The Official Species Rerelease Discussion

rosaline_kaye • 29 July 2015 at 11:20 PM

@plague

preach

ok back to sleeping now

despair • 29 July 2015 at 11:23 PM

Better never than late, I'd say. Without exclusiveness the game lacks challenge snd thrill imo

netherling • 29 July 2015 at 11:26 PM

@despair
Its not like the site will go into disrepair. Eventually its going to get to the point where they're super rare again. Because of people who quit, hiatus and end up never coming back. And then other things.

despair • 29 July 2015 at 11:29 PM

Super rare...i'd say not. I know the value will go up again eventually, but then it'll go right back down.

I strongly prefer @bluewolf's idea of exclusive limited creatures.

iceiceice • 29 July 2015 at 11:29 PM

Alrighty, all we've been talking about is how we're for or against rereleases, but not a possible resolution. If we continue bickering, I think we'll just end up repeating ourselves.

So, if we were to rerelease, how are we going to do it?

People seem to be jumping onto nyms, macbots, or whatever. slow down.

Also, if you're against the idea, do you have any other suggestions?

okami • 29 July 2015 at 11:31 PM

I can't believe this discussion is still going at the rate it is xD I'm not going to actively join in at the moment though, as I'm sick from good ol' dehydration and feel terrible. All I'll say is that this site gave their word about past creatures being retired forever. And as for people who want things to "change for the better", as I'm sure most of us do, there's better ways to go about doing so than going back on ones word and rereleasing past creatures.

Edit:

@despair

Thanks x3

dawnfur • 29 July 2015 at 11:32 PM

@iceiceice

I liked the idea of event/quest

I've always been a fan of the valentine event, feed so much to get points and maybe a prize could be like a drem? Maybe there could be a limit..?

But that's just me. I'm not very creative. ._.

syndrome • 29 July 2015 at 11:36 PM

No chill, no chill.

despair • 29 July 2015 at 11:53 PM

@bluewolf

My point exactly. 😸 Jumping on the re-release boat seems to be everyone's first choice, haha.

veritaspunk • 29 July 2015 at 11:58 PM

@despair

of course, because it's either to re-release or don't ... "first choice" .. it's an either / or

What some are jumping to is either a full re-release or just cave creatures

yam • 29 July 2015 at 11:59 PM

@despair
@bluewolf

I have a question for you guys. Is it that you don't see a problem with how the site currently is, about older creatures having no outlet into the "Egg cave economy" and thus being not a part of the game anymore, or is it that you understand there's a problem but think a rerelease is not the answer because of eggcave's word?

despair • 30 July 2015 at 12:02 AM

@yam

A mixture of both, tbh. Re-releases aren't the answer. They said they wouldn't so instead they need to find a different way of doing things and from now on make it to where the slogans of creatures don't stress up and down nine ways to Sunday that it's your last chance to get them. Forever is forever, not a year and a half in an event puzzle giveaway.

yam • 30 July 2015 at 12:05 AM

@despair

I see. So say, hypothetically, eggcave made a public statement that they were thinking about rereleases in the future and that all creatures would be culpable and blah blah, for that once they would be going back on their word but it's also a public policy change: would you (and others who believe eggcave should stick to what they said) be ok with that, or would you say that should (regardless of whether or not it does) only apply to future creatures?

Sorry that might have been a long explanation, basically if eggcave made a public policy change that applied to past creatures as well.

netherling • 30 July 2015 at 12:08 AM

Whatever happens happens. A re-release is a very big possibility, and when/if it happens it'll be worked with. And everyone will get used to it eventually whether they like it or not. Just being real.

despair • 30 July 2015 at 12:09 AM

@yam

I say that they should stick to what they have said, point blank. Saying "Oh, and we're changing what we said in the past" is just as bad as lying, imo. Now, if they said future creatures might be subject to re-releases, that's a different story.

Still disagree with it a bit, but at least they admitted that a future re-release is possible.

netherling • 30 July 2015 at 12:12 AM

@despair
Sometimes things happen. People's opinions change and if they feel like a re-release should be discussed then they must have a reason.

yam • 30 July 2015 at 12:14 AM

Ok. Well, i think i've injected my two cents in here and hopefully it gets considered. This thread is really clogging up the livepulse tbh 😋 (just playing)

Just to summarize my view:

It seems that most people who are against it are because of eggcave's policy in the past (and not so much because of the decreasing rarity or whatever). I understand the point of view, but I don't agree with it because things change and you can't predict the future. And because this is an entertainment site with certain goals, it is inevitable that they'll have to play by ear sometimes to keep the majority of the population content with playing. Sure breaking a promise is generally bad, but I don't believe in absolute morality, and I think this is one of those cases where that rule doesn't apply because it'll benefit the majority of the players as well as the future of the site.

