Jump to content
LOTROCommunity

Mockingbird

Members
  • Content Count

    278
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Mockingbird last won the day on October 16 2011

Mockingbird had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

10 Acquaintance

About Mockingbird

  • Rank
    Not to be killed

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female

LotRO Data

  • Server
    Gilrain
  1. I think she has some fair points but it has to go both ways. Finding private infraction messages here for example... they often end up here because the person posting them feels they have been treated unfairly and are looking for support or somewhere to vent. Bohunk's case is a classic example of someone being treated unfairly by Turbine and having very limited recourse. I think its great he managed to get his community account back but how long did it take? How many actions did he have to take to achieve the end result? Whether his posting the details here had any effect on the end outcome is pure speculation, however I hope he found the community here supportive in the process. As far as I am concerned it is clear cut that personal attacks should not be allowed on this forum anymore than Turbine's own forum. Unfortunately when such attacks are integrated in a post where the poster is making some very good points it can be difficult to separate 'attack' from 'point'. In addition there is often an emotional element to the post worked in as well which can further complicate things. The fact is Turbine have treated their long term players unfairly and as such players often have a large time investment both in the game itself and in the community they have built or participated within it then they do care about how Turbine treats them as customers. Walking away does not solve anything and the player stands to lose a lot more by walking away than Turbine does by the loss of any money they might otherwise have given. Add to that the F2P element and players have realised they don't need to lose out on the community or parts of lotro that they enjoy to 'walk away' from handing over money to Turbine. So they can stick around and make a lot of noise about the change in how Turbine treats its playerbase. As for the community management team whether through the forum itself in the closing of threads, handing out of infractions, banning accounts and failing to fairly moderate negative rep (when the comment breaks their forum CoC) consistently and within reasonable expectations of their own CoC then it is impossible to make these points without them feeling 'attacked' in some way. Therem I said it, did I just 'attack' the community management team? Matter of perspective I think and very much depends how you define 'attack'. Personally I would define 'attack' as some kind of rage about them - most likely using swear words, name calling and such. Attacks in game are not allowed either but would a GM step in and moderate someone who says in IM 'I think you are a selfish person and I don't want to play with you anymore'? I doubt it. On the other hand (back in Codies days) I had someone start ranting at me and making threats that they wanted me to die a horrible death... I did report it as an attack and the GMs were great and dealt with it. I think getting rid of any signatures that reference this forum is a bit overkill to be honest. While I can understand and empathise with their reasoning I think the point is that they need to look at their own behaviour and how they treat their customers. It isn't too late for them to fix things and if they start being more fair both on the forums and in the way they treat their customers from marketing through to game design and subscription values etc then I doubt they would have anything to worry about from those visiting this forum. One more thing. When someone does make a post on this forum that is out of line, the need to moderate it heavily is often negated to some extent by the response from other posters who often address the point in a respectful way and let the poster know that they were out of line and why. I think that says a lot about this community and it is one I am happy to be part of.
  2. Since F2P came out we had the following content that was free to VIPs but required payment from Premium players - Enedwaith Bundle (695 TP) - Halls of Night (395 TP) - Inn of the Forsaken (395 TP) - Attack at Dawn (395 TP) - Icy Crevace (395 TP) Total: 2275 TP So a premium player would need to spend approximately $20 to get the above. Meanwhile a VIP subscriber would have to pay a monthly subscription which can add up to over $180 for a year. Clearly it is not worth being VIP on this basis unless you spend a lot of time in EM. Perhaps a good question to ask could be 'Are you now encouraging long term players to switch to Premium as there seems little incentive for non PvP players to maintain a long term subscription as it is not cost efficient in comparison?' or something along those lines. I think in interviews it is beneficial to give them the benefit of the doubt, so perhaps the above demonstration of the way VIP has been devalued is an unintended side effect of their move to F2P and they intend to correct this and encourage more players to go back to VIP. I think I read somewhere from an interview that they said VIP players were their 'safety buffer' or words to that effect. As much as I am interested in their intentions regarding the value of the VIP subscription over the long term, unless they are going to come out and say 'yes we are winding down VIP' my more immediate question would be what content can VIPs expect in Update 6 to justify the expense of maintaining their VIP subscription? When will Update 6 be released? Why are there no mounts available as gameplay goals as part of ROI? Are all new mounts to be store exclusive only from now on? Thanks for giving us the opportunity to put these questions forwards for you to consider!
