Official Mount Adoption Feedback Thread [merged] - Page 21 — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Official Mount Adoption Feedback Thread [merged]

1181921232461

Comments

  • Wolfheart.7483Wolfheart.7483 Member ✭✭✭

    @Roadkill.2374 said:

    @SmirkDog.3160 said:

    @Wolfheart.7483 said:
    Obviously, y'know, I mean for the future, not just right this second. And, y'know, there were Halloween mount skins and the Reforged Warhound. So, y'know, the adoption contracts haven't actually bee the only way to get new mount skins. Y'know.

    Except it would be nice to, oh I don't know, maybe acquire them some other way by like, uh......... hm................... maybe playing the game? Instead of just buying them?

    Exactly what I was saying few pages back. Let us earn them ingame! They gave us only one dye channel mounts so they can milk us on them later.

    They gave you a basic, one-dye channel, mount and offered upgraded (cosmetic upgrade only) versions for sale. How is that not ok? They can't force you (i.e. milk you) to buy them. It's not like they said you have to buy the skins or your mounts cease to function.

  • Ah RNG and lootboxes what a lovely greedy thing to see again...
    I hate RNG never bought anything involved with it, I've bought gems with gold in game and real cash but i bought them for the exact item I wanted in my case especially outfits and armor skins. Here's the problem Anet I would gladly buy gems for a skin if I know that I get what I want otherwise what's the point on buying something that has some % of rate to get an item?Logic says there's no point.
    Wanna sell a lot of skins? Because it's clear more than ever you need cash from mounts, and I get it, a game it's business and after all you make money with it.
    Advice: Lower the prices and let the people choose what item they want, you'll see people will buy a ton of them simply because they don't feel forced/scammed to waste money on it.
    So you tried to put a single defined skin which is the Reforged Warhound, which I think it's really really cool. Wanna know why I don't buy it? Because it's 2000 gems which is 25 euros. In my mind I basically do this confront: Does a skin for 25 eur equal almost the value for your expasion PoF (29,99 eur)? And as you can understand the answer is simply no.

    Anet I get it you want to make money with mounts, all the playerbase saw it miles away, but this is not the way you do it. This way only upset players and make you look really like another greedy company. As I said lower prices, defined item and you'll get all the cash you want from players.

  • Wolfheart.7483Wolfheart.7483 Member ✭✭✭

    @pah.4931 said:

    @SmirkDog.3160 said:

    @pah.4931 said:
    Hi, Anet. Thanks for making a fun game. I'm sorry you're families have grown accustomed to having homes and food. I don't work 4 to 5 hard hours per 8-hour day to earn money just to give it to you for also working hard. Also, I have no idea how businesses or the economy works. I don't understand why, as a company, you are so concerned with making money. GREED. Why don't you grow a conscience and stop worrying about growth and profits and stuff. Gosh!

    Have a good day.

    Suck up to them more, please. Have you bought all the skins yet, or are you just missing one or two?

    Ain't bought a single one. Don't plan to. Don't care to. And my characters still move the same as everyone else; they do as much damage, jump just as high, etc. That's what I love about Anet's cash shop and game design. You buy what you want. And your life changes none at all because of it. They broke 0 promises and are in breach of 0 contracts with its players. If you think this is appalling, then why not go to work for free for the next few days. Maybe then you'll realize that businesses need to make money or they close down.

    Go to Lion's Arch. People obviously don't mind this "cash grab" (read: business trying to make money from customers FOR SHAME) as much as you think.

    Absolutely.

  • @Jaquelidor.2618 said:
    I'm a returning player after several years away from the game so I'm not all that familiar with how common the use of lootboxes is in the game. I do know that other than the Black Lion Chests thus far the only RNG I've been exposed to in the Gem store have been the dyes. I'm not a fan of RNG lootboxes and rarely buy one. I know what I want and that's what I want to pay for. Same reason I don't buy blind boxes or subscribe to things like Loot Crate. So while I do find a couple of the skins something I would buy outright none are enough to get me to buy lootboxes or to spend $120 for the license to get a tonne of skins I don't care for.

    BL Chests, Dyes, Minis and other things like memories box.
    the most evil are the BLChest, i bought all my keys (and sometimes got it from drop, storyline and few free ones from ANet), and i have NEVER got anything good from those chests. if u r after wild magic backpack/glider, u need luck and/or a lot of money, if u r lucky 1 BL key is all u need, if u r unlucky u might need 170+ keys.

