Pricing and reimbursement

[webnesto]

I agree that expecting Shuffle iT to take the financial burden of Making Fun's mistakes, does not make sense from either a legal or ethical standpoint.

I do however take issue with the $ I'm being "credited" being applied to what appears to be little more than a beta release.  Given that there are cards not yet implemented (Inheritance, Stash), no continued ability to play with mobile users (my primary play partner used a phone), and the copious amounts of user experience and functional bugs in place - I would actually say it is absolutely a beta release.

I've seen Hearthstone mentioned in some threads as a comparison to this release: which seems silly to me - Hearthstone was being produced by a company that had all of the resources necessary to create such a game AND the profit margins to do so at a loss until the product was perfect.  Plus that had an astronomically larger user base to leverage (from WoW). 

That being said, this release seems much rougher than one would expect for a pay-to-play game.  I know there's an argument to be made that this *is* free to play, but if my subscription has a monetary value (it does) and the product is not one that I would be paying for yet (I wouldn't), then it seems I'm being forced to pay for an unfinished product.

Which seems kinda lame to me.

[tufftaeh]

I know there's an argument to be made that this *is* free to play, but if my subscription has a monetary value (it does) and the product is not one that I would be paying for yet (I wouldn't), then it seems I'm being forced to pay for an unfinished product.

Which seems kinda lame to me.

How are you being forced to pay if you get this year for free without paying one Dollar? Seems kinda strange to me. If you don't like the gift you got, don't use it. Have some other fun and come back in a month or so to see if it then suits your requirements.

[webnesto]

I know there's an argument to be made that this *is* free to play, but if my subscription has a monetary value (it does) and the product is not one that I would be paying for yet (I wouldn't), then it seems I'm being forced to pay for an unfinished product.

Which seems kinda lame to me.

How are you being forced to pay if you get this year for free without paying one Dollar? Seems kinda strange to me. If you don't like the gift you got, don't use it. Have some other fun and come back in a month or so to see if it then suits your requirements.

Well the "gift of a year's subscription" seems like not much of a gift, if I'm being used as a beta tester.  It's more the appearance of such.  I do get that Shuffle iT doesn't have any real legal responsibility to have gifted us the subscriptions, but it did so for a valid economic reason: the volume of users they would have lost without some sort of concession would've seriously hurt the product.  No one will want to play if there is never anyone to match with.  So, it's not just out of the kindness of their hearts.

There are/were a myriad of ways that they could have better handled this.  In the welcome letter: note that the product is still in beta, give some sort of timeline of finished product release, for example.

Honestly I think this reflects more poorly on the license holder(s) than it does Shuffle iT.  They seem far too willing to (repeatedly) have their name attached to products released before being production ready.

I dunno... I was really looking forward to the change over... I thought some of the MF shortcomings would be improved upon... I'm finding myself soured on the product.  (For reference, I own all print expansions and had paid full price for all previous expansions in the MF version).

"If you don't like the gift you got, don't use it." seems rude.  I don't think I made hyperbolic or unfair criticisms of the product.

Are you an employee of Shuffle iT?  You seem to say things on the forum that makes me think you are.  If so, you're not representing your company very well.

[tracer]

Any employee of Shuffle iT would be denoted as such under their username.

You are not being used as a beta tester and it is not still in beta.
Software is constantly updated and fixed based on reports and suggestions from users. I can assure you that this is a much more finished product than it was during the actual beta testing period, and it likely never will be truly finished - updates will be made and bugs will be fixed; Making Fun was the same way until they stopped due to having lost the license.

[Stef]

You are not being used as a beta tester and it is not still in beta.

It is indeed no longer in beta, but I don't blame people for thinking it is. We have a long way to go - especially on some issues that have a large impact on the games look and feel (graphics, sounds).

Comparing this product to something like hearthstone is... ambitious. Apparently they built it with an exceptionally small team of 15 people in only 6 years... well we were with 2-3 people for one year. If people still expect the same result I can understand their disappointment. The harsh truth is that a lot of money was lost with all the failed Dominion Online trials we've had over the past several years.

