Official Mount Adoption Feedback Thread [merged] - Page 23 — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Official Mount Adoption Feedback Thread [merged]

1202123252661

Comments

  • Lilyanna.9361Lilyanna.9361 Member ✭✭✭

    If they make these more expensive just because people wanted to get pissy on receiving a specific one, I'm going to be livid.

    I'm grinding gold to get a skin every three to four days, and if they boost it up to 2k gems because people can't just learn to control their money spending then I am giving up on humanity.

  • Deihnyx.6318Deihnyx.6318 Member ✭✭✭
    edited November 8, 2017

    The funny thing is that should the price have been shown in gold at a vendor, like typically: 150 gold for one RNG mount, people wouldn't have complained so hard. Why? Because the cost is shown in gold instead of gems... even though the conversion would be pretty similar.
    That might be Anet real mistake here, they didn't hide it behind ecto gambling or anything this time. And people got all salty for it.

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

    This isn't specific to you, but in addition to constantly blaming one side of the problem, why not also discussing the other side? Aka people who never want to contribute helping finance the game they play everyday? Who won't ever spend one dollar on anything else than the core game, and still ask to get remunerated during stress tests (okay that was a very particular case)? People who, in this very thread, have no problem telling you $30/players every 2 year is enough to finance servers, employees, marketing, new content etc?

    It's shady, yes. RNG isn't ideal. But I can kind of understand how not getting steady numbers every month push companies to try as much as possible to secure money from the few users who can and are always willing to finance their game.

    That's why having a subscription fee would be infinitely better. Plus skins could get locked behind what actually matters, aka gaming, skill, etc. Players got what they deserved for massively rejecting monthly subscriptions in modern games.
    (And yes, it would hurt the portion of players not willing to help financing the game... but they don't matter economically anyway).

    (EDIT: Oh, also the guaranteed wardrobe are kinda worse already. You play the RNG game to even get them, then you play the RNG game to get a skin you'd like. Somehow this didn't cause all that fuss.)

  • I like most of the skins (although I'm sad that the skimmer didn't get as much variety as the rest of them) and we're guaranteed not to get duplicates, so I'm mostly okay with the RNG part. I would like it a lot better if we could at least choose which mount we get a skin for- I wanted a griffon skin (didn't matter which one) since it's the mount I use the most, but it took several tries just to get one. Picking the type of mount would also help people narrow it down so they have a better chance at getting the exact skin they want.

  • Im sure a lot of effort went into making these skins, but for me the price point is the issue. 400 gems is too much for a "chance" at the one I want. Even if I am guaranteed to get a skin that I don't have every time.
    100 ~ 200 gems would be better.

    It would also have softened the blow by having some of these available through achievements or in-game activities rather than just solely through the BLTC.

  • Here is an idea, one that might be able to serve as a suitable compromise (forgive me if someone already suggested it, it is a long thread):

    Introduce "skin boxes" in the same vein as mount boxes for the other skins. Split the skin boxes up as such:
    Outfit Skins
    Armor Piece Skins
    Light Armor Outfits/Armor Pieces
    Medium Armor Outfits/Armor Pieces
    Heavy Armor Outfits/Armor Pieces
    Jackal Skins
    Raptor Skins
    Glider Skins
    Etc, etc.

    Each of these would cost 200 gems and would give an item in accordance with the theme (outfit boxes give outfits, raptor skin boxes give raptor skins, etc.) that the player does not own already.

    Then, allow the player to buy each skin individually, at a higher price (what they are now).

    So, you can choose to purchase a skin box at a lower price for a chance of getting the skin you want, or a skin that is not currently available (for example, a Halloween skin when it is not currently Halloween could be acquired from the skin box). Or, you can purchase the skin you want at a higher price (400-1000, depending on sales, deals, or what the item is).

    If we wanted to go for a really generous route, skin boxes could also be given as rewards similar to how black lion keys are given away. For example, a skin box could be given for world completion or some-such.

    Do you want a balanced GW2? Then you are obliged to unironically agree with this suggestion!

  • I have no interest in gambling to hopefully get a skin I like. I haven't taken a close look at the skins, but Anet's tactics with this 'license' have more than made me disinterested.

