Simple poll... RNG Gem-store items... yes/no

Seeing as the voting is anonymous, I would like to tell everyone I voted yes. All those yes are mine on different accounts.

No, no to RNG. I haven't cared much about it before because the RNG options were relatively minor to me, but they are pushing the system too far, and really I shouldn't have been siltent on this issue so long.

RNG gambling is morally corrupt, and should never be encouraged. Any time that a player has to pay actual money (or gems that can be purchased with money), with no guarantee of getting the item they want, that is gambling, and it is wrong, and it is shameful.

Don't be shameful.

I don't mind some RNG like in the Black Lion chests, but putting the first non-Halloween mount skins into an RNG box wasn't the best decision.

I don't buy things unless I know what I'm getting.

Not a fan of RNG.. never was a fan of the BL chest.. not a fan of this.

I don't go into a supermarket throwing money into a machine which then throws out random ingredients I may or may not be able to make a meal out of, spending hundreds of € until I actually get something I want, which would only be worth 5€.

Why the hell would I do that in an online store?

Give me a product I want for a reasonable price, and I'll buy it.

Real money for virtual random goods is unethical at best.

If you think this stuff is OK now, you bring on the future for video games you deserve, but we all have to live in.

That's a lottery. I do not like it much, but since we are not forced to it, I do not see the problem. I am like Opal. I buy only when I know what I get. So, I just don't buy, but it does not disturb me that it exists. Some of my friends are excited at the uncertainty and love it. I find it good that there are RNG therefore, so everybody enjoy own type of fun. I vote yes.

@Dreamy Lu.3865 said:That's a lottery. I do not like it much, but since we are not forced to it, I do not see the problem. I am like Opal. I buy only when I know what I get. So, I just don't buy, but it does not disturb me that it exists. Some of my friends are excited at the uncertainty and love it. I find it good that there are RNG therefore, so everybody enjoy own type of fun. I vote yes.

But why not please everyone? Have the RNG lottery as one option, but ALSO offer the items directly at a fair price, so that those who do not want to throw their money at RNG have alternatives?

RNG has been in the Gemstore since themed dye packs.

"But I can just buy the dye I want off the trade post!!!"

And for you to do that, someone else has to have gotten a dye pack, gotten that dye, and put it up for sale. In fact, dye packs are an even WORSE RNG because you can and will get things you already have, you may not even get the new special dye colors. If you couldn't buy dyes off the TP, I wouldn't have any of the Gemstore ones aside from those in birthday gifts and I'd be fine with that.

I don't like RNG but it's silly that suddenly now, when it concerns the mounts players pestered and pestered AND PESTERED to have put in the game that suddenly RNG is awful and world ending and "how dare". I'd like to see this system tweaked - it'd be nice if you could choose to buy a Raptor one or a Jackal one and then you got a random pick from that mount pool. I like that you can't get the same one twice, I'm afraid allowing them to be sold would mean the elimination of that as a "balance".

Or... they could do theme packs but honestly? I felt $20 was too much for the Spooky Mounts when I only liked and would have used two of them. I can see a "Celestial" pack being more expensive because Anet is going to milk these mounts they were pestered for to death. If you only like one or two skins, your best bet is likely to wait and see if they come out on their own because RNG in this game rarely comes out the way you want it to.

RNG is imho needed in order to create a market ( permanent items, bltc skins, nodes, etc... ) and to get cash from players.

You don't have to pay anything for GW2, except a few bucks for the new expansion every 2 years.You can also convert golds into gems.

Gemstore items are an extra for fashion or time save which are not needed.The only thing that every player needs it is the Copper Fed Salvage O Matic, which is worth 800 gems.

And since they need that some players buy from the store with real cash ( or else GW2 would have been closed years ago, cause they can't survive with only expansion and a low playerbase which buy em ), they have to bring you to buy some shinies.

Because 99,9% of the gemstore items are fashion, boosters, minis, gamble, teleports, slots i am fine with that.Who wants to look better, or simply different, or maybe wants to show something to the others, can buy what he desire.

If he thinks that the RNG gamble is not worth his golds, or money, then he will simply skip those items.

If many players thinks that the RNG gambe is not worth it and don't buy those items, then maybe ANET will change the modality.If many players instead will gamble for em, then ANET ( if the earnings are good ) will probably continue this way

Time will tell how players received this feature ( unfortunately, forum is less than 1% of the playerbase ).

@Aerlen.5326 said:And for you to do that, someone else has to have gotten a dye pack, gotten that dye, and put it up for sale. In fact, dye packs are an even WORSE RNG because you can and will get things you already have, you may not even get the new special dye colors. If you couldn't buy dyes off the TP, I wouldn't have any of the Gemstore ones aside from those in birthday gifts and I'd be fine with that.

Two problems with this argument.

