30 November 2016, 1:49 PM
with the staff posting their official Q+A for egg cave V3 it seemed like the perfect time to post something @fainne_24 and i have been working on for a while. in the Q+A someone asked about creature re-release and the answer was DEFINITELY NEVER AGAIN…but maybe in quests? a glimmer of hope i’m jumping at! we would like to see creature rereleases so we’ve put together this post to explain why we think they’re so important and propose a method we’re really excited about.
egg cave is an adoptables site for collecting and raising creatures. before i joined the site in july i read everything i could about egg cave and most of it was focused on the raising creatures part, but in truth that takes a backseat to the collecting part of the game almost immediately. there’s around 60 cave commons, even if a new player wants every single one it doesn’t take terribly long to find all of them. it took me ten days to get all the cave commons i wanted. but i just wanted more! i was trying to earn ec feeding big coves full of creatures i wanted but was years too late to catch or buy.
old and new players
i think there are some distinct player groups on the website, and the group that has most of these really valuable pets are in a difficult position. these are dedicated players that have been around a while, since they’ve been around for so long they have a lot of great stuff so usually their wishlists are comparatively short. that means they’re looking for higher values on their creatures. the problem is that these people have most of the old creatures that new(and by new, i basically mean the majority) users are looking to get. new users don’t have the resources that these older users do, so a lot of the times price estimates of a few k cc are pretty much impossible. but that’s what these owners legitimately need for a trade to be worth it to them, it’s not that they’re trying to make high prices on purpose. also sometimes creatures are priced according to age, so their price can increase(sometimes by the month!) while you’re saving up for them. that’s arguably a fair way to price things, it just makes it even more difficult for people without a lot of stuff to trade with. so the gap keeps growing. currently only 11% of the creatures of the game are available and not incredibly rare (like asteroid or thief shop eggs). new players try to build their tradeable things by collecting cave monthlies but new cave monthlies are on a completely different price tier. i see a lot of accounts with huge collections of uft cave monthlies that still don’t add up to the value of one creature on their wishlist. it’s sad to see people put little hopeless comments under their wishlist about how they don’t expect it to happen. a friend of mine even auctioned off all of her trading creatures because she was giving up on trading for her wishlist. people don’t put things on their wishlist just because they’re rare and valuable, but because they really like that creature. so it’s especially disappointing when someone who seems like they have everything is putting a big price between them and the creature they adore. but like i tried to say above…those prices don’t come from meanness or greed…but that doesn’t stop users with rare and popular creatures from getting harassed. even me, pretty much a newbie still!
egg cave economy
the value of old rare pets is currently so overinflated that their user-led reintroduction can flip the whole egg cave economy on its head. a while ago an user resurfaced to auction off some very rare creatures. this permanently changed the values of cc and ec on egg cave; as the bids climbed higher i began to see mass cove/item clear outs for ec and discounts on cc that have lasted til now. i think it is more usual to have cc be rare and sought after; though i have not been playing this game for long, i get lots of requests to trade cc from people whenever i make even a small reference to maybe having some. basically since everyone wants the same thing the economy either goes one way really hard or the other, preferring ec or cc based on what rare creatures are currently going for in trades or auctions. i think if these values were more stable the game would be less stressful, although these huge shifts definitely show just how valuable these old creatures are! i think giving the egg cave team the ability to moderate the releases of these creatures allows them to be planned and regulated, so users don’t give up on the creatures they want most.
but how to do it? which creatures? when? we’ve discussed many many different possible scenarios, but there’s one that i think answers all of these questions. every two weeks, egg cave opens a round of submissions. users submit the creature they’d like to see return the most. users are allowed to discuss their submissions and collaborate with other users. after submissions close, the five creatures submitted the most times are put to vote. the voting also lasts two weeks. users cannot submit or vote from side accounts. the winner is released in the cash shop for a two week period, a bi-monthly email i would really look forward to! hopefully all of these rounds overlap, so there’s a chance to submit, a chance to vote, and a new retired creature available in the cash shop park twice a month for ~25 creatures rereleased each year. that might be a fever dream, maybe one creature per month is more reasonable. there is lots of tweaking to be done! regardless, i think this method helps the supply match the demand and gives users a constructive outlet to help them build their dream coves if this is completely the worst idea you’ve ever heard say so and we’ll post some other ideas if people like this idea we can expand on it with some more thoughts we have on how it would work! thanks for reading and please let us know what you think!
