Official Mount Adoption Feedback Thread [merged] - Page 41 — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Official Mount Adoption Feedback Thread [merged]

1383941434461

Comments

  • STIHL.2489STIHL.2489 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited November 9, 2017

    @Fallesafe.5932 said:

    @feroxeu.7416 said:
    this is a carebear game. Anyone who says they don't feel rewarded are just numb due to the amount of rewards they recieve. Facts: You get rewarded for losing. You get rewarded for winning. You get rewarded for logging in.

    And it's all garbage. I wish I had a giant snow-shovel to throw it all into the delete-incinerator at the same time. This game absolutely showers you with trash while offering you nothing of any real value. If came up to you every day, and gave you a milk-crate full of ribbons, and colored drinking straws, and chewing gum, and number 2 pencils how long would it take before you started getting annoyed?

    To use your analogy, to get a bunch of "useless stuff" .. I do hobby crafts and such, Pintrst style junk, i(With a welding torch, but still artsy crafts stuff) in case you are wondering, so, if I was say.. a member of a Hobby Shop, and as a customer they sent me a milk crate full of ribbons, erasers, and the like, I'd start crafting with it, seeing what I could make, maybe try some new things and see what comes of it.

    In the end, much in the same way I peruse the isles of Home Depot and Harbor Freight, you have chosen to play this game, so there is in part some small desire on your part to get that crate of stuff, even if you feel that it is junk, you still pursed it.

    There are two kinds of Gamers, Salty, and Extra Salty.
    Ego is the Anesthesia that dullens the pain of Stupidity.

  • Vavume.8065Vavume.8065 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Even when you do get a reward very often you then have to pay for it... a.k.a vendors, you unlock the right to buy your reward... this annoys me no end.

  • @kharmin.7683 said:

    @wingedsoul.9406 said:

    New mount Skins with different dye channels for 400 Gems are super ok. If you want all Legendary Mount Skins, you will have to pay much more (as always).

    I think most in this thread are fine with paying more for "Legendary". It's the RNG that's at issue.

    But why??? This is positive RNG!!
    Ecto- and Pre-Gambling is negative RNG, because if you paid the highest expected amount of gold, you can still end up with nothing.
    Here you know the maximum amount of Gold, you will have to pay, if you want the super awesome mount skin.

    Our feedback should be "The lootbox-concept here is cool. We just don't like, that you started it with mount skins." or something like this.

  • This is ridiculous
    Why would you make the skins RNG? It's just a way to try get a few more gems out of me, if you could just buy the skins you want how you normally can with armour and weapon skins then it'd be fine. But putting and RNG on things makes me wary of giving you any more of my money that I already have, I want to be sure that I can comfortably give you money for expansions or those few extra gems I need for a cool skin that's leaving the store, without having to worry about it being RNG and not getting what I want. What's next, RNG Costumes, RNG Weapons, RNG Utilities? Step up your game Guild Wars, this is disgusting.

  • @Azure The Heartless.3261 said:
    Wait. Hold on.

    Isn't this slightly better than the black lion chest? I mean yes, you can gamble for a skin you want and -not- get it, but it then removes that option from the pool. Eventually you will have larger and larger chances to get what you want. If you liked black lion chests for super rare/rare weapon skins, this is actually slightly better than that.

    I'm not saying it still doesnt -reek- of lootbox, but the lootboxes that contained rare skins didnt progressively have better rates the more gems you spent.

    Lets say they put these in the black lion chest as rare drops, as was mentioned before. I don't think there would be even a fraction of the backlash that I'm seeing here if they did. There was some backlash when the hydra skin was introduced, because it was tied to account, but that only really hurts the people who dont buy the keys in the first place.

    Iiiiiii think I'm on the fence about this. It would be one thing if we could get dupes, but I'm going to have to weigh the "you will always get something you dont have" side of it. Because that way you are guaranteed what you want at some point, instead of potentially spending and spending and never getting what you want.

    There are a some different factors here that I think deviates this issue (for a lot of people) from BLCs

    • Most of the BLC items that people want are also tradeable on the TP which gives at the very least an alternative method of acquiring them. BLC keys can be earned in game.
    • The price difference - 1BLC Key is 125 gems vs 400 for a shot at the mount roulette wheel. True, the mount roulette wheel isn't going to give you another bank access, but if you dislike the skin, then that difference will be almost meaningless. (TBF, I personally think the BLC keys are way over priced for the odds)
    • There was quite a bit of anger with BLC 'exclusives' - meaning things that could only be gotten through a drop, or BLC skins that weren't tradeable on the TP
    • There are no other mount skins available in game and the only other mount skin available is significantly higher in cost in the gem store
    • The base mount skins only come with 1 dye channel and this does feel like a decision that was made to push people to the cash store. I remember a lot of comments about the spooky mounts of people buying them specifically to get the dye channels and then playing around with dyes to get the best look while 'hiding' the bones.
    • There is a diminishing return with mount skins. Sure you get a new one each time, but how feasible is it that people will use all 30 skins? or even 20? If you luck out and get the skins you really want in relatively few rolls, it will feel like a good investment. If you don't, then it won't.
    • The gaming industry on the whole is generating a lot of ill will with lootboxes, especially in games that you buy and then have to pay extra to get the boxes/keys/whatever. Even though the skins are not required for gameplay, it's been pointed out and I think has some merit, that a significant portion of GW2 endgame is Fashion Wars and mounts are the hot, new fashion accessory.
    • People just bought PoF less than two months ago, this particular loot box package at $100+ dollars feel even more like a cash grab when a lot people just forked over $30 and up to Anet.
    • The general feel (which may be somewhat subjective) that the best skins - weapons, armor, gliders, and now mounts - are only available via the gem store, leaving in game rewards anemic and/or little more than 'farm gold to buy gems to trade in to get what you want'.

