Insider Update

Sept 26, 2017 6:59:11 GMT -5 SATmaster728 said:

Sept 26, 2017 6:54:05 GMT -5 Russel said:

Yeah, Hanlon's Razor at its finest

I guess Pixonic just was not aware of the whole "rates rant" going on.

well, now there is only the choice of the person. you have the numbers, good luck saying it isn't your choice 

Thanks Russel . I am sure they were aware of what was going on. Their marketing and BI department would be close to being reckless if they were not monitoring player sentiment after such a major change. Also feed back is provided by various parties that have a closer relationship with Pix as was mentioned by super-hero in another post.

Satmaster,
I don’t think anyone said that pix was lying about the drop rates. No one can accuse pix of that because no one has the information to make such a statemetn. What people were saying is that no one but Pix new what the drop rates were and that they could alter it as they wished. That in turn provides for different returns which the poor punters are totally unaware of and thus they cannot make an informed decision (then the words of predatory behaviour, scam…..alike followed).

This is a small step in the right direction but its not enough.

And thanks for changing your position on the matter as you are the living proof how people can be manipulated by such a mechanism and think they have the right answers while they have next to nothing. love to hear your feedback (not being a smart arse or trying to be sarcastic) 

Lets look at the facts and the information presented by Pix and work through the information properly to avoid Hanlon’s razor related circumstances. I will use the bronze chest as an example and analyse the common items which make up 93% of that chest (don’t have the time to do the rest but makes little diff in the outcome if i was to do the math for the whole chest). There is one super critical information that has not been presented which is the average pay out per each item category. The pay out ratio can have a humongous variation in terms of what a punter gets despite of the information presented. How much? Look at the table below (for the common items in the bronze chest).

So what does all this mean? Well in real terms you could spend US$100 for 13,000 keys and get back anything between 1,300 keys and 5,200,000 keys. While the potential variation for the keys is large (400) overall the variation for the items analysed is 203.

So that means. You gamble US$100 and could end up with between US$10 and US$ 203,000 worth of Items as per Pixonics currency conversion mechanism (ps. Was doing the maths and the table on the fly so there could be mistakes and definitely presentation realted issues – but the overall point is still there)

So, the table presented does not provide sufficient information by the longest stretch of the imagination for a punter to determine the pay out ratios. All it does is provides the odds for a category of items. Readjusting what is inside the item categories can huuuumongusly vary the payout ratios without anybody realising that. So one day your 13000 keys are worth $20 and the next day they are worth $250 in real terms.

Next pix needs to publish the average payout ratio per item. Then publish the information to all users (even if it’s a link before you buy keys) and finally change the spinning wheel graphics or remove it all together. At that point in time we have stepped into a reasonable territory in my opinion. still don't like gambling in a game but not sure if that battle is worth fighting.

                       %                  Low         High             Variation         Proportional Variation
Equipment      4.40%          1                 20                     20                     0.9

Eq. Comp     13.20%          5             70                          14                     2.0
Rob. Comp     19.43%        5             70                         14                      2.9
Ag                 10.02%         5,000       200,000                 40                     4.3
Au                 6.05%              3         1,000                         333                 21.8
Keys             39.56%          1             400                         400                  170.8

                    92.66%
                                                                                    Poterntial Variation 202.7

Edit: almost forgot. pix also needs to publish the probability of winning the dash bots as that is the stuff that a lot of customers are after. hiding the propability within a category us hopeless in terms of informing people of their chances of getting such a bot. dare I say misleading. you could have 100 lancelots and 1 dash bot in the category one day and 1 lancelot and one dash in the same category the next.

Sept 26, 2017 8:03:34 GMT -5 ⓣⓡⓘⓒⓚⓨ48 said:

Sept 26, 2017 1:41:12 GMT -5 hyderier said:

There's no "ultimately" in this issue. We are responsible for our actions, but we are also responsible for other people, to the degree that is reasonable.

