Six piece Outfits would $ell better than the one piece (imo) — Guild Wars 2 Forums
Home Guild Wars 2 Discussion

Six piece Outfits would $ell better than the one piece (imo)

I get so much more out of having outfits that come in six pieces rather than just one. Experimenting with dye combinations is a satisfying part of the game for me. I believe Anet used to sell armor sets with 6X (X for subunit dye slots / typically 4) dye-able slots from the Black Lion Trading Post ? I have a Trickster Oufit (I think I paid 800 Gems for it) that came in six pieces which has a total of 26 separate dye slots. There's a lot of things you can do with that kind of color potential.

Comments

  • Due to popular demand, Armor Sets were moved to in-game acquisition.
    Keep in mind that Armor Sets take approximately 9 months to create; this is the reason Outfits appear more often.

  • KrHome.1920KrHome.1920 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Armor pieces are too expensive to create. Because of the modular design, they have to be adjusted to a ton of possible combinations with other armor pieces and character customisation options (body shape, head size, haircut...). This becomes worse with every additional armor in the game.

    So maybe they would sell a little better, but they would be a lot more expensive to develop and create less profit than the outfits at the end of the day.

    If armor pieces would be more profitable for anet, then they would simply add more of them.

  • Fueki.4753Fueki.4753 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 19, 2021

    Outfits are one piece because Arenanet wanted to cut the workload and not have to worry about making it possible to match individual pieces.

    I just wish that the price actually reflected that the workload is far less than for an armour set.

  • Sigmoid.7082Sigmoid.7082 Member ✭✭✭✭

    If outfits came in 6 pieces we would have about 20-33% of the outfits we currently have.

  • The Greyhawk.9107The Greyhawk.9107 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Outfits that are made up of six pieces already exist in the game, they're call armor sets and its already been explained why we get much more of the former than the latter.

    Hate Is Fuel.

  • Westenev.5289Westenev.5289 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 20, 2021

    The fact that these sorts of threads keep popping up is a hint (but not proof) that there is a CURRENT market for gemstore armour skins, whatever quotes you might dig up from any decision made 8 years ago. I know because I would personally be interested in more skirt / shorts / pants options like those provided in Vipers, Magitek and Aetherblade (heavy) armours.

    Realistically though, I just want more dye channels on outfits. More often than not, choosing colours that make one part of the outfit great makes another part look ridiculous. It's annoying having to run analysis and research on an outfit you like, just to find out if it doesn't dye the way you want it to.

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 20, 2021

    @Westenev.5289 said:
    The fact that these sorts of threads keep popping up is a hint (but not proof) that there is a CURRENT market for gemstore armour skins, whatever quotes you might dig up from any decision made 8 years ago. I know because I would personally be interested in more skirt / shorts / pants options like those provided in Vipers, Magitek and Aetherblade (heavy) armours.

    Realistically though, I just want more dye channels on outfits. More often than not, choosing colours that make one part of the outfit great makes another part look ridiculous. It's annoying having to run analysis and research on an outfit you like, just to find out if it doesn't dye the way you want it to.

    Just as in the past there was a lot of complaints about armors being mostly via the gem store or gem store armor items devaluing in game armor.

    The developers will never be able to please each and every single player. The situation in the past was different from today in that actual armor pieces were sold on the gem store. Due to player feedback and likely work constraints a change was made to:

    • there should be meaningful rewards in the game acquirable via in game tasks and not just credit card warrior style
    • an easier to produce, all encompassing visual option for gems from the gem store aka outfits

    That's where we are right now and for all intents and purposes, it strikes a good middle ground between rewarding engagement with the game as well as optional gem store purchases.

  • Westenev.5289Westenev.5289 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 20, 2021

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Westenev.5289 said:
    The fact that these sorts of threads keep popping up is a hint (but not proof) that there is a CURRENT market for gemstore armour skins, whatever quotes you might dig up from any decision made 8 years ago. I know because I would personally be interested in more skirt / shorts / pants options like those provided in Vipers, Magitek and Aetherblade (heavy) armours.