  • SmirkDog.3160SmirkDog.3160 Member ✭✭✭

    @pah.4931 said:
    Go to Lion's Arch. People obviously don't mind this "cash grab" (read: business trying to make money from customers FOR SHAME) as much as you think.

    Actually they do mind as much as I think, because this thread (or these merged redundant threads) blew up and all the polls have at least 80% of voters saying 'no' or 'take out the RNG'. The only people you'll see in Lion's Arch showing off their mounts are the gullible whales that will buy any and every item from the gem store because they want it first and want to feel special. There will always be mindless supporters who never stop to think, but it's pretty clear that the majority of players are extremely displeased.

    Daud Dreadwyrm | Renegade | Yak's Bend (NA) | I don't want to play anymore because GW2 has just become a pointless grindfest.

  • @pah.4931 said:

    If you think this is appalling, then why not go to work for free for the next few days. Maybe then you'll realize that businesses need to make money or they close down.

    Except no one is saying not to sell them. In fact, some are saying to feel free to sell them for more gems per piece, and we'll still buy them. We don't need them for free. People are saying that they would like to be able to pick what to spend their money on, not that they're not willing to spend money on cosmetics.

    For Anet, this is probably a viable way to make the most possible money out of it, and it's entirely likely they'll put out more skins later (whether individually or also via the stables). But for part of the playerbase, the randomized aspect is where they object, as I am.

    Yes, they're free to make money. They're even free to make this decision, as much as I may not like it. But it's not as if everyone is telling them not to sell them at all, or not to make money at all. The danger in the approach they've taken is that, while they may make more money instantly this way, it also makes for a lot of dissatisfied players. The same players they want encouraging others to play GW2.

  • Aya.6321Aya.6321 Member ✭✭

    So are we going to get any news or feedback from ANET about the atrocity of this or are we just going to let them watch us mangle each other and wait for it to blow over? THIS IS BS. Why can't they ever just talk to us. Coddle us. Explain to us the situation. Come up with a solution.

    None of that is happening. When there is quite a kitten storm right in front of them and they're going to just pretend it's not happening.
    They don't care. They're ignoring us all the way to the bank.

  • Oh fun, the first merge of the threads. Get ready for this to disappear on the boards now. Seriously, this is a bad idea Anet. You have made a huge mistake here and changing the mount skins to a pay for what you actually want method is your only course out of this one.

    Greck Howlbane - Firebrand
    Sorrow's Furnace For Life

  • @Wolfheart.7483 said:

    @Roadkill.2374 said:

    @SmirkDog.3160 said:

    @Wolfheart.7483 said:
    Obviously, y'know, I mean for the future, not just right this second. And, y'know, there were Halloween mount skins and the Reforged Warhound. So, y'know, the adoption contracts haven't actually bee the only way to get new mount skins. Y'know.

    Except it would be nice to, oh I don't know, maybe acquire them some other way by like, uh......... hm................... maybe playing the game? Instead of just buying them?

    Exactly what I was saying few pages back. Let us earn them ingame! They gave us only one dye channel mounts so they can milk us on them later.

    They gave you a basic, one-dye channel, mount and offered upgraded (cosmetic upgrade only) versions for sale. How is that not ok? They can't force you (i.e. milk you) to buy them. It's not like they said you have to buy the skins or your mounts cease to function.

    So you play the game to look average? You can spent hours chasing achievements and better loot, running dungeons and tunning your skills. And than you return to LA and next to you would stand some newbie with lots of money in glorious flaming outfit and awesome greatsword you cant get anywhere in the game other than to just buy it with zero effort. Did you hear about Fashion Wars 2. Its a thing why do you think theres such an outrage now, people care about cosmetic stuff its an MMO.

  • pah.4931pah.4931 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited November 8, 2017

    @SmirkDog.3160 said:

    @pah.4931 said:
    Go to Lion's Arch. People obviously don't mind this "cash grab" (read: business trying to make money from customers FOR SHAME) as much as you think.

    Actually they do mind as much as I think, because this thread (or these merged redundant threads) blew up and all the polls have at least 80% of voters saying 'no' or 'take out the RNG'. The only people you'll see in Lion's Arch showing off their mounts are the gullible whales that will buy any and every item from the gem store because they want it first and want to feel special. There will always be mindless supporters who never stop to think, but it's pretty clear that the majority of players are extremely displeased.

    Quoting 1,000 people in a game that has hundreds of thousands isn't a great argument. Try again.

