Is the Halloween update destined to be a huge disappointment?

Thought of something else to add:

Even if they do charge donuts for them, you will then see people complain that they cost too much, and/or "this game has too many premium items". Then they feel they should have been entitled to purchase the items with in-game cash or gotten it free like those of us that have the item. In game cash does not pay the bills for this game though.

Also this creates a "Santa's Little Helper, Barney" scenario, where you get a 'premium' item, with no "premium bonus". So those that did not know it was free before, would be upset that they bought a premium item that didn't offer a bonus %. They could however add that premium bonus % in, but again that's more code work.

GamerGD3 wrote:

JoshSherer wrote:
Now, if someone wants to present a GOOD reason why they should stay gone . Good reasons for bringing them are extra money for EA (which in turn leads to a longer game for us), it's not fair to screw over new people, there is almost no additional work or coding to make items accessible that have already been designed and implemented, etc.

I presented a reason. The limited items vary between 3 levels. Free (no currency), in-game cash, and donuts. The first 2 would require code changes to make them purchasable with donuts. There is code work since items are likely assigned to a "type" meaning free, purchasable, or premium purchasable (donuts). So it would be re-working the code on some/many of the items as they would need to be changed. When code changes, things break. When things break, they get more in flux of tickets with issues. So in turn by updating the code, they are liable for new issues, and creating additional problems for their support. You see many with how EA doesn't respond for weeks, especially on critical issues like the harps of death, lockouts, etc. This could blow up even more. More people that may drop the game entirely. This would be likely affect those of us that have the items, more than the ones purchasing the items.

They do have the option of just re-enabling them, and it would just be dumped into the inventory, or able for in-game cash - but then this doesn't make them money. This would only please players that missed it, and there's those that would be upset/mad that they are available again.

(I don't personally care if everyone has them or not, I'm just providing a reason as a counter-argument)

Yes, there is a little bit of additional coding to add them to the donut store. But that is minimal effort. They are designed. Their frames are created. Their function is built in. Their tasks have been made. Dialogue will not be required. They just have to code them into the premium shop. Sure it takes a little bit of work, but very little. The payout would be huge. Could it glitch? Obviously. But I have yet to see a glitch connected to adding something to the premium shop. And even if it did, what should they do, stop adding items to the premium shop on the chance that it may glitch? That's silly and you know it.

GamerGD3 wrote:
Thought of something else to add:

Even if they do charge donuts for them, you will then see people complain that they cost too much, and/or "this game has too many premium items". Then they feel they should have been entitled to purchase the items with in-game cash or gotten it free like those of us that have the item. In game cash does not pay the bills for this game though.

Also this creates a "Santa's Little Helper, Barney" scenario, where you get a 'premium' item, with no "premium bonus". So those that did not know it was free before, would be upset that they bought a premium item that didn't offer a bonus %. They could however add that premium bonus % in, but again that's more code work.

Of course people (like myself) would complain that they cost donuts. We complain about most things that cost outrageous amounts of donuts. But why should that be treated any differently than new premium content? Should it just not exist?

theredjacket wrote:

JoshSherer wrote:
Now, if someone wants to present a GOOD reason why they should stay gone (being immature about being exclusive or claiming that EA cannot come up with an inventive way to bring episode tie-ins back are not good reasons). Good reasons for bringing them are extra money for EA (which in turn leads to a longer game for us), it's not fair to screw over new people, there is almost no additional work or coding to make items accessible that have already been designed and implemented, etc.

It's not fair to screw over "old" (for lack of a better word) people. While they are petty and childish there are people who will feel screwed over if everything is re-released and if you upset those people and they stop playing and EA stops making money then EA would be sad, because EA likes money. That's why, as I previously stated:

theredjacket wrote:

EA needs to keep the people frothing at the mouth for new Limited Time items while also keeping those people who are missing a few items happy by offering a slow trickle of previously released content.