*fingers extra crossed @ian reads this*
30 November 2016, 3:00 PM
@spectaclenest wow, I honestly love what I just read. You and @fainne_24 did a lot of thinking and planning there. I support everything you wrote and if I come up with any ideas, I'll surely post them in this topic. I'm a big supporter of the creature re-release and I hope that @Ian and the moderators read this topic and take part in the discussion.
30 November 2016, 5:51 PM
Nice, thoughtful post
I've been around for a few years now and have seen this topic come up time and time again. I support re-releases and still do, if they ever do occur. However, the more I think about it, the more I can see why it's such a controversial issue to begin with.
Unfortunately, we have to take into consideration the players that have been here far longer than we have. Creatures that players own just because they have been here from the beginning or that some players have spent tons of resources and months, if not years, seeking to obtain just suddenly being given out?
Whether it happens or not, doesn't matter to me since I'll gladly capitalize or keep the re-releases should I get my hands on any.
What would be nice was if there were more "free"/LE creatures released that actually gain value. An example of this was when the Weggy was released a few years back for the easter egg hunt. CSP creatures from 2011 were showing up the TC and users, new and old alike, who were willing to trade theirs were able to acquire some very valuable pets It was a nice to see.
30 November 2016, 6:11 PM
Hi. I support re-release of old creatures, too. On Dec. 11, I celebrate six years here and I still don't have that Onny, I so very much want, while there are coves that I could name that sit unattended for three, four years with those rare creatures just forgotten.
I wish they were ALL in the Oasis! If that isn't an option then I'd like to be able to win them in the new Quests or have a monthly raffle. Or, an annual raffle. I don't like the fact that I'd have to give up (trade) all of my lovely old creatures just to get one Onny. I'm sorry, but to me that is just too much to ask (for me). Everyone differs in their opinions, of course.
This is a pleasant post full of ideas. I enjoyed reading your collaboration of ideas. Thank you!
Now, I ask how many OLD players are actually active? How many coves have sat for years without logging in? I'm guessing the number is large. That is the sad part of rare creatures. They aren't in the economy. I've always thought that you should have to log in at least ONCE a year to continue on Egg Cave. That's me!
Re-release or not, I'm here to stay as long as the good Lord allows me to be able. It's good to have conversation and ideas.
I look forward to Version 3. I can say I was here for Version 1 and Egg Cave has come a long way. It will be nice to have more games to play!
30 November 2016, 7:56 PM
thank you both so much for posting!
@element i absolutely agree that we have to consider the older players, but if we only consider one group the game's player base will have trouble growing and retaining new users. i'm looking forward to hearing from older users and why they might be wary of rereleases.
i'm interested in the Weggy release, it sounds like a great time to be around! has there ever been another creature released that had that same sort of effect? this summer when the Leep was released it seemed to have virtually no effect on the economy, so perhaps it's very creature-dependent.
@novrain62 to me, it seems like most of the eggs i want are rotting away in inactive accounts! you've hit the nail on the head, if these creatures were around consistently their prices wouldn't be so unobtainable for us. a once a year log in minimum is a great idea! i would love to see more users stick around or even come back to the game; i wonder if anyone would come back to the site to nominate, vote for or buy rereleased creatures.
raffles are fun but i'm so anxious i hate the element of chance lol! would you prefer the chance to buy raffle tickets for a creature or the chance to buy that creature? i admit my voting idea was a bit inspired by your tireless onny-seeking, as that bun seems pretty extinct for all intents and purposes.
thanks again for contributing! it means so much! would either of you participate in the suggestions and voting?
30 November 2016, 8:39 PM
I already voted, of course.
I just think that if it continues to be impossible to get older creatures, then Egg Cave loses players. Why bother if you cannot attain what you'd like? I understand the frustration for some. There are many many empty coves on this site; many! I wonder if those will be deleted?