    Interesting points. Keeping an eye on this.

    [Charr Noises]
    [Plays every class]
    [JUST GIT EVEN GUDDER ITS FINE]

  • Randulf.7614Randulf.7614 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @wingedsoul.9406 said:

    @kharmin.7683 said:

    @wingedsoul.9406 said:

    New mount Skins with different dye channels for 400 Gems are super ok. If you want all Legendary Mount Skins, you will have to pay much more (as always).

    I think most in this thread are fine with paying more for "Legendary". It's the RNG that's at issue.

    But why??? This is positive RNG!!
    Ecto- and Pre-Gambling is negative RNG, because if you paid the highest expected amount of gold, you can still end up with nothing.
    Here you know the maximum amount of Gold, you will have to pay, if you want the super awesome mount skin.

    Our feedback should be "The lootbox-concept here is cool. We just don't like, that you started it with mount skins." or something like this.

    You would know the maximum amount you would have to pay if each mount was a set price. There would be the added bonus of getting the exact one you wanted.
    Plus it would likely attract a wider audience willing to pay rather than a smaller sub section willing to keep paying until they got all they wanted (speculation).

    What sleep is here? What dreams there are in the unctuous coiling of the snakes mortal shuffling. weapon in my hand. My hand the arcing deathblow at the end of all things. The horror. The horror. I embrace it. . .

  • It's nice to see some people with reason here. First of all I bought a few of these tickets, while I got some nice skins, I also didn't get a couple of the skins I wanted. Am I mad about it? Heck no. Here's the thing, I knew what I was getting into, and I was fine with it. I saw there were multiple skins from the tickets that I liked, and I felt like it was worth the gems even though I didn't get all of them. At the end of the day, it's only cosmetics and offer no real gameplay advantage.

    If you don't like the rng or don't think the risk-vs-rewards is not worth it, then don't buy it and wait for them to release other mount skins that don't have rng. I would save my outrage for if all future mount skins will come in rng tickets like these. I don't need to have everything in the game/gemstore to enjoy the game, only have like 6 glider skins out of the however many they released.

  • I understand the company needs to make money. Path of Fire sales have probably hit the post-launch decline. Employees need to be paid and they have earned it. The issue is how do you generate more revenue without upsetting the player-base. I know, I know.. any decision you make seems to upset any number of players. Finding a way to make money, to continue making this great game is difficult from the business side. Which is why I think the studio should try to view it from the player's side. Imagine your company consists of MMO players without any developer history, with various levels of income. What decisions would you want your preferred MMO developer to make for your favorite game?

    Many players, inlcuding myself enjoy your games because you broke the MMO mold. You made a AAA title without a monthly fee. You implemented player and consumer friendly methods of progression. You considered that having fun does not mean grinding for gear, loot or the nicest items in the game. The implementation of continuous content has had ups and downs but overall has worked well. ArenaNet, you are in a small demographic of studios, that aren't indie, making genuinely good gameplay.

    I want to re-iterate, ArenaNet, you need to make money. Other players have offered some great ideas for different avenues to pursue this. I've spent over $1k for gems over the past five years to support this studio. I've been playing Guild Wars since 2005. Keep up the great work, don't let the negative reaction dampen your spirits but realize you are better than the lootbox craze. We want mount skins and we want to support you. We want it to be fun, reasonable and consumer-friendly.

  • Most players would probably use 1 or 2 skins per mount. Some people would use 1 mount most of the time just because of the look alone.

    Right now it is about 12000 Gems for all 30 skins, but you can't choose the few you like.

    ANet could have a bundle per mount type for 2400 Gems; so if I use Gryphon's most, I could buy all Gryphon skins for 2400 Gems

    Further more ANet could sell individual skins for 700 Gems, making it a better value to buy bundles, but still giving an opportunity for people to just get that 1 skin they really want.

    This also gives everyone the chance to get all the skins eventually as they earn Gold, or they buy or earn Gems (even tho they will end up paying more for them)

    Just some ideas of the top of my head.

  • We have lootbox system with dyes, but they are not bound and can be traded. Why mount skins are different? Greed? Well, more money left for other games then. Tnx anet.

  • Proeliator.4158Proeliator.4158 Member ✭✭
    edited November 9, 2017

    This is outrage,disgrace,...i`m very disappointed by ANet what they did,i love this game and this is not what ppl at ANet should do,think about it!Would like to see answer by ANet about all of this what happend about mounts and overall loot system...!

  • One voice, but I'm firmly in the "This system would be absolutely fine if the skins were tradeable as with many other Black Lion items" camp. Pay a little more in gold so gamblers can profit, get exactly the skin you like. Works with dyes, skins, minis. Why not mounts? Really don't understand why it wasn't set up this way int he first place.

  • 1st of all, full disclosure, I bought the bundle, not the individual packages (which would have cost more). The reasons why are arbitrary, but suffice to say I came into some income I wasn't expecting. My thoughts follow below.

    There are a couple things that muddy the waters of the discussions here and I'm not sure if these have been talked about, but here we go. In no particular order:

    • An obvious lack of skin tiers. Many companies that have similar systems - looking at you Riot Games (League of Legends) & Dota 2 (Valve) in this instance - have very clear distinctions of what skins are available at what price and what may be included for each corresponding price tier. These distinctions may be animations, sounds, voiceover (for the characters of that game), or crazy things like skins that change appearance drastically and evolve over time (Pulsefire Ezreal).

    Why is this important?

    I know many of you are looking at a handful of skins for each mount - or even fewer - and those are the only ones of which you're interested. Without making the pricing or other distinction that some skins are clearly more nuanced and/or elaborate than others, the marketing team or whoever made the directive from the top down has thrown in every single skin into the same price range. This is obviously a error in judgement and quite literally feelsbadman.

