Official Mount Adoption Feedback Thread [merged] - Page 31 — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Official Mount Adoption Feedback Thread [merged]

1282931333461

Comments

  • Konig Des Todes.2086 has the right idea.

    I think that, going forward at least, you should give us the option to either RNG the skins for cheaper, RNG the skins from a smaller pool (by mount type) for a slightly larger price, and then finally sell a token in the gem store that will allow us to "use" the contract to select a skin.

    If I had the option to not-RNG skins, I would actually spend more money over time on just the current skins that are available. I am interested in buying around 13 skins, both for myself and friends. I just don't want to gift my friends a contract and have them receive a skin they hate, it devalues the gift itself.

    Imagine getting a skin from your friend and learning that their well-spent money got you the ugliest skin in the book. (For me, that would be the Fire Pinion) It's just a waste. I would never go to a restaurant and accept a deal where if I gave them $1 I would get a random item off of their menu when I could just spend $5 on an item that I want.

    All we have to do is look at who at Anet/NCSoft has a paycheck that is directly reflects GW2's profits to find out who's idea this was.

  • pixie.5940pixie.5940 Member ✭✭
    edited November 9, 2017

    I simply wanted skins. Overall I think the price should be lower to black lion key if it RNG. If not maybe make loot boxes like Duffy said which is. Put all rabbits in their own box. Put all raptor's in their own box and so on.
    But I would be dis-please if I get refunded my gems for something I did want and paid for. I don't like outfits and a lot of other things, but I'm not forcing or whining about you guys refund or stop selling those said items.
    This is double edge sword when BLC should be re-looked at then too.
    Then gem store as whole etc.

    As a person who bought $20 gems. Then plus gifted 2 to friends. Overall I'm good. I was just happy to have 4 dye slot channels on my raptor instead of one. Who knew some people it's the simple things that win them over haha.
    I do think ANet needs look into price change though. Maybe have a better system or P.R. to express what coming into gem store. What is % of said items what is my dollar value going towards?
    Plus it really upset me to see people tell devs to "Kys" when they didn't even work on said items or area. Like what....?? At the end of the day this is a digital world it can easily be shut down with a switch. All the money I spent on GW1 to GW2. It would mean nothing so quick.
    Or told how to spend my money that I'm part of the issue. Hello...we all are then. ANYTHING thing a person buys is from gem store to endless tools, kits. Want talk RNG what about dye packs. I shouldn't be told how spend my hard earn money. If not hard earn gold. At the end the day. Big time when not all us came in mindset of I'm here to GAMBLE AND GET LUCKY BOIS!
    I came legit to get some skins ugly or not. I WAS happy just to have 4 slots. BECAUSE that all I wanted from day 1 of PoF.
    I hope next box or any mounts you guys do.. next time. Do your research for a fair price so this doesn't upset a bunch, folks. Because at the end of the day price/rng of it was a bit over top.

  • Alternative solution: keep the 400gem mount raffle and add the "choose mount" option for 600gems. You save money per skin if you take the random option, but you still have the opportunity to choose only the ones you want.

    For the 2k gem mount, that one I have no solution other than 2k gems for 1 non-bundled skin is ridiculous. I know more work probably went into this one than the others, but either bundle it with similar skins for each mount or drop the price. I happily bought the spooky mounts at the same price, but that was for 5 of them

    "Beware those who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master."
    Tempest, Spellbreaker, Mirage, Scourge
    [AGNY] - Eternal Agony Guild, Sanctum of Rall

  • Shaaba.5672Shaaba.5672 Member ✭✭✭

    @Hezkore.9568 said:
    The Black Lion Chests are very much random, people seem fine with those.

    Then you're not really paying attention. The specific problem most people have with the BLC is exactly the RNG factor of skins that are otherwise unobtainable. Same as the mount adoption scheme.

  • The only thing I've been doing in the game since finishing PoF story is making money waiting for mount skins. Spooky mounts were added, but although the price tag of 400 per skin was okay for me, I only wanted 2 skins, not all 5, so I refrained from buying them disappointed that they decided to go with a bundle instead of individual skins. So I went back to waiting, just to get the news that individual mount skins are now 2000 gems, with an option for RNG skin for the old price tag of 400 gems.

    I haven't logged into the game since yesterday, I probably won't play until they remove the RNG from the 400 gems skins, I have no reason to play for RNG lootboxes.