Nonetheless I have faith in the future... now that we can actually sell subscriptions there will also be room to pay more people to get some great graphics, and when we add them over the next couple of months I think people will be positively surprised. The emailing was problematic at the start but the gameservers themselves easily handled the load and I think we have something here we can build upon. Time will tell.

[webnesto]

You are not being used as a beta tester and it is not still in beta.

It is indeed no longer in beta, but I don't blame people for thinking it is. We have a long way to go - especially on some issues that have a large impact on the games look and feel (graphics, sounds).

I work in tech, I know that "beta" is a matter of opinion and doesn't necessarily refer to any technical definition.  However, a product that has *significantly* less functionality than the standard set by a previous release and is still full of many untested/unidentified bugs should not be considered a release candidate.  It's pretty much an open beta.  Semantics I know, but significant when dealing with customer satisfaction.

As a user, if this is an open beta, I think the product is in great shape.  If this is considered a release worthy (i.e. *sellable*) product, then it is woefully lacking in features, design, and customer liaison.

[santamonica811]

I bought a car at Michaels Toyota in Fresno, CA years ago.  It broke down.  Now I should be able to go to Stevens Creek Toyota in San Jose and have them give me a new car since I paid for one and it no longer works.

This illustrates the flaw in your argument.  You didn't pay for the right to use Dominion for the rest of your life no matter who is providing it, you paid for the use of Goko/MK's Dominion product. That is now gone (broken down).  You didn't "already" pay for ShuffleIt's product, but they, in the interest of customer service, are giving you free use of their product for a limited time. 

We've all heard this argument before, and it stems from an emotional reaction where you feel that you should own the new product, not the legal reality.

This.

Not a great analogy.  Here is a different one:
You got to your first Fresno Toyota dealership to buy your car.  Instead of paying $25,000 for Model X, you instead pay 37,500 for the same car, for a lifetime of Toyota car use.  All good, for many years.  But then Toyota is bought out by, say Honda (or Rolls Royce, or whatever).  Now, you find out that your original "lifetime" warranty is worthless.  Yes, your fault for not reading the fine print of that contract you signed, where it said it was valid only re Toyota.

The fact that Honda is willing to give you a year's free lease on a replacement car is something, of course.  And maybe something that, strictly speaking, it was not legally required to do.  But you probably are not going to be super-happy with Honda, and since it's the only car dealership still around (Remember that Toyota was bought out), it's Honda that will get the brunt of your wrath.

Of course, it could have been part of the Toyota-Honda buyout agreement that all 'lifetime' warranties would be honored by Honda.  Or Honda could say, "Hey, it wasn't part of the agreement, but we'll grandfather all of you legacy buyers and your old agreements will be honored."  But unless Honda gets a crapload of bad publicity, there really isn't any business reason to turn down all that future renewal money.

I pissed away close to $100 buying (or overbuying, in retrospect) the game and all the expansions under the old ownership.  I am hopeful that, at the end of this year, I'll be given the option of buying future use for a vastly reduced amount.  I'd feel ripped off if I had to pay double, and probably would not elect to renew.  If enough people feel the same way, then I suspect that the new Dom. owners will listen, and will try to work with us.  If it turns out that only a few people are really that exercised about it, then I think that the message to us will be, "Hard cheese.  If you want to pay full price again, great.  If not, then we'll be sorry to lose your business with us.  Don't let the door hit you in the a** on the way out."  :-)

Market forces at work.  Alas.

[Jacob Marley]

Many auto dealerships are independently owned and operated, and simply have an agreement to sell the cars of a given manufacturer.  In my analogy, I assume that Michaels and Stevens Creek are independant dealers and are stand-ins for MF and ShuffleIt, and Toyota represents Rio Grande Games, so I think the analogy holds.  In any case, my point is that the benefit people lost when RGG took the license away from MF is not something that ShuffleIt is responsible for, but a lot of people here are blaming ShuffleIt.