  • You've done kitten it up. Not only you released this kitten during lootbox witch hunt, you released this kitten same week WoW released new expansion, LoL started new season and along with it you released this sorry kitten patch that has probably worst changes I have seen so far.

  • So stupid. First of all, the majority of these skins should have been in-game rewards. The really unique ones clearly should be gem store exclusive. And by that I mean, "hey I like that, I want that. I'm going to buy that". Instead we get "Hey, I like that, I want that. I won't get that when I buy that box though. I guess I can't get that."

    I mean, what do you expect Anet? I've definitely spent my fair share (probably) over a thousand dollars on the gem store.... already more than I spent to play WoW. But you want me to pay $150 CAD just to get the mounts that I want? Are you bloody insane? I have other games, in fact other games I'm interested in. If this is the direction of the game, I certainly won't hesitate to play your content for free.

    Oh, and you want me to pay $38 CAD for that Reforged Warhound? Guys. kitten. I'll pay $15-20 CAD for one mount. The mount I want. Read it carefully. I will gladly spend a reasonable amount of money for the mount that I want.

    This kitten is just BS. I've always thought the gem store prices were a bit high and I've never said anything but this takes the cake.

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

    @Shirlias.8104 said:
    Btw it's like the spooky bundle.
    9600 gems for 30 skins
    400 gem for 1 skin

    10k gems for all 31 skins.

    322 gems per skin.

    Spooky bundle was 320 x skin.

    Everything is fair.

    Not like it at all. Spooky was only a few skins so the extrapolation does not work.

    Besides, if you do not have the griffon with spooky it is only one skin. Depending on how much you liked the others it may or may not be worth it. With this it is more than a single skin.

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

  • I don't really care, but I'll leave this here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/7bevvt/mount_adoption_licenses_are_an_outrage/?ref=share&ref_source=link
    And also this comment specifically: https://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/7bevvt/mount_adoption_licenses_are_an_outrage/dpj3kol/
    I think being able to pay 1000 gems for the exact skin you want could be fair.

  • To be honest, I would absolutely pay the equivalent of an outfit price for those skins,... And I would already have bought 3-4 of them if it wasn't for the RNG factor and that's money you're not ever getting the way things are right now, because I am NOT gambling my money and getting some lazy recolor. I think they would be received much better if they were priced like outfits are, that's the model everyone's been used to anyway. And some of the skins that are simply recolors could be a bit less expensive and you could keep the most complicated ones, like the Reforged Jackal at the price they are now.

  • Chicken Fro.6953Chicken Fro.6953 Member ✭✭✭
    edited November 8, 2017

    TL;DR at bottom

    Gaile, as always thank you for being a great point of communication, reason, and understanding; also for hearing a ton of the heat the players have. You're too good. That being said, nothing I say is against you, but more against this decision with the new mount skins.

    First of all, I think these new mount skins are great, beautiful even, and unique. Who wouldn't want at least some of them? Regarding that, I am for them being on the gem store. I love this game, and as a 911 EMT I personally don't make much money right now, but with responsibility and in moderation over the years, I have likely spent more than a few hundred American dollars just on the gem store to support this game and the things I like in it. After all, I am a capitalist, and in the realm of the economy, I vote with my wallet. That being said, I am especially in support of individual skins being available to be obtained at my discretion and by my decision or possibly even in small packs! I would pay for them.

    Some of these skins warrant a 400 gem price, some are easily 1,000 gems. I would pay either for the ones that I wanted, I'm not going to get carried away with the 2,000 gem Reforged Warhound though lol. As it stands, I am rendered without a choice but to not purchase any, as I--and everyone that I know--cannot compel ourselves to spend $120 to unlock all of them, and we cannot spend 400 gems for even one with very little likelyhood that we will get one of the ones which we want most (even if we would enjoy any of them, the choice is not there). I even have 1,900 gems left over from buying the Ultimate of PoF!

    I believe that the extended use of RNG into mount skins, however fantastic they are, is a move that will cost ArenaNet far, far more than they will gain from the hopes of us purchasing bundles. To be frank, it feels dirty, and I cannot, no, I will not, dump roughly one tenth of my paycheck into gems just to get what I want, with many skins left over that I will enjoy, but truly did not want to pay for in the first place for the simple reason that: I did not intend to get them in the first place, but I had to because of RNG.