  • sidecarpilot.3468sidecarpilot.3468 Member
    edited November 9, 2017

    Lets be real, there's a place for RNG-based cosmetics (and most of the RNG based stuff for that matter) called the Black Lion Chest, that said, the price of thoose skins is fine, the RNG factor isn't, for me, out of all the 30 skins i (kinda) like 8, as a costumer I won't buy any just because the chances are ridiculous, and the only way to bypass the rng is buying the whole thing, leaving me with 22 cosmetics i don't like for a HUGE amount of money. The lootbox would be fine if like many players said there was a realistic way to bypass the random factor, like "choose a skin tickets". As i said, i'd buy 8 of thoose 30 skins... with this rng system i won't buy any.
    About the Jackal skin, seriously, I'm gonna be honest here, when i read the patch notes and saw Warhound skin for 2000gems i thought it was a pack of skins, then i realise its a single skin for 2k gems, are you out of your mind? how can you justify selling a single skin for the same amount as a 5-skin pack release weeks prior? It just doesnt make any sense, it's completly insane, single mount skins should go for 500 gems, i dont think players will buy if you go over that.
    Now, what i'd really like to see here is, remove the rng factor, the price is fine, but leave the rng stuff for the old lootbox we all love to hate, called Black Lion Chest.
    And decrease the price of the warhound skin, i wonder how many you sold at that price lol.

    EDIT: Also, I do think you handled the halloween skins perfectly, was just missing the option to buy "singles" out of the pack, but overall it was perfection compared to this madness RNG-lootbox and 2k jackal skin.

  • Nihevil.8024Nihevil.8024 Member ✭✭✭

    ya blew it.

    I thought I could actually recommend your game again with the release of the new expansion.

  • Let's be honest in 30 mount's that they added we are all looking to get 10 mount's that we like , coz other 20 are more or less the same as regular mount's.I dont want to pay 120 $ to get all of them since i rly want only those 10 , and i dont want to gamble because i will pay even more true gambling proces.Those who say it's just cosmetic , no it's not.

  • Honestly would be completely fine with this, so long as you guys are transparent with how the mount skins money was used.
    If it funded a better code base and dx12/vulkan, that would be amazing and id be all for it.

    However, I would be more ok with the mount contracts being seperate so if someone wants all of one particular mount, its only $5 more than say a mount on the wow store. Maybe even make it so a portion goes to a charity from a list.

  • @Gaile Gray.6029 said:
    Sorry for the delay. Things went a little weird and I thought I had a disappearing thread here. All should be fine now.

    As far as whether we need more feedback: As long as players want to offer their thoughts, we want to read them. I have already submitted a detailed report on the feedback, including many areas of concern, individual and aggregate suggestions, and much more. I've also had conversations on the topic, as well. So this is "in the system" so to speak, but anyone else who wants to share their thoughts is more than welcome to do so!

    Thank you, Gaile. It goes without saying that this feedback is appreciated. It can't be easy reading through these 38 pages, in terms of volume let alone content. Fingers crossed for a speedy resolution.

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

    @Quarktastic.1027 said:

    @Menadena.7482 said:

    @Nile.5614 said:
    Here's the real way to "fix" this, or at least make it less of a sting to people that don't want a large pool chance.
    Because I doubt the RNG aspect is going to be removed, it's just kinda how these things work nowadays.
    Why aren't these being treated like gemstore dye kits?

    1. Purchase a Mount Adoption License.
    2. Double-click to use the item once purchased.
    3. Select from a prompt window of what type of mount you'd rather adopt: Raptor, Springer, Skimmer, Jackal, Griffon.
    4. Now the RNG is restricted to only ONE type of mount.
    5. This makes targeting easier. This makes people happier with the concept. It makes it less painful and less obviously exploitative.

    EDIT:
    And one more thing. The "natural" mount skins should be just obtainable in game. The special ones, like Pyroclast for the Jackal or any of the "magical" ones? Those probably can stay where they are.

    There would still be problems but it would solve a biggie. Right now this can 'give' you a skin for a mount you did not have. So if you never intend to get the griffon but unlock a griffon skin that is 400 gems up in smoke.

    Honestly, if you don't have the griffon, you should convert that 400 gems to gold and put it toward getting the griffon instead of gambling on mount skins.