    Take the Forged Warhound skin. That is a complete change in the model, the sounds used, the animation for the movement skill (I haven't confirmed this).

    Some of the skins in the random packages also contain one or more of these elements combined, though very few, if any are fundamentally changed in their model or rig to the extent of the Forged Doggo (Warhound).

    An important caveat here, is that at least League of Legends (that I know of) does give you the option to gift a "Mystery Skin" to a friend as a surprise "Oh boy, I wonder what I'll get" sort of gimmick. I think it works better in this regard.

    • A lack of distinct bundling options. The spooky mounts pack was a pack that was pretty reasonably priced compared to the single mount skin for the Forged Doggo that's currently a whooping 2k gems. It would have been wise to include a way to organize each of the "families" of newly introduced skins in such a way. This also touches back on the tiering issue, so I'll just stop it there.

    But finally...

    This is all coming to a head over ** optional** items people want to purchase, but do not have the option to do so in a way that allows them to do it without financial collateral damage. For this, I totally agree that the marketing strategy is more than a bit predatory/greedy.

    BUT! It would be hasty to blanket the blame without hearing from the pertinent party in charge of this MountGate fiasco.

    Potential requires action in order to be realized.

  • @wingedsoul.9406 said:
    But why??? This is positive RNG!!

    In what way is this positive RNG? If consumer A has no interest in product B, C, D or E and the only interest he has is product A, then he's at a net loss. The chance he will get B, C, D or E is much higher than what he actually wants, product A. In this situation he's spending $120 gold, or however much 400 gems is at the time, for something he doesn't want.

    Ecto- and Pre-Gambling is negative RNG, because if you paid the highest expected amount of gold, you can still end up with nothing.

    This would be valid if there was an option to hone in on a specific mount or skin, in its current form, the only way to do that is go through the 30 mount/skin gauntlet, that's a joke.

    Here you know the maximum amount of Gold, you will have to pay, if you want the super awesome mount skin.

    Certain skins are super awesome, the rest are quite average. I would certainly agree that 400 gems for even the base line skins could be a good deal, however, there's no guarantee you will use this skin for whatever reason.

    Our feedback should be "The lootbox-concept here is cool. We just don't like, that you started it with mount skins." or something like this.

    The loot box-concept could be cool. Right now, the concept is extremely awful. A lot less people would complain if the skins were tradeable, contract specific (Skimmer, Griffon, Jackal ect) or able to buy it at a fixed, flat rate. Anything that made the consumer think like they had a legitimate shot at the product they want without being fleeced.

  • Rashagar.8349Rashagar.8349 Member ✭✭✭

    @Cloud.7613 said:

    @Rashagar.8349 said:

    See the thing is, tonedeaf is exactly how I feel the community's reaction to it is too.

    Pardon? Unable to appreciate or understand the concerns or difficulties of others, in what way is the community – or those who are complaining – not understanding the role of ANet/those in charge? The way in which these loot boxes were implemented is absolutely awful. If they wanted to bring in loot boxes, there's a plethora of ways in which they could have done it that wasn't so consumer unfriendly.

    1. Mount separate contracts: still gross, but it lowers the % in which you'll get a mount that you don't care about if you're after specific mounts.
    2. A flat price based on quality of skin and then cheaper gamble contracts: still psychologically beneficial for what they want to achieve and doesn't bother those who want to catch em' all.
    3. Release mounts by smaller proportion: gives chase rare mounts per 'grouping', in this instance at least the percentage in which you'll get what you want is better than the initial 3.33%. This also again, doesn't hurt those who want to catch em' all and benefits those who want to roll the more friendly dice for the skin.

    Overall what they chose to do was bundle it all together (30) – give no mounts to any form of achievement, raid ect – and laugh to the bank.

    Like, you can think it's too expensive. That's fair enough. Everyone has different ideas about what "too expensive" is for them and there's no wrong answer.

    In its current form, they are too expensive. Some skins could easily be valued at 800-1k gems, if not more. The issue arises when you get a skin for a mount that you don't use, in which it's not only useless to you, but you'll need to spend another 400 gems to reroll til you get something of personal value or just a low overall quality skin.

    You can say you'd prefer to only buy the thing you want (most likely for a higher price) instead of it being randomised. That's fair enough. It's a preference, and it's a preference that probably should be catered for (though from the sounds of it when it is being catered for there are a lot of people here who won't be happy with how it'll be implemented, those expecting to spend 400 gems on the shiniest of shinies for example).

    ... Yeah, that's the problem, in its current iteration, gambling is one of the only thing beings catered for. Those who decide to gamble and hopefully come out RNG king and those who want all the mounts anyway. If you cannot see how this is a problem, i don't know what to tell you, you're anti-consumer.

    But things like trying to justify that preference by calling the alternative predatory behaviour and all that just seems to show a fundamental lack of understanding of what makes the other instances of predatory game behaviour actually deserve the label. And I just wish people would be smarter about throwing those words around, because when it's applied in the wrong instances (like this one) it detracts from the severity of the actual instances of predatory behaviour. And then I start wondering why people are deliberately misusing the label and what they're trying to gain by manipulating current gamer trends to their own ends, and it's not a happy line of thinking.

    I can agree with this, however, that doesn't mean the method they chose was good especially seeing how not one mount was included in actual game play that didn't involve Gold Wars 2.

    I've read your reply a couple of times now and I'm having difficulty figuring out where we disagree hehe.

  • AegisRunestone.8672AegisRunestone.8672 Member ✭✭✭
    edited November 9, 2017

    @Gaile Gray.6029 I'm becoming concerned. I know this is something you guys need to consider closely, but there is massive backlash from multiple sites, Jim Sterling, and the community about the Mount Licenses.