    (A great majority of players never go to forums)

  • SmirkDog.3160SmirkDog.3160 Member ✭✭✭

    @Aya.6321 said:
    So are we going to get any news or feedback from ANET about the atrocity of this or are we just going to let them watch us mangle each other and wait for it to blow over? THIS IS BS. Why can't they ever just talk to us. Coddle us. Explain to us the situation. Come up with a solution.

    None of that is happening. When there is quite a kitten storm right in front of them and they're going to just pretend it's not happening.
    They don't care. They're ignoring us all the way to the bank.

    They have, however, argued on a different thread because I made a joke about one of them saying our comments were redundant. They're handling this whole debacle as best they can.

    Daud Dreadwyrm | Renegade | Yak's Bend (NA) | I don't want to play anymore because GW2 has just become a pointless grindfest.

  • SmirkDog.3160SmirkDog.3160 Member ✭✭✭

    @pah.4931 said:
    Quoting 1,000 people in a game that has hundreds of thousands isn't a great argument. Try again.

    (A great majority of players never go to forums)

    Okay well, there are people who are coming to the forums to both praise it and complain about it. Of those that care, most hate it. You can move the goal posts all you want, but it's a fact that this has pissed players off more than anything they've done in a long time.

    Daud Dreadwyrm | Renegade | Yak's Bend (NA) | I don't want to play anymore because GW2 has just become a pointless grindfest.

  • Vegeta.2563Vegeta.2563 Member ✭✭✭

    @WingedLass.7456 said:

    @pah.4931 said:

    If you think this is appalling, then why not go to work for free for the next few days. Maybe then you'll realize that businesses need to make money or they close down.

    Except no one is saying not to sell them. In fact, some are saying to feel free to sell them for more gems per piece, and we'll still buy them. We don't need them for free. People are saying that they would like to be able to pick what to spend their money on, not that they're not willing to spend money on cosmetics.

    For Anet, this is probably a viable way to make the most possible money out of it, and it's entirely likely they'll put out more skins later (whether individually or also via the stables). But for part of the playerbase, the randomized aspect is where they object, as I am.

    Yes, they're free to make money. They're even free to make this decision, as much as I may not like it. But it's not as if everyone is telling them not to sell them at all, or not to make money at all. The danger in the approach they've taken is that, while they may make more money instantly this way, it also makes for a lot of dissatisfied players. The same players they want encouraging others to play GW2.

    Halloween we got 5 skins for 1600 gems. Then they throw out 1 skin for 2000 gems ... given the skin looks sick, but it would be nice if it was for all 5 mounts.

  • Im not a fan of random loot boxes for something I paid gems for. I would rather they did them in themes bundles like the Halloween mount skins.

    Also, that 2000 gem mount is way over priced - if it's just a skin and not a new mount it should cost the same as an outfit.

  • Hooglese.4860Hooglese.4860 Member ✭✭✭
    edited November 8, 2017

    @Pi Slinger.5801 said:
    Here's what we as a player base are seeing that is honestly disturbing us and make us question the integrity of ArenaNet:

    • Mounts released with single-dye channel. Made to think that it was time/design constraint. Large number of mounts then sold less than 1.5 months later that look like the standard mounts, but with the 4 dye channels the originals should have had at release. And the cherry on top is that they're gated behind RNG.
    • Increasing number of awesome skins being placed into BLC. They're account bound on acquire. Drop rate of items appears to have been made very small to exploit the hypothetical 5% in attempt to artificially boost sells to be like the 60% buying the item once. People would have definitely purchased these from Gemstore if not for RNG.
    • Single mount skin sold for same price as account upgrades, almost the same price as even buying the game. Is ArenaNet saying that this one item has as much value as buying the game? Is it being sold at this price to make the RNG mount item not seem as bad by comparison?

    ArenaNet is the company that sold us a game based on respecting a player's time. However, based on the RNG, I'm starting to feel as though they don't respect my money, which took time to earn.
    Let the quality of the product drive sales. Not desperate RNG purchases. Happy customers have looser wallets than those that feel cheated. If we can't trust the Gemstore for getting the items we want from it, then we'll inevitably stop using it.

    Some pretty solid points, depressing ones at that. It implies they no longer value the player base as people and equals (ex of player base respect), but instead see the player base as a source of income/inferiors and are willing to prey on the ones of them who have addictive personalities, but what kind of person that plays a video game for 5 years has an addictive personality?