    What ever happened to 'play your own way", since when is the griffon mandatory? Many who have it say the exact opposite. Whatev, that is getting off-topic. The point is it is possible to get a skin you can not use. Unlike other content, if you do not have HOT you can not buy a glider.

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

  • I don't post on the forums ever, but I've been playing the game for 3-4 years now, and I'm just hopping in to throw in my two cents. There's not much that I can say that will be new, but I personally am the exact sort of person these business practices exploit. I disliked it when it was exclusive items in Black Lion Chests. But as mount skins were something that I, as well as many others, were looking forward to, this just feels... low. As someone with a highly addictive personality, it's tough to hold myself back from these sorts of things when I want something out of them. I even rushed without thinking to sell off a bunch of mats just to buy one, and I feel incredibly ashamed. I know this is still my fault, but it takes a lot of self control to stop myself from buying into these systems, and leaves me feeling personally targeted and exploited.

    I would be absolutely fine, and certainly purchase them myself if the price was raised per skin (more in line with gliders), but we could buy them individually. I would even be a bit more okay with this if the mount skins you got from the Adoption were sell-able on the TP, much like the Black Lion weapon skins. But as it stands, I cannot approve of this decision, and I feel it is disrespectful and exploitative to your player base.

    All in all, I just feel incredibly disappointed in this move to further capitalize on an exploitative business practice. I've been incredibly generous with gem purchases in recent memory due to just how satisfied I have been with the quality of content that's been put out. I've ADORED LS3 and PoF. But if this points to how this game's monetization is going to be handled in the future, I'm incredibly reluctant to spend any more money on gems, as well as continue recommending the game to others, as I have for so long.

  • Umbramare.9156Umbramare.9156 Member ✭✭
    edited November 9, 2017

    @Gaile Gray.6029 said:
    Sorry for the delay. Things went a little weird and I thought I had a disappearing thread here. All should be fine now.

    As far as whether we need more feedback: As long as players want to offer their thoughts, we want to read them. I have already submitted a detailed report on the feedback, including many areas of concern, individual and aggregate suggestions, and much more. I've also had conversations on the topic, as well. So this is "in the system" so to speak, but anyone else who wants to share their thoughts is more than welcome to do so!

    Will we get acknowledgement or will you guys just shrug it off?

    Never forget, never forgive #MountGate

  • dolcolax.1268dolcolax.1268 Member ✭✭
    edited November 9, 2017

    arent kids supposed to be supervised by parents when playing? i just dont get ppl saying this encourages kids to gamble, when they have someone.

    edit: if your friend gave you an ugly skin with his hard earned money and you think its a waste, arent you just being ungrateful?

    please release me, let me go

  • I'll just say this.. if its 400gems per random mount.. why not have a second more expensive option lets say 600/800 gems per specific skin? This way everyone is happy?
    Also 2k gems for one mount as unique as it is.. errr ... rip?

  • Honeychan.2805Honeychan.2805 Member
    edited November 9, 2017

    I like most of the designs for the new mount skins. But I never liked spending my money on things that are luck-based. I play this game since release and I never cared buying black lion keys. But this time I could not resist, even if I hate this way of selling the skins. I bought 13 tickets. And I highly regret it. Not because I got only "bad" skins ( I got 3 that I like), but I feel robbed and I hate myself for spending money on 10 skins that I will most likely never use.
    I would pay 600 or 700 gems for a nice mount skin with a fresher look or nice particle effects. 400gems for a recolor skin would be okay. Maybe 1000k gems if the skin is really really outstanding or different from the original - like the Reforged Warhound Jackal.
    And please let me choose which one I can buy.
    I'm not a player that buys gems that often, but I'm willing to pay for good looking or super useful stuff for a fair price. And I always buy the ultimate addon editions, because I like this game way too much, so that's the least I can do.
    Fashion Wars, as silly as it may seem, is also a huge huge part of the endgame - especially in GW2. And now mounts are a part of it.
    I hope that the way of selling mount skins will be reconsidered and changed.
    And I hope, that there will be a way for people, who already spend money on the rng-method, to get their gems back (not the money). So that we can just re-buy the skins that we want.
    ~sincerely, a 5 years GW2 player

  • JustTrogdor.7892JustTrogdor.7892 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited November 9, 2017

    @Gaile Gray.6029 said:
    Sorry for the delay. Things went a little weird and I thought I had a disappearing thread here. All should be fine now.