    Realistically though, I just want more dye channels on outfits. More often than not, choosing colours that make one part of the outfit great makes another part look ridiculous. It's annoying having to run analysis and research on an outfit you like, just to find out if it doesn't dye the way you want it to.

    Just as in the past there was a lot of complaints about armors being mostly via the gem store or gem store armor items devaluing in game armor.

    The developers will never be able to please each and every single player. The situation in the past was different from today in that actual armor pieces were sold on the gem store. Due to player feedback and likely work constraints a change was made to:

    • there should be meaningful rewards in the game acquirable via in game tasks and not just credit card warrior style
    • an easier to produce, all encompassing visual option for gems from the gem store aka outfits

    That's where we are right now and for all intents and purposes, it strikes a good middle ground between rewarding engagement with the game as well as optional gem store purchases.

    You're free to your opinions, but I honestly don't feel like there are any meaningful in-game rewards you wouldn't achieve through passive play, and "easier to produce" gemstore content just creates unsatisfactory styles that leave you thinking "... if only x was y...", like the dye problem I mentioned earlier.

    Saying "BUT THE COMMUNITY SAYS WE MUST" just comes off as an excuse at this point, for the fact that Anet created a 4-weight wardrobe system they struggle to create new content for.

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Westenev.5289 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Westenev.5289 said:
    The fact that these sorts of threads keep popping up is a hint (but not proof) that there is a CURRENT market for gemstore armour skins, whatever quotes you might dig up from any decision made 8 years ago. I know because I would personally be interested in more skirt / shorts / pants options like those provided in Vipers, Magitek and Aetherblade (heavy) armours.

    Realistically though, I just want more dye channels on outfits. More often than not, choosing colours that make one part of the outfit great makes another part look ridiculous. It's annoying having to run analysis and research on an outfit you like, just to find out if it doesn't dye the way you want it to.

    Just as in the past there was a lot of complaints about armors being mostly via the gem store or gem store armor items devaluing in game armor.

    The developers will never be able to please each and every single player. The situation in the past was different from today in that actual armor pieces were sold on the gem store. Due to player feedback and likely work constraints a change was made to:

    • there should be meaningful rewards in the game acquirable via in game tasks and not just credit card warrior style
    • an easier to produce, all encompassing visual option for gems from the gem store aka outfits

    That's where we are right now and for all intents and purposes, it strikes a good middle ground between rewarding engagement with the game as well as optional gem store purchases.

    You're free to your opinions, but I honestly don't feel like there are any meaningful in-game rewards you wouldn't achieve through passive play, and "easier to produce" gemstore content just creates unsatisfactory styles that leave you thinking "... if only x was y...", like the dye problem I mentioned earlier.

    Sure it is my opinion, as you have yours. You not feeling as though in-game rewards are meaningful achieved via game play is very subjective and goes directly against what most players have been complaining about, even more given the already present complaints about the gem store as is, but you are free to this opinion..

    I personally fail to see how credit card warrior acquiring is in any way satisfying. I guess our approach and opinion differs here.

    @Westenev.5289 said:
    Saying "BUT THE COMMUNITY SAYS WE MUST" just comes off as an excuse at this point, for the fact that Anet created a 4-weight wardrobe system they struggle to create new content for.

    We have had more armors introduced lately than for quite a while. The developers themselves have stated that creating an entire armor set costs a LOT more time than outfits. If we assume basic reason to their resource distribution, going for an easier to mass produce and sell product which does not interfere with other parts of the game, is reasonable.

  • Westenev.5289Westenev.5289 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 20, 2021

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Westenev.5289 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Westenev.5289 said:
    The fact that these sorts of threads keep popping up is a hint (but not proof) that there is a CURRENT market for gemstore armour skins, whatever quotes you might dig up from any decision made 8 years ago. I know because I would personally be interested in more skirt / shorts / pants options like those provided in Vipers, Magitek and Aetherblade (heavy) armours.

    Realistically though, I just want more dye channels on outfits. More often than not, choosing colours that make one part of the outfit great makes another part look ridiculous. It's annoying having to run analysis and research on an outfit you like, just to find out if it doesn't dye the way you want it to.

    Just as in the past there was a lot of complaints about armors being mostly via the gem store or gem store armor items devaluing in game armor.