I assume people quit because they can't compete with those of us that are older players. There are still many creatures I don't have from the past.
There was a click exchange outside of Egg Cave that was fabulous. It was connected to Egg Cave, but at another site. You could earn different colored raffle tickets and then buy entries for creatures. That was so much fun! I thought it was very successful but the person(s) who ran it, quit.
30 November 2016, 8:41 PM
Just saying that there has to be compromise between supporters and non-supporters of re-releases. If you search, you might find an official (I think?) locked topic from a few years back where we were allowed to discuss whether re-releases should happen or not. Things got heated pretty quickly :/
But I do agree that if things stay the same, retaining new users might become very difficult. I actually almost quit myself the first month I joined when I heard that Nyms were worth 10k CC ($100?!), but ended up staying when someone was kind enough to trade me one for a fraction of its "value" a week later.
Since I joined back in 2013, I haven't seen any other creature have that sort of effect. The circumstances surrounding the Weggy is probably why things happened the way they did. Higher difficulty finding easter eggs to complete the hunt, hidden stages in archives, insane amounts of stats to evolve, limit of only 1 prize per user. Leep were distributed from a practically unlimited source for a limited amount of time. Some creature designs are more popular than others, but long story short: supply and demand...
1 December 2016, 1:52 AM
I'd like to thank @element for giving awareness regarding this topic. And to @spectaclenest I believe I was the one who asked about the re-releases lol.
The topic you both are looking for is here. Opinions vary, but looking at the poll, an overpowering 133 votes of re-releasing CSPs and Cave Creatures are widely supported among users -- 5 times more than the number of people who think only Cave monthlies should be re-released or re-releases should not be considered at all.
I honestly have nothing to add but fully support to this idea.
We can't just focus on a niche of users and ignore the status quo, rather the general well-being of the whole site. I think a lot of people are going to continue playing EC with the presence of re-releases, instead of leaving -- which is something non-re-releases would generate upon frustrated members regardless of their experience in the game.
Still though, it's really mind-boggling to come up with an idea that would both satisfy the arguments of the fors and the againsts.
I mildly agree with how you and @fainne_24 (you again! xD) sketch the concept of bringing creatures back. There are flaws, I guess, I'm just not smart enough to point them out. xD But I think it'd be good to start small, accompanied by the popular consensus, in the most delicate and unerring way o.O
- As with Cave monthlies or anything that was obtainable from the Cave, they would be introduced from time to time (and we need to endanger some prevalent commons right now -- i.e. Skreel, Caiman, Gode, Puffup, Crabbert, Obarn, Flor, Spidet, etc) to bring the older ones back in?
- New event/quests should be introduced with the reappearance of old plot creatures, CRWs, Easter Egg Hunt (Luskrull, Fangtharp, Rousel, Beweg, Olimpt, Eyleymo, Goldox, etc -- so many... ) -- though the rarity and popularity factor have to be heavily accounted for in this situation.
- For CSPs, this one's tough because it involves real money, but I think your way of carrying it out would be just about right (the popular vote).
I don't know, my logic doesn't make sense, but I just want to share my thoughts. Thank you so much for bringing this up!
1 December 2016, 1:52 AM
@novrain62 i'm so sorry for wording my question unclearly! what i meant was if egg cave implemented this type of idea with users voting on what creatures would return to the cash shop would you want to participate in suggesting creatures to be rereleased and voting on suggestions?
i'm completely in agreement on the huge effect creature availability has on player retention. i think @element 's recollection of their first month here is reflective of that too!
no need to apologize, i'm enjoying reading your responses and i appreciate your input so much
i have seen the other discussion forum and i encourage anyone else who wishes they could post in it to chime in here
@sony you've brought up something important that i completely overlooked, that creatures should be reintroduced the way they were originally released. thank you thank you! i think that helps keep creatures rare even if actually making them less difficult to obtain. i would love to hear other flaws you can show me if you want to try, you seem plenty intelligent to me and i am committed to keeping everything pleasant
thank you all so much for contributing! it really means the world!