    Here, someone showed what a perfect mount license would be like.

    I don't condone the current practice. And it seems like there's more to the outrage than just the Mount RNG. I know you guys recently upped the rewards for PoF events in the last patch, but people still feel like they are unrewarding. It seems all these things adding up (apparently also some things with HoT, which were addressed, but some players feel Anet is making the same mistakes with PoF), the current RNG Mount License is the straw that broke the camel's back.

    Again, I don't condone this practice, but I don't want to see my favorite MMO lost due to this choice (I am exaggerating here, but the backlash is painful). I beg that some action be taken very soon; before the end of this week. :(

  • Chicken.9650Chicken.9650 Member
    edited November 9, 2017

    shrug Nice try, ANet. I'll keep my money or buy me some drugs like chocolate. There I know, what I get.

  • I was excited to purchase PoF tomorrow and decided not to because of this new thing they added. I am really disappointed with anet.

  • edited November 9, 2017

    just allow people to buy any of the mounts on their own for 1200gems (3* the price, or a 66% rng discount) and im sure most people will quit whining

    honestly i think the reaction is ridiculous; for sure you didnt output a perfect system; but please; black lion chests are an absolute trash system that no one seems to give a kitten about trying to change (and adoption licenses -again; not perfect- are a massive, MASSIVE step up from that system)

  • GW2 fell into the loot box trap that other games have fallen into. Sad to see that mount gambling in the gem store.

  • Loosifah.4738Loosifah.4738 Member ✭✭✭

    It's not really gambling as you are guaranteed to get a skin that you don't already have. The chances of getting the one you want are pretty slim; but it's just like black lion boxes(only you actually have 100% chance to get a skin)

  • neven.3785neven.3785 Member ✭✭✭

    This is not gambling as some people like to yell. They simply can't get exactly what they want some are pissed off at anet for sticking to their chosen business model for this game. I love that they offer skins now and am glad they didn't chose to lock away certain mounts behind an account upgrade , rather it is only about how pretty you can make our mount.

    Now I would say that there have been much truer forms of gambling in this game for a long time. You have the mystic toilet, black lion chests and those oriann boxes at the start of this game. Then came ecto gambling and races. People didn't complain much about it then.

    Instead they choose to try to take this out of proportion because they want a pretty and they want it now. This is a pretty childish reaction. If they matter to you, then buy them, if you feel it's a rip off, then use the free skin you get with your mastery unlock. The choice is yours and it is your responsibility to manage your finances responsibly.

    For those with kids worried they will take advantage of your credit cards, then rid the accounts of your info and make sure you don't use auto fill.

    When my child bought $100 worth of robox because my autofill synced to the tablet from my phone, I didn't blame roblox or Google, I blamed myself and made him pay back every cent and donated all that currency to his brother as punishment. Then I removed all that information and disabled synchronization like a responsible person should.

    So yes I like this concept, I like you don't get doubles and I like that you don't have to buy them. Only change that would have been better would be for anet to break up the bundles into mount types as that full bundle price is a hard pill to swallow for the common folk. As a side note I bought myself one and gifted one to my wife, this will likely take place of the odd black lion key purchases we make every month or two to support anet until we get all the mounts we want

  • This whole mess has just made me so disappointed in Arenanet. I mean its bad enough that black lion chests are a thing. But now RNG only mount skins? Why? I feel so disrespected as a customer and player. Why can't I just pay a set gem amount for a certain skin? Why does loot boxes have to invade everything? Arenanet, I want to support you and the game you make and I play, but can I just pay you money for something I want? And now, the only talk around the web is not how much fun PoF is (which it is) but how another game got yet another loot box system.
    Why... just... why...

    Well, time for this post to be lost in the endless sea of this massive thread.

  • GreyWolf.8670GreyWolf.8670 Member ✭✭✭

    @wingedsoul.9406 said:

    @kharmin.7683 said:

    @wingedsoul.9406 said:

    New mount Skins with different dye channels for 400 Gems are super ok. If you want all Legendary Mount Skins, you will have to pay much more (as always).

    I think most in this thread are fine with paying more for "Legendary". It's the RNG that's at issue.

    But why??? This is positive RNG!!
    Ecto- and Pre-Gambling is negative RNG, because if you paid the highest expected amount of gold, you can still end up with nothing.
    Here you know the maximum amount of Gold, you will have to pay, if you want the super awesome mount skin.

    Our feedback should be "The lootbox-concept here is cool. We just don't like, that you started it with mount skins." or something like this.

    Ending up with something you don't want or can't use is no different to the end user than ending up with nothing.

  • I was super excited when I saw the announcement about the mount skins, so I was very disappointed when I realised how it had been implemented. I don't buy things from the gem store all that often, and when I do I always use real money. I bought the halloween mount skins since I was excited about them, wanted to show that there was interest and thought the price was slightly steep but still okay. I am not going to buy these. One of my friends bought a couple with converted gold, out of curiosity and got a griffon skin (he doesn't have the griffon unlocked) and a skimmer, which is the mount he has unlocked which he'd have liked a skin from least... since it's more niche in where it's used, and all the skins only have different dye channels.

    As I saw someone point out on reddit, you can pick two out of expensive, untradeable and random. If it's expensive and random then at least you can sell them on the TP, if it's expensive and untradeable then at least you can pick the one you want, and if it's random and untradeable then at least it's inexpensive so you don't mind getting a few skins you're not so keen on.