  3. I am confused. I was told that Update 5 was coming around 22nd December... has this changed? Is the closing of Bullroarer a sign that they are likely bringing forwards the release date for Update 5 to next week? If so I really don't like the sound of it - can't help but feel they are releasing stuff early to cash in before SWTOR comes out. I already have the impression that Turbine don't expect or haven't planned to compete for players and are expecting to lose a lot of players to other games over the next year and if they are bringing forwards Update 5 in this way it doesn't make me feel reassured at all.
  4. Didn't someone say you need over 1k rep points to be able to give out negative rep? I got more negative rep for what was an informational based post for the most part, there wasn't really even much opinion in there for someone to disagree with. The fact that the information itself wasn't favourable must have been the reason for the negative rep. This time I actually smiled when I saw the post the negative rep was aimed at however, clearly I had hit a nerve and so I will take the negative rep as a compliment After that I have decided that isn't a bad idea, whenever I get negative rep I go back and check the post and shake my head, I don't write posts that warrant negative rep unless given by someone who just doesn't like what I have to say whether its information or opinion. I am not far off the 1k mark for rep now and the positive rep flows in rather nicely... so what if I annoy a few people who would rather I didn't make my points well! Naturally I would love to know who is giving the negative rep... would like to know who gives the positive rep too really. We know the system is flawed and with all the holes in Turbine's sinking boat the rep system just doesn't seem worth getting upset about anymore.
  5. This is the most important thing to me and as far as I can tell he didn't address it. The point that has been most frequently made on the official forums is that Turbine are taking away the rewards for those who don't want to use Instance Finder. I am disappointed he did not address this point.
  6. I haven't really paid much attention to these charts in the past as I am a little sceptical on how the data is collected and its accuracy. That said, if we take the data shown as an approximation then it strikes me that the release of ROI had very little impact on player activity - a new expansion should surely create a large spike in logins per minute that steadily decreases over the next 4-6 months but there doesn't really seem to be a noticable spike at all. The other thing I was wondering is how this data allows for people who crash and log into the game again - does that count as another login? If so then I wonder what impact crashes had following the release of ROI on these charts as from what I can tell there was certainly a 'crash spike' around this time. What I would really like to see is comparison charts for the years MoM and SoM were released to see what impact those expansions had on player numbers.
  7. If we look at the content released since F2P I think there can only be a very small developer team left - am guessing resources are being diverted into a different game or something. As has been mentioned before, the odds are most of Enedwaith and its instances were probably quite advanced prior to the resources being put towards F2P. It's also quite possible (since as far as we know Enedwaith was never intended for an expansion) that part of ROI was already in development back then if they were planning on releasing it a year after Mirkwood (if resources hadn't been diverted into F2P). SoM was planned and implemented as a five level increase, I don't think its too far fetched to think that they had planned another 5 lvl increase a year later at that time and its been said that ROI was originally intended to be 5 levels. So we have had ROI as an expansion, albeit with minimal content to meet its needs and the delayed instance cluster coming in Update 5. Now I think Update 5, in line with the new F2P model was planned to have this instance cluster in its own right (so they could charge for it) and that was all. The Epic ended fairly abruptly so perhaps the Epic part coming with Update 5 was originally planned for ROI and held back to give Update 5 more content? The Instance Finder tool as I said in another post I think has been a rush job based on something like 'we need something to promote update 5 with, it needs to be thrown together quickly and wanted by players, what can we do with minimal resources?' and the instance finder comes out 4-5 months later. Update 6 is meant to have the other part of the IF but as history has shown (e.g. legendary item updates) part two to things doesn't always happen. No other news is released about Update 6 yet as far as I know including an approximate release date. Will there even be an Update 6? I don't wish to go all alarmist, I never thought I would say this but I am beginning to believe the end of lotro is in sight by design... perhaps sooner rather than later if the IF is launched as planned