1 December 2016, 2:17 AM
I think it's too early to call anything official now, but we should keep our hopes up. xD And yes, I think reintroducing them the way they were initially brought to the site would still retain the excitement and demand for the creatures, but in a more approachable way for all users.
I don't think it's /that/ serious and necessary that the trading process should be too rigorous. It should be enjoyable, adventurous, as opposed to being near impossible, and so re-releases don't essentially dwindle (?!) the creatures' values and the "fun" we receive from trading, it's just a way of not discouraging users and help the site grow. So yeah.
And thank you, but I am nowhere remotely near the definition of intelligent lol. I honestly don't know about the flaws, the voting procedures seem unfamiliar to me. And so I think the biggest risks would be spam? xD Or like... users grouping and slowly getting every single creature on the site back in the least healthy way I guess? Mere votes are not reliable enough to me, there are other factors to be included and to be taken into account, such as rarity and effort the old users put into getting the original creature.
I'm all about fun and constructive discussion lol, I'd hate to get involved into any drama or argument. But you said in the first post that there were more ideas that you'd like to present, so I'd love to hear them!
Thank you so much, too!
Say I am all in for this idea lol. I honestly don't care if Macbots were to appear all of a sudden in the Cave (it shouldn't happen though) xD
1 December 2016, 2:53 AM
@sony hence unofficial discussion ;D
i don't have much fun trading, so it's good to hear from someone who likes it! hopefully the periodic reintroduction of retired creatures keeps trading fun and helps new users feel relevant in the trading game
spam is totally a huge risk for submissions, i thought it might be avoided completely with a submission/voting page (maybe even a "voting centre" with an appropriate corresponding building on the map!) with a drop-down list of retired creatures to select from to submit, and another list for voting on the highest submissions from the last round.
i am obviously really hung up on this voting thing! i need to think about some other ways to get input that will help take some of the factors i'm ignoring into account. any suggestions appreciated! do you think that there are ways to compromise with owners who have put a lot of time into getting rare creatures other than not rereleasing?
thank you again so very much!
1 December 2016, 2:53 AM
I think the decision to which creatures should be re-released should be left to the discretion of the eggcaveteam. Voting could result in unfavorable results, like the same creatures always being chosen over and over again due to their popularity.
And thanks @sony for finding that topic! Over 100 votes for re-releases should account for something, right?
1 December 2016, 3:07 AM
@element something we discussed to prevent the same creatures reappearing constantly was a time limitation: a creature couldn't be rereleased more than once in a year. we also discussed reserving the month of december for 4 creatures that had received lots of votes over the year but never enough to win, but that's getting off-topic: voting does have risks even with something that prevents repetition of results! i just want users to have as much say as possible in any species that might be rereleased so that they don't end up collected for trading fodder and neglected like cave monthlies are now. as always, i leave it all in the hands of the egg cave team. thank you again for your thoughtful contributions!
1 December 2016, 3:24 AM
Nice discussion. I find the voting part weird; but I like the idea of bringing them back the way they were first introduced, so maybe that can be combined with voting. And if they do come back I think they should have time limits on how long they'll be available according to how rare they are.
But we'll have to wait and see what happens. I remember when the Foos and Treelars etc were rereleased and the backlash that @Ian got at that point in time. So if it does happen, it needs to be done carefully.
1 December 2016, 2:07 PM
Once a year might not be long enough though :/ Some players might take advantage of the Onny's, Gobbler's, Macbot's, Doovoo's, & Tine's astronomical values and vote for them every year to be re-released ...which may or may not be a problem, depending on how you look at it.
The only downside I see to re-releasing them in the way they were first introduced is the possibility of hindering players from actually being able to obtain one or ...hoarding by a certain group of players.
I think the Oasis works great for the endangered species and eventually other less valuable species like the cave monthlies.
As much as I want a male & female pair of nym and tine frozen in every stage, I think the means to obtaining re-releases shouldn't be as easy or simple as a click of a button, especially for the more sought-after species (i.e. the CSPs).
In my opinion events/plots that require users to put time and effort into earning the re-released creature/s that they want is the best way of distribution. Maybe a prize pool should be available and a limit on how many prizes each participant can get. I also think several announcements and reminders prior to a re-releasing event should be made so ample time is given to active and inactive users alike to ensure they can be apart of the event and not miss out.