    The developers will never be able to please each and every single player. The situation in the past was different from today in that actual armor pieces were sold on the gem store. Due to player feedback and likely work constraints a change was made to:

    • there should be meaningful rewards in the game acquirable via in game tasks and not just credit card warrior style
    • an easier to produce, all encompassing visual option for gems from the gem store aka outfits

    That's where we are right now and for all intents and purposes, it strikes a good middle ground between rewarding engagement with the game as well as optional gem store purchases.

    You're free to your opinions, but I honestly don't feel like there are any meaningful in-game rewards you wouldn't achieve through passive play, and "easier to produce" gemstore content just creates unsatisfactory styles that leave you thinking "... if only x was y...", like the dye problem I mentioned earlier.

    Sure it is my opinion, as you have yours. You not feeling as though in-game rewards are meaningful achieved via game play is very subjective and goes directly against what most players have been complaining about, even more given the already present complaints about the gem store as is, but you are free to this opinion..

    I personally fail to see how credit card warrior acquiring is in any way satisfying. I guess our approach and opinion differs here.

    You seem oddly fixated on the "credit card warrior" angle, despite the fact people will buy gems for gold anyway, and veteran players like you or I will likely buy gems with gold. Really, what's the change here?

    Perhaps those sentiments exist, though I've never encountered a post complaining about how there are too many cosmetics in the game, and that there are too many ways to meaningfully acquire them. I do, however, see topics popping up all the time that the outfit system could do with a bit of improvement, and a few more dye channels would certainly help in that regard (if not breaking them down into armour pieces, even if they aren't mix and match, so we can get our desired colour schemes and remove unwanted gloves/shoulders like we remove helmets).

    ... y'know, to steer us back on topic? xD

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 20, 2021

    @Westenev.5289 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Westenev.5289 said:

    @Cyninja.2954 said:

    @Westenev.5289 said:
    The fact that these sorts of threads keep popping up is a hint (but not proof) that there is a CURRENT market for gemstore armour skins, whatever quotes you might dig up from any decision made 8 years ago. I know because I would personally be interested in more skirt / shorts / pants options like those provided in Vipers, Magitek and Aetherblade (heavy) armours.

    Realistically though, I just want more dye channels on outfits. More often than not, choosing colours that make one part of the outfit great makes another part look ridiculous. It's annoying having to run analysis and research on an outfit you like, just to find out if it doesn't dye the way you want it to.

    Just as in the past there was a lot of complaints about armors being mostly via the gem store or gem store armor items devaluing in game armor.

    The developers will never be able to please each and every single player. The situation in the past was different from today in that actual armor pieces were sold on the gem store. Due to player feedback and likely work constraints a change was made to:

    • there should be meaningful rewards in the game acquirable via in game tasks and not just credit card warrior style
    • an easier to produce, all encompassing visual option for gems from the gem store aka outfits

    That's where we are right now and for all intents and purposes, it strikes a good middle ground between rewarding engagement with the game as well as optional gem store purchases.

    You're free to your opinions, but I honestly don't feel like there are any meaningful in-game rewards you wouldn't achieve through passive play, and "easier to produce" gemstore content just creates unsatisfactory styles that leave you thinking "... if only x was y...", like the dye problem I mentioned earlier.

    Sure it is my opinion, as you have yours. You not feeling as though in-game rewards are meaningful achieved via game play is very subjective and goes directly against what most players have been complaining about, even more given the already present complaints about the gem store as is, but you are free to this opinion..

    I personally fail to see how credit card warrior acquiring is in any way satisfying. I guess our approach and opinion differs here.

    You seem oddly fixated on the "credit card warrior" angle, despite the fact people will buy gems for gold anyway, and veteran players like you or I will likely buy gems with gold. Really, what's the change here?

    The same as why people where complaining about legendary weapons and why all future legendary items are not trade-able on the TP.

    There is some value in having actual in-game rewards versus simply letting players buying everything they desire. You know, as to motive actual game play.