and puts players like myself off from playing as they won't use it and the instances / skirms without its use don't yield sufficent reward to progress at a decent pace. What will the impact of this be? I would say that Turbine have the numbers, far more data than we do etc... but everything I have read about the IF gives me the impression it just hasn't been thought through in many respects so am not that confident they have thought through the impact to the playerbase much either. I would be pleasantly surprised to see another levelling area for levels 65-75 added, particularly so if it were of the quality we have been used to in the past. Unfortunately the fact that we had no new zones following the release of Enedwaith does not encourage me. I would like to see some older instances scaled and I really think In Your Absence cluster should be scaled... and yet the scaling of instances is something they say is 'in the pipeline' but has not actually materialised at all since its original release over a year ago. Realistically, I do not think the goals of the game are to deliver content anymore and that the content delivered will be minimal but if they do create content for Update 6 I would expect a 3-man scalable or a skirmish or something along those lines. More task boards perhaps! lol I am sad to confess my hopes are not high anymore... sorry to be doom and gloomish.
  8. I just can't see what Turbine are thinking in regards to releasing the IF in its current state. I have managed to come up with two potential theories, although I think both are pretty weak; 1) They are worried that they will have a big drop in numbers due to industry competition and decided that this tool was needed to help retain players (and they didn't think it through very well and screwed up!) 2) They were in a tight spot having diverted the originally intended Update 5 instances to being included in ROI and having no *real* content for Update 5 except maybe the Epic. The IF really seems to be a rush job and I can imagine being scrambled together since August as it doesn't seem to have gone through even basic checks prior to being developed. I don't think they had the time to develop new skirmishes, scale new instances, add a new zone and they needed something to promote Update 5 with fast. A half built IF seems to be their answer. Naturally I may be way off base with both the above scenarios although I suspect both may be at least partially the case. I do think its wrong to release things like the IF in game as a beta version. If they are to do so they need to be clear it is a 'beta' feature and in no way allow it to effect the natural course of gameplay for anyone who doesn't want to participate in beta-testing this feature. I am really left to wonder if there is anyone watching over lotro with something like this as it has the feeling of an airplane where the pilot has fallen asleep and no one has noticed that the plane is losing altitude... I mean seriously... if the IF is designed with the purpose of encouraging players to play a wider variety of content then first of all their objective is flawed (many simply won't play because they don't like the random part required for the reward of playing content to be worthwhile) and their implementation is flawed for several reasons, most obvious one being that it is more likely you will be playing the same instance more often by random chance paired with free content. GB will always come up more often than Annuminas as the latter requires a quest pack. Free skirmishes will come up most often, followed by Free Epic skirmishes followed by others... the latter is unlikely to get played much unless joining with a pre-made group. Turbine seem to have forgotten that players log in to play for fun... *I still think the ROI instance cluster was intended to be an Update 5 paid for instance cluster originally and was added to ROI due to a post a player made on the official forums a couple of days before they announced the instance cluster in which the player pointed out that legally speaking Turbine were on dodgy ground not releasing any instances as part of the expansion as its like releasing a car without wheels. Just the timing made me suspicious of this along with the fact the instances were clearly never planned to be ready for ROI release.
  9. We actually paid for two subscription accounts for almost three years before buying two lifetime accounts just prior to the release of F2P. We additionally bought the expansions for both accounts. I wasn't opposed to the hybrid F2P model we were told about and was supportive of it in general the way they initially sold it to us. Despite having some concerns, around the time ROI was announced I was about to put hand in pocket and buy TP for the first time (my bonus points had finally run out). I didn't mind paying out money again for a game I enjoyed despite having a lifetime subscription. The above said, I have voted above that I am a lifer who doesn't buy points as I never actually bought them. I held back initially over some concerns about the ROI marketing and over the past six months I have been firmly of the opinion that until / unless Turbine start showing a little more integrity and being honest with their customers I will not give Turbine any more money. So the short version is - I would have happily continued to spend money on lotro for both TP and expansions, however I won't because of the way ROI has been marketed. If Turbine change their tune then I may well start throwing some money their way again, but I can't see either happening the way things stand now.
