I wonder how bad all the @Riot's want to tell us off.

First Riot Post
Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

WizardCrab

This user has referred a friend to League of Legends, click for more information

eCommerce Associate

Follow WizardCrab on Twitter

02-18-2014
30 of 63 Riot Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blaine Tog View Post
To make up for the lower price by selling higher volume, and use the threat of an imminent price increase to create a false scarcity. In other worse, the number of people who would be willing to pay 1600 RP for a skin is very likely more than double the number of people willing to pay 3200 for one, and people who would normally not be interested in paying even 1600 might decide to spring for it if they feel like they have a chance at a deal by buying now. If you know the price is going up significantly and have been told it won't ever go down again, you might be more inclined to put up your money now. While it's possible you might've gotten those sales like a year in the future if you'd discounted the skin later, that's a years less time you would've had those people's money and it's entirely possible they might've decided they didn't want the skin after all by then. By holding a skin's one and only sale out of the gate, you put pressure on people to give you their money now even if they don't necessarily want the skin just because changing their mind later would be prohibitively expensive.

I don't agree with the claim that Riot's greedy, but there are very sound financial tactics behind pricing Ultimate skins the way you guys have priced them so far. Are you telling us you guys actually lost money on PFE, when everything's said and done? I was under the impression it was one of your greatest individual successes.
It WAS one of our greatest successes. I'm just trying to say that it wasn't profit maximizing. We left money on the table. We could have created the same effect that you described with a "1 time only sale" any time after release. Hell, a day after release would have made us more profit. Obviously there are other ramifications, but in terms of profit maximizing strategies, this was not it.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Eniolas

Member

02-18-2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by WizardCrab View Post
Maybe a little :P Thanks for the reminder though

I just want everyone to understand what we do and say here at Riot! If only I could have every player follow us around for a day :/

i would freaking love to follow you guys around a bit. i'd help the best i could too, even if it was just picking up coffee or something. i love this game, and i enjoy the red responses even if they are a bit vague sometimes, understand that most game companies don't get on their own servers at all.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

WizardCrab

This user has referred a friend to League of Legends, click for more information

eCommerce Associate

Follow WizardCrab on Twitter

02-18-2014
31 of 63 Riot Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechanical Heart View Post
Yeah, well, oh well. If you don't trust someone, there's nothing they can say to convince you.

He probably told you the truth, but you're just too stubborn to accept it. Things have to fit the way you believe the world is. Even if it's not that way.


Man do I love this post.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

MetalGearTeemu

Senior Member

02-18-2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatalfugus View Post
Thanks for being so involved in this thread, Morello and wizardcrab. Please don't forget about us in favor of the community beta. Not everyone on GD is spiteful, and I can't even figure out the community beta or enjoy its format, so the only red love I see is here.
I don't think that will be the case since the top bumped post on the community beta landing page is a post talking about how much the player base hates community beta.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Haha same YOLO

Senior Member

02-18-2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by WizardCrab View Post
It WAS one of our greatest successes. I'm just trying to say that it wasn't profit maximizing. We left money on the table. We could have created the same effect that you described with a "1 time only sale" any time after release. Hell, a day after release would have made us more profit. Obviously there are other ramifications, but in terms of profit maximizing strategies, this was not it.
There's a difference between maximizing profit and being "nice."

You made boatloads of money, and the ROI was clearly great enough that you went forward with a second skin following the same process. I really wouldn't consider it Riot being nice, since you guys made a huge profit regardless, and the difference would be minor.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

WizardCrab

This user has referred a friend to League of Legends, click for more information

eCommerce Associate

Follow WizardCrab on Twitter

02-18-2014
32 of 63 Riot Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellioning View Post
I dunno. I think the death of 750 skins, the complete lack of recolors, and the slow update schedule are pretty good points to complain about. Sure, they're not exactly unique at updating slowly, especially compared to what we're used to, but it's still irritating.

Still waiting on a new Skarner/Karma/Yorick skin, by the way!
Yes, if you want 750s, recolors, and skins for certain champions, please continue to tell us! We want/need to hear what the players want.

You just have to not get angry if we determine that just because you as an individual want it (or even a group of like-minded forum goers), it doesn't mean that everybody in the world wants it or that it's the best direction for our game. But please keep asking for it.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

DeathByGrenade

Senior Member

02-18-2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by Haha same YOLO View Post
You actually don't understand.