    I find that the one skin you can buy individually is very expensive, it should by no rights be more expensive than outfits. I find it detestable that the other mounts are random, since this prays on people with gambling/addiction issues and is very predatory. Plus the odds of getting one you like can be very low depending on how many you like. I would pay 400-500 gems for a mount skin I really liked, and 100-200 for a random one. Playing the game after these mounts went on sale was pretty disappointing, since I logged on and found that Lion's Arch looked like WoW. I've always liked the style that GW2 has had, even if I don't like a lot of the individual ridiculous skins, but I feel like some of the new mounts are taking it too far and it's pretty immersion breaking. I confess, I do like some of the more ridiculous ones, such as the starry jackal, but I don't think it looks like it fits in. If it's just a character with ridiculous skins and particle effects (wish we could turn those off) then I can ignore it, but if there's a platoon of people with over the top mounts in LA it's pretty hard to miss. Some of the gliders were ridiculous too, but at least you don't see those as much. If we're going to have different skins from the shop then I think it would also be nice to have some quests to get more in game too, especially since mounts like the griffon have regional variation within the game. If you could get the other skins by doing some sort of hunting quest that would be really cool!

    I am loving Path of Fire (haven't completed it yet since I've been too busy) and even one of my friends who basically only still plays the games to hang out with the rest of us who still like it loved PoF. He complains about everything, but thinks PoF was a masterpiece. I think it's a shame ANet are ruining the good praise and coverage they have by doing something like this, especially amidst all the hate in gaming communities for lootboxes right now.

  • Wolfheart.7483Wolfheart.7483 Member ✭✭✭

    @Andryej.4609 said:
    Oh, and by the way - I was under the impression, that when I go to the shelter to adopt an animal I get to choose which one exactly I want to adopt? It's not like: 'Hi, I wanted some cute little kitten for my little sister...', 'Well, sir, you're in luck. Here, have Brutus, the traumatized guard dog.' Yeaaaaaaaah, right...

    If you insist on calling it "adoption", then at least make it look like one.

    EDIT: Plus, you could always make it work like miniature claim tickets, that one "slip" unlocks you one basic skin of your choice, and two or three allows to pick one of the "shiny" ones.

    Can we please stop using real living things that need a real home as the equivalent to this? It's absurd. There are so many more factors that go into adopting an animal than getting a mount skin in a video game.

  • Here is my 2 cent as A-net seem to want some feedback.

    I am mostly a wvw player so its hard to farm any amount of gold and i still have not got any kind of nice drops in this game after ~1.9k hours.

    That beeing said i still regularly buy in the gem shop stuff like, witch outfit, 3-4 armor outfits, 2 server transfers, bag slots etc, I just counted around 6k gems in my purchase history.
    I would have bought one of the griffion skins as i am running around with it most of the time as long as it was reasonably priced (~1-1,2k).

    I wont buy any of the skins the way they are now and feel very dissapointed with you!

  • GreyWolf.8670GreyWolf.8670 Member ✭✭✭

    @neven.3785 said:
    This is not gambling as some people like to yell. They simply can't get exactly what they want some are pissed off at anet for sticking to their chosen business model for this game. I love that they offer skins now and am glad they didn't chose to lock away certain mounts behind an account upgrade , rather it is only about how pretty you can make our mount.

    Now I would say that there have been much truer forms of gambling in this game for a long time. You have the mystic toilet, black lion chests and those oriann boxes at the start of this game. Then came ecto gambling and races. People didn't complain much about it then.

    Instead they choose to try to take this out of proportion because they want a pretty and they want it now. This is a pretty childish reaction. If they matter to you, then buy them, if you feel it's a rip off, then use the free skin you get with your mastery unlock. The choice is yours and it is your responsibility to manage your finances responsibly.

    For those with kids worried they will take advantage of your credit cards, then rid the accounts of your info and make sure you don't use auto fill.

    When my child bought $100 worth of robox because my autofill synced to the tablet from my phone, I didn't blame roblox or Google, I blamed myself and made him pay back every cent and donated all that currency to his brother as punishment. Then I removed all that information and disabled synchronization like a responsible person should.

    So yes I like this concept, I like you don't get doubles and I like that you don't have to buy them. Only change that would have been better would be for anet to break up the bundles into mount types as that full bundle price is a hard pill to swallow for the common folk. As a side note I bought myself one and gifted one to my wife, this will likely take place of the odd black lion key purchases we make every month or two to support anet until we get all the mounts we want

    How is it NOT gambling? It's a slot machine just like the BLCs. The [i]only[/i] difference is that you will eventually get all of the skins if you keep buying.

  • @GreyWolf.8670 said:
    How is it NOT gambling? It's a slot machine just like the BLCs. The [i]only[/i] difference is that you will eventually get all of the skins if you keep buying.

    A key facet of gambling is that winning is never guaranteed.

    [Charr Noises]
    [Plays every class]
    [JUST GIT EVEN GUDDER ITS FINE]

  • Rashagar.8349Rashagar.8349 Member ✭✭✭

    @GreyWolf.8670 said:

    @neven.3785 said:
    This is not gambling as some people like to yell. They simply can't get exactly what they want some are pissed off at anet for sticking to their chosen business model for this game. I love that they offer skins now and am glad they didn't chose to lock away certain mounts behind an account upgrade , rather it is only about how pretty you can make our mount.

    Now I would say that there have been much truer forms of gambling in this game for a long time. You have the mystic toilet, black lion chests and those oriann boxes at the start of this game. Then came ecto gambling and races. People didn't complain much about it then.

    Instead they choose to try to take this out of proportion because they want a pretty and they want it now. This is a pretty childish reaction. If they matter to you, then buy them, if you feel it's a rip off, then use the free skin you get with your mastery unlock. The choice is yours and it is your responsibility to manage your finances responsibly.

    For those with kids worried they will take advantage of your credit cards, then rid the accounts of your info and make sure you don't use auto fill.