Not too sure how feasible this is, but maybe it would be a good idea to have a variation in the color of the re-releases (or placing noticeable markings on them) to help set them apart from the originals so the non-supporters can at least say they own the original species design or something.
1 December 2016, 5:28 PM
Thank you everyone for the discussion around here! I really would love this to happen around here. Maybe some old players would even come back. It is everything @spectaclenest already wrote
Also I was thinking about the "values" of the creatures decreasing and thinking about the re-release of obtainable items. Like the Star of Betelehem on the asteroid plot. It didnt decrease its value, they are still quite valuable and everyone seemed happy to have the chance to get one
1 December 2016, 11:14 PM
I personally don't want any rereleases, as it takes away the value of creatures other people spent valuable time and money for.
2 December 2016, 12:54 AM
I don't like the idea of creatures being re-released. In my opinion collecting creatures on eggcave knowing that they are limited is what makes the game worthwhile and fun.
I feel that even re-releasing a small amount of creatures will destroy the value of that creature and be unfair to those who had worked hard paid tons of money to obtain their dream cove like @Jellifish had mentioned.
And I don't believe that the whole economy on eggcave has been permanently changed. It may take a couple of months or maybe even a year for it to return to what the economy was originally.
And the only problem I see with doing the release of the retired CC creature within the cash shop for a 2 week period are people spending tons of CC to get a bunch of the retired creature therefore destroying the value even if the retired creature is in the shop for a short amount of time. If each player is limited to 1 creature per account and could only choose which creature they would like a year that may work? Without completely destroying the value of the chosen creature.
The problems I see with doing the release of a retired Cash shop creature for a 2 week period are people spending a large amount of CC to get a bunch of the retired creature, therefore making the retired creature worth 500cc again or lowering the value immensely making it near impossible for those who don't purchase CC to gain more through selling the creature that has been re-released. (Unless they just purchase the CC monthlies and sell those ;-; I feel that people would stop purchasing the missed CC monthlies and would be focused on spending all their earnings or saving their cc for the re-released CC creature.) I don't buy cc and I live off of selling my CC creatures for a higher amount CC. Plus what will happen when the majority of the players fully achieve their wishlist through voting for the re-release of the retired Cash Shop creature? I think it would be a better idea to have people choose which creatures they would like to see in the CC Shop yearly (1 retired creature per year) and limit the value of the creature 1 per account. I believe that would at least not impact the value as bad as having the retired creature able to be purchased as many times as one likes. (Not sure if you did mention a limit on how many could be purchased I re-read it a couple of times.) If creatures were to be re-released I rather have @Ian do it to the newer soon to come cash shop creatures since he had already retired the Cash Shop creatures meaning that they wouldn't return. (Or at least that's what retirement means to me.) (Sorry if none of this makes sense. I'm usually horrible at explaining things. ;-; Though my views are completely opinionated since I usually like working hard to achieve older and rarer creatures.)
2 December 2016, 8:59 PM
I don't think that creatures will be rereleased - even the Rebirth CC potion got a lot of backlash from the people who collect Egg stages of creatures, and decreased the value of Jester Eggs significantly.
It's a nice idea, but I feel that it should be executed more better. Maybe something like Eggcavern has done before, before it was shut down? I think that'll work pretty nicely.
3 December 2016, 7:41 AM
As @novrain62 has said above, Eggcavern was basically kind of a Click Exchange site, where you could earn different colored raffle tickets randomly from clicking on creatures. After that, you could then buy entries for creatures.
Sadly, the person/people who hosted it decided to close it down.
You can still see the old profile of Eggcavern here.
3 December 2016, 9:10 AM
I just wanted to support @element 's idea of the re-releasing:
1) Being left up to the discretion of the eggcave team to decide what/when/how, as they could then control the economy and keep it in check (re-release in SARC maybe?); and
2) Having colour variations / art variations to set them aside from the original releases.
