Reconciliation plan

7 years ago

"MasterSeedy;c-1987107" wrote:
leef

My point is that ... he increase of revenue they gained ...yada yada yada... that it doesn't make sense for it to be a "bait & switch"..

No, reread what you wrote before. Your point wasn't just that it doesn't make sense for it to be a "bait & switch". Your point was that because it doesn't make sense for it to be a bait & switch, therefore we know it wasn't a bait & switch.

But that logic only makes sense if everything in human society makes sense. We humans are remarkably capable of doing things that make no sense whatsoever. Therefore, you can assert all you like that it wouldn't make sense (and I would agree with you), but you don't have evidence that because it doesn't make sense it couldn't have been a bait & switch.

I'm with you that a bait & switch makes no sense. I am agnostic on whether a bait & switch actually occurred.

I don't even see me using the term "bait and switch" except for in that last comment after you brought it up. I was just saying that imo it's rather unlikely that this was intentional. So i'm not sure what you want to hear from me?
My previous comments:

Spoiler

"leef;c-1986409" wrote:

What you're implying is hilarious, truly hilarious.
You can't honestly think they're sabotaging their own game for what can only be minimal revenue gains even in the most beneficial scenario from their perspective, only to end up sending free stuff to every single player and upset a whole lot of players in the process.
Come on now..

"leef;c-1986480" wrote:

@MasterSeedy
What are you even trying to say here? I'm trying, but i can't figure out what it is you're implying.
Sabotaging the game you're getting paid to code for and risking your job in the process also seems rather unlikely to me, if that is indeed what you mean.
It also means we (the playerbase) can't blame ea/cg for being a greedy bunch of .... , which is even worse than having to deal with this screw up for some of the forum posters.

"leef;c-1987094" wrote:

My point is that even in the best scenario for ea/cg the short term gains were minimal. The increase of revenue they gained by rewarding shards for replays as opposed to not rewarding shards for replays is so gosh darn low that it doesn't make sense for it to be a "bait & switch".

"leef;c-1986409" wrote:What you're implying is hilarious, truly hilarious. You can't honestly think they're sabotaging their own game for what can only be minimal revenue gains even in the most beneficial scenario from their perspective, only to end up sending free stuff to every single player and upset a whole lot of players in the process. Come on now.. "leef;c-1986480" wrote:@MasterSeedy What are you even trying to say here? I'm trying, but i can't figure out what it is you're implying. Sabotaging the game you're getting paid to code for and risking your job in the process also seems rather unlikely to me, if that is indeed what you mean. It also means we (the playerbase) can't blame ea/cg for being a greedy bunch of .... , which is even worse than having to deal with this screw up for some of the forum posters. "leef;c-1987094" wrote:My point is that even in the best scenario for ea/cg the short term gains were minimal. The increase of revenue they gained by rewarding shards for replays as opposed to not rewarding shards for replays is so gosh darn low that it doesn't make sense for it to be a "bait & switch".

Forum Discussion

Featured Places

SWGOH General Discussion

Community Highlights

Weekly Shipment Request

Recent Discussions

How to report harassment

Next GL

When is „Beset on all sides“ returning?

Christmas calendar

Collasium is better than you think.