  • I have no problem with the current setup.

    I like the cheaper price with rng. I rather suspect that if there were an element of choice involved it would cost more....and I want to collect them all eventually anyway so the adoption license works out nicely.

    That being said, I'd like it if they added more costly license with ability to choose mount type (jackal, raptor, griffin, skimmer etc) for maybe 500 gems per.

    If they posted something saying there'd be the chance to individually buy skins rotated through the shop, as well as the rng route then I think it'd smooth some ruffled feathers.

  • Exstazik.5847Exstazik.5847 Member ✭✭
    edited November 8, 2017

    Price is fine but RNG-aspect is terrible. Let us choose WHAT we want to buy and problem solved. I'll gladly buy mount's skins which i LIKE and want for 400-600 gems no problem. But i refuse to gamble.
    And it's not only about mount's skins, you guys starting to put even costumes and gliders in RNG-chests. So low. Wanna sell smthn? Put it in store with actual price and i'll buy it. But i'll never pay real money for just a CHANCE to get something.

  • This randomization of the mount skins are terrible. The price would be fine if we could choose which skin we got when turning in a contract but because it's random it's just outrageous.

    The other things people have said concerning the BS this is has already been stated, but i'm making a comment anyway due to the concern of repeat posters. This is my first post concerning this and thus not a repeat.

    I am just... incredibly disappointed. I have been with gw2 since original beta and have argued to many, many people as to why this game is so awesome and wonderful and fun. I love the story, the area, the vistas, the raids, fractals, the character and personality behind npcs. But this just takes all of that and cheapens it. I avoid games with expensive RNG because I think it's unethical for all the reasons that have been described by previous people. And, though it sounds melodramatic in the extreme, a part of me still cannot help but feel betrayed. A slap to the face.

  • starlinvf.1358starlinvf.1358 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Oldirtbeard.9834 said:

    @Asum.4960 said:

    @Sodeni.6041 said:

    @Rawr.9467 said:
    Unfortunately you only need a few people to buy them. Boycotts don't work very well when you have whales that give in and purchase everything, further solidifying the benefits of this marketing model.

    I strongly believe that if there are enough people that also don't buy those skins, Anet will have to change it since everyone counts as a source of money and they make less money if people don't buy those skins because of RNG aspects.

    Considering gambling cash shop games get up to 90% of their revenue from around 0.2% of their player base, so called "whales", if ArenaNet want's to transition to that business model, loosing some "Dolphins" and "Minnows" or especially "non-monetizers" won't matter to them.

    That doesn't mean outcry's or boycotts don't matter though, especially before it's to late, at this phase they might still turn around if public perception of Anet gets bad enough.
    Shame though, since I rather would have just bought the one or two mount skins I really like for a reasonable price and recommend the game to everybody thinking about getting into a new MMO instead.

    But what does this small fish know?

    Not sure if 100 a month makes me a whale or not but I refuse to spend any of it on RNG.

    See this article from 2011, which considered $20 a month as whale territory.....
    http://www.gamesbrief.com/2011/11/whales-dolphins-and-minnows-the-beating-heart-of-a-free-to-play-game/
    http://www.gamesbrief.com/2011/09/whales-true-fans-and-the-ethics-of-free-to-play-games/

    Reading it now, in today's market, that whole bit about the difference between whales and true fans has been largely, if not entirely blurred, when you consider how polarizing people's opinions have become whenever the subject gets brought up. The fact I even feel the need to clarify this is why it bothers me..... its become increasingly difficult to have a proper discussion on a subject, when the most extreme opposing groups are trying to be as loud as possible to decry or affirm view points as irrefutable facts. There is also a problem where there is an increasing lack of empathy, or even the statement of false empathy, to dismiss issues that may had been minor before, but are now front and center. The phrases "it doesn't affect X" or "only affects Y" are no longer valid once you realize that EVERYTHING is becoming intertwined. The process may be slow, but it is happening.

    As for the situation with the Mount skins....... this was an unnecessary move, as the player base was more then ready, even eager to buy mount skins that they liked, so long as the gem cost fell into similar price ranges as gliders and outfits. 700 Gems (or ~$8) is the upper limit people I believe people are willing to go for a single item like that. As pricey as that is, Mounts were popular enough to get away with it with little push back. There is pretty much no way to spin this situation with the RNG Unlock, as there was no reason to implement a system like that; other then ensuring as many people would put in the maximum possible investment, with no other incentive then to remove uncertainty that didn't need to exist.