YOUR playing adds value to the game, because the people that play for free give incentive to those that pay money to play, since they have OPPONENTS.

That's how F2P games work at their core. The community is largely created by people who buy nothing, but the business is maintained by those that do. The game wouldn't exist if there wasn't incentive through FREE TO PLAY. If everyone had to pay, the community would be very small, and people purchasing goods would be part of a smaller subset and not want to participate as much since the community IS smaller.

You don't understand that free to play players provide value. You aren't getting it for free. You make the game work since people need opponents to play.


Essentially you're saying I "work" for Riot by providing them with a player in their game and for other players to play against. While that's true, you're not placing any value on the joy I get out of the game. While yes, we provide them with value since they'd be nothing without us, what they provide us in return is my "paycheck" for "working" for Riot.

If I were playing something I didn't enjoy and getting nothing in return, this would be totally logical, however it is not.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Haha same YOLO

Senior Member

02-18-2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeathByGrenade View Post
Essentially you're saying I "work" for Riot by providing them with a player in their game and for other players to play against. While that's true, you're not placing any value on the joy I get out of the game. While yes, we provide them with value since they'd be nothing without us, what they provide us in return is my "paycheck" for "working" for Riot.

If I were playing something I didn't enjoy and getting nothing in return, this would be totally logical, however it is not.
No, I never said you are "working" for Riot. You are providing VALUE for Riot, even if you are getting to play the game for free.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Morello

Lead Designer

02-18-2014
33 of 63 Riot Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by FatedTitan View Post
But how do you know that there will be mid-long term gains? You can't prove that there will be gains in the long run. You could rework a kit that people enjoyed at one point into something else, believing that it will be better for that champ in the long term, but it end up being poor for the long term. It could ruin the champion in the long term.

Let's pretend that the Xerath rework turns out to be a massive failure (I don't think it will be) and two years down the line, Xerath is the least popular champion by far and is just not cutting it. Will there be ANOTHER rework? What if the community is still saying "Won't you just bring old Xerath back?" Will you bring it back? Or are things that are gone permanently removed?

What about Trundle? All Trundle players asked for was some QoL upgrades, that he got with his update, but then we got this complete character remodel and retcon that no Trundle players asked for. The reasons for those changes have been stated time and time again, and I understand Riot's position on the matter whether I agree with it or not, but let's look at Trundle now. Trundle has become a popular top lane champ because of the current meta shift. He counters the tanky top laners, which gives him more popularity. But let's take it back a few weeks. Before Trundle was brought into popularity to counter these tanky top laners. Where was Trundle sitting then? In the Bottom 10 of popularity. Because it was never about how he looked, it was about the problems with his kit.

I guess what I'm getting at is this. You can't determine if something will be healthy mid-long term at the beginning. What do you do when it turns out to not be healthy? What if Trundle was still being complained about heavily (I know he's not, but trying to make an example) and players were asking if they could have old Trundle back? Would you give it back, or would it be "too bad"?
You can, because healthy is based on mental models of the game as opposed to tested results in many cases. This will never be "final" because League changes a lot on its own, and we learn all the time by making new models. So, to see it as "done" is the fallacy, where the actual path is one of slow change towards a set of values.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

SmokingPuffin

Senior Member

02-18-2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by Haha same YOLO View Post
I run a business. So that's a silly argument.
Fair enough. Let me pivot to "man, would I not want to work at your company."

The reason I said it is because I have never met a businessperson who sounds like you do about business.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Haha same YOLO View Post
IF I'm being "Nice," it's generally for a larger motive. I'll be nice to potential sponsors because I want their business, and I can offer them something they want. That involves either free advertising or included value-addeds for no cost. Doesn't mean I know that there's an ulterior motive - KEEP them as a CUSTOMER.
If you keep following this line of thinking, you'll conclude that "being nice" isn't possible. Not just for businesses, but for people. Almost every nice thing that people do has some ulterior motive. Even the quintessential example of altruism, giving money to charity, is usually done in part because it makes the giver feel good.

Back on the concrete example of Pulsefire Ezreal, I'm pretty sure that Riot wanted to price it lower because they wanted to widen the audience and get more people to enjoy their work as quickly as possible. It's natural for the creator of something cool to get value from showing off their creation and wanting people to like it.