Yoshiro;n2333854 said:Finding the right value is never an easy thing to do, and if you undervalue it, you can't correct it. Everybody knows it has been offered for less so they won't buy it for more.
pie1055;n2333906 said:TL;DR, If anyone from TWI is reading this I have three requests/suggestions for the betterment of the shop and inventory- sorting, searching, and 3D preview functions. If you're having problems with micros the usability of the shop is where I would look first, 'cause it's currently not great.
Yoshiro;n2333946 said:While the team is continuing to put thought on the future of the current implementation of the ZedConomy's crate and key system, we don't have anything to announce today.
Aleflippy;n2333960 said:More content is always nice, but after a while : we also need to have a game that doesn't crush on its own weight.
Copycat;n2333942 said:Phasing out means removing the monetary value of all cosmetics while making it easier to earn them by merely playing the game. I have also spent a hefty sum of money on cosmetics and I am proud of my outfits, however, I do not wish to continue doing so because the expense is no longer justified by the fact that it finances the free updates.
As for the monetary value of the cosmetics I already have, I do not mind if they lose their value because I do not trade cosmetics for profit, I trade them to get the cosmetics I want, and if they all become free, I will be able to get all the new cosmetics I want more easily, which I should, considering that there is no reason for them to have a price tag on them now that updates are not free.
Your items are not going anywhere, though, so why do you want them to retain their market value? Are you planning to sell them in the future? What for, profit? That is not what cosmetics are for. Cosmetics are for us to use, not for us to profit from, I do not see why this game should be treated as a money-maker because it is a game. And if you phase out the Zedconomy only for the new items, that would still mean I would have to pay for a lot of old cosmetics that do not fund free updates, which would not change my mind on not wanting to buy anything from Tripwire. I never said that new cosmetics should be packed together, I refuse to pay for cosmetics if I have to pay for updates (i.e. new weapons). Your argument for rarity is an aesthetic one rather than a consumer-producer relation argument, so I do not see its relevance.GigaBowserX;n2333968 said:I would be pretty disappointed if they decided to remove ALL monetary value of the cosmetics and gun skins, since like I said, I have spent a good deal of time and money acquiring them. Maybe they could just leave the older cosmetics as they are, keep those older crates, and phase out the zedconomy just for the new stuff? That way, you could still get the upcoming cosmetics and skins for "free" (read: through vault dosh crates or certain amounts of playtime) without devaluing the precious and other rare cosmetics from before. Best of both worlds. Or they could just package new cosmetics together, as you suggested. I do like the RNG aspect of the rarer cosmetics that currently exist, though, because it makes it more fun when I see someone running around in-game with a precious or other rare version of something.
Copycat;n2333972 said:Your items are not going anywhere, though, so why do you want them to retain their market value? Are you planning to sell them in the future? What for, profit? That is not what cosmetics are for. Cosmetics are for us to use, not for us to profit from, I do not see why this game should be treated as a money-maker because it is a game. And if you phase out the Zedconomy only for the new items, that would still mean I would have to pay for a lot of old cosmetics that do not fund free updates, which would not change my mind on not wanting to buy anything from Tripwire. I never said that new cosmetics should be packed together, I refuse to pay for cosmetics if I have to pay for updates (i.e. new weapons). Your argument for rarity is an aesthetic one rather than a consumer-producer relation argument, so I do not see its relevance.
Tripwire may proceed with its new practices, but I absolutely and irrevocably refuse to take part in them. The only way for us consumers to steer a producer into fair trade is by ceasing trade altogether until the terms of trade are amended.
People buy action figures and keep them unopened because they are collecting for 1. the sake of collecting, or 2. for profit. If you are doing either one of those, the monetary value of your cosmetics is irrelevant, because 1. your collection is not going away and 2. you are not intending to profit from them at all. As for "supporting Tripwire within reason", there are limits to reason, not all choices are equally reasonable.GigaBowserX;n2333980 said:I plan to keep all my cosmetics, so I'm not trying to profit off of them. I'm just a sucker for aesthetics, I guess. It's just nice to know that the stuff you have invested in has value, even if you don't plan on selling it. Why do you think people buy action figures and then keep them unopened inside their original packaging? It's fine if you want to forego any kind of trade with Tripwire from now on - that's your choice. As for me, I will continue to support them within reason (and the definition of "within reason" is much different for me than for many others, I'm sure).
