Jump to content
  • Sign Up

BLTC: Mythic Weapon


Recommended Posts

Mythic weapons are awesome and they've packaged them like this so you spend more gems. And they they allow you to buy another package and dump the same items you already have now from the first purchase just because you want the mythic weapon skins. I think it's unfair, but it's what they do and if you want the skins bad enough, you'll pay dearly and get duplicate back pack or glider pack for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Yggranya.5201 said:

@Brian.6435 said:I honestly don't know why they don't do a premium account thing that gives you gems etc for 15 bucks a month. Literally every other successful MMO has this.

But I really just wanted to stop by to say... BRING.BACK.THE. MYTHIC. WEAPONS.Because you can still pay for 15 bucks worth of gems every month. Not sure whats so hard about that.

No extra benefits? No advantage over those who don't pay? That is most likely the reason.The extra benefits for buying $15 worth of gems monthly over not buying $15 worth of gems monthly is that every month you have $15 worth of gems to spend on things costing gems.

Again, not sure people would have issues with this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@Brian.6435 said:I honestly don't know why they don't do a premium account thing that gives you gems etc for 15 bucks a month. Literally every other successful MMO has this.

But I really just wanted to stop by to say... BRING.BACK.THE. MYTHIC. WEAPONS.Because you can still pay for 15 bucks worth of gems every month. Not sure whats so hard about that.

No extra benefits? No advantage over those who don't pay? That is most likely the reason.The extra benefits for buying $15 worth of gems monthly over not buying $15 worth of gems monthly is that every month you have $15 worth of gems to spend on things costing gems.

Again, not sure people would have issues with this.

Obviously that isn't enough of a benefit to these people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The mentality used to be if you don't like something about a product, don't buy it. Lately it feels like the mentality is if you don't like something about a product, don't buy it and expect the company to change it to your expectations. Then still don't buy it and expect it for free since they didn't do it your way in the first place.

I suspect if they felt they could make more money selling these skins seperately then they would be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Super Hayes.6890 said:The mentality used to be if you don't like something about a product, don't buy it. Lately it feels like the mentality is if you don't like something about a product, don't buy it and expect the company to change it to your expectations. Then still don't buy it and expect it for free since they didn't do it your way in the first place.

I suspect if they felt they could make more money selling these skins seperately then they would be.

It is the same reasoning why they made the first group of mount skins random only. They knew that most of the skins were so bad no one would buy them. The rng factor was so that people would spend money on crap no one wanted in order to get that one skin you actually did want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Eloc Freidon.5692 said:

@Super Hayes.6890 said:The mentality used to be if you don't like something about a product, don't buy it. Lately it feels like the mentality is if you don't like something about a product, don't buy it and expect the company to change it to your expectations. Then still don't buy it and expect it for free since they didn't do it your way in the first place.

I suspect if they felt they could make more money selling these skins seperately then they would be.

It is the same reasoning why they made the first group of mount skins random only. They knew that most of the skins were so bad no one would buy them. The rng factor was so that people would spend money on kitten no one wanted in order to get that one skin you actually did want.

That is a good example, in my opinion, because enough people didn't buy it that Anet made a change for future mount packs. Of course they also lit up the forums with complaints but I'm thinking thier lack of spending was heard much louder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Super Hayes.6890 said:

@Super Hayes.6890 said:The mentality used to be if you don't like something about a product, don't buy it. Lately it feels like the mentality is if you don't like something about a product, don't buy it and expect the company to change it to your expectations. Then still don't buy it and expect it for free since they didn't do it your way in the first place.

I suspect if they felt they could make more money selling these skins seperately then they would be.

It is the same reasoning why they made the first group of mount skins random only. They knew that most of the skins were so bad no one would buy them. The rng factor was so that people would spend money on kitten no one wanted in order to get that one skin you actually did want.

That is a good example, in my opinion, because enough people didn't buy it that Anet made a change for future mount packs. Of course they also lit up the forums with complaints but I'm thinking thier lack of spending was heard much louder.

Yeah, being "evil" generally doesn't make companies very much money compared to just doing the straightforward thing and letting people buy what they want. The market follows the law of supply and demand. While plenty of people in real life lose tons of money gambling, there are even more people who can see through that and won't. If there was a law that required you to play the lottery in order to win a car and there was no other way to get a car, in a democracy that'd be overturned really quickly, but if there was still an option to play the lottery for a car some people would do that anyways. That's basically what you see in real life: most people buy cars, but there are still car giveaways for people who want that. If I were Anet, I wouldn't lock so many things behind gambling but I'd still allow it in countries where it's legal. Just because you can buy something doesn't mean no one will choose to gamble for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Coeruleum.9164" said:Yeah, being "evil" generally doesn't make companies very much money compared to just doing the straightforward thing and letting people buy what they want. The market follows the law of supply and demand. While plenty of people in real life lose tons of money gambling, there are even more people who can see through that and won't. If there was a law that required you to play the lottery in order to win a car and there was no other way to get a car, in a democracy that'd be overturned really quickly, but if there was still an option to play the lottery for a car some people would do that anyways. That's basically what you see in real life: most people buy cars, but there are still car giveaways for people who want that. If I were Anet, I wouldn't lock so many things behind gambling but I'd still allow it in countries where it's legal. Just because you can buy something doesn't mean no one will choose to gamble for it.

The statuettes for black lion chests was a good step in the right direction to avoid rng and get those exclusives if you didn't get lucky. It would have been perfect if the rates in the vendor wasn't so inflated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...