Honestly, if we voted to re-release creatures, it would be overwhelmingly Tawnys, Macbots, Doovoos, Nyms, Onnys, Shaibuns, etc, which, although I would love to have them, might destroy the value that they're worth. (And I know some people have spent lots of real $$ on their wishlists!!).
Colour or art variations in the new releases would make them distinct from the originals. The originals and the re-releases would then have their own values - an 'original onny' will still be difficult to get but a 'purple onny' may be abundant and worth like 50K.
tldr; people can still get the nice-looking creatures they want without upsetting the economy/long time players.
3 December 2016, 9:41 AM
Being an older user, I disagree with what many users are suggesting on this forum. I have spent countless hours and countless amounts of CC waiting for rare creatures to appear and to try to trade for them. Every rare creature I have I had to sacrifice for. I remember being a new player and feeding 100+ coves a day so I could have enough EC to trade with. Egg Cave requires work and this is what a collectables website should be. You have to work for the creatures you want.
Other sites thrive and grow while still having those rare and hard to obtain creatures. It makes the site challenging and gives players something to strive to obtain.
Egg Cave is about collecting rare creatures, just like most other adoptables sites. If you rerelease every creature as easily as suggested, there is virtually no challenge or reason to strive for rare creatures if everyone has them. I strongly believe that getting these creatures like Macbots, Onnys, Tines, Gobblers, etc should be super changeling but not impossible. I want people to have to work hard for these creatures but still have the opportunity to get them.
That being said, I support a VERY limited and VERY controlled amount of creatures to be added back into the EC economy.
My favorite way and the idea I have always been in favor of is recirculating creatures from inactive accounts, @novrain62 touched on this briefly. I see where this can be controversial because what if players want to come back after years of hiatus? I also see that many are NEVER going to come back and the Onny is going sit there forever.
A major argument I see against rerelease and one I support strongly is when most limited creatures were released they came with the stipulation that they will not be released again. (I remember @despair brought this up.) This makes creatures limited edition (cannot be rereleased) and (in my opinion) in order to maintain it's integrity Egg Cave should keep their promise to the users who spent money or worked hard to get CC and buy those creatures.
Now moving on from that, recirculation is not rerelease and neither is giving creatures as prizes on a small scale. Those ideas are not rereleases and can serve as possible solutions to the high demand but low supply problem. The recirculation would not break the economy or drastically reduce the value of rare creatures if it was controlled, plus the creatures added back into the trading pool are the ones that have already exist on Egg Cave.
Edit: Also strongly against art edits/variations. It's good thought but I do not believe that is right for Egg Cave.
I have more to say but not enough time to say it.
////////Very blunt opinion warning!///////
In my opinion, many of the newer users want rereleases because they do not want to work for these creatures. Not everyone gets a trophy. I have seen new users come and get rarer creatures in a week or two. It is possible and done quite often. New users out number old users but the older users are the ones who built this community and should not be overlooked as the minority. @Ian has done a great job taking everyone feelings into account but he cannot please everyone.
If you disagree with me, please please please feel free to civilly tell me why. I would love to see other users' ideas with solid reasoning behind them. This will help foster a positive discussion towards species rerelease.
3 December 2016, 11:32 AM
Being someone who has returned to a site (neopets) after a TEN YEAR xP hiatus, I can not fathom taking creatures from inactive users as a fair way to get older creatures circulating again.
In the 3 years that I have been on eggcave, I have seen countless players returning from year long, if not longer, hiatuses. You've been here longer than me, so I am sure you have, too. Sometimes people grow up and lose interest, get busy, or can't sign on for whatever unforeseen circumstances but eventually do return. I would be livid if something happened and I returned to find my creatures scattered all over the place. All that time and money I've spent on this site gone simply because I couldn't sign on?
When we joined this site, no where in site rules & guidelines did it state that our creatures would be forfeited should we become inactive after a certain amount of time. Neither was an option given that we could consent to should we become inactive.
Should this change? Sure, but perhaps when the site finally updates to v3. This could be an option given to us in account preferences or as a part of the getting started routine. Where the creatures get stored and how they get distributed should be carefully taken into consideration.