    I'm not fixated on the credit card warrior aspect as much that I am only wondering when we as a gaming community have started to WANT to skip content for money. This isn't even in any way related to affordability or not, I have certainly spent my share on this game, I am just wondering about how players intentionally want more and more gem store related content over actual in game content. I also doubt that this approach is valued by a majority of players. Then again I could be wrong given how mobile games and other exploitative games are making a ton of money.

    @Westenev.5289 said:
    Perhaps those sentiments exist, though I've never encountered a post complaining about how there are too many cosmetics in the game, and that there are too many ways to meaningfully acquire them. I do, however, see topics popping up all the time that the outfit system could do with a bit of improvement, and a few more dye channels would certainly help in that regard (if not breaking them down into armour pieces, even if they aren't mix and match, so we can get our desired colour schemes and remove unwanted gloves/shoulders like we remove helmets).

    ... y'know, to steer us back on topic? xD

    Cosmetics designed for this game and the different avenues of acquisition all compete for the same resource. Having more armor skins in the gem store directly translates to having less added to in game rewards. As such it should not be surprising that players who actually enjoy acquiring skin via game play would be opposed to an increase in gem store armors skins.

  • Liewec.2896Liewec.2896 Member ✭✭✭
    edited February 20, 2021

    i always hear people saying "it takes 8 months to make an armour set!" and other such nonsense.
    how? over a decade ago i was taking 3d classes and i made a half decent full character in less than a week, that was me, a random newbie.
    (and that was back then with old tech)
    IT SHOULD NOT take a massive company like Anet [whatever hilarious timeframe people are using as an excuse] to make armour.

    "oh but each race/weight has different cut off points!"
    so what?
    thats extremely easy to do.

    then theres the "clipping" excuse,
    "outfits weren't designed to mix with other parts so there would be clipping!"
    yeah? so what? i could make a truly awful clipfest character right now if i wanted to
    "clipping" doesn't seem like a good enough excuse when so many armour pieces in game already clip.

    there is no satisfactory excuse.

    outfits are pretty much a full set of armour already, are you really telling me it takes 8 months to chop it into bits?
    rather like 8 minutes.

  • @Liewec.2896 said:
    i always hear people saying "it takes 8 months to make an armour set!" and other such nonsense.
    how? over a decade ago i was taking 3d classes and i made a half decent full character in less than a week, that was me, a random newbie.
    (and that was back then with old tech)
    IT SHOULD NOT take a massive company like Anet [whatever hilarious timeframe people are using as an excuse] to make armour.

    "oh but each race/weight has different cut off points!"
    so what?
    thats extremely easy to do.

    then theres the "clipping" excuse,
    "outfits weren't designed to mix with other parts so there would be clipping!"
    yeah? so what? i could make a truly awful clipfest character right now if i wanted to
    "clipping" doesn't seem like a good enough excuse when so many armour pieces in game already clip.

    there is no satisfactory excuse.

    outfits are pretty much a full set of armour already, are you really telling me it takes 8 months to chop it into bits?
    rather like 8 minutes.

    We are here in the gw2-forum. Have you read some threads here? Do you see a pattern? :"D

    I am totally with you guys. But as long as people buy clothing set that anet cost less time, but bring more money there will be no change no matter what is right or wrong.

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 20, 2021

    @Liewec.2896 said:
    i always hear people saying "it takes 8 months to make an armour set!" and other such nonsense.
    how? over a decade ago i was taking 3d classes and i made a half decent full character in less than a week, that was me, a random newbie.
    (and that was back then with old tech)
    IT SHOULD NOT take a massive company like Anet [whatever hilarious timeframe people are using as an excuse] to make armour.

    "oh but each race/weight has different cut off points!"
    so what?
    thats extremely easy to do.

    then theres the "clipping" excuse,
    "outfits weren't designed to mix with other parts so there would be clipping!"
    yeah? so what? i could make a truly awful clipfest character right now if i wanted to
    "clipping" doesn't seem like a good enough excuse when so many armour pieces in game already clip.

    there is no satisfactory excuse.

    outfits are pretty much a full set of armour already, are you really telling me it takes 8 months to chop it into bits?
    rather like 8 minutes.

    We are going by direct quotes made from the developers of this game.