As for why a rerelease should happen, once again the rarity of some of the creatures is getting absurd and making this a site more about gaining access to some exclusive club for owning certain creatures instead of about communities and happiness and creative stimulation, which is not where I (personally) think the site should go.

Anyways, I trust that the admins will make the correct choice, whether or not it is my personal choice or not. Thanks everyone for helping me understand both sides!

despair • 30 July 2015 at 12:15 AM

@ami_utsukushii

Ok, so their opinions changed. That's all fine all dandy but their word didn't change.

But listen yall I'm getting sleepy so I'm going to hit the hay.

Tl;dr anything I said: Eggcave shouldn't re-release stuff for various reasons.

Have a good day everyone.

okami • 30 July 2015 at 12:36 AM

@yam

For me it isn't about values and rarity. I honestly couldn't care less about that, because values are all in the eyes of each individual user. And I am very much aware that some retired creatures seem to be very hard to ever obtain. It's just that if they decided to rerelease creatures from the past that they sold with slogans like "will be gone forever" it's false advertising and discredits anything the site says. I'm completely fine with future creatures being rereleased if they change the way those ones are advertised.

I feel like other options should at least be tried first, because rereleasing stuff doesn't seem like the answer to me. If nothing else works and rereleasing creatures is a serious option, then it should at least be cave ones only. That way the site wouldn't be completely going back on their word. Only somewhat. But still, it just doesn't seem like a solution. People will just end up demanding for more and more rereleases. Others who worked hard and spent a lot to make their coves what they are now will feel foolish because they traded so much for something that could now be somewhat easily obtained. There wouldn't be as much of a thrill in collecting and working towards goals because all one would have to do is just sit around and wait for creatures to be rereleased.

I'm going for the moment too though. Dehydration is taking a toll on me xP

yam • 30 July 2015 at 12:39 AM

@bluewolf

I understand the sticking to their word point.

As for not discrediting people's hard work, what if it happened in a way that only ever so slightly trickled creatures into the system? I mean, it's true in every system, whether game or real life, that the market moves up and down rather than keeps going up. I don't think we're talking about mass re releasing, but what about others' ideas of like a quest where at the end you got one random retired creature or something? So that you couldn't just like mass buy onny's or something like that.

Ok, go rehydrate yourself. Dehydration really sucks, I know from experience 😋

netherling • 30 July 2015 at 12:41 AM

Things are going to go with the majority, which will keep most people happy. I still support the re-release but I know in the morning there will be more debating. I'm taking a break. Peace.

okami • 30 July 2015 at 12:54 AM

@yam

I edited my previous post. I'll just copy that part here:
I feel like other options should at least be tried first, because rereleasing stuff doesn't seem like the answer to me. If nothing else works and rereleasing creatures is a serious option, then it should at least be cave ones only. That way the site wouldn't be completely going back on their word. Only somewhat.

So yeah. I think other things should be tried, and as a last option, rerelease some retired cave creatures in a way similar to what you described. If rereleasing happens though, I think it should just be limited to cave creatures, not cash shop. Because those creatures are and have been heavily advertised with slogans like "last chance before they're retired forever". That way people who believed those words won't feel dumb/cheated.

And yeah, it sucks a ton xP At my job I had to work outside in 92 degree weather for eight hours straight all by myself, doing things that at least 3 other people should've been helping with.

kschr26 • 30 July 2015 at 12:55 AM

Hello, everyone who may or may not be reading this!😸

I have seen so many for and against arguments, my mind is spinning! I have to say that after reading all these opinions and reasons, i have to say that i would most likely be on the fence about this subject.