    As far as whether we need more feedback: As long as players want to offer their thoughts, we want to read them. I have already submitted a detailed report on the feedback, including many areas of concern, individual and aggregate suggestions, and much more. I've also had conversations on the topic, as well. So this is "in the system" so to speak, but anyone else who wants to share their thoughts is more than welcome to do so!

    Given how much this has blown up and in the interest of transparency, perhaps you would consider posting your report here for all those concerned to see? It might go a way to let those concerned know what has been submitted to Anet for review.

  • TexZero.7910TexZero.7910 Member ✭✭✭✭

    My only addition if it has not already been said in this now 40 page mega thread is

    I'd like the content to be a part of the game, not the gem store. Glider's suffered the same fate and it's time to rethink having so many artist dedicated to the gemstore team and perhaps dedicate some of them to meaningful long-term in game rewards.

  • sephiroth.4217sephiroth.4217 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited November 9, 2017

    @Gaile Gray.6029 said:
    Sorry for the delay. Things went a little weird and I thought I had a disappearing thread here. All should be fine now.

    As far as whether we need more feedback: As long as players want to offer their thoughts, we want to read them. I have already submitted a detailed report on the feedback, including many areas of concern, individual and aggregate suggestions, and much more. I've also had conversations on the topic, as well. So this is "in the system" so to speak, but anyone else who wants to share their thoughts is more than welcome to do so!

    I'm glad you guys are taking these complaints seriously... If you intend to make it less RNG or more direct, any chance you can throw a bone to those of us that have buyers remorse?

    It was really disheartening to spend a large sum of money and lose on the "gamble" so to speak. I would have spent 2k gems just on a griffon stable area if it meant I could end up with the mount I wanted, but instead I spent 4k gems on mount skins I'll never use because they are mounts that I do not use.

    Just for clarity: I would have directly bought the Fire Griffon or Star Griffon for 2000 gems if it was released like the Forged Warhound.

    Not to brag, but I put together a puzzle in 4 days and the box said 2-4 years.
    Please allow team queue with rewards again at our own discretion.
    Apologies if I come off as dry or blunt.

  • Let the Mount License allow us to select the category of the mount and then randomize the selection. At least the selection then won't be so painful. I understand you have to eat too, well, not just you, but a lot of you who have bills to pay and a life to run.

  • Just give us the alternative to buy specific mounts for a standard price, or try our hand at gambling to get them for cheap.

  • nexidecimus.5973nexidecimus.5973 Member
    edited November 9, 2017

    Arenanet, I just have one question. What could have possibly possessed the entire company to go along with this and have not a single individual say "Maybe this is a bad idea. it might kitten some people off." ? edit: wow forum lords are so literal. ok lemme clear this up, i mean all the people who are responsible for letting this happen. as in, the people who actually gave this the green light. not one of them was like "uh, no how about we don't?"

  • Since these mount skins are random, I have opted to buy none, instead of ~5. I feel there are better uses of my gold and gems and I don't have any desire to pursue random skins.

  • @nexidecimus.5973 said:
    Arenanet, I just have one question. What could have possibly possessed the entire company to go along with this and have not a single individual say "Maybe this is a bad idea. it might kitten some people off." ?

    You assume that everyone did. Just because it happened doesn't mean the entire company went along with it. It just means that the people in charge were in favor of it.

  • @nexidecimus.5973 said:
    Arenanet, I just have one question. What could have possibly possessed the entire company to go along with this and have not a single individual say "Maybe this is a bad idea. it might kitten some people off." ?

    That's ...not how companies work. The people in charge can make decisions without needing input from employees, and often (I'm not suggesting this is the case here) employees won't voice a dissenting opinion for fear of losing their jobs.

  • Ashantara.8731Ashantara.8731 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @dolcolax.1268 said:
    arent kids supposed to be supervised by parents when playing? i just dont get ppl saying this encourages kids to gamble, when they have someone guiding them.

    Because nowadays, where parents have to work three times as much to be able to support their families, they still have time to control their children's online behavior 24/7? I seriously doubt it.