It's simply the best business model, the model that makes them the most money.

Now your main error in argument:

"a GOOD reason why they should stay gone " a good reasons to return previously released content

EA is not interested in Good. EA is interested in cash and they make tons of it, obviously whatever they are doing is working to their favour so I’d assume they’ll just keep doing it.

Some might even say EA is evil, and that EA is the “Worst Company in America” (two years in a row) and EA obviously knows you, that’s why they referenced you in their game and honestly, what’s more fun than watching you squirm and complain because you missed out on items?

How would the older players be screwed over by re-releasing old items? It has zero effect on them, and no one is going to quit because of it. And if you find 1 psychopath out there who does quit because they are being bratty about older items being re-released, I will find you 20 million people who are going to pay real money for it. EA is a business and wants to make money. They don't care about what 500 bratty whiners have to say. They care about the wallets of 30 million people. But again, I'd love to hear how older players are being screwed by re-releasing old items.

JoshSherer wrote:

theredjacket wrote:

JoshSherer wrote:
Now, if someone wants to present a GOOD reason why they should stay gone (being immature about being exclusive or claiming that EA cannot come up with an inventive way to bring episode tie-ins back are not good reasons). Good reasons for bringing them are extra money for EA (which in turn leads to a longer game for us), it's not fair to screw over new people, there is almost no additional work or coding to make items accessible that have already been designed and implemented, etc.

It's not fair to screw over "old" (for lack of a better word) people. While they are petty and childish there are people who will feel screwed over if everything is re-released and if you upset those people and they stop playing and EA stops making money then EA would be sad, because EA likes money. That's why, as I previously stated:

theredjacket wrote:

EA needs to keep the people frothing at the mouth for new Limited Time items while also keeping those people who are missing a few items happy by offering a slow trickle of previously released content.

It's simply the best business model, the model that makes them the most money.

Now your main error in argument:

"a GOOD reason why they should stay gone " a good reasons to return previously released content

EA is not interested in Good. EA is interested in cash and they make tons of it, obviously whatever they are doing is working to their favour so I’d assume they’ll just keep doing it.

Some might even say EA is evil, and that EA is the “Worst Company in America” (two years in a row) and EA obviously knows you, that’s why they referenced you in their game and honestly, what’s more fun than watching you squirm and complain because you missed out on items?

How would the older players be screwed over by re-releasing old items? It has zero effect on them, and no one is going to quit because of it. And if you find 1 psychopath out there who does quit because they are being bratty about older items being re-released, I will find you 20 million people who are going to pay real money for it. EA is a business and wants to make money. They don't care about what 500 bratty whiners have to say. They care about the wallets of 30 million people. But again, I'd love to hear how older players are being screwed by re-releasing old items.

you know I love you josh. But there needs to be sum kinda rewards for early adopters of the game don't cha think?

sdv325 wrote:
I can see them bringing back the stuff that Android users weren't able to get as EA hadn't developed the game yet, but in the same sense if they bring it all back whether it is for cash or donuts it doesn't matter.

At the end of the day if they bring it back, they will make more money. They don't have to develop anything, just re-release the content and they will make more money from donut purchases plain and simple

We all know EA loves money, so just release all the missed content in stages lol

I agree totally also including the IOS users that started late as well.

As you can see that's not their main argument. They are trying to say people will be mad/upset which I see no reason over this especially if they also have another chance of buying the items in donuts or in game cash or free. For the items we can't have duplicate of then that's the only thing that they won't get because they already have them. For example you can't have 2 Georgous Grandpa skin so you just won't get that part of the update. Just like for Fat Tony after the build people got Fat Tony and people who already had Fat Tony, JUSt got the building pretty simple. Same with Sir-Puts-Alot.