1. They have been giving out free possibilities for picking up even the fanciest dyes. Yes, if you want EVERY dye you'd probably have to engage the gem store, but you can get pretty much any dye available for free.
2. There are HUNDREDS of dyes in the game, most of which have nothing to do with the gem store. Can't get your single favorite dye? Bummer, but you can get a halfdozen dyes that are within a few shades of the one you want in most cases. I have a few "fancy" dyes, but if I didn't have them I also have plenty of non-fancy dyes that are as good or close to it at achieving the color I'm looking for.

?This does not apply to mounts, at least not in November 2017. In November 2017, there are NO free mount skins beyond the defaults, which only have one dye channel each (even though they could obviously have four). If you don't have the specific mount skin you want from the "stables," you have NO mount skins. It would be like if the ONLY dyes available for free were the couple dozen that every new account gets.

I mean, it's ok if you personally don't mind this situation, but don't try to build a rickety false logical framework to support your opinion. It's just your opinion, no more, no less.

@Shirlias.8104 said:RNG is imho needed in order to create a market ( permanent items, bltc skins, nodes, etc... ) and to get cash from players.

RNG is not at all needed to get customers to pay you. I have yet to walk into a single Walmart or Starbucks that works on an RNG mechanism. Pretty much any retail product involves you declaring which item you want, paying a fair amount for it, and then recieving that item, not throwing money into a wishing well and hoping it spits back the item you wanted.

RNG is somewhat acceptable as a purely in-game mechanism, involving no money changing hands, but it is and always should be completely unacceptable when it comes to real money gambling.

@Ohoni.6057 said:RNG is not at all needed to get customers to pay you. I have yet to walk into a single Walmart or Starbucks that works on an RNG mechanism. Pretty much any retail product involves you declaring which item you want, paying a fair amount for it, and then recieving that item, not throwing money into a wishing well and hoping it spits back the item you wanted.

RNG is somewhat acceptable as a purely in-game mechanism, involving no money changing hands, but it is and always should be completely unacceptable when it comes to real money gambling.

They have to make cash.I see 2 alternative

1. Monthly Sub ( on everybody ).
2. Aesthetic Shop ( on those who want shinies ).

Since i prefer not to pay a monthly fee, i leave the rest to the ones who want extra items from shop.

Now, since the gems can be purchased from golds, but ANET needs that players buy with cash, it has to think the best way to turn the game into profit.

Will the RNG way be the best choice or not?We will see soon the results.

I am not with RNG nor against it.The game is free and i am not really into fashion wars, but i do understand that they are a company and what's their goal is pretty clear.

So whatever allows em to take GW2 alive is fine ( if the community, not the forum, will perceive the RNG in a bad way and won't convert $ into Gems, then they will be probably take a step back and change something ).

the example of the supermarket isn't entirely correct, a supermarket doesn't charge you for a entrance ticket that lasts forever, and then allows you to take 90% of the product in the store for free, with a few being payed for, a supermarket isn't the best store to choose to begin with, I'd have gone for some type of different retail store that sells non-essential products (not food and water, ect).

Anet has the right to do this, as much as we hate it.if they notice it's not popular and doesn't bring in money they will change it.basically, if you don't like the rng, don't buy something based on rng.

I'm trying to place a answer without to much of my personal opinion on the subject, but looking at it from a logical perspective (I personally would prefer buying a specific skin aswell)

@Shirlias.8104 said:They have to make cash.I see 2 alternative

1. Monthly Sub ( on everybody ).
2. Aesthetic Shop ( on those who want shinies ).

I have no problem with them having a gem store, I would happily buy the Mount Skins that I want if offered at a reasonable price. The problem here is the randomized aspect of it, nothing requires that chance be a factor in this purchase at all. Just let people buy the skins that they want to buy.

@CharterforGw.3149 said:the example of the supermarket isn't entirely correct, a supermarket doesn't charge you for a entrance ticket that lasts forever, and then allows you to take 90% of the product in the store for free, with a few being payed for, a supermarket isn't the best store to choose to begin with, I'd have gone for some type of different retail store that sells non-essential products (not food and water, ect).

Again, nobody is saying that they can't charge for these skins, just that it should not be random which skin you get each time you give them money. I have no problem with Walmart charging $7 for a pack of socks or $60 for a blu-ray player. What I would mind is if the only way I could get either of them would be to hand them $30 and have a random chance of getting either of those, or any of 28 other random items from around the store, and if I didn't get the thing I wanted on the first try, I'd have no option but to keep handing them 20s until the thing I came in for showed up.

Anet has the right to do this, as much as we hate it.

Of course they have the right to do this, they have "the right" to do any number of crazy things, but that doesn't make it right.

if they notice it's not popular and doesn't bring in money they will change it.basically, if you don't like the rng, don't buy something based on rng.

If we, as customers, rely on that strategy, then all hope is lost, because whales are out there, and loot boxes will ALWAYS be profitable because of them. If it means kittening 99% of the players because 1% is willing to spend money like it's breathing, then so be it. Loot boxes need to be stopped, there's no way that they can be made unprofitable. Gambling is too effective and corrupting an industry to compete with.

@Ayumi Spender.1082 said:Seeing as the voting is anonymous, I would like to tell everyone I voted yes. All those yes are mine on different accounts.