I mean, if in moderation and control i think this could really benefit the community and give so many a great deal of joy❤️

But, certain species could lose value, and this could be a bad thing for some, who have spent so much time and money on their creatures! and it might cause people to leave the site or cause an uproar among people which would be really sad☹️

I have only been here for about 6 months and I have worked hard for my creatures, but I could also greatly benefit from this, so that's why this is such a big predicament and its so hard to agree with one side! but i'm gonna stick with the middle and say im for it and against it!😸

Edit: but I would absolutely love to get my hands on these; Yuki, Onny, tine, gobbler!

Id love to hear more opinions, so i will ping some people, sorry if you have already been pinged or don't like pings!
@emo_pattys
@Savanahall
@Scorpio
@mlpnko159
@ida92

dragonnn • 30 July 2015 at 2:47 AM

But for those against the possibility of creatures being re-realeased, who do happen to care about the value of original release dates versus later 'copies', maybe the original/older creatures could gain some sort of special status like the Star creatures, only, this status cannot be purchased from the Cash Shop Park and is limited to only those specific older creatures.

netherling • 30 July 2015 at 3:39 AM

@dragonnn
And maybe they can get a unique bonus and a few other things too. Something you can only have from an original, you cant buy it either

Deleted • 30 July 2015 at 3:41 AM

I'd like to point out something else, too.

I totally agree with what @maleficent said before.
Nobody forced people to pay so much for the creature they bought. They decided on their free will to spend money on it. They can't complain or blame the others who decided to make different choices If the market change.

To me, this kind ot attitude it's like a kid's complain.
Something like "My game broke! I can't play it anymore, so nobody should, too!" ... If that makes sense...

Honestly, I kind of understand where the ones complaining are coming from, as they paid and all... but just because they paid a lot, it doesn't mean they have the rights to decide what is right or wrong for other people as well. This is not an oligarchy, and while I do think that everyone should work hard for their coves, I also think and support the idea of things being, actually, fair and feasible for everyone.

Also, I think @Ian should do what he thinks it's right.
It's okay to listen to users' advices and all, but never forget, that's his site. He should do what he thinks it's right for it, even If that could bring some people to rant / complain.

As for me, I support re-relases done in a small amount / higher price / responsible way. And, honestly, If (and that's just an "If") that was to really happen, and people would complain... well, you're free to leave, If you don't like it.
People, open you eyes! Some prices are... just absurd. We need something to decrease the values of some creatures, and badly.

People who paid a lot for them shouldn't really complain, as they'd be given, too, a chance of getting another one for a lower price. Honestly, I see only people trying to make their own doubts into a problem, and to try to magnify the it even If there's no need to.

This told, I think nobody can be sure of what would happen. I honestly think that, before complaining, ranting and tossing the ball we should first give it a shot.
I mean, you can't know how a new dish taste without trying it first, I am right? And it passed a lot of time since the last time, so wouldn't you all give re-relased at least a chance to prove itself?

If something was to happen, that would be bad, it could be improved. But, it's stupid to immediately deny something without giving it a chance...

netherling • 30 July 2015 at 3:50 AM

@wererage
You make really good points. Its what I was trying to say, the thing about just giving it a chance and having an open mind. Some of the reasons are basically "I bought this and I don't want anyone else to have it unless they paid as much as me" if you put it simply. Like you buy a certain tv for... $4000, and years later its back in stores for $1000 for a limited time. Yes you earned the money and paid for it back when it was more expensive, but now that's it's back doesn't mean you complain to the store about its new price. More people have it yeah, but everyone who got it in the limited time can enjoy it too.

despair • 30 July 2015 at 3:53 AM

@wererage

I totally agree with what maleficent said before.
Nobody forced people to pay so much for the creature they bought. They decided on their free will to spend money on it. They can't complain or blame the others who decided to make different choices If the market change.

As stated numerous times,we are aware that noone "forced" us to trade anything. We did so because Eggcave said that the creatures would no longer be available ever. We traded for them because we trusted Eggcave and believed that the only way to now get the creature is to trade for it. If we wanted it, we traded for it. Eggcave said it was gone forever, so if we wanted it we sacrificed some stuff for it. Yeah, it's us to blame for trading it, but the cause is what Eggcave said.


Honestly, I kind of understand where the ones complaining are coming from, as they paid and all... but just because they paid a lot, it doesn't mean they have the rights to decide what is right or wrong for other people as well. This is not an oligarchy, and while I do think that everyone should work hard for their coves, I also think and support the idea of things being, actually, fair and feasible for everyone.

