[Suggestion] RE: RNG Gemstore Mount Skins

Alright, ANET. I love you, I really do, but this is where I draw the line.

I've always done my best to support you where I could. I am a college student; my limited income is stretched far and thin, and I rarely have much left over at the end of the month for the little things. However, when I do, I always make an effort to pick up something neat from the Gemstore as my way of supporting my favorite MMO and the company behind it. I thought that maybe, with PoF and mounts, that mount skins would be the new thing. As always, of course, there would be some that I had no interest in but that's okay! I can just buy the others that peak my interest.

Except I can't, because the maybe 6 skins I like out of the 30 are stuck behind a wall of RNG. So where as I may have spent money on those 6 skins up front, now I've got to decide if it is worth it for me to throw my money away at this lootbox system to see if I will get any of the skins I want. And with my luck when it comes to RNG, I probably wont. This is the same reason I try to find some semblance of impulse control within me to keep away from the black lion chests. I'd love that little jackal backpack-- but not when there is a 90% chance I probably wont get it.

Then there is the 120$ to bypass a gamble (-- which, by the way, this certainly is. I am honestly surprised that lootboxes and other rng content in games haven't been subjected to gambling laws yet but that is a whole other issue that I will not be digging into today) by getting all 30 skins-- half of which we probably do not even want, with no way to give said unwanted skins to someone who may feel more strongly toward them.. The 120$ option is limited, too. After this week is up then you're back to 12000 gems for all 30 skins, which is around 150$ for those that do not know.

So, here are my suggestions --

• Make the unlocks able to be sold / traded on the BLTP, similar to dyes and various other things limited to gambling with RNG. This would at least give people who do not want to gamble directly with the boxes a chance to get the skins they want, albeit at what I'd imagine would be a heafty sum of gold for some of the more desired ones (Clouded Corvus / Crowned Ancient, anyone?)
• Add another 'ticket' option that limits the gambling to a certain type, ie 'Skimmer Stable Adoption License' or 'Jackal Stable Adoption License', for perhaps 500/600 gems. This limits the mounts that they'll be gambling with to a smaller pool, but they have an increased chance of getting the skin they want.
• An extremely unlikely option, but perhaps change the system to allow you to PICK one of the 30 mounts. Considering ANETs love for RNG, though, and assuming this is meant to be a giant cash grab-- I doubt this is a route they'll opt toward.

Also, I apologize if my wording is poor. I hope this conveys my disappointments with the current rng box well enough, though.

Simply remove any and all RNG from it.

Make using the papers bring up a list of all available skins and allow you to pick one.

Badabing, badaboom. Done and done.

No, just remove the loot boxes.

@Oglaf.1074 said:Simply remove any and all RNG from it.

Make using the papers bring up a list of all available skins and allow you to pick one.

Badabing, badaboom. Done and done.

As much as I would love for this to be a plausible solution, Anet loves their RNG too much for me to believe they would ever scrap it completely for this box and allow us to simply pick.

@Ohoni.6057 said:No, just remove the loot boxes.

We can dream, but like the above, Anet is too fond of the RNG $$$ for this to be a likely course of action. I'd much prefer it, but ultimately they're going to go with what seems most profitable.

@Canis.7451 said:

@Oglaf.1074 said:Simply remove any and all RNG from it.

Make using the papers bring up a list of all available skins and allow you to pick one.

Badabing, badaboom. Done and done.

@Ohoni.6057 said:No, just remove the loot boxes.

Doesn't change the fact that removing the RNG is the right thing to do, now does it?

@Oglaf.1074 said:

@Canis.7451 said:

@Oglaf.1074 said:Simply remove any and all RNG from it.

Make using the papers bring up a list of all available skins and allow you to pick one.

Badabing, badaboom. Done and done.

@Ohoni.6057 said:No, just remove the loot boxes.

That is debatable, and probably more of a topic for another thread entirely. I've never been a fan of RNG myself but I understand the necessity for it in certain respects.

@Canis.7451 said:

@Oglaf.1074 said:

@Canis.7451 said:

@Oglaf.1074 said:Simply remove any and all RNG from it.

Make using the papers bring up a list of all available skins and allow you to pick one.

Badabing, badaboom. Done and done.

@Ohoni.6057 said:No, just remove the loot boxes.

Haha no it is not a "necessity in certain respects" at all.

For example, they entirely lost out on my shekels for these skins because of the gambling, whereas if I could buy them directly they would have my purchase - and based on the comments about this, I am not alone in that regard.

@Oglaf.1074 said:

@Canis.7451 said:

@Oglaf.1074 said:

@Canis.7451 said:

@Oglaf.1074 said:Simply remove any and all RNG from it.