Name checks out.

I don't buy things unless I know what I'm getting.

@CharterforGw.3149 said:the example of the supermarket isn't entirely correct, a supermarket doesn't charge you for a entrance ticket that lasts forever, and then allows you to take 90% of the product in the store for free, with a few being payed for, a supermarket isn't the best store to choose to begin with, I'd have gone for some type of different retail store that sells non-essential products (not food and water, ect).

Buying a game at full price is now "buying an entrance ticket"?Is that how far "games as service" propaganda has gotten into peoples heads?

I guess EA is doing something right...

Digital goods have no material or production cost beyond first generation. You can sell the very same product you made once a billion times at no additional cost. Ofc that situation differs from a supermarket. They actually have to continuously invest heavily into offering the same product to people over and over again, games do not.I was only referring to the absurd nature of Lootboxes, not the game as a whole.

And last time I checked I paid for core and expansion content, as well as all the Outfits, Gliders and co. I own.Not quite sure where I walked off with 90% free product here, even without gambling boxes.

Im not 100% no, but i am 100% no in regard of the mounts. Most of what the Black Lion Lootboxes offer can be obtained in a different way, but the mounts are exclusively rng only

The poll is pointless. Obviously the majority of the players would vote "no", as that would give them more control over what they are getting in exchange for their currency. But the developers can sell more with a RNG involved, so...

@Ohoni.6057 said:

@Shirlias.8104 said:They have to make cash.I see 2 alternative

1. Monthly Sub ( on everybody ).
2. Aesthetic Shop ( on those who want shinies ).

@CharterforGw.3149 said:the example of the supermarket isn't entirely correct, a supermarket doesn't charge you for a entrance ticket that lasts forever, and then allows you to take 90% of the product in the store for free, with a few being payed for, a supermarket isn't the best store to choose to begin with, I'd have gone for some type of different retail store that sells non-essential products (not food and water, ect).

You can't really compare GW2's virtual world with the actual world, there is no competition for the in-game store. Walmart has competition with other stores.my previous statement is a bit vague, but this what i was trying to say. As far as I know, there is no law preventing Walmart from having a RNG based sells system. It's just not profitable when you have competition.

Anet has the right to do this, as much as we hate it.

if they notice it's not popular and doesn't bring in money they will change it.basically, if you don't like the rng, don't buy something based on rng.

If it was 99% "casual" vs 1% "whale" they would try to get the 99% to buy it aswell.if it was 66% "casual" vs 33% "whale" they would try to get the 66% to buy it aswell.if it was 33% "casual" vs 66% "whale" they would try to get the 33% to buy it aswell.

if you have a better solution, please share it with us, because I would love to have a way of stopping "lootboxes" to go any further.

I'm not trying to bash you or disagree with you that it's not a bad thing, I'm just trying to point out we can't really do much against it and that comparing it with real life isn't completely accurate.

"Internet gambling" (casino-like gambling) is legal in a lot of countries, so this will stay legal as long as "internet gambling" stays legal. the "always price" aspect makes it a grey area when it comes to the laws that exist for gambling.

@Shirlias.8104 said:RNG is imho needed to get cash from players.

No it most certainly is not.

Just take a look at the forums: Anet are losing potential money from these mount skins because a large number of players would buy them (myself included) were they simply directly purchesable for Gems, with no gambling.

That kind of non-gambling premium content clearly has kept the game alive for years, so what you're saying is just ridiclous to the extreme.

The playerbase clearly has no issues with buying enough premium content to keep the game afloat. We just have a problem with gambling.

Never liked RNG in the trading post. Not even in Black Lion Chests.

Its not suddenly now an issue. Its been an issue for 5 years.

Ofcourse, I opened many black lion chests over the years. But I only once or twice bought keys on the gemstore (over 3 or 4 years ago). Since then always pers. story farming, or PvP reward tracks or random drops.

I guess because of the availability of keys through actual gameplay, BLCs have been sort of more accepted as well.

Mounts licenses arent available through gameplay.

@CharterforGw.3149 said:

@Ohoni.6057 said:

@Shirlias.8104 said:They have to make cash.I see 2 alternative

1. Monthly Sub ( on everybody ).
2. Aesthetic Shop ( on those who want shinies ).

@CharterforGw.3149 said:the example of the supermarket isn't entirely correct, a supermarket doesn't charge you for a entrance ticket that lasts forever, and then allows you to take 90% of the product in the store for free, with a few being payed for, a supermarket isn't the best store to choose to begin with, I'd have gone for some type of different retail store that sells non-essential products (not food and water, ect).

Anet has the right to do this, as much as we hate it.

if they notice it's not popular and doesn't bring in money they will change it.basically, if you don't like the rng, don't buy something based on rng.

Not being able to adequately fight against something does not justify it. Might does not make right.

Voted no for RNG but I caved and bought 5 adoption licenses anyway. Got the storm ridge raptor, primal hare, crowned ancient jackal and starbound griffon so I'm actually pretty happy with my decision.