I know this might be the next arugment for you guys to pick up, that its prolonging the regluar updates that it runs by just for older items to get rereleased for certain players. So here's a solution for example they recently are releasing updates more frequently. So if updates are every 2 weeks the first week the older "limited time"' items can rerelease. So that way the people not caring for the rerelease items doesn't have to feel upset because the people who have missed it, is prolonging their time to get the next new update because it will still be a consistent flow of updates. So EA wins and people missing them be can have a chance of getting them and the rest can buy the items that you can purchase more then one of. Now if they still get mad OMG god help you and please get a life.

Undaunted-001 wrote:

JoshSherer wrote:

theredjacket wrote:

JoshSherer wrote:
Now, if someone wants to present a GOOD reason why they should stay gone (being immature about being exclusive or claiming that EA cannot come up with an inventive way to bring episode tie-ins back are not good reasons). Good reasons for bringing them are extra money for EA (which in turn leads to a longer game for us), it's not fair to screw over new people, there is almost no additional work or coding to make items accessible that have already been designed and implemented, etc.

It's not fair to screw over "old" (for lack of a better word) people. While they are petty and childish there are people who will feel screwed over if everything is re-released and if you upset those people and they stop playing and EA stops making money then EA would be sad, because EA likes money. That's why, as I previously stated:

theredjacket wrote:

EA needs to keep the people frothing at the mouth for new Limited Time items while also keeping those people who are missing a few items happy by offering a slow trickle of previously released content.

It's simply the best business model, the model that makes them the most money.

Now your main error in argument:

"a GOOD reason why they should stay gone " a good reasons to return previously released content

EA is not interested in Good. EA is interested in cash and they make tons of it, obviously whatever they are doing is working to their favour so I’d assume they’ll just keep doing it.

Some might even say EA is evil, and that EA is the “Worst Company in America” (two years in a row) and EA obviously knows you, that’s why they referenced you in their game and honestly, what’s more fun than watching you squirm and complain because you missed out on items?

How would the older players be screwed over by re-releasing old items? It has zero effect on them, and no one is going to quit because of it. And if you find 1 psychopath out there who does quit because they are being bratty about older items being re-released, I will find you 20 million people who are going to pay real money for it. EA is a business and wants to make money. They don't care about what 500 bratty whiners have to say. They care about the wallets of 30 million people. But again, I'd love to hear how older players are being screwed by re-releasing old items.

you know I love you josh. But there needs to be sum kinda rewards for early adopters of the game don't cha think?

I've never owned a video game that rewards early buyers, and I own MANY video games. I didn't even have an iPhone in October. This isn't a reward, its just a punishment.

theredjacket wrote:

JoshSherer wrote:


How would the older players be screwed over by re-releasing old items? It has zero effect on them, and no one is going to quit because of it. And if you find 1 psychopath out there who does quit because they are being bratty about older items being re-released, I will find you 20 million people who are going to pay real money for it. EA is a business and wants to make money. They don't care about what 500 bratty whiners have to say. They care about the wallets of 30 million people. But again, I'd love to hear how older players are being screwed by re-releasing old items.

Once again, since you are struggling here, they are NOT literally being screwed over, but as you have seen throughout the life of this thread and the other threads created before you re-invented the wheel, there are people who will be upset just because they like the feeling of the exclusivity.

Agreed. And that is unbelievably childish. My answer to them is "too bad and grow up."

JoshSherer wrote:

GamerGD3 wrote:

JoshSherer wrote:
Now, if someone wants to present a GOOD reason why they should stay gone . Good reasons for bringing them are extra money for EA (which in turn leads to a longer game for us), it's not fair to screw over new people, there is almost no additional work or coding to make items accessible that have already been designed and implemented, etc.

I presented a reason. The limited items vary between 3 levels. Free (no currency), in-game cash, and donuts. The first 2 would require code changes to make them purchasable with donuts. There is code work since items are likely assigned to a "type" meaning free, purchasable, or premium purchasable (donuts). So it would be re-working the code on some/many of the items as they would need to be changed. When code changes, things break. When things break, they get more in flux of tickets with issues. So in turn by updating the code, they are liable for new issues, and creating additional problems for their support. You see many with how EA doesn't respond for weeks, especially on critical issues like the harps of death, lockouts, etc. This could blow up even more. More people that may drop the game entirely. This would be likely affect those of us that have the items, more than the ones purchasing the items.