  10. My point with the horse situation is that previously new areas came with their own horses you could work towards as part of your gameplay experience. ROI is different in that the horses are not in ROI via gameplay at all but only through paying cash for the expansion or through the store. In terms of this thread, I don't have a problem with store-exclusive mounts and from that perspective I am fine with the MT model. However, as a subscription based game where horses used to be available via gameplay, I think they need to continue doing that. The MT model / store should offer things that are supplementry to the gameplay experience, not replace it. So horses available as part of gameplay = great! Horses that are store-exclusive as well = even better perhaps! Horses becoming available in-store as a replacement for those normally obtained via gameplay = not good.
  11. I think polls / questionnaires like this are very difficult to create in a fair way. This one is no exception. Believe it or not I actually started out opting for the store being a good thing as the original question focusses on the store being implemented as part of a hybrid model. The thing is the following options were spot on for my complaints about the current implementation of MT and there were not many positives for the hybrid model as it was originally put to us. I really liked the concept of a hybrid F2P model as Turbine originally sold it to us. I had no problem with it generating additional revenue and with the lines about premium loot not being in the store and convenience not advantage I thought the store would be a nice supplement to the game that would allow them to invest resources into some extra things such as cosmetics that were not integral to gameplay but enjoyed by many nonetheless. I do not believe they have successfully implemented a hybrid model at all. Whatever their original intention lotro seems to be in a conversion process to a full on F2P model where subscriptions don't really carry any meaningful purpose and certainly have not maintained the value they had pre-F2P. This is the only mmo I have ever played, so I cannot compare to other F2P models. With the implementation of the store and how Turbine have followed through on it over the past year I think it has been very bad for the integrity of the game and seems incredibily focussed on short term gains at the expense of any long term playability. I will still give the concept of the hybrid model a thumbs up as I don't believe it was followed through on and I think it could have worked very well to create additional revenue, bring new people to the game while still supporting a subscription model and maintained the integrity and quality of the game as it was pre-F2P. Out of curiosity (and not meaning to derail) but do people think 'horses' have been taken out of the game and put in the store? Is this another example of relic removal scrolls? I ask because as far as I am aware there have been no new horses introduced with ROI (as we would normally expect) and yet we are already on our second store-exclusive horse which is also being promoted via the lottery.
  12. I think my answer is 'I prefer variety!'. I enjoy 3, 6 and 12 man instances in PvE (I like 24 man raids in PvP but not PvE). I really liked the In Their Absence cluster in total and am hoping the new cluster will be of similar quality (although am doubtful as I think the Enedwaith cluster was the last content started pre-F2P). I like 3-mans because they are easy to put together for a quick run, they aren't necessarily easy but can be. The one draw back to 3-man is it can be difficult to make a 3-man that isn't easy and yet is doable by class mixes that go away from tank / healer / dps set up. I think NCF and Stoneheight did a relatively good job on that but the difference between that set up and any variation could be quite big, especially if players weren't well kitted out. I like 6-mans because they do have more versatility and seem to allow more variety of content. For 12 man raids I enjoy, but I wouldn't want to do them more than a couple of times a week so like the 3 and 6 man content to be optional the rest of the time. When I say 12 man raids I don't mean skirmishes. The way skirmish raids are being run at the moment I am finding really dull and the only way to enjoy them is just to have some good company.
  13. OMG... I have no words... was my initial reaction. I have just been looking though and it is definately still there / there again now. The links above are to a specific post that seems to have been removed. So were interesting things posted that have been deleted since by any chance? Any screenies?
  14. This surprises me. I don't like 'big business' for many reasons and no I don't think they have much integrity for the most part. That said there are many small, medium and even larger businesses that do maintain integrity to various degrees and these are the ones I generally prefer to buy products or services from. I do boycott certain large companies both retailers and brand names because I have strong feelings about their ethics and what they do in the name of profit. Turbine are different. They are the only producers of a game that I think is pretty great. I have not been so happy with its latest developments both in terms of ROI and their marketing practices however the original game I still find pretty amazing.
  15. Please continue discussion here;
×
×
  • Create New...