  • Wolfheart.7483Wolfheart.7483 Member ✭✭✭
    edited November 8, 2017

    @Wolfheart.7483 said:

    @Roadkill.2374 said:

    @SmirkDog.3160 said:

    @Wolfheart.7483 said:
    Obviously, y'know, I mean for the future, not just right this second. And, y'know, there were Halloween mount skins and the Reforged Warhound. So, y'know, the adoption contracts haven't actually bee the only way to get new mount skins. Y'know.

    Except it would be nice to, oh I don't know, maybe acquire them some other way by like, uh......... hm................... maybe playing the game? Instead of just buying them?

    Exactly what I was saying few pages back. Let us earn them ingame! They gave us only one dye channel mounts so they can milk us on them later.

    They gave you a basic, one-dye channel, mount and offered upgraded (cosmetic upgrade only) versions for sale. How is that not ok? They can't force you (i.e. milk you) to buy them. It's not like they said you have to buy the skins or your mounts cease to function.

    So you play the game to look average? You can spent hours chasing achievements and better loot, running dungeons and tunning your skills. And than you return to LA and next to you would stand some newbie with lots of money in glorious flaming outfit and awesome greatsword you cant get anywhere in the game other than to just buy it with zero effort. Did you hear about Fashion Wars 2. Its a thing why do you think theres such an outrage now, people care about cosmetic stuff its an MMO.

    Looking "average" is a matter of opinion. Eye of the beholder and all that. I love cosmetics and all my characters look very different from each other. However, I don't give a kitten what they guy next to me has. I care about what I have. So, no it doesn't bother me when I see someone with something I don't have, not in the least. I play the game and customize my characters for my own enjoyment, not to compete with others.

    None of my posts are meant to imply I think this implementation was ideal. I am saying that there are some terrible overreactions. I think it should have been done differently or at a later date after more direct-purchase options were available to players. There are many ways they could have done it differently and better. I simply don't think it's the end of the world. Despite what many people on the forum claim, Anet has learned from many of their mistakes that upset a large number of players in the past. They have revised their approach when significant backlash occurs. Anet isn't completely in the dark here. I am quite sure they knew there would be backlash to this but they gambled on how much there would be. There is probably more than they anticipated. The talk of them stabbing players in the back or not deserving our trust, etc. is simply overreacting in my opinion.

    I still believe they are testing the waters with different delivery methods for new mount skins to see what works and what doesn't. Was this adoption contract the best approach? I certainly don't think so. Could it have been far worse? Yes, absolutely. Can they rectify it? Most likely not since many people have purchased already. They might be able to put a band-aid on it somehow, time will tell. Can they learn from this and do far better next time? Without a doubt and I hope, and believe, that they will.

  • SmirkDog.3160SmirkDog.3160 Member ✭✭✭

    @Wolfheart.7483 said:

    @SmirkDog.3160 said:
    Suck up to them more, please. Have you bought all the skins yet, or are you just missing one or two?

    Your response to his post means nothing.

    You're right, I was just being redundant again.

    Daud Dreadwyrm | Renegade | Yak's Bend (NA) | I don't want to play anymore because GW2 has just become a pointless grindfest.

  • As someone who doesn't actually mind the RNG aspect of the mount skins, those who are trying to claim that other's complaints aren't warranted are being ridiculous. People have a right to be upset, and the amount who are clearly show that this is a problem for people.

  • Anet's business model and their choices in the game come down to the whales. Always has, always will. As long as a few fools with deep pockets are willing to throw money at BS like this, then Anet will gladly do things which lead to player bleed off, lower quarterly numbers and more vet player loss. Then they push hard to a new xpac and hope to create enough buzz to get new players in so they can find new whales to cater to. They have a chance here to change their strategy and listen to a large number of players that have already stated they will not give them money for this and time will tell if they listen or not. If not though, this might be the thing that will sink their chances of seeing another xpac.

    Greck Howlbane - Firebrand
    Sorrow's Furnace For Life

  • @Aya.6321 said:
    So are we going to get any news or feedback from ANET about the atrocity of this or are we just going to let them watch us mangle each other and wait for it to blow over? THIS IS BS. Why can't they ever just talk to us. Coddle us. Explain to us the situation. Come up with a solution.

    None of that is happening. When there is quite a kitten storm right in front of them and they're going to just pretend it's not happening.