@despair brought up a good point, so paraphrasing, what I mean by this is: It's one thing to have your creatures "gone forever" than it is to have the chance to get a creature to be gone forever, but that's just me.
Surely there has to be some better way than re-circulation without the consent of inactive users. I just see more harm than good should any of those inactive users ever return. They're gonna want their (insert creature here) back, and most likely, the person who has it ain't gonna want to give it back since they got it fair and square :/ Where's that replacement going to come from to make the returnee happy? And if most of these inactive users don't come back, consider those rare creatures never in circulation again.
I don't want free handouts, either. Nor do I want eggcave to be any less challenging than it is, but I am concerned about what I have been seeing where values and trading is concerned lately. This is probably irrelevant, but the last thing I want is for eggcave to have the same level of dishonesty and greediness that neopets has, if that makes sense?
3 December 2016, 11:52 AM
I have shared my opinion on this discussion several times, and, attempting to get the point across was...challenging, to say the least. I don't have it in me to express my full thoughts again, but I'd still say I'm against the idea of re-releasing. Essentially, however, I agree almost completely with @promise and I especially like:
"Other sites thrive and grow while still having those rare and hard to obtain creatures. It makes the site challenging and gives players something to strive to obtain."
I feel this is a good summary of my thoughts on the matter, this is a sentiment I can definitely get behind.
"When we joined this site, no where in site rules & guidelines did it state that our creatures would be forfeited should we become inactive after a certain amount of time. Neither was an option given that we could give our consent to should we become inactive."
Don't get me wrong, I'm not entirely sure where I stand on the account purging situation, but if that point can be used in an argument against account purging couldn't one also draw similarities to how Eggcave DID say that they wouldn't re-release creatures? If Eggcave's word is needed for account purging to be considered then their word about not re-releasing creatures should also be considered definite. If that makes any sense, I'm really sleepy.
3 December 2016, 12:17 PM
No, you're making sense.
Eggcave has gone back on its word before. There was a lot of outrage, but it did happen. Now, there's the Oasis. I consider that as a type of subtle re-releasing, even though it's just the endangered species.
Also, site rules & guidelines are subject to change. Why shouldn't purging happen? I just think that the way it should take effect could be a little different than what was mentioned here...
For this topic's sake, I was just using that as an example of why taking creatures from an inactive user's account shouldn't be done. It's one thing to have your creatures "gone forever" than it is to have the chance to get a creature to be gone forever, but that's just me.
3 December 2016, 12:46 PM
Glad it didn't sound like crazy talk. xD
Yeah, that's totally understandable. The account purging situation, as I stated previously, is something I'm not quite sure where I stand on.
But, I have one thing to add. You say the rules and guidelines are subject to change. Let me give an example that's actually in defense of anti-creature purging.
Say the guidelines state that any creature you own is yours forever and will never be removed from your cove after it becomes immortal. Then, they change this rule....and they change it to "after two years of inactivity your creatures will be place in the adoption center." This change is completely contradictory to what they said, and to what users assumed to be true. Understandably, users who returned to see their creatures gone would be outraged. I understand this part of the anti-creature purging argument. Users do return. But...just because things can change doesn't mean they shouldn't...in certain situations.
Now, someone's creatures being gone forever and some of their creatures being a little less "rare" are two completely different points, I admit. The former being much more harsh. The principle of the two, however, are exactly the same.
3 December 2016, 1:15 PM
Hmm...not sure if I understood the part where you mention a change in guidelines correctly, but if purging was to be done, I would like and actually appreciate it if the option was given to users whose accounts predate the changes in those rules & guidelines to choose whether we consent to those changes or not through account preferences.
As far as that goes where I am concerned, I intend to be active on eggcave until the day I die so if those changes do happen, I better get at least get an e-mail about it! >:/
I know what you're saying, but just for the sake of this topic (where re-releasing is concerned), if re-releasing does happen, in whatever form it may take, I just don't think they should be taken from inactive accounts -- yet. And if it is via purging, values could drop but not to the point of destabilization should circulation be done in a very limited and controlled manner.
Also, I suggested color variations/mutations as a sort of way to ensure the originals retain their value or stay "rare". Idk how you feel about that, should this ever occur.