    You should see all the games that are exploiting people, and especially youngsters, by introducing skin gambling content into their games (opening containers and what not). This doesn't end with MMOs, mind you. Popular shooters like CS:GO are releasing tons of stuff that lures people into gambling, and many of those players are still teenagers. In addition, there are gambling sites for those gaming skins (mostly illegal, but that is a different story) that support this kind of behavior. I know several people online who have grown addicted to gambling for skins.

  • I will keep it simple.

    Please just let us choose the mount skins separately, and price them according to tiers/quality. As they are now, I will never buy a mount skin. for fear of wasting money on something that doesn't appeal to me.

  • Just adding my two cents here for what it's worth (commented on a separate thread that got merged with this one).

    I, like many others, am extremely disappointed this is the route you have chosen to go down. I've spent more time and money on this game than any other I've ever played and it sucks to see this happen. Although I think at this stage it's unlikely, I really hope you will change this and remove the RNG aspect to let people buy the specific skins they want.

    If this is an NCSoft decision - I sincerely hope they see all of the outrage this has caused and rethink their business strategy for GW2. There is a great community and a talented dev team worth protecting here that many games would love to have - don't jeopardise that because you got greedy.

  • I'm not totally against there being a random aspect to the mount skins, but I think it could have been done better. People don't totally hate RNG, they hate it when there are no alternatives (Remember the days before precursor crafting?). The only other mount skin set in game is a holiday based one. Adding more skins that you can individually pick either in game or in the gem store will present an alternative for those who are not interested in RNG.

    Another option which could probably be done faster would just be to let people pick what mount they're getting the skin for. So if I had a mount skin box, I double click it, I choose a skimmer, and then I get a random skimmer skin. I think this could pull a lot of the hate away from these boxes. If you want to keep a full rng box though, add more avenues to get skins to supplement it.

    Option 3 is to go a route similar to overwatch. Keep the full RNG box, but let people individually buy skins for an increased price.

    Hope this helps :)

  • @JustTrogdor.7892 said:

    @Gaile Gray.6029 said:
    Sorry for the delay. Things went a little weird and I thought I had a disappearing thread here. All should be fine now.

    As far as whether we need more feedback: As long as players want to offer their thoughts, we want to read them. I have already submitted a detailed report on the feedback, including many areas of concern, individual and aggregate suggestions, and much more. I've also had conversations on the topic, as well. So this is "in the system" so to speak, but anyone else who wants to share their thoughts is more than welcome to do so!

    Given how much this has blown up and in the interest of transparency, perhaps you would consider posting your report here for all those concerned to see? It might go a way to let those concerned know what has been submitted to Anet for review. Also I looked at your posts and can't find the one from earlier where you said you sent an Anet wide message including feedback. What happened to that post? Thanks.

    This is just my 2c, but I don't think that's a good idea. I'm not sure transparency is even warranted. A speedy and reasonable solution would be preferred, but there are many reasons not to disclose the inner workings of the company, especially for our own benefit. For one, it would open a can of worms as players dissected every word and wasted Gaile's time with questions, time better spent on her pushing our feedback back to anet. I know it's a hard situation but we have to give her some faith here and see what happens. Sometimes it's better not to look behind the curtain.

  • First and foremost, I absolutely adore this game and franchise since gw1 came out. The latest adoption rng based trend, left me disheartened. As there were a couple mounts I really wanted alongside the new shiny back piece located in the BLC, I quickly did the math and for the first time, I felt like this game put a wall up for me.

    I've always advocated for gw2, and I've never thought twice about buying things from the gem store that I could control as a consumer, but this lootbox system isn't the right way to do this.

  • Starfall Leyline.2481Starfall Leyline.2481 Member ✭✭✭
    edited November 9, 2017

    My thoughts, which I'm sure someone's already posted:

    I don't "like" RNG, but I get it. That being said, I don't like RNG at the prices that it's being offered, or at the odds of it being offered. For example, I really don't like the Springer mount. I don't really care about getting mount skins for it. I did get a couple skins, and then I stopped, because I realized I didn't want to empty what spending money I have trying to get more.

    • If you want to have your cake and eat it too, have the "normal" skins be purchaseable directly, and put the "special" skins in your black lion chest like you do the gliders.
    • If you're going to keep it at 400 gems a pop, make the adoption certificates mount-specific. Have one for griffons, have one for raptors, have one for skimmers, etc.
    • If you're going to keep it at 30+ mounts and add more down the line (which I assume you are), drop the gem price.
    • If you're going to make it so we can purchase specific skins I'm okay with upping the price, and having the "special" skins be a bit more.

