's good for you, then don't bother asking for something.

And if you do work there, I seriously wonder if you have any idea what you're talking about and if you shouldn't be fired because of your poor consumer relationship skills and lack of insight in consumer and shareholder thinking. Sounds like your priorities are fucked up. There is no company without consumers and your method of "well let's just piss people off to not potentially offend the people that are pissing other people off out of selfish greed even if we can easily compensate those players" means people will be pissed off. And leave.

I know a lot of outfits that already left, in large part due to the vehicle spam and the boring vehicle gameplay. If this change would make more players come in than the few that would leave (nobody would leave over making the MBT crewed, don't kid yourself), then shareholders would actually be quite pleased.


You don't seem to understand the concept of station cash or gold refunds in the same in game currency and the effect on consumer retention, which will lead to future purchases. Where if you DO NOT refund them, the client will say "this is the last time I spent SC on anything, because it's not a risk free investment". And when THAT happens, shareholders will be FAR MORE WORRIED.





But still, I must say this is the lamest excuse for retaining control over OP weaponry I've ever heard.

"If I don't get to keep my tank, the shareholders of SOE will be pissed off!"


RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT. Sod off. If you can't defend your position and are reaching for straws, just sod off.

[Boomzor]

I see what Omega Four is saying.

However, if a refund is equalled to a lost sale, and that as the cause for them not doing it, how do you explain double or even triple SC deals?

That is an equal loss of sale. And we've seen plenty of those.

[Shogun]

Originally Posted by omega four

Shareholders will frown up any company that refunds services rendered when more services can be sold for money. SOE doesn't need to refund SC for services rendered when it can sell MORE SC.

rly?
then why could soe give out the loyal soldier promotion for free without their shareholders going rampage? they could have sold this package for money, so the promo was a loss of money according to your theory.

or the triple station cash promotions. soe could get three times the cash they got by NOT doing this!

sure, now you will say "but those were promotions to lure in more players to buy something". cool! and where is the difference to refunding certs or sc when doing changes to prevent people from stopping to buy anything?

it´s the same thing, and since no real money is refunded, it is no loss to soe at all. it is customer service and promotion all together.

[omega four]

LOL. You really are quite clueless, even for someone in his late 20s/early 30s.

SOE is the American subsidary to a Japanese multinational corporation. As such, SOE takes its marching orders from a Japanese company. Regardless of what you may think, SOE follows Sony's directives (at least if they want to keep their jobs).

With that, I won't bother educating you further about what shareholders do and don't care about as it's obvious that such an education would be entire lost and wasted on someone of your immature, childish nature.

Besides, I somehow doubt I'll be seeing you at any shareholder meetings anytime soon....

Originally Posted by Figment

1. SOE is an AMERICAN company, regardless of its ties to Sony.
2. Irrelevant statement. Shareholders care not for individual transactions and service refunds.

If you think so, you have not been paying attention to Wargaming, which is selling like hot buns to both consumers and shareholders, while having a more than decent customer service scheme because it actually makes customers come back.

A refund like this would retain the customer and the investment is not under threat. In fact, it encourages future investments by that consumer.

You know that good consumer pleasing policies on such small scales actually stimulate consumers, thus please shareholders? Right? Right? You do realise that shareholders that actually are capable of understanding that SOE doesn't lose money, but makes money out of such a refund and thus wouldn't be upset, at all?



Seems like you don't understand the concept of selling station cash: once sold, it is sold. The company does not care what you do with it or what game you spend it on: you already bought whatever.

Virtual currency refunds are NOT THE SAME AS AN ACTUAL REFUND (where you'd have had a point). You ensure that the consumer does not take the money elsewhere.



Immature? "BUT MOMMY I WANT IT". That is immature. If you can't make a case on why it's good for the game rather than why it's good for you, then don't bother asking for something.

And if you do work there, I seriously wonder if you have any idea what you're talking about and if you shouldn't be fired because of your poor consumer relationship skills and lack of insight in consumer and shareholder thinking. Sounds like your priorities are fucked up. There is no company without consumers and your method of "well let's just piss people off to not potentially offend the people that are pissing other people off out of selfish greed even if we can easily compensate those players" means people will be pissed off. And leave.

I know a lot of outfits that already left, in large part due to the vehicle spam and the boring vehicle gameplay. If this change would make more players come in than the few that would leave (nobody would leave over making the MBT crewed, don't kid yourself), then shareholders would actually be quite pleased.


You don't seem to understand the concept of station cash or gold refunds in the same in game currency and the effect on consumer retention, which will lead to future purchases. Where if you DO NOT refund them, the client will say "this is the last time I spent SC on anything, because it's not a risk free investment". And when THAT happens, shareholders will be FAR MORE WORRIED.





But still, I must say this is the lamest excuse for retaining control over OP weaponry I've ever heard.