    When my child bought $100 worth of robox because my autofill synced to the tablet from my phone, I didn't blame roblox or Google, I blamed myself and made him pay back every cent and donated all that currency to his brother as punishment. Then I removed all that information and disabled synchronization like a responsible person should.

    So yes I like this concept, I like you don't get doubles and I like that you don't have to buy them. Only change that would have been better would be for anet to break up the bundles into mount types as that full bundle price is a hard pill to swallow for the common folk. As a side note I bought myself one and gifted one to my wife, this will likely take place of the odd black lion key purchases we make every month or two to support anet until we get all the mounts we want

    How is it NOT gambling? It's a slot machine just like the BLCs. The [i]only[/i] difference is that you will eventually get all of the skins if you keep buying.

    Which is a fairly big difference. I don't know of any slot machine that will eventually give me all of the money if I keep playing.

  • Wolfheart.7483Wolfheart.7483 Member ✭✭✭

    @GreyWolf.8670 said:

    @pah.4931 said:

    @GreyWolf.8670 said:

    @pah.4931 said:

    @GreyWolf.8670 said:

    @Dinks.2478 said:
    And those of us who actually like to play the game as just sitting here wondering when we'll get good in game rewards.

    Judging by this move? When you pay cash for them. :/

    200 gems to get Teq to drop the purple chest... any takers?

    OR pretend that gems are sold by Argos the Gem Trader and he takes your in-game gotten gold for gems. And then you can trade your Gems with Cashopia the Wicked for a magical orb that unpredictably (magic isn't an exact science) gives your a mount a new look.

    BOOM. You can actually play the game and get good in game rewards...

    Can't you see how it's all an illusion?????

    Yeah, except for that pesky "currency exchange" where you can bypass all the hard work by buying gems from someone else that paid real money for them.

    So? The skins don't make you better or awesomer. Who cares if someone else bypasses the fun? Does that stop you from having fun?

    I think you're intentionally evading the point, so I'm done discussing this with you. :/

    No, he is simply trying to provide a counterpoint. But in many cases where overblown outrage comes into play, like this, anyone who isn't 100% on the critical side is seen as supporting or condoning what has occurred. Then they are accused of missing or evading the point simply because they don't see it the same way. Not everything is that black and white. In fact, most things in life fall into the gray area.

  • Very expensive. need to enter the data of skin measured. and the price is 2000 crystals for 1 skin? stop screwing us this way. I'd rather expand your inventory or Bank.

  • There have been so many people who are trying to paint Anet in the worst possible light over this. There have been players in Map chat telling others to not team up with people who are buying the mount skins because to them, apparently people who buy them don't deserve respect. There are people who are actively out there trying to encourage others to not play/support GW2 anymore because of this decision. If that's not unnecessary hatred and anger, I don't know what is. This isn't something that warrants a cease of support for Anet for all of time. The fact that they're asking for feedback shows that they see that people aren't liking the decision and they can adjust it accordingly. I doubt that they sat there in a meeting and said "OK, let's worm more money out of people by exploiting and preying upon their unhealthy habits." like I have seen many people in an out of game say that was Anet's train of thought on this release That just makes Anet seem like an evil company that doesn't care about the people that play the game. Yeah, the whole concept of loot boxes might have a bad rep/history as of late, but again, Anet is not trying to become a Gacha game where you get tons upon tons of trash loot before getting that one ultra rare unit that's actually viable to use to progress the game. Someone could've thought getting two random mount skins for 10$ sounded like a genuinely fun and worthwhile idea. You never know. Everyone makes mistakes sometimes, people just need the space/time to fix them instead of being constantly harped on about it. They know that the majority does not agree with this adoption situation at this point already so here on Day 3, it's probably time to let the hate die down a bit because the stress probably isn't going to help. Associating the company as a whole with negative words/treating them as something that shouldn't be supported isn't fair to the people that work on the game who are genuinely passionate about the content that they release in it. You don't have to buy the mount skins if you don't agree with them, but "donating" 10$ at least once a year even just to have 800 gems to sit on won't hurt anyone and collectively, could provide more funding for content to be developed. Even then, it's still up to the player if they want to even do that. Once again, there's no need to hate Anet for this so much. Things will get better, have faith. :)

  • It's not that I think it was a bad thing to implement. But it is way to expensive. If it was 50 bucks for the whole deal I probably would've done it. But 120 for all 30 is just way too much. And the 2000 skin feels way to overpriced for what it is. They already introduced a skin pack for 1600 gems (that I bought). 2000 without any discounts for 5 skins? There is no reason for them to make these new skins locked behind a gambling system that's more expensive. Or as expensive as 2000 gems for one.

    200/300 gems for a normal skin would be fine. 1000 if it looked REALLY good (And possibly came with a mini). But the way it's now it's not worth the chance/money.

  • GreyWolf.8670GreyWolf.8670 Member ✭✭✭

    @Rashagar.8349 said:

    @GreyWolf.8670 said:

    @neven.3785 said:
    This is not gambling as some people like to yell. They simply can't get exactly what they want some are pissed off at anet for sticking to their chosen business model for this game. I love that they offer skins now and am glad they didn't chose to lock away certain mounts behind an account upgrade , rather it is only about how pretty you can make our mount.

    Now I would say that there have been much truer forms of gambling in this game for a long time. You have the mystic toilet, black lion chests and those oriann boxes at the start of this game. Then came ecto gambling and races. People didn't complain much about it then.

    Instead they choose to try to take this out of proportion because they want a pretty and they want it now. This is a pretty childish reaction. If they matter to you, then buy them, if you feel it's a rip off, then use the free skin you get with your mastery unlock. The choice is yours and it is your responsibility to manage your finances responsibly.