    The only reason $100+ for all the mount skins sounds like a lot to people, is due to the fact it's the only available option to guarantee they'll get a skin they like. If they were able to have some choice in the matter, they wouldn't care how much the full pack would cost for the most part. They'd leave that to the people who can afford to dump that kind of money.

    So there are the options I foresee being feasible.

  • I barely tolerate the Black Lion Chests as is. Earning keys is few and far between during normal game play as is. If this mount adoption is carried forward, I'll spend my time and money some place else.

  • I have made this survey that sums up some of the topics that people brought up, it should be an important tool for people to get a broader vision of the communitys thoughts. (and its what arena net should be doing themselves at this point, right?)

    here is the link

    You can see all results at the end of the pool, so Arena Net can check it up too.

    Please please please share word of this so we can give valuable data in an organized form to them.
    Thank you!

  • Jordan.5930Jordan.5930 Member ✭✭✭
    edited November 9, 2017

    @Boingo.5264 said:
    I don’t post much, but this has got me so annoyed. To the people who are defending this type of RNG delivery method for mount skins I ask you this: In how many other areas of your life would you be willing to put up with this? Would you buy a car not knowing which one they will ultimately give you? Are you OK buying EVERY car on the lot, just in hopes of getting the one that you actually like? And after buying all of those cars, would it then be reasonable to justify your purchase by saying, “Well, I guess the dealership has to make its money somehow.” This is WRONG, and I guarantee you you would not put up with this sort of thing in almost any other consumer environment.

    As many have already said, this could have been avoided by just allowing people to buy the skins that they wanted.

    THIS POST RIGHT HERE. If you lack the forsight and understanding to see why this type of behavior is unacceptable and disastrous not just for Guild Wars 2 but for the gaming industry as a whole, YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM. If you do not understand why this behavior encourages lazy game design, YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM. If you are ok with getting less and support companies taking advantage of their player base because by some twisted logic you think this is the only way for them to make a living!!! YOU. Yes YOU. Are part if the problem.

    P.S - Thank you Boingo for telling it like it is

  • I didnt like the gamble, i want to buy the skins i want. Name the price, but let me choose and exactly what i want it

  • JustTrogdor.7892JustTrogdor.7892 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited November 9, 2017

    @Zoltar MacRoth.7146 said:

    @JustTrogdor.7892 said:

    @Gaile Gray.6029 said:
    Sorry for the delay. Things went a little weird and I thought I had a disappearing thread here. All should be fine now.

    As far as whether we need more feedback: As long as players want to offer their thoughts, we want to read them. I have already submitted a detailed report on the feedback, including many areas of concern, individual and aggregate suggestions, and much more. I've also had conversations on the topic, as well. So this is "in the system" so to speak, but anyone else who wants to share their thoughts is more than welcome to do so!

    Given how much this has blown up and in the interest of transparency, perhaps you would consider posting your report here for all those concerned to see? It might go a way to let those concerned know what has been submitted to Anet for review. Also I looked at your posts and can't find the one from earlier where you said you sent an Anet wide message including feedback. What happened to that post? Thanks.

    This is just my 2c, but I don't think that's a good idea. I'm not sure transparency is even warranted. A speedy and reasonable solution would be preferred, but there are many reasons not to disclose the inner workings of the company, especially for our own benefit. For one, it would open a can of worms as players dissected every word and wasted Gaile's time with questions, time better spent on her pushing our feedback back to anet. I know it's a hard situation but we have to give her some faith here and see what happens. Sometimes it's better not to look behind the curtain.

    As big as this has gotten I disagree. In my 4 plus years of playing GW2 this is the biggest issue I have seen regarding the game and how it goes forward (I wasn't around for the ascended thing). I feel now is the time for transparency more than ever given all the bad press this issue as gained after a very successful PoF launch. Customers that feel strongly about this issue should be shown what is being reported back to Anet decision makers. I don't really have a horse in this race as I am not a mount fan to start with. However, customers that do care about this issue may want to see what is being reported back to those that make the decisions.