    Feel free to do a better job or get in contact with Arenanet and offer your expertise in improving their work flow and output. I'm sure your extensive knowledge and experience in the field will be highly valuable.

    Until then we are bound to what THE DEVELOPERS have told us is possible.

    EDIT:
    Here, I did you the favor of looking up the actual quote from the lead developer back then:

    Armor sets are by far the most expensive reward we can make. A full set includes heavy, medium, light, times five races, times two sexes, so it's like developing 30 sets. It takes nine months to develop. (That's for a normal armor set -- legendary is much longer.) It's not something we can do for Living World episodes. Individual pieces are good rewards for Living World episodes; full sets are more something for expansion packs.

    Now Mike O'Brien is not with Arenanet any longer, you will likely have to go through HR or such to contact who ever is in charge now to offer your expertise.

  • Sigmoid.7082Sigmoid.7082 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Liewec.2896 said:
    i always hear people saying "it takes 8 months to make an armour set!" and other such nonsense.
    how? over a decade ago i was taking 3d classes and i made a half decent full character in less than a week, that was me, a random newbie.
    (and that was back then with old tech)
    IT SHOULD NOT take a massive company like Anet [whatever hilarious timeframe people are using as an excuse] to make armour.

    "oh but each race/weight has different cut off points!"
    so what?
    thats extremely easy to do.

    then theres the "clipping" excuse,
    "outfits weren't designed to mix with other parts so there would be clipping!"
    yeah? so what? i could make a truly awful clipfest character right now if i wanted to
    "clipping" doesn't seem like a good enough excuse when so many armour pieces in game already clip.

    there is no satisfactory excuse.

    outfits are pretty much a full set of armour already, are you really telling me it takes 8 months to chop it into bits?
    rather like 8 minutes.

    A lot of people think they make a good omlette but would get laughed out of a decent kitchen or rejected for culinary school.

    Lots of Dunning-Kruger energy here.

  • Fueki.4753Fueki.4753 Member ✭✭✭✭

    While it might be slightly offtopic,
    But Blizzard announced "cosmetic outfits" at their Blizzconline, which can be used on any class, regardless of armour weight.
    And they come come in pieces, so they can be mixed with regular armour pieces.

    It reminded a lot of what some players wish for GW2's outfits to be.

  • kharmin.7683kharmin.7683 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Fueki.4753 said:
    While it might be slightly offtopic,
    But Blizzard announced "cosmetic outfits" at their Blizzconline, which can be used on any class, regardless of armour weight.
    And they come come in pieces, so they can be mixed with regular armour pieces.

    It reminded a lot of what some players wish for GW2's outfits to be.

    Once again, we cannot compare Blizzard with Anet. The reason given for not producing armor sets as they had was because of the length of time needed. Blizzard has way more resources than Anet -- they have to as a sub-based game. I, for one, would hate to see GW2 turn to a sub-based model.

    I am a very casual player.
    Very.
    Casual.

  • Fueki.4753Fueki.4753 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 20, 2021

    @kharmin.7683 said:
    we cannot compare Blizzard with Anet.

    I did not even try imply a comparison.

  • AgentMoore.9453AgentMoore.9453 Member ✭✭✭✭

    If I like a single piece of a 6-piece armor set, I will purchase the entire set. If I dislike a single piece of an outfit, I will not purchase the outfit. Right now, this means a vast majority of outfits have gone unpurchased by me (which means a profit of $0) when I'd likely have bought them all just because I liked the gloves or the pants or whatnot (a profit of $$$).

    To me, that by itself is a good enough reason to aim for armor sets and not outfits. Outfits, if they make them at all, should be for basic looks or designs that are very cohesive which, if you look at some of the nightmares that have made it into the gem store, is not always the case. We can speculate all day and night about how long it does or doesn't take to make armor, but in the end, I know exactly how long it takes to make a purchase - or not.

    There's money to be made in all aspects of the game, but I think the greatest source is by providing fuel for the FashionWars.

  • Liewec.2896Liewec.2896 Member ✭✭✭
    edited February 20, 2021

    @Sigmoid.7082 said:
    A lot of people think they make a good omlette but would get laughed out of a decent kitchen or rejected for culinary school.

    well most people don't take 9 months to make an omelette...