I think it's quite reasonable to expect a company like Pix to be responsible enough to not run a deceptive (showing completely false odds of winning) money grabbing scheme such as the BM chests. And I think modern society and market economy relies on buyers being able to reasonably trust sellers. Pix has broken this trust by implying they are selling good chances to win, when they are selling really low chances. People need to be able to have some basic level of trust, and society needs to enforce (via laws etc) business practices which can maintain this trust, because word getting around about scams etc isn't enough alone.

In mobile app economy, laws don't quite work (yet, if ever), so other mechanisms need to pick up the slack. Therefore Pix deserves every Appke refund, and every rant about their bad business practices.

Agree to disagree. 

I don't think that they were in any way NEAR as bad as other games I have played that have chance components.  And, again, for people who say it's "gambling" and should be regulated... it isn't.  It may be in the strict sense of "I am gambling for that Dash bot...", true.  But legally?  I don't think it will be very easy to get the protections/penalties involved in laws for casinos and such ported into Mobile games.  Again, Virtual goods are not the same as MONEY.  The GOV treats things a bit differently when they don't get a tax cut off of it... Just sayin. 

I ain't saying how they (Pix) do things is all Kosher... but I don't think some player who KNOWS how bad the BM is, that spends 1k to 1.5k, willingly, gets the bots (and gold and whatever else) they want, then gets the refund, is right.  They are NOT right, they are wrong.  THEY are scammers.  They never had to spend a dime and won't be banned from the game so they keep it all.  They can say that they are sticking it to the man.  Making Pix pay.  But they are as bad or worse than Pix for doing that... unless they put down the game entirely, afterwards.  If they keep playing... it's dishonest and akin to theft.  I know it is not theft unless Apple has it stated in their TOS that once something like that happens they need to stop playing (which I doubt that they do), but it reeks as bad as anything they can accuse Pix of.  It may be virtual goods... true, but by doing that they show themselves to be hypocrites.   I am not sympathetic to anyone who games the system for whatever reason.  Pix, players, whatever.  But that's just me.  *Shrugs*

Anyway.... doesn't matter... moving on from that and other moral arguments and to the point of the thread... it seems Pix is listening from various pieces of news released.  Which is why I say "wait and see" for the changes to come... I have heard that Ag payout may be increased, as well, to help with the new levels (no details nor confirmation... but it seemed both likely and credible.)  Time will tell.

Maybe the torches and pitchforks can go back into storage for a little bit?  And yes, I know about the point distribution changes and until I hear their reasoning or excuse or whatever, I wait to scream.  It very well could be to get the leagues proportioned differently in prep for the 3.2 changes.  Or it could be a bug... Unless we get direct word, one way or the other, guessing is all we can do.  

Ah well, 

Stay devastating to reds my friends.

IMO, YMMV

I think the whole situation is much simpler than how you are looking at it.

Most people buy keys to gain access to new content and especially the dash bots. The customer pays real money and gambles for the desired prize. The key word is “gambles” and it is gambling by any possible definition. In this case its money for virtual goods/services. Virtual goods and services are just as real as the apples and strawberries you buy in a supermarket or the virtual server that this forum is hosted on. Virtual goods are not the same as MONEY. Money is required to purchase virtual goods/services.

In this case the customer is encouraged to gamble by in game mechanisms, marketing and very importantly has no visibility of his/her odds. The customer is also misled by the fake spinning wheel. The system is open for manipulation as the odds are obscure. The customer is deprived the chance to align expectations to risk as a result of the previously mentioned items. By removing the customers’ ability to align expectation to risk the advantage goes to the house.

Such conditions and mechanisms are not legal in other industry segments nor should they be. Virtually all semi developed and developed societies have laws and regulations to stop such practice for the protection of the masses. The protection mechanism is supported by the majority through the political process.

The gaming industry is getting away with it because regulations haven’t caught up with it just yet. It should not be up to the players to put pressure on the developers for transparency and fairness after the fact to prevent such future behaviour. Developers should have boundaries and limits in which they can operate (just like any other industry) otherwise they can invent mechanisms to take unfair advantage of people as evidenced by the BM.

Because developers are hard to control that does not mean they should not be controlled. Taxes related matters are different as that is controlled by the relevant taxation system where the company resides.