    I really hope they don't take the "Blizzard Route" of just hunkering down and waiting for things to blow over. That's why I quit that game. I got tired of the current dev team taking the players for granted with a "we know you'll keep playing no matter what" attitude.

    Give an explanation. Talk to the players. Even if there's still disagreement and ANet chooses to "stay the course" at least treat your customers like customers.

  • Wolfheart.7483Wolfheart.7483 Member ✭✭✭

    @SmirkDog.3160 said:

    @Wolfheart.7483 said:

    @SmirkDog.3160 said:
    Suck up to them more, please. Have you bought all the skins yet, or are you just missing one or two?

    Your response to his post means nothing.

    You're right, I was just being redundant again.

    And that post is actually misrepresenting, yet again, what the original redundancy comment was even implying.

  • Menadena.7482Menadena.7482 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Exactly, I am sure most people thought it would follow the model of outfits and other skins. No RNG. A cost of a few hundred per individual skin (the exact cost is debatable).

    New to the game? Feel free to give a yell if you need PVE help.

  • Lisara.7830Lisara.7830 Member
    edited November 8, 2017

    @Gaile Gray.6029 <3 thanks gaile we appreciate having you and your staff review this topic

    Most of the threads ive read, and what i've noticed in game is as follows.

    If your going to to do rng items like this, it shouldn't be with high priced items or with items that most people only need 1-2 of. In the case of mounts most people wanted 1 or 2 of a specific skin out of these contracts. However, most people don't want to dig deep for $120 to end up with the skins they want but have 25 extra skins they payed for and won't use. Mainly because its wasteful. Alot of people have also commented they would pay a little extra gems (maybe not 2,000 gems but around 500-800) just to have the ability to purchase one mount skin and not a set.

    Summery of most people's ideas and how to improve.
    -Remove RNG
    (Most games that have lootboxs, and are very successful but at the same time have a bad relationship with their community)
    -Possible up the price
    (most people in the community love you guys and are willing to help fund the game)
    -Keep making mounts but not in large bulks like this
    (People will buy in small amounts its proven through micro-transactions. However when people have to pay more then the game allows them to buy in one
    transaction most people stop and hesitate (CANT BUY 9600 GEMS AT ONCE)
    -I would say release mounts like you release gliders (You get what you pay for)
    -If you want to do mounts as lootboxs I wouldn't see an issue if you added one or two rare mount skins (just not 30) to the Black Lion Chests for our gamblers out there.

  • Oglaf.1074Oglaf.1074 Member ✭✭✭✭

    400 Gems for those skins that are simply a retexture, 600 Gems for those that add a new model and/or special effects.

    I would have no problems paying either of those if I could pick the mount skin I would get.

    Please Anet give us a hide Chest Armour-option. Tattoo-clad Norns everywhere beg of you.

  • Manasa Devi.7958Manasa Devi.7958 Member ✭✭✭
    edited November 8, 2017

    @Skobel.6920 said:
    In Q2 2017 GW2 hit all time low earnings. Anet probably got letter from NC to do something about it. Business is business.
    These are the times we live in: Ub.. popular France-based developer announced they earn more from DLC and microtransactions than from digital distribution of games.
    And this is bacause of you people who buy this crates, keys and all this RNG stuff.
    It's not that Anet sets RNG trap for you. It is you who encourages them to use such marketing method. If this weren't effective, they would never have used it. This is how free market works.

    And I know this game is PG13, but are you naive kids?
    You should all know what can happen if you buy and use it.

    If you buy lottery ticket and didn't win a car do you argue with guy who sold you this ticket? I don't thivk so. So why so much anger towards Anet right now?

    Grow up.

    The main problem isn't even the gambling. It's the fact that there's no other way to obtain mount skins other than the spooky pack or a skin for a single mount type (jackal). If, like gliders and outifts, the vast majority of skins was up for single direct purchase and a small handful behind RNG, there wouldn't be this enormous backlash. If I could just buy a regular old raptor with 4 dye channels for a reasonable amount of gems, I wouldn't care one bit about all the "my mount crashed through a few christmas trees and a neon sign but I just can't be bothered to clean the poor thing up" disasters they're putting behind RNG.

  • Looking "average" is a matter of opinion. Eye of the beholder and all that. I love cosmetics and all my characters look very different from each other. However, I don't give a kitten what they guy next to me has. I care about what I have. So, no it doesn't bother me when I see someone with something I don't have, not in the least. I play the game and customize my characters for my own enjoyment, not to compete with others.