    @Cyninja.2954 said:
    Here, I did you the favor of looking up the actual quote from the lead developer back then:

    Armor sets are by far the most expensive reward we can make. A full set includes heavy, medium, light, times five races, times two sexes, so it's like developing 30 sets. It takes nine months to develop.

    but see thats the BS part.
    i can guarantee you that they aren't creating an entirely new model from scratch for each race,
    they'll finish the first set (probably on a human model)
    and then tweak it for the other races.
    (and all this entails is scaling and moving parts, and also sometimes making alternate foot and tail additions for charr.)

    human, norn, sylvari and asura all use the same model with mere scaling adjustments. (asura sometimes get two points added to their boots.)
    so this "developing 30 sets" nonsense is already BS.

    plus we aren't talking about making different sets for the 3 different weights, we're talking about chopping up outfits,
    when it comes to weights, all that would mean is splitting the outfit up at slightly different points.

    so while i don't believe for a second that it takes 9 months for them to make and tweak SIX (not 30...) different armour sets.
    it would definitely not take 9 months to chop outfits up, no way in hell.

  • hugo.4705hugo.4705 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I'm okay to pay 600 gems an armor piece if all the current outfits are turned into pieces. What a shame that outfits exist, better have stayed with armors.

    Shiny links, take a look!
    ->Ideas: Housing , Designing a new lounge , New GameMode
    ->Project: ASURAN/PRIMORDIUS EXPANSION available on WIKI.
    ->NEW: Crucible of Eternity path 4: Legacy on WIKI
    ->NEW Asurapedia

  • kharmin.7683kharmin.7683 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Fueki.4753 said:

    @kharmin.7683 said:
    we cannot compare Blizzard with Anet.

    I did not even try imply a comparison.

    Then what was the point of your post? Why mention Blizzard at all?

    I am a very casual player.
    Very.
    Casual.

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 20, 2021

    @Liewec.2896 said:

    @Sigmoid.7082 said:
    A lot of people think they make a good omlette but would get laughed out of a decent kitchen or rejected for culinary school.

    well most people don't take 9 months to make an omelette...

    @Cyninja.2954 said:
    Here, I did you the favor of looking up the actual quote from the lead developer back then:

    Armor sets are by far the most expensive reward we can make. A full set includes heavy, medium, light, times five races, times two sexes, so it's like developing 30 sets. It takes nine months to develop.

    but see thats the BS part.
    i can guarantee you that they aren't creating an entirely new model from scratch for each race,
    they'll finish the first set (probably on a human model)
    and then tweak it for the other races.
    (and all this entails is scaling and moving parts, and also sometimes making alternate foot and tail additions for charr.)

    human, norn, sylvari and asura all use the same model with mere scaling adjustments. (asura sometimes get two points added to their boots.)
    so this "developing 30 sets" nonsense is already BS.

    plus we aren't talking about making different sets for the 3 different weights, we're talking about chopping up outfits,
    when it comes to weights, all that would mean is splitting the outfit up at slightly different points.

    so while i don't believe for a second that it takes 9 months for them to make and tweak SIX (not 30...) different armour sets.
    it would definitely not take 9 months to chop outfits up, no way in hell.

    Sure, so you are calling the former lead developer a liar.

    Meanwhile the amount of full armor sets we have seen introduced into the game are reflective of approximately this long a development time. So not only did the former lead developer intentionally misrepresent the work load, the entire studio decided to intentionally produce less content which players clearly desire.

    Do yourself a favor: do google Dunning-Kruger effect. Then put that in perspective of how you assume to know better than a studio lead developer, measurable results over a set period of time (the amount of this content we did actually see release) and the amount of knowledge you possess in this specific field.

  • Sigmoid.7082Sigmoid.7082 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @AgentMoore.9453 said:
    We can speculate all day and night about how long it does or doesn't take to make armor

    Why? We have explicitly been told how long it takes as well as the reason for doing so. There is no speculation needed.

    The classic "I want something therefore I see no reason not to put it in the game". Also the "I would spend more therefore everyone would, thus they would make more money doing it the way I want".