    I truly hope that you can see the dilemma, and frustration that I, and many supportive people like me, feel towards the situation. Like I've beaten on a few times: I want to buy them, but I will not put a single dime towards the skins until I can choose the ones I want. I believe you will accumulate much more revenue if you stick to those ethics. Thank you for the forum thread for such feedback, and I do hope it influences the Mount Adoption topic, because it is a neat idea without RNG.

    -Leggo My Drago [MOO]

    TL:DR (because I basically wrote an essay):

    *I want to buy mount skins--I cannot spend $120 on all of them; I will not spend 400 gems on one of them due to the RNG.
    *I will buy mount skins for a fair price when this is fixed. Until then, it feels dirty. I love the game.

    ~Fin.

  • I was so excited about these skins until I logged in to find out they were basically RNG loot boxes. I got disappointed and logged back out lol. I would have loved if they were rewards in game to give me more of incentive to play and another option to get them instead of throwing money out hoping I get the one I want and not stuck with one I dislike. Heck I would have even rather just have the option to specifically choose which I want to buy.

    I feel like this is something BDO would do and that's part of the reason I stopped playing it tbh. I really, really dislike RNG cash shop items.

  • I feel a lot like I was something like "forced" to buy the mount pack (9600 gems) yesterday, cause I, on one hand, liked 5 out of the 30 skins, but I also wanted to avoid the gambling part which in the long run will probably cost a lot lot more than "just" 9600 gems.

    Never ever do something like this to me again, please.

  • Turk.5460Turk.5460 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited November 8, 2017

    If this is more profitable than players individually buying skins, then I hope anet doesn't give in here and change it. Many posters here make it seem like they think they are entitled to easy access of the purely cosmetic items they want, not stopping to think that this is a free to play game. The company needs funds to continue to provide us with a free to play game.

    If this proves more profitable, then I hope they continue with this type of practice for future neat items.

    Fort Aspenwood
    Jekkies

  • Aya.6321Aya.6321 Member ✭✭
    edited November 8, 2017

    @Wolfheart.7483 said:
    .> @Aya.6321 said:

    Since when is the trend of gambling in this game okay? Ecto gambling, sure, but gambling for things that we should have access to freely in the first place is just wrong.
    RNG stuff isn't even allowed on the eastern market anymore because of how wrong it is.
    I hate knowing that the Devs are just sitting back watching this unfold. It's so sad.

    You got access to your mounts with Path of Fire. Putting the RNG issue aside, why do you think you should have the mount skins for free? Or did I misinterpret what you meant?

    Well, for all the vanilla mounts we just got basic models and 1 dye slot.
    The only way to customize the mount is by spending real money...
    I would think that we would at least be able to unlock some sort of skin for each mount by playing the game respectively.
    Why? Because that just makes simple sense.
    My problem is that the only way to really make your mount your own, you have to pay for it
    Instead of playing the expansion that we already payed for.
    Which from my understanding, mounts were one of the main selling points.
    They knew people would buy these skins simply because there is no other way to obtain mount skins or customize them in-game without Gems~

  • I would rather pay 800 gems for the skin I want, than 400 for an 80% (if drops aren't weighted) chance of a skin I don't want.

    Similarly I would rather pay 800 gems for the skin I want rather than 2000. If the only alternative to 400 gem randomized skins ar 2000 gem skins, then no, thank you. I don't want either. I've spent more than 25 000 gems over the past year but there are limits to how much I'd pay for a single cosmetic item.

  • kurfu.5623kurfu.5623 Member ✭✭✭

    I don't like this trend at all... what's next? 700 gems for a chance at a random outfit?

    This is my signature. It is not very exciting.

  • I think the sticker shock of getting the mounts unlocked is hitting hard because it was 30 skins all at once. If they had been spread out over the course of time between expansions, there would be much better adoption by the community. Hitting all at once coupled with the RNG aspect makes it seem like players are being forced to spend an exacerbate amount of money to get what they want.

    While I cannot see the returns on Glider skins as they released gradually, I know that myself and many friends ended up getting multiple glider skins over the course of time between HoT and PoF releases. By releasing all at once, I see a couple I am interested in and would only spend the minimum to get those skins now as a result.