They do have the option of just re-enabling them, and it would just be dumped into the inventory, or able for in-game cash - but then this doesn't make them money. This would only please players that missed it, and there's those that would be upset/mad that they are available again.

(I don't personally care if everyone has them or not, I'm just providing a reason as a counter-argument)

Yes, there is a little bit of additional coding to add them to the donut store. But that is minimal effort. They are designed. Their frames are created. Their function is built in. Their tasks have been made. Dialogue will not be required. They just have to code them into the premium shop. Sure it takes a little bit of work, but very little. The payout would be huge. Could it glitch? Obviously. But I have yet to see a glitch connected to adding something to the premium shop. And even if it did, what should they do, stop adding items to the premium shop on the chance that it may glitch? That's silly and you know it.

Agree it may be a little additional coding, but as a software tester, I can tell you little code changes can still cause issues/errors/problems/bugs however you want to describe it. I understand that all the properties and GUIs are there. Does EA test the game before updating it? Some would argue that they do not with a backlog of issues that have been present for a while, with new issues always arriving. This game is on many devices now and I'm sure some of them may not like the changes. Either way you put it, there's still a risk when changing existing content to be something else.

To get around this, they can simply copy the items and their properties, but simply update the currency and technically have a second 'version' of the item present in the game. This would probably be easier, but then you are also storing twice the data for a single item.

Also with all their anti-hacks they've been destroying, I wonder if they now see what has been purchased - meaning like newest premiums only (like Disco Stu, Nuclear barrel, NOT items that were purchased before a certain date). So I don't know if they see someone has a legit originally free item, or that someone found a hack to have the original. This might not even exist, but they might have started to track it to fight off the hacks.

GamerGD3 wrote:

JoshSherer wrote:
Now, if someone wants to present a GOOD reason why they should stay gone . Good reasons for bringing them are extra money for EA (which in turn leads to a longer game for us), it's not fair to screw over new people, there is almost no additional work or coding to make items accessible that have already been designed and implemented, etc.

I presented a reason. The limited items vary between 3 levels. Free (no currency), in-game cash, and donuts. The first 2 would require code changes to make them purchasable with donuts. There is code work since items are likely assigned to a "type" meaning free, purchasable, or premium purchasable (donuts). So it would be re-working the code on some/many of the items as they would need to be changed. When code changes, things break. When things break, they get more in flux of tickets with issues. So in turn by updating the code, they are liable for new issues, and creating additional problems for their support. You see many with how EA doesn't respond for weeks, especially on critical issues like the harps of death, lockouts, etc. This could blow up even more. More people that may drop the game entirely. This would be likely affect those of us that have the items, more than the ones purchasing the items.

They do have the option of just re-enabling them, and it would just be dumped into the inventory, or able for in-game cash - but then this doesn't make them money. This would only please players that missed it, and there's those that would be upset/mad that they are available again.

(I don't personally care if everyone has them or not, I'm just providing a reason as a counter-argument)

Sorry to break it to you, but your argument, while on the surface appears valid, isn't. Allow me to cite precedent.

Barney/the Bowlarama did not cost donuts, but is now available. For donuts.

Miss Springfield/Sleezy Motel did not cost donuts, but is now available. For donuts.

Tatum...you see where I'm going with this, I've quite sure.

If they made the Duff Racer available for donuts, people would buy it. Period. If people bought it, EA would make money. Period.

This. can. NOT. be. argued. It has already been PROVEN. People buy Tatum/Barney/Miss Springfield. There is a market for past items. If you don't believe me, just ask Allen Cox.