    None of my posts are meant to imply I think this implementation was ideal. I am saying that there are some terrible overreactions. I think it should have been done differently or at a later date after more direct-purchase options were available to players. There are many ways they could have done it differently and better. I simply don't think it's the end of the world. Despite what many people on the forum claim, Anet has learned from many of their mistakes that upset a large number of players in the past. They have revised their approach when significant backlash occurs. Anet isn't completely in the dark here. I am quite sure they knew there would be backlash to this but they gambled on how much there would be. There is probably more than they anticipated. The talk of them stabbing players in the back or not deserving our trust, etc. is simply overreacting in my opinion.

    I still believe they are testing the waters with different delivery methods for new mount skins to see what works and what doesn't. Was this adoption contract the best approach? I certainly don't think so. Could it have been far worse? Yes, absolutely. Can they rectify it? Most likely not since many people have purchased already. They might be able to put a band-aid on it somehow, time will tell. Can they learn from this and do far better next time? Without a doubt and I hope, and believe, that they will.

    You got a point. But I just dont like the attitude that its just cosmetics it doesnt matter. I want to feel rewarded for playing the game with some good looking loot. I want to have option how to get gear with quality design. Look at the legendary armor and how hard it is to obtain. Compare it to any of the outfits and tell me it is worth the grind (I know matter of opinion).

    But what I dont like the most about the mount skins, other then the rng bs, is that is the first and only way to get different variants and it is behind a paywall.

  • Tachenon.5270Tachenon.5270 Member ✭✭✭

    News of this is hitting the gaming sites, in case it hasn't been mentioned yet.

  • Oglaf.1074Oglaf.1074 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Tachenon.5270 said:
    News of this is hitting the gaming sites, in case it hasn't been mentioned yet.

    I've been trying to get Jim Sterling's attention on this since yesterday.

    Please Anet give us a hide Chest Armour-option. Tattoo-clad Norns everywhere beg of you.

  • Lisara.7830Lisara.7830 Member
    edited November 8, 2017

    @pah.4931 said:
    Hi, Anet. Thanks for making a fun game. I'm sorry you're families have grown accustomed to having homes and food. I don't work 4 to 5 hard hours per 8-hour day to earn money just to give it to you for also working hard. Also, I have no idea how businesses or the economy works. I don't understand why, as a company, you are so concerned with making money. GREED. Why don't you grow a conscience and stop worrying about growth and profits and stuff. Gosh!

    Have a good day.

    You really think their extra pocket change goes in their pockets your awfully narrow minded. I believe in anet, and I can see them being a company which as it grows would also grow as a company. Increasing the number of staff, and improving and expanding old and new content. Most of us are working people out in the world, I will be honest I wasn't happy when i saw the new items and mounts mainly because of the RNG. However, Mounts dont make your character stronger only cooler to look at, so by no means is anet scamming you. It a buy at your own convenience, If you think its a bad deal dont buy it and dont support it. Let ANET KNOW YOUR UPSET but your comment doesnt offer any SOLUTIONS only a useless rant that shows you dont wish for anet's success. The last comment in particular only shows your stupidity and only further discredits your arguement.

  • well im not suggest or boycott anything, im just an old GW player from GW1, and b'cos i do have conscience, which is why I will stop buying gems from anet, i love the game, but i will not and never will support gambling.

  • Witch of Doom.5739Witch of Doom.5739 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Tachenon.5270 said:
    News of this is hitting the gaming sites, in case it hasn't been mentioned yet.

    It has been mentioned but needs mentioning again. I watched one review that can be basically summed up with its term "debacle." Personal opinion and all that, but I agree. The RNG aspect has a lot of people po'ed but if ANet changes it to "buy the one you want" they will have po'ed people that already gambled.

  • Eldrich.5764Eldrich.5764 Member ✭✭
    edited November 8, 2017

    I really want those sparkly griffon skins but I refuse to gamble my way to get them. And I say this as a person who dropped 2000 gems on the new jackal skin. While I certainly don't regret my purchase because I love that skin, I don't think I'll pay 2000 gems for another skin again no matter how much I like it. But I'd be perfectly ok with a sort of tiered skin system where some of the basic ones are like 200-300 gems while the more effects-laden ones can be 800-1000 gems. If I knew I could buy the flame griffon directly and it was going to cost me 800 gems, I'd buy it in a heartbeat. However, I'm not going to spend 400 gems for a RNG license that gives me a 1/30 chance (initially but reducing over time) of getting the skin I want.