Yoshiro;n2333845 said:simplecat I am told in-game store.
Copycat;n2333982 said:People buy action figures and keep them unopened because they are collecting for 1. the sake of collecting, or 2. for profit. If you are doing either one of those, the monetary value of your cosmetics is irrelevant, because 1. your collection is not going away and 2. you are not intending to profit from them at all. As for "supporting Tripwire within reason", there are limits to reason, not all choices are equally reasonable.
They are not losses because the assets remain with you. Plus that is like asking for a refund after finishing a game, that is not how refunds work, you get a refund if the purchase is defective, and there is a time limit to refunds. Asking for a refund months after usage is asinine.GigaBowserX;n2333998 said:What about a third option, though - simply breaking even? What if I decided sometime that I didn't want my cosmetics anymore or that I wasn't going to play KF2 anymore? I'd definitely want to be able to resell the cosmetics to recoup my losses, at least.
s5yn3t;n2333953 said:Also steam.
I almost had a heart attack, when later refreshed it showed 786 players, and then lowest 584.... was thinking that players really gone boycotting because i never seen the concurrent drop below 4k
Copycat;n2334008 said:They are not losses because the assets remain with you. Plus that is like asking for a refund after finishing a game, that is not how refunds work, you get a refund if the purchase is defective, and there is a time limit to refunds. Asking for a refund months after usage is asinine.
The market is no longer justified because Tripwire is going to charge us for updates. And no, it is Tripwire who should let us enjoy the cosmetics without putting them behind a paywall now that they are introducing paid weapons, the market is not for enjoying, the game is. The only people who are going to be upset if their items lose their value are people who are too busy trading items for profit instead of playing the game, and no, they should not be sold for a "new, lower price", they should be free because of the update change I already explained. Tripwire's focus should be fairness to us players, not to the micromerchants who are mining cosmetics with bots for profit.GigaBowserX;n2334030 said:Fine, call it "asinine" if you want, but I'm not asking for a refund. That is a whole different animal. In fact, the Steam marketplace doesn't have any refunds - all purchases are final. I'm talking about re-selling the cosmetics because the market is a living, breathing thing, with changing prices and values. It's fine if you're against capitalism and such, but you should still let us enjoy using the marketplace if we so choose. I don't know how they could safely phase all of that out, because if they decided to do away with it all, there would be a general uproar/chaos as people scrambled to sell off their most valuable cosmetics so that they could just re-purchase them at the new, lower price.
Copycat;n2334115 said:The market is no longer justified because Tripwire is going to charge us for updates. And no, it is Tripwire who should let us enjoy the cosmetics without putting them behind a paywall now that they are introducing paid weapons, the market is not for enjoying, the game is. The only people who are going to be upset if their items lose their value are people who are too busy trading items for profit instead of playing the game, and no, they should not be sold for a "new, lower price", they should be free because of the update change I already explained. Tripwire's focus should be fairness to us players, not to the micromerchants who are mining cosmetics with bots for profit.
Then the traders are not even a valid consideration for keeping the Zedconomy and the only excuse that Tripwire could offer for keeping it is that they want to profit from us players as much as they can, which is not going to resonate with us considering the circumstances. Hopefully they will see reason and reconsider their paid DLC + Zedconomy plan.GigaBowserX;n2334146 said:I see your point, but you shouldn't worry about the "micromerchants," as it's really difficult to actually make a profit selling cosmetics on the market, in my experience at least. At best, you break even, at worst, you are losing tons of $$ as you open crate after crate or craft item after item looking for the precious or more sought-after items. I guess there are probably some people with bots who are able to farm thousands of low-cost items and sell them for five cents a piece. But with most higher-value items, the people who post buy offers put up a price that's way lower than what anyone would hope to make off of it. There have to be buyers for the high-cost items to actually turn a profit, and those buyers are few and far between these days.