  • I'm, with many others, are very disappointed in this last update. RNG can be fun, but not with the current mount skins and how it's acquired. Guild Wars 2 is currently lacking fun ingame rewards. It would have been a much more fun experience if these mount skins were used as rare like random drops from upcoming raid bosses and upcoming fractals, and maybe random drops from upcoming world bosses. And maybe some for some collections for those who don't like that sort of system. But I think it is highly needed with the current state of the game with only trash blues and greens dropping. If they were also account bound and not sellable in the trading post or tradeable to other players, would make it so you had to do content and not just buy new skins for gold. It would give the content high motivation and replayability, witch PoF now lacks alot. Sure I'm happy to spend some gems in the gem store from time to time but these new 30 mount skins SHOULD have been fun new ingame rewards, not gem store skins, and absolutely not from random lootboxes from the gemstore. Maybe fun special mount skins, like halloween, wintersday and other special skins should be in the gem store, but not the kind that are currently in the lootboxes, that kind should be earnable ingame through fun loot in ingame content like raid drops, fractal rewards or world bosses. As I said, the game lacks fun loot and motivation and all friends I know stopped playing because of it.

  • Zin Dau.1749Zin Dau.1749 Member ✭✭✭

    Let's be objective.

    Not all systems with randomness, uncertainty, and risks are gambling. In this case, eventually the chances reach 100%, or absolutely certain that you'll get the mount skin you want.

    Nevertheless these systems do exploit certain psychological disorders, like those with OCD or collector's syndrome. These people will throw their entire life savings, even knowing they're not getting parity value or ROI compared to how much they spend, even knowing they're being exploited and cheated.

    Thus on the flip side, these types of system feel exploitative, predatory, and unfair to their customers, and most sane people should and will protest these unethical business practices. When better alternatives can be just as profitable. In this particular case, the amount spent by the buyer is finite and upper bounded at a low-ceiling. So there is doubt how much extra profit they would get from a pseudo-gambling system.

    Even if they want to keep the RNG system, they should provide alternative methods to acquire these mount skins--preferably in the game via some non-monetary effort. Maybe as low-chance loot or another collection quest.

  • I highly suggest you to watch this video

    This guy is so right, plus there are some really great suggestions in the video.

    Anyway I have one suggestion myself. On one hand I absolutely hate this RNG thing but on the other hand I really like that the mounts in that box are kind of rare due to high pricing and low chances to get what one wants. That brings me to my point. Why not to make a few skins that are obtainable in game proving player's dedication to the game.

    Just an example
    1000 legendary bounties tokens = some sick-looking mount skins
    10,000 trade contracts = some good looking skins (but not that good)
    One hell of a difficult collection = legendary gryphon mount skin (a dragon-like look would be nice btw. - and it might go well with lore and possibly with LS4)

  • Miko.4158Miko.4158 Member ✭✭✭

    I quite like the random aspect of the mounts, If they'd been sold individually then everyone would be on the same astral griffon. Also you can see whats available with glider skins you think quite like this one, maybe hold out for a better one, oh no the next batch are worse and the one I quite liked has gone and then wait 6 months etc.
    in terms of price 400 gems seems pretty fair given the dye options, if you don't like it that much you can dye it like crazy and its completely different. One part I don't like is that you cant choose the mount. Bought 2 got a griffon and a flatfish thing ( why do they all look the same?), as a wvwer I doubt I'll bother with griffon unless I can unlock it with wvw tokens of which I have loads and loads of siege and nothing to spend them on cough. 3rd go got giant rabbit of my dreams so happy customer. But.
    I would prefer the boxes by mount and the skins graded rare etc on the 'chance system'.

  • jantogni.4086jantogni.4086 Member
    edited November 9, 2017

    I don't thin ArenaNet is really worried. This post is only to have a wall where the people release their madness. If you really want to know the people opinion, this might be a poll/survey with public results!

    In my humble opinion, I don't like how ArenaNet care about the economy. How do you explain the fluctuation of 50% of the exchange rate gems <-> gold? Did you really think about that? All the changes you introduced yesterday created A HUGE inflation in Guild Wars economy. Is really frustrating read some post from Arena Net people saying: "We had originally intended that you should be able to change the sigils in the same way as runes for armor (so we had thought of it for everyone out there who thought we forgot :) ). However, when we started our economic impact analysis it became clear that we needed to do a deeper investigation to assess potential risks we had not previously foreseen. The investigation is currently ongoing."