"If I don't get to keep my tank, the shareholders of SOE will be pissed off!"


RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT. Sod off. If you can't defend your position and are reaching for straws, just sod off.

[omega four]

Thank you. It's good to see others who understand where I'm coming from, even if some like Figment are too young/immature/childish/inexperienced to do so.

You've asked an excellent question. Double and triple SC sales are one of SOE's ways to incentivize gamers to spend real money on SOE games (e.g. PS2). As you've astutely noted, SOE does leave some money on the table, so to speak, when it runs these sales. By not selling SC at full real world monetary value (e.g. 1 SC = $1 USD), SOE is effectively losing money (or giving money away) when it sells 2 or 3 SC for $1 USD.

Such incentive programs are viewed by SOE (and other companies) as the cost of doing business. But, it is a painful cost to bear. That is why SOE does not run these SC sale deals very often (especially the Triple SC deals).

Furthermore, shareholders and stock analysts view incentive program deals like SC sales in a more favorable light than they do refunds, as these incentive program deals actively bring in more real money, whereas refunds do not.

Originally Posted by Boomzor

I see what Omega Four is saying.

However, if a refund is equalled to a lost sale, and that as the cause for them not doing it, how do you explain double or even triple SC deals?

That is an equal loss of sale. And we've seen plenty of those.

[omega four]

Your question is similar to Boomzor's. So my answer will be similar as well.

Much like its double and triple SC sales, Loyal Soldier Promotions are one of SOE's ways to reward existing gamers' loyalty and incentivize gamers to spend real money on SOE games (e.g. PS2). The hope is once gamers experience all the benefits a subscription have to offer for a month, then gamers will subscribe to SOE's programs. As you've astutely noted, SOE does leave some money on the table, so to speak, when it offers these incentive programs.

These incentive programs are viewed by SOE (and other companies) as the cost of doing business. But, it is a painful cost to bear.

Furthermore, shareholders and stock analysts view incentive program deals like SC sales in a more favorable light than they do refunds, as these incentive program deals actively bring in more real money, whereas refunds do not.

Just because no real money is refunded does not mean that an opportunity cost is not incurred. I encourage you and others who don't see this to take a introductory business class or Microeconomics 101. It'll help clear things up.

Originally Posted by Shogun

rly?
then why could soe give out the loyal soldier promotion for free without their shareholders going rampage? they could have sold this package for money, so the promo was a loss of money according to your theory.

or the triple station cash promotions. soe could get three times the cash they got by NOT doing this!

sure, now you will say "but those were promotions to lure in more players to buy something". cool! and where is the difference to refunding certs or sc when doing changes to prevent people from stopping to buy anything?

it´s the same thing, and since no real money is refunded, it is no loss to soe at all. it is customer service and promotion all together.

[Shogun]

Originally Posted by omega four

Such incentive programs are viewed by SOE (and other companies) as the cost of doing business. But, it is a painful cost to bear. That is why SOE does not run these SC sale deals very often (especially the Triple SC deals).

Furthermore, shareholders and stock analysts view incentive program deals like SC sales in a more favorable light than they do refunds, as these incentive program deals actively bring in more real money, whereas refunds do not.

ok, so the whole shareholder thing is a totally unvalid argument on the topic, according to your own argumentation...

refunding as a compensation for changing mbt to driver/gunner would be a one time thing, soe wouldn´t have to more than once, and therefore it is not more frequent than sc deals.

and an option to recert would keep paying customers happy and more willingly to spend more money. that would equal the second part of the quote.

the whole shareholder arguments are hollow bullshit. just don´t call it "refund" and everything is ok. enable a recert option in general, or just for limited time after patches, for the affected items, problem solved.

this should also fall under business costs, because keeping customers happy and loyal is valuable service.

[omega four]

Like I said, please consider taking a introductory business class or Microeconomics 101. It'll help clear things up.

Originally Posted by Shogun

ok, so the whole shareholder thing is a totally unvalid argument on the topic, according to your own argumentation...

refunding as a compensation for changing mbt to driver/gunner would be a one time thing, soe wouldn´t have to more than once, and therefore it is not more frequent than sc deals.

and an option to recert would keep paying customers happy and more willingly to spend more money. that would equal the second part of the quote.

the whole shareholder arguments are hollow bullshit. just don´t call it "refund" and everything is ok. enable a recert option in general, or just for limited time after patches, for the affected items, problem solved.

this should also fall under business costs, because keeping customers happy and loyal is valuable service.

[Shogun]

Originally Posted by omega four

Like I said, please consider taking a introductory business class or Microeconomics 101. It'll help clear things up.

nice way of avoiding to acknoladge defeat...
and very arrogant to send people off to read a book or get aditional education. especially for someone who doesn´t know the difference between there their and they´re.