    For those with kids worried they will take advantage of your credit cards, then rid the accounts of your info and make sure you don't use auto fill.

    When my child bought $100 worth of robox because my autofill synced to the tablet from my phone, I didn't blame roblox or Google, I blamed myself and made him pay back every cent and donated all that currency to his brother as punishment. Then I removed all that information and disabled synchronization like a responsible person should.

    So yes I like this concept, I like you don't get doubles and I like that you don't have to buy them. Only change that would have been better would be for anet to break up the bundles into mount types as that full bundle price is a hard pill to swallow for the common folk. As a side note I bought myself one and gifted one to my wife, this will likely take place of the odd black lion key purchases we make every month or two to support anet until we get all the mounts we want

    How is it NOT gambling? It's a slot machine just like the BLCs. The [i]only[/i] difference is that you will eventually get all of the skins if you keep buying.

    Which is a fairly big difference. I don't know of any slot machine that will eventually give me all of the money if I keep playing.

    Nope, that's not what that means.

    gam·ble
    [ˈɡambəl]
    VERB
    gambling (present participle)

    1. play games of chance for money; bet:
      "she was fond of gambling on cards and horses"
      synonyms: bet · place/lay a bet on something · stake money on something · [more]
    2. bet (a sum of money) on a game of chance:
      "he was gambling every penny he had on the spin of a wheel"
    3. [b]take risky action in the hope of a desired result[/b]:
      "the British could only gamble that something would turn up"
      synonyms: take a chance · take a risk · stick one's neck out · go out on a limb
  • +1 for not supporting gambling loot boxes, for mounts or any other stuff.
    As much as I love the GW2, if this is the direction of the game, I won't support the game any more.

  • wetwillyhip.7254wetwillyhip.7254 Member ✭✭
    edited November 9, 2017

    If you're going to implement huge RNG, at least make the gem prices SUPER CHEAP. Otherwise, this is down right disgusting.
    Each skin is $5? The 30 pack is over $100 lol.

    This needs to be changed to at most 200 gems and you get to select the skin you want.

    RNG is bad enough in this game with the vast amount of loot containers and Black Lion Chests.

  • Azure The Heartless.3261Azure The Heartless.3261 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited November 9, 2017

    @GreyWolf.8670 said:

    Nope, that's not what that means.

    gam·ble
    [ˈɡambəl]
    VERB
    gambling (present participle)

    1. play games of chance for money; bet:
      "she was fond of gambling on cards and horses"
      synonyms: bet · place/lay a bet on something · stake money on something · [more]
    2. bet (a sum of money) on a game of chance:
      "he was gambling every penny he had on the spin of a wheel"
    3. [b]take risky action in the hope of a desired result[/b]:
      "the British could only gamble that something would turn up"
      synonyms: take a chance · take a risk · stick one's neck out · go out on a limb

    Posting the definition of gambling doesn't make you right. There is a guarantee that you will win at a point in time.

    Yes, random skin acquisition has the potential to become costly. It gets progressively less random over time though.

    I'm not on board with this method of marketing, but I'm also not going to scream that its the worst thing ever and call it what it isnt in an attempt to prove a point.

    Theres a handful of people just plain dissatisfied that mounts are monetized, and they're using this as a vehicle to be outraged. Agreed, any randomness when it comes to purchasing is unsatisfactory, but it has a stopgap. You cant ignore that if you want to voice an opinion without just being dismissed as being angry that mount fashion costs gems.

    [Charr Noises]
    [Plays every class]
    [JUST GIT EVEN GUDDER ITS FINE]

  • Rashagar.8349Rashagar.8349 Member ✭✭✭
    edited November 9, 2017

    @GreyWolf.8670 said:

    @Rashagar.8349 said:

    @GreyWolf.8670 said:

    @neven.3785 said:
    This is not gambling as some people like to yell. They simply can't get exactly what they want some are pissed off at anet for sticking to their chosen business model for this game. I love that they offer skins now and am glad they didn't chose to lock away certain mounts behind an account upgrade , rather it is only about how pretty you can make our mount.

    Now I would say that there have been much truer forms of gambling in this game for a long time. You have the mystic toilet, black lion chests and those oriann boxes at the start of this game. Then came ecto gambling and races. People didn't complain much about it then.

    Instead they choose to try to take this out of proportion because they want a pretty and they want it now. This is a pretty childish reaction. If they matter to you, then buy them, if you feel it's a rip off, then use the free skin you get with your mastery unlock. The choice is yours and it is your responsibility to manage your finances responsibly.

    For those with kids worried they will take advantage of your credit cards, then rid the accounts of your info and make sure you don't use auto fill.

    When my child bought $100 worth of robox because my autofill synced to the tablet from my phone, I didn't blame roblox or Google, I blamed myself and made him pay back every cent and donated all that currency to his brother as punishment. Then I removed all that information and disabled synchronization like a responsible person should.

    So yes I like this concept, I like you don't get doubles and I like that you don't have to buy them. Only change that would have been better would be for anet to break up the bundles into mount types as that full bundle price is a hard pill to swallow for the common folk. As a side note I bought myself one and gifted one to my wife, this will likely take place of the odd black lion key purchases we make every month or two to support anet until we get all the mounts we want

    How is it NOT gambling? It's a slot machine just like the BLCs. The [i]only[/i] difference is that you will eventually get all of the skins if you keep buying.

    Which is a fairly big difference. I don't know of any slot machine that will eventually give me all of the money if I keep playing.