[Polk5440]

Making Fun honored purchases made under Goko. It's not unprecedented in Dominion land.

I would totally pay again for a brand new version of online Dominion (and I did just pay for Adventures and Empires to support the new version), but honestly, it's easy to see where the complaints are coming from, given the current state of the new product. The complaints are not unreasonable.

[Polk5440]

You are not being used as a beta tester and it is not still in beta.

It is indeed no longer in beta, but I don't blame people for thinking it is. We have a long way to go - especially on some issues that have a large impact on the games look and feel (graphics, sounds).

Comparing this product to something like hearthstone is... ambitious. Apparently they built it with an exceptionally small team of 15 people in only 6 years... well we were with 2-3 people for one year. If people still expect the same result I can understand their disappointment. The harsh truth is that a lot of money was lost with all the failed Dominion Online trials we've had over the past several years.

Nonetheless I have faith in the future... now that we can actually sell subscriptions there will also be room to pay more people to get some great graphics, and when we add them over the next couple of months I think people will be positively surprised. The emailing was problematic at the start but the gameservers themselves easily handled the load and I think we have something here we can build upon. Time will tell.

This is great! Thanks for posting this, Stef. It gives me a lot of confidence that the future of Dominion is in good hands, even if the vision isn't 100 percent actualized at the moment.

[Angelbane]

I bought a car at Michaels Toyota in Fresno, CA years ago.  It broke down.  Now I should be able to go to Stevens Creek Toyota in San Jose and have them give me a new car since I paid for one and it no longer works.

This illustrates the flaw in your argument.  You didn't pay for the right to use Dominion for the rest of your life no matter who is providing it, you paid for the use of Goko/MK's Dominion product. That is now gone (broken down).  You didn't "already" pay for ShuffleIt's product, but they, in the interest of customer service, are giving you free use of their product for a limited time. 

We've all heard this argument before, and it stems from an emotional reaction where you feel that you should own the new product, not the legal reality.

This.

Not a great analogy.  Here is a different one:
You got to your first Fresno Toyota dealership to buy your car.  Instead of paying $25,000 for Model X, you instead pay 37,500 for the same car, for a lifetime of Toyota car use.  All good, for many years.  But then Toyota is bought out by, say Honda (or Rolls Royce, or whatever).  Now, you find out that your original "lifetime" warranty is worthless.  Yes, your fault for not reading the fine print of that contract you signed, where it said it was valid only re Toyota.

The fact that Honda is willing to give you a year's free lease on a replacement car is something, of course.  And maybe something that, strictly speaking, it was not legally required to do.  But you probably are not going to be super-happy with Honda, and since it's the only car dealership still around (Remember that Toyota was bought out), it's Honda that will get the brunt of your wrath.

Of course, it could have been part of the Toyota-Honda buyout agreement that all 'lifetime' warranties would be honored by Honda.  Or Honda could say, "Hey, it wasn't part of the agreement, but we'll grandfather all of you legacy buyers and your old agreements will be honored."  But unless Honda gets a crapload of bad publicity, there really isn't any business reason to turn down all that future renewal money.

I pissed away close to $100 buying (or overbuying, in retrospect) the game and all the expansions under the old ownership.  I am hopeful that, at the end of this year, I'll be given the option of buying future use for a vastly reduced amount.  I'd feel ripped off if I had to pay double, and probably would not elect to renew.  If enough people feel the same way, then I suspect that the new Dom. owners will listen, and will try to work with us.  If it turns out that only a few people are really that exercised about it, then I think that the message to us will be, "Hard cheese.  If you want to pay full price again, great.  If not, then we'll be sorry to lose your business with us.  Don't let the door hit you in the a** on the way out."  :-)

Market forces at work.  Alas.

Here is MY analogy.