Make using the papers bring up a list of all available skins and allow you to pick one.

Badabing, badaboom. Done and done.

@Ohoni.6057 said:No, just remove the loot boxes.

Considering that GW2 is a subscription-free MMO and their source of income mainly comes from the gem store outside of expansion releases, I understand that having RNG boxes as a consistent pull and lure is something we're never going to shake. It is easy, consistent money for them-- looking at the Black Lion Chests, mainly, since it is something they've always made an effort to keep stocked with new things to draw out the inner gambler within their playerbase. However, considering it seems our opinions on this differ greatly and I doubt either of us intends to sway, I'll leave this as is.

As for the following bit, you're not wrong-- I am personally not buying into this new lootbox either, so any profit they could have made off of me is lost as well. I'd very much prefer if the tickets allowed us to pick one of the thirty skins every time-- I'd be able to just get the skins I have any intention of ever using, then. My hopes that Anet consider this route are.. slim, though.

@Canis.7451 said:

Considering that GW2 is a subscription-free MMO and their source of income mainly comes from the gem store outside of expansion releases, I understand that having RNG boxes as a consistent pull and lure is something we're never going to shake.

A )it's now worth a clap when some company doesn't join the subscription-rip-off-train?! No way. Buy it, get it, it's yours. That's the way it was and should be. The thing that you can't sell your game anymore, or just give it to your friend is worth taking it to the court. If there would be a court where you get your consumer worth treated correctly.

B ) also a No! Having RNG for fun, yes. We all like to gamble, were humans, we like the little thrill. ^^ But in no way is this something that's needed, nor can't be changed. It wasn't until recently in games, so it can go, if the greedy management goes, when they see that the customers won't buy into this >>> swearword of your choice <<< anymore.

And this is were it gets awkward.Since this isn't as easy as it seems, especially when you're (as a company) first create a need and then fulfil the need with overpriced stuff. For example, I'm in a field were it's absolutely necessary to have some design programs from different companies, because everyone works with them, so you're forced to use them in my industry. And they're often subscription based, wich just sucks imho. So, I'm forced as a customer to follow. But if alotta ppl speak out and/or just don't buy into this marketing scheme anymore, the system will come down to what it was before: usable and not greedy!

@Matick.4132 said:

@Canis.7451 said:

Considering that GW2 is a subscription-free MMO and their source of income mainly comes from the gem store outside of expansion releases, I understand that having RNG boxes as a consistent pull and lure is something we're never going to shake.

I never said it is worth "a clap" that GW2 hasn't hopped on the MMO subscription bandwagon. I merely stated that I have some understanding as to why Anet would lean toward something like lootboxes (specifically referencing the black lion chests) as a source of income in their cash shop.

B ) also a No! Having RNG for fun, yes. We all like to gamble, were humans, we like the little thrill. ^^ But in no way is this something that's needed, nor can't be changed. It wasn't until recently in games, so it can go, if the greedy management goes, when they see that the customers won't buy into this >>> swearword of your choice <<< anymore.

And this is were it gets awkward.Since this isn't as easy as it seems, especially when you're (as a company) first create a need and then fulfil the need with overpriced stuff. For example, I'm in a field were it's absolutely necessary to have some design programs from different companies, because everyone works with them, so you're forced to use them in my industry. And they're often subscription based, wich just sucks imho. So, I'm forced as a customer to follow. But if alotta ppl speak out and/or just don't buy into this marketing scheme anymore, the system will come down to what it was before: usable and not greedy!

Valid points. But once again, this stuff would be better off in its own thread-- this thread was made so I could offer some alternative suggestions to the new RNG box that has created quite an uproar and understandably so, not debate the gamblebox system as a whole.

Well written, thanks for putting this up :)I would option for a refund system. Give people as many mount skin picks for as many adoptions they bought or refund the money for skins you don't want and then disable the skins. Giving people the option to choose what skin the want for each 400 gems they spend would be best for the long term solution. That way you can spend $10 bucks and get two nice shiny skins.

@Meowatatonic.1738 said:Well written, thanks for putting this up :)I would option for a refund system. Give people as many mount skin picks for as many adoptions they bought or refund the money for skins you don't want and then disable the skins. Giving people the option to choose what skin the want for each 400 gems they spend would be best for the long term solution. That way you can spend $10 bucks and get two nice shiny skins.

But then theyd have to put in the work to actually make every skin original and attractive instead of making a few of those and filling up the rest of the lootboxes with lazy recolors.

Please join the official feedback thread to share your thoughts.