    Nope, that's not what that means.

    gam·ble
    [ˈɡambəl]
    VERB
    gambling (present participle)

    1. play games of chance for money; bet:
      "she was fond of gambling on cards and horses"
      synonyms: bet · place/lay a bet on something · stake money on something · [more]
    2. bet (a sum of money) on a game of chance:
      "he was gambling every penny he had on the spin of a wheel"
    3. [b]take risky action in the hope of a desired result[/b]:
      "the British could only gamble that something would turn up"
      synonyms: take a chance · take a risk · stick one's neck out · go out on a limb

    You said it's a slot machine with a difference.
    I said the difference is important.
    The above copy/paste does not refute my claim.

  • Atlas.9704Atlas.9704 Member ✭✭
    edited November 9, 2017

    I won't go into my history with this title as some have, that's a waste of time. I'm only going to comment as a consumer who purchased the expansion; I will not purchase random chances at Mount skins. I will support direct purchases instead. Anet you can fix this. Please do so or my Halloween mounts will be the last store purchase from you. Be better than this, be Anet once again.

  • Interesting proposition, but I would rather opt for more expensive 600-800 gems non-RNG option. Your idea is better than the current option, but I would still not buy these because I only liked one of the skins.

  • @Goatstroker.6149 said:

    "You people have history books? Open any one of 'em and it'll tell you: short-term gains bring long-term trouble."
    Rytlock Brimstone

    A truly apt statement. Who'd've thought the Charr of all Tyrian species would have the most poignant of quotes.
    Actually sums this whole 'mountgate' up pretty well.

    Anet, if you were going for a quick burst of profit you really screwed up. You should've made things cheaper to encourage mass sales; less immediate income but more income over time. Silly marketing team. Back to college for you lot.

  • @neven.3785 said:
    This is not gambling as some people like to yell. They simply can't get exactly what they want some are pissed off at anet for sticking to their chosen business model for this game. I love that they offer skins now and am glad they didn't chose to lock away certain mounts behind an account upgrade , rather it is only about how pretty you can make our mount.

    You're wagering money for a chance to get something you want. It is gambling. And how is being glad they didn't do something even worse an argument for this being good? What people want is the ability to pay for something they want and not having to hope they don't draw the short stick. Just because this is their business startegy doesn't mean it has to be good. Imagine if you could buy all the mounts for a set price. People like you who want all or any of them get to have any of them, people who want to have specifics can have specifics. The key difference being that people aren't forced into buying things they don't want if they try to buy things they want.

  • Bad method. Just sell the idividual skins for gems like you do gliders and other cosmetics. Leave the rng out of it. Ezpz

  • Personally I don't mind the RNG system for mount skins like that but the problem I see in the game is no connection between rewards. I understand micro-transactions are here to keep the game alive and content coming but the rewards have zero common goals! At least reward us with 10 or 20 gems for finishing daily fractals or weekly raids or xy games in pvp just enough that every xy days we can get a gem store thing with playing the game it self and not changing gold to gems! GW2 being "f2p" doesn't justify the gemstore model simply because it is a b2p game and f2p is more like demo in the end. There are games that are f2p and not b2p like gw2 (mount skins are good only for PoF players) that are based on containers like this but they have enough understanding of player-friendly rewards to let players get few things with play time and if you want all put in the money (example: Blizzards Hearthstone ingame packs you get with playing). We have zero repeatable content with xpac, zero long term goals with xpac, a ton of recycled minis in xpac (really angry with this part), living season 3 full of maps where you could have copy-pasted bosses in to a cave and call it a fractal but no. So why would i pay 5€ per gamble (12000 gems in total) for a mount to have in a game that will spend the money for more gemstore items and zero play time rewards or content? I won't simple as that.
    But GW2 gold to gems system is not that! AP 5k marks are the only way to get few gems. If at least you would give players a chance for playing the game to get one or two items every now and then from gemstore in more frequent way the mount skin loot-boxes would be a great system that with a bit of thought could be copied to black lion chests and make both systems player and developer friendly but you need to rework the whole reward system for that imho!
    Oh and the 2000 gems goat is a bit too much to be fair even with all the effects. It would be a better reward for completing all PoF achievments imo.

  • Wolfheart.7483Wolfheart.7483 Member ✭✭✭

    .

    @Galactic.6453 said:

    @neven.3785 said:
    This is not gambling as some people like to yell. They simply can't get exactly what they want some are pissed off at anet for sticking to their chosen business model for this game. I love that they offer skins now and am glad they didn't chose to lock away certain mounts behind an account upgrade , rather it is only about how pretty you can make our mount.

    You're wagering money for a chance to get something you want. It is gambling. And how is being glad they didn't do something even worse an argument for this being good? What people want is the ability to pay for something they want and not having to hope they don't draw the short stick. Just because this is their business startegy doesn't mean it has to be good. Imagine if you could buy all the mounts for a set price. People like you who want all or any of them get to have any of them, people who want to have specifics can have specifics. The key difference being that people aren't forced into buying things they don't want if they try to buy things they want.

    Here is another key difference:
    If a player likes all mount skins and will be happy with whatever they get, it isn't a gamble for them. Hence, it is not 100% universally a gamble. Whereas people playing games in a casino are always there to try and win and all of them have a chance at losing every single time.

  • @marceline.8163 said:

    @Goatstroker.6149 said:

    "You people have history books? Open any one of 'em and it'll tell you: short-term gains bring long-term trouble."
    Rytlock Brimstone

    A truly apt statement. Who'd've thought the Charr of all Tyrian species would have the most poignant of quotes.
    Actually sums this whole 'mountgate' up pretty well.

    Anet, if you were going for a quick burst of profit you really screwed up. You should've made things cheaper to encourage mass sales; less immediate income but more income over time. Silly marketing team. Back to college for you lot.

    Digressing for a minute, you do know the charr are the industry spearheads for Tyria right? C w C

    [Charr Noises]
    [Plays every class]
    [JUST GIT EVEN GUDDER ITS FINE]

©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.