We're not being completely close-minded, just so you know. We've discussed releasing new creatures in limited supplies to help the new users and we've also suggested no longer using the "gone forever" slogan so that future re-releases would be possible.


Also, I think @Ian should do what he thinks it's right.
It's okay to listen to users' advices and all, but never forget, that's his site. He should do what he thinks it's right for it, even If that could bring some people to rant / complain.

I disagree. First of all, we support Ian and Eggcave. Obviously we don't have theright to control anything on the site directly, but I feel we definitely deserve input on matters such as these.

People who paid a lot for them shouldn't really complain, as they'd be given, too, a chance of getting another one for a lower price. Honestly, I see only people trying to make their own doubts into a problem, and to try to magnify the it even If there's no need to.

But that's...not even the problem We don't want to just get the same creature and it's all good. We don't want re-releases in the first place.



Ok now I really do need to go.

Deleted • 30 July 2015 at 5:34 AM

@despair

" We don't want to just get the same creature and it's all good. We don't want re-releases in the first place. "



That, to me, seems just like being close minded, actually.
Sorry for sounding rude but... well, I'll make an example.

Many users got their dream creatures working hard and all. I, too, had to overoffer and sell my souls for many creatures, too.
I put a lot of effort to get my foo / oscoas etc, and I really don't feel like I want another foo or another oscoa. So what? Just 'cause I don't want or need them, that gives me the right to prevent other users from getting a chance to get 'em as well? I don't think so.

Also, I want to state something important.
To the ones complaining just because that all revolves around money spent: You paid money, but that doesn't mean non-CC-users didn't spend anything to get their coves... they put effort and spent time, which is as important as money is[/i], at least speaking about a site like EC (time IS money saying, ahah).


But I agree on the slogan thing...
I think it should've been more appropriate something vague, like...

These are July's Cash Shop Monthlies! They are available through the end of July and, after that, they will disappear. Get yours now!

Disappear. Lol, that's just a poor example, but anyways...
I was thinking about something... like, I'd be against re-relases as well If they were to re-relases creatures just after some time those "disappeared". But, certain creatures were relased years ago, and relasing a bunch of them (for a price which is higher than the original, and in a limited amount, meaning also that an user can't get more than one, to prevent an user for hoarding all of them) after so many time has passed won't really hurt anyone, I think.
It would, instead, help us balance values a little.


However... I'm telling, re-relases would be good If done in a responsible way. However, I understand finding a way like that won't be easy and will take a lot of time, thinking and efforts. I, myself, can't still figure out a way how to make it fair for everyone, CC users included, of course...

Maybe we should, hypotetically speaking, try to find a way to make it work. Even If there are people who oppose the idea, we should focus on how make it work, since we alredy stated the pros and contros.

So, a question.

What do you think would be a good way to make re-relases work and be fair for everyone?

I'd really like to hear users' suggestions about that, actually. I don't really have a clue myself for now... but I'll think about it for sure.



PS: Sorry If the flow of my posts it's a bit messy...
I always have problems writing in english stuff. Bear with my errors and all. XD

noah • 30 July 2015 at 5:39 AM

I'd like to chime in as a user who joined just last year, but who has achieved many of my wishlist creatures over the course of that time, and is, for the most part, content with the way things are. What frustrates me as a player is the amount of coves I come across which have the sorts of rares people would absolutely die for, and yet the owner has long since abandoned, leaving their creatures to languish for the rest of time, as they seemingly all go to the trouble of making them immortal before they completely peace out. I'd say it's pretty obvious that if more than, say, a year has passed, the player probably isn't coming back, and there's a lot more good that could be gotten from offering those creatures to active players in some way (through the Oasis or competitions), preserving the rarity and value as no new creatures are being generated- just redistributed to people who would actually appreciate them.

To be brief, I've voted against re-releasing retired Cave and Cash Shop creatures, because on a personal level, I know what it's taken to achieve the cove I currently have, and I think if someone is able to simply buy/generate the same creatures outright, then it completely undermines the steps I've taken to build something from nothing, and pursue every creature on my wishlist knowing that it will be difficult, yes, but never, never impossible. I've proven to myself time and time again that it doesn't matter when I joined, because I can earn wishlist creatures through hard work, and know that the feeling is a thousand times greater than if I were given the opportunity through the Cave or Cash Shop. I enjoy the challenge, and would be disappointed if that were to change.