    Quoting this topic: https://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/68vw84/flashpoint_devs_here_ask_us_anything/dh1po09/

    After read that answer, is like you are making jokes to the people who invested many hours or usd in your game, and then one day, you just play with the economy like that.

    I don't mind the mount skins, but I really cares about the game economy. I used to say that GuildWars2 was a really serious game in this area. For the moment, and the recent changes, I don't think I will continue thinking like that.

    Cheers. Btw, first time posting in the forums. I wanted more people get my point of view of this topic.

  • Echoing most ppl here:

    • Paying for rng is just garbage unless everything in the box is valuable. Currently the blc are just packed with filler for the sake of chase. boosters are of no value.
    • Putting the majority of your skins in the shop ruins in-game rewards.
  • I'll post what I posted on Reddit

    this mount gate scandal could be solved in many ways.

    1. Drop the price. Make them tradable. Make it so the duplicates could be sold on the Trade Post. Loot boxes cost 250 gems.

    2. Make it more expensive 700-800 gems but let the player base choose there skins. Or 500 gems and you choose a random skin from a mount you want.

    3. Split them have some in the cash shop and make some for achievement hunting. Give us a pvp/wvw reward tracks to grind out to get them. Add them to the collection panels and explore Tyria to allow players to collect them like legendary weapons.

    These 3 options above would please me. And for the love of God remove the 9,600 gems for all 30 £102 for all of them.

    I also think many are missing some points. Anet have been testing the player base with the Loot Box system for years. First the BLC and the keys. Then they add some very shiny skins I'm the BLC's this was the start and now this. They knew mount skins would be popular so they took the easy route.

    Also stop attacking Devs it's not them. They have made a great game. I for one have some amazing moment's in the game they created. It's the publishers taken the easy way out.

    At the end of the day it's a skin a mount skin it's not game breaking but it's still a skin and people care about these things. But to see some reactions it's mad.

  • Dear Anet,

    I rarely post on forums but you have motivated me to do so. I have bought all of your deluxe expansions and purchased gems freely and happily as I, overall, enjoy your product. However there is a time and a place for every company when your efforts to maximize your profits comes at the cost of a great degree of disgust and revolt from your fanbase. I think this system is obscene. Make beautiful, even expensive, mounts and we will ourselves selectively purchase them.. but I've already seen too many people screwed over by this grotesque money making scheme. Calling this "adoption" is absolutely absurd, whoever came up with that idea should be fired. Adopting an animal is an act of love and respect, your RNG adoption of mount skins is an act of greed and blindness.

    Thanks!

  • I just realized that, while I have been spending time in this thread and commenting, I have yet to give an actual suggestion other than 'don't keep it randomized'. So here's my contribution:

    I get that the Trading Post would be an iffy thing when it comes to exploitation, especially if you keep the account-bound drop nature (imagine someone making sure they get everything except the expensive ones: the only drops they'd have left would be those most desired skins). The only way out of this would be to make them not account-bound, which so far has been a redeeming (if necessary, in its current form) part of the experience. That would also mean crafting drop tables, resulting in a lot more frustration over the rare skins, etc. This might not be the best way.

    Putting them all up separately in the Gem Store would be interesting, but I also get how that defeats some of the purpose. For some players, the random nature is not a turnoff at all, and they're having fun with this. Others just want them all (and some of them now have them all). The biggest 'problem' is the people (like me) who want a few skins, and who don't want them randomly dropped because it's frustrating and I, for one, can't afford it.

    That said, I seem to remember from my Halloween package that they were dropped into my inventory first, like minis. I then added them to my 'account wardrobe'. I'm not sure how much of what has already been bought can be turned back, but theoretically, you could put the bought skins back in the inventory so people could choose whether to add them again or:
    What I would like to suggest is the possibility of having someone at the stables who will exchange two unused skins for one chosen skin. It would make the 'price' of choosing a skin be 800 gems, and I can say I would be alright with this (not to mention, if you get really lucky (which I usually don't, but hey, you have people) you might get the skin you want from one of the actual contracts already).
    Theoretically, you could even make it so the 'price' for one of the fancier skins, like the Starbound Griffon or the fiery mounts, would be three unused skins (so 1200 gems). You might want an opinion on the fairness of this deal from someone else, though, considering those skins don't appeal to me much, so I'm not representative for what their value would be if they could be chosen.

    Good luck with the entire situation, and I hope it will get resolved.

©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.