    TL;DR: spread out skin releases and stop the RNG aspects of it.

  • Kitty.6219Kitty.6219 Member ✭✭✭

    I'm not happy.

    While I love the new skins, paying that much for random items seems a little bit too much. I'm more than happy to buy gems and expansions, because i know what I'm buying, but RNG stuff??
    No thanks.

  • If the prices were lower in gems then it would be okay for a random skin, but at this point, 400 gems for a random mount skin is a bit steep. I'd prefer to just pay for the skins I want than gamble a good chunk of money away for skins I don't.

  • 400 for a random one. 600-800 to be able to pick the one you want.

  • TL;DR no RNG

    Anet, i'm quite willing to drop money on the 8-10 mount skins i like, providing i get to pick which ones those are.
    with the randomized drop, im voting with my wallet, and my wallet says no.
    aside from that, as a purely academic argument, i think the prices are also too high for what they are. starbound griffon and stardust jackal, sure i'd pay $10 for those, oceanic ray..$8-10, primal/arctic springer and flamelander/storm raptor,$5-8 each. the rest though are not particularly 'fancy', and i just cant justify a premium price tag for a re-skin, maybe $2.50/200gems/40-60gold at the most

  • It is great to see new mount skins no doubt, but method of getting them is completely wrong. Random skin per license. Of course you can't get duplicates but still it rng. I checked all the skins through and I wasn't fan of the jackal skins or some of the springer skins. And what comes to skimmer, well it isn't used that much. Raptor and Griffon skins were awesome, but rng makes me wonder do I get at first just jackal and skimmer skins and end up spending lot of gems or do I get lucky. Far more better solution would have been either ability to buy license for certain mount, but it would have been random. I would have been fine with that. By that method I could have bought just Raptor and Griffon skins. Or just sell the skins same way as outfits are sold. People would have bought them still. I know I would have. Now I am hesitating.

    And what comes to that special skin, Reforged Warhound, 2000 gems. A way too much for a skin. You were able to buy Halloween skins with 1600 gems as it was 20% off, normally it would be 2000 for all 5 Halloween skins. 1000 gems would have been enough and still it would have been little bit overpriced.

  • Aya.6321Aya.6321 Member ✭✭
    edited November 8, 2017

    So can we petition for them just to rollback and reimburse the GEMS we spent on contracts and redo the how mount stable thing entirely?
    I can't really think of anything else that would work and not upset both sides. (those who already paid and got nothing/don't agree with RNG and the prices, and those who got what they wanted)
    Then re-release the stables with the option to buy the individual mount skin of your choice.
    They get money. We get the skins we want without the RNG kitten and then we all get a cup of tea and wait for all of this to blow over

    -nervous-laugh-cry intensifies-

  • Ubermacho.4251Ubermacho.4251 Member
    edited November 8, 2017

    If mountboxes are here to stay, at least segregate them based on mount. Many of us don't have the final mount yet, and those that do have mount preferences. This whole system would sit easier for me if I bought, say, a gryphon license, knowing that I would at least get a skin for my favorite mount.

  • I think there are problems with the new mount skins system, but I believe it is a balancing act. It is a matter of balancing in-game rewards with gem store rewards. If people have a few in-game options to unlock a few mount skins, they'll be less inclined to complain about gem-store acquisition methods. I also think RNG is a slippery slope and when implemented it should be done so in moderation. In the case of these mount stables, if we are going to take the lootbox approach, we should at least be able to select which mount we are rolling for. I do think there is value in having "prestige mounts" such as the new Warhound skin. I also believe the gem store is a healthy thing for Anet & the game as a whole. Arenanet should be able to monetize cosmetics, but they need to do it in a way that doesn't resort to exploitative gambling.

    In all honesty, my main concern with the mount skins is the massive spike in visual clutter. This game already filled with sparkle and particle effects and it just got a whole lot worse. The new mounts are way too flashy and create eye sores when dyed brightly. At the very least, this need to be taken into account more moving forward. Ideally some new options could be introduced to hide mount skins or custom dye jobs on other mounts.

  • Chorne.8195Chorne.8195 Member ✭✭✭

    Please let us choose our mount skins instead of gambling and getting a raptor with a single extra head spike. No more RNG in the gemstore please.