  • Oglaf.1074Oglaf.1074 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @SidewayS.3789 said:

    @Oglaf.1074 said:

    @Tachenon.5270 said:
    News of this is hitting the gaming sites, in case it hasn't been mentioned yet.

    I've been trying to get Jim Sterling's attention on this since yesterday.

    https://i.redd.it/ikr4781murwz.png

    Here it is.

    Thank God for Jim Sterling, Son.

    Please Anet give us a hide Chest Armour-option. Tattoo-clad Norns everywhere beg of you.

  • Just wanted to post this here since I think this conversation about the future skins needs to happen.

    @Nabuko Darayon.9645 said:

    @Kheldorn.5123 said:
    Used to have*

    This is a B2P game that for years stood as an example for fair microtransaction model. We are currently experiencing Anet testing waters of how far and how fast they can go with this scheme. It didn't start tomorrow, it's happening since the revamp of BLCs and introducing more and more unique skins gated behind RNG.

    We are not talking about single mount being BLC exclusive here. We are talking about 30 skins locked behind RNG box that you have no control how much you have to spend to get the one you want. 1 player will pay 400 gems to get the one desired skin, the other may be required to buy all of them to get it.

    Unless players make their disgust heard this is only a step to worse practices. So this is one of many points where the community has to say "NO". If you keep people down with claims you posted, you are only hurting yourself in the future.

    I agree with you on this about the future but the current rampage on reddit doesn't even touch this issue. It's more about whining that someone else can afford to buy the 30-mount pack then whining about the RNG aspect. IMO if ANet clearly states that they wanted to release all the Pack 1 Mounts together in an RNG form I'm fine with that. I actually prefer that instead if they went around silently releasing 5 skins per patch where they would cost 1200-2000 gems (None even mentions how expensive the Warhound skin is). What needs to be done is that someone talks with ANet in a polite and respectful way (or the people from Black Lion's Arch set) and figure out a solid way to make majority content.

    Like I said I agree with you about the worries of the future, but I'm actually fine atm since this gives me an opportunity to buy these skins throughout the year with Gold->Gem conversation. Yes, it will probably take me a while before I get that Starbound Griffon like the other "cool" kids have but then again I'm not a kid anymore and I'm not attracted by Shinies others have, but with the personality they portray. And so far the Torchbarers and Pitchforkcarriers showed obnoxious personality traits.

  • Griever.8150Griever.8150 Member ✭✭✭

    I hate gambling so screw this :). Quite simple really.

    I like being rewarded for my time/efforts/money investements in a way i personally chose, otherwise its not worth it.

    I mean christ, when you go to a car dealership they don't roll a dice to decide what model and color your car is going to be no? You pay with your own kitten money that you spent time and efforts earning, you chose. Its that simple.

    The fact that it exists isn't a huge issue itself, if it tickles some people's fancy, why not have it But its infuriating to not have the OPTION to pick and chose skins we want, even if it means paying slightly more than the gambling method per skin.

  • Erulogos.2591Erulogos.2591 Member ✭✭✭

    Given that I only have interest in 2 or 3 skins, and have active dislike for about twice that many, I dislike the gambling aspect heavily. If they had released non-RNG unlocks at twice the price per I'd have almost instantly gone for that. If they're married to RNGsus on this (corporate meddling?) the price per should be lower (which is just common business sense, you want your pricing to encourage impulse shopping.)
    I'd also settle for the consolation price of the skins being tradeable. Then I could more reliably farm my way to a doge jackal.

  • Blaeys.3102Blaeys.3102 Member ✭✭✭
    edited November 8, 2017

    The price per skin is fine imo.

    The RNG element is extremely shady and non-Anet (at least the Anet that first created this game). That is where they go way too far.

    Basically, this purchase model requires people to potentially buy multiple skins they do not want in order to get the one they do want. That crosses a line that I never expected Anet to cross.

    Sell one clear item for one clear price and stop resorting to shady sales tactics that take advantage of consumer trust and encourage addictive buying behaviors. It really isn't more complicated than that.

©2010–2018 ArenaNet, LLC. All rights reserved. Guild Wars, Guild Wars 2, Heart of Thorns, Guild Wars 2: Path of Fire, ArenaNet, NCSOFT, the Interlocking NC Logo, and all associated logos and designs are trademarks or registered trademarks of NCSOFT Corporation. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.