I Buy a Toyota with all the bells and whistles to go off-road alone I don't want/need anyone with me cause anyone with me it came with a winch (campaign mode) if I get stuck. So I off driving the trails and all of a sudden my truck stops running. I have gas I have spark there is nothing wrong with it. Unbeknownst to me Toyota just sold the rights to the truck line to GM and a kill command was sent to my perfectly GREAT vehicle (at least to me I like it even if others don't). I then find out that in order to continue driving the trails I have to use a DIFFERENT truck does not have all the features that I am used to and really the only ones that matter to me (campaign mode) and to add insult to injury I have to pay ~50% of what I paid originally EVERY YEAR for the privilege.

Oh and as far as the first year free not on my account.

[Jacob Marley]

You are not being used as a beta tester and it is not still in beta.

It is indeed no longer in beta, but I don't blame people for thinking it is. We have a long way to go - especially on some issues that have a large impact on the games look and feel (graphics, sounds).

Comparing this product to something like hearthstone is... ambitious. Apparently they built it with an exceptionally small team of 15 people in only 6 years... well we were with 2-3 people for one year. If people still expect the same result I can understand their disappointment. The harsh truth is that a lot of money was lost with all the failed Dominion Online trials we've had over the past several years.

Nonetheless I have faith in the future... now that we can actually sell subscriptions there will also be room to pay more people to get some great graphics, and when we add them over the next couple of months I think people will be positively surprised. The emailing was problematic at the start but the gameservers themselves easily handled the load and I think we have something here we can build upon. Time will tell.

This is great! Thanks for posting this, Stef. It gives me a lot of confidence that the future of Dominion is in good hands, even if the vision isn't 100 percent actualized at the moment.

But Goko sold the license to MF when it folded.  ShuffleIt was awarded the license by RGG when the MF license expired so the Goko to MF transition is not a model for MF to ShuffleIt.

[Stef]

...really the only ones that matter to me (campaign mode) and to add insult to injury I have to pay ~50% of what I paid originally EVERY YEAR for the privilege.

Oh and as far as the first year free not on my account.

Many, many people bought a subscription at MF until the end of 2016, while thinking they were buying their idea of permanent card ownership. While I cannot be sure, I think the same applies to you. At least in their export your name was only credited with the "Base" expansion. Did you pay ~$5/month to them, or did you actually pay the full $100? If it's the latter, please send me a PM and we'll get it sorted out.

I am sorry we didn't manage to launch with Campaigns included. They are coming though.

[Panoptikus]

While I share much of the criticism regarding the interface of the current implementation, I think the subscription based model is very smart and reasonable. I just paid for 2 month to get the new expansions. It did cost less than a meal. I am not forced to renew my subscription. Let's call this the "Netflix" model of the digital economy. Why is this model smart? Because you constantly pay for a product that is constantly generating costs. You pay for a service not a physical product. MFs model was unfair (because it provoked expectations it could not fulfill) and doomed to fail.
Dont get me wrong: there is indeed much room for improvement- but the business model is solid and fair. I guess if the implementation survives 2017 most of us would be more than happy to pay a small amount of money for a service that is much better than the current incarnation.

[yed]

...really the only ones that matter to me (campaign mode) and to add insult to injury I have to pay ~50% of what I paid originally EVERY YEAR for the privilege.

Oh and as far as the first year free not on my account.

Many, many people bought a subscription at MF until the end of 2016, while thinking they were buying their idea of permanent card ownership. While I cannot be sure, I think the same applies to you. At least in their export your name was only credited with the "Base" expansion. Did you pay ~$5/month to them, or did you actually pay the full $100? If it's the latter, please send me a PM and we'll get it sorted out.

I am sorry we didn't manage to launch with Campaigns included. They are coming though.

Angelbane probably had subscription (unless he changed username or bought cards and the did not used them for 6 months).
His first game was: 2016/12/12 00:54
All Angelbane games:
http://gokosalvager.com/logsearch?p1name=Angelbane&p1score=any&p2name=&startdate=08%2F05%2F2012&enddate=01%2F06%2F2017&supply=&nonsupply=&rating=any&pcount=any&colony=any&bot=any&shelters=any&guest=any&minturns=&maxturns=&quit=any&resign=any&limit=500&submitted=true&offset=0