Could anyone explain to me why DB wouldn’t regularly update the portals to include all crew for any reason other than to be deceptive?
I've always just assumed it was in an effort to maintain a perceived value of newer crew. By withholding them from general circulation, there's a greater value placed on specific crew. The most obvious examples are the Gauntlet and Voyage exclusives. We may ordinarily be reluctant to keep a 1/4, but if one of the Voyage exclusives drops, we may be even more reluctant to dismiss them because we've been told they'll only drop for us once (The Clown glitch notwithstanding).
By keeping the time-limited and event crew out of general circulation, there's a brief period where they're "special". It fosters a sense of scarcity, which is critical in capitalism to the perceived value of any given good. It's not malicious, per se, or at least, it's one of the more benign manifestations of that economic principle.
I haven't seen as much of it on this new forum, but on the old forum, there were constantly whole threads dedicated to players bemoaning that a crew they'd gone to great cost to acquire were quickly made available to the masses. For instance, Lore was originally a time-limited crew. When he surfaced a few months later in the rewards table for "Ghost in the Machine", several forum members balked that that effectively invalidated the value of the Lore they'd paid good money to get since now everyone and their brother could easily get him just by playing in that event. They placed great value on the exclusivity of Lore--they had him and most others didn't, and there was no way they could get him.
Personally, I always thought it was laughably ridiculous that anyone playing this game would actually believe that "I don't want anyone else to ever get this thing I have more easily and less expensively than I got it" constituted a legitimate position that DB should respect and adhere to, but then, I've seen a lot of unreasonable demands over these last two years.
I don't know that this is the reason, mind you, and to my knowledge, no one at DB has ever formally addressed the matter.
It's been explicitly stated by DB that no compensation will be given for all FF beholds.
Yeah, you're right, spending 45000 honor to get 550 honor is totally cool because DB said so in advance.
I'm so sick of this thinking. I don't care what they can get away with. I care about what's right.
Yeah, yeah, and lottery my father buys every other week should totally give major prizes to everybody and not nothing or less than ticket worth...
Beholds are good chance for new players. But that's it. The moment you get three characters FF they become pure lottery and should be treated as such (as in do not play unless given for free).
PS. Well, for a certain degree of new. I certainly can play them still as all my FF 5* are non-circulation ones... but, well, still need 10 citations between Kortar, Kahless and Guinan. And another 300k for Bev. So it's possible I'll get chance way after I'll get enough golds to FF three just by playing.
By keeping the time-limited and event crew out of general circulation, there's a brief period where they're "special". It fosters a sense of scarcity, which is critical in capitalism to the perceived value of any given good. It's not malicious, per se, or at least, it's one of the more benign manifestations of that economic principle.
obligatory janeway gif:
That's called artificial scarcity, and it's by no means critical to capitalism - in fact it unfairly disadvantages the consumer and creates an imbalance in which producers can arbitrarily set the value of goods (e.g. monopolies or cartels). Any capitalist society must curtail this behavior in one way or another to maintain equilibrium between the producer of goods and the consumer, and any producer attempting to force an imbalance by such means is hardly acting in a benign manner.
There are no comprehensive rules for delineating at which point this behavior should be curtailed as it is a situational problem but in this instance DB is grossly overstepping by withholding information crucial to the consumer, in this case what they are actually expected to get when they pay for a portal. Chance is always a factor in loot boxes like these but being intentionally deceptive as to what the player could possibly get for their money is a separate and distinct issue - which is not to say that exact odds of which cards one is expected to receive are necessary (although recent litigation has determined that even this much information is necessary for consumers to have).
It's a clear and unfair disadvantage to the player - one created and maintained by DB - that could be easily rectified.
Comments
I've always just assumed it was in an effort to maintain a perceived value of newer crew. By withholding them from general circulation, there's a greater value placed on specific crew. The most obvious examples are the Gauntlet and Voyage exclusives. We may ordinarily be reluctant to keep a 1/4, but if one of the Voyage exclusives drops, we may be even more reluctant to dismiss them because we've been told they'll only drop for us once (The Clown glitch notwithstanding).
By keeping the time-limited and event crew out of general circulation, there's a brief period where they're "special". It fosters a sense of scarcity, which is critical in capitalism to the perceived value of any given good. It's not malicious, per se, or at least, it's one of the more benign manifestations of that economic principle.
I haven't seen as much of it on this new forum, but on the old forum, there were constantly whole threads dedicated to players bemoaning that a crew they'd gone to great cost to acquire were quickly made available to the masses. For instance, Lore was originally a time-limited crew. When he surfaced a few months later in the rewards table for "Ghost in the Machine", several forum members balked that that effectively invalidated the value of the Lore they'd paid good money to get since now everyone and their brother could easily get him just by playing in that event. They placed great value on the exclusivity of Lore--they had him and most others didn't, and there was no way they could get him.
Personally, I always thought it was laughably ridiculous that anyone playing this game would actually believe that "I don't want anyone else to ever get this thing I have more easily and less expensively than I got it" constituted a legitimate position that DB should respect and adhere to, but then, I've seen a lot of unreasonable demands over these last two years.
I don't know that this is the reason, mind you, and to my knowledge, no one at DB has ever formally addressed the matter.
Beholds are good chance for new players. But that's it. The moment you get three characters FF they become pure lottery and should be treated as such (as in do not play unless given for free).
PS. Well, for a certain degree of new. I certainly can play them still as all my FF 5* are non-circulation ones... but, well, still need 10 citations between Kortar, Kahless and Guinan. And another 300k for Bev. So it's possible I'll get chance way after I'll get enough golds to FF three just by playing.
I had one that all three were immortalized. It happens unfortunately.
That's called artificial scarcity, and it's by no means critical to capitalism - in fact it unfairly disadvantages the consumer and creates an imbalance in which producers can arbitrarily set the value of goods (e.g. monopolies or cartels). Any capitalist society must curtail this behavior in one way or another to maintain equilibrium between the producer of goods and the consumer, and any producer attempting to force an imbalance by such means is hardly acting in a benign manner.
There are no comprehensive rules for delineating at which point this behavior should be curtailed as it is a situational problem but in this instance DB is grossly overstepping by withholding information crucial to the consumer, in this case what they are actually expected to get when they pay for a portal. Chance is always a factor in loot boxes like these but being intentionally deceptive as to what the player could possibly get for their money is a separate and distinct issue - which is not to say that exact odds of which cards one is expected to receive are necessary (although recent litigation has determined that even this much information is necessary for consumers to have).
It's a clear and unfair disadvantage to the player - one created and maintained by DB - that could be easily rectified.