  • Nope, don't do RNG loot ripoffs. I refuse on principal to support this extorionate, abusive practice.

    Gutter level move, Anet. Needless to say, I'll not be buying anything further from you.

  • It's a ridiculous money grab. I actually throw a fair bit of cash at this game for cosmetic/fun items from the Gem store, but I absolutely will NOT gamble on getting a mount skin I might actually like at 400 gems per pop. No. Effin. Way. Just sell the skins for 400 each on the Gem Store and let players acquire their -favorite- skins at a fair price.

  • I'm going to be honest: I don't mind the mount adoption mechanics. I'm writing this here to let Arenanet know that there's people who don't think they're literally satan for doing this.

    I'll break down my logic in just a moment, I just wanted to get that out here. I don't think this was an outright bad decision, but it was not a great decision. It has made people upset, but I personally believe this level of outrage is entirely unjustified in the case of the scenario going on here.

    Let's start off with price.

    Most people here? Will probably want between 5 and 10 skins out of this block, because judging from the people I see, there's a few regularly popular skins: the fire, celestial, and tiger griffons, the bone, celestial, and fire jackal, the electric and fire raptors, the fire, ice, and jackalope springers, and then lastly the celestial skimmer. While some people may vary, generally these are top picks that most people would be happy to grab. That's a total of, give or take, 10 skins of fairly high value. The current price to 'gamble; (which I think is a really silly way to phrase how this works, you never get duplicates and if you follow my logic later, it's never an actual loss in value), is about $5 a roll. That's dirt cheap. If they sold these individually in a pick and choose manner, the price would go up, probably to $10 a pop or higher. Let's use $10, as most people would agree that's a fair value for a mount skin right?

    Those 10 popular skins, to get all of them, would cost $100.

    The cost of the bundle pack, is $120 for everything. About $150 if you kept 'gambling' instead of buying them all at once.

    Buying them all at once would cost over $200, in a pick and choose state. This would drastically hurt people who want them all, but favor people who literally and without any question only wanted one or two skins. People who want only the most desirable skins, would be paying about as much. This is a good middle ground from my perspective.

    For $20 on this gambling system, we're basically getting 20 extra mounts from the super cool popular ones. Or $50 if you take it in smaller payments over the course of time.

    I don't personally mind this. I understand it doesn't work well for everyone, but I personally think overall this is not a bad deal.

    But now onto the next aspect: there's no really "bad" rolls on this, in my perspective. Even if you don't get a skin you wanted and it's pretty close to the vanilla skin, you just got 3 new dye slots. For $5. That's not a bad deal from my perspective.

    This is a purely cosmetic option. This is not mechanical in any manner. This does not effect your gameplay experience in any way shape or form. It is entirely optional. Arenanet is not holding a gun to your head and saying you have to buy it.

    You have every option to farm for mounts. If you farm the proper paths you can easily afford a mount every other day. You have an option, to, entirely free of cost, obtain literally every one of these 30 some mounts, in 2 months or so.

    Loot box mechanics are not new to GW2. Arenanet has always been fair with their black lion chests, as you can farm keys and gems over time by just playing the game, and while I don't personally like them, Dye Packs are an even worse deal IMO. But nobody complained until the mounts came out, in a not flawless, but overall fair manner.

    That said I want to say I'm disappointed in people who are legitimately attempting to take down Arenanet over something so petty. It is not worth trying to harm people's livelihood over something this.

  • In my opinion the problem isn't that mount skins are behind the gemstore combined with RNG, it lies in the fact that this is the only way to get mount skins. There isn't a single way to get glider or mount skins playing the game. I would like a griffon skin for getting gold in all griffon adventures for example.

  • First the outfit (fallen balthazar) in the chests, and now these mount skins. I've been a long time user of the black lion store but if you are turning to what is essentially gambling now I will no longer purchase gems.

  • Hya.5168Hya.5168 Member ✭✭

    The feedback is pretty simple: I like some of the mount skins and I will likely buy some of them for the right price. But I am definitely not willing to buy anything that is giving a random result for a real money. I do not gamble with a real money and although the mount skins have the same value on the paper, in reality it is not so true (because I like just some of them and just for some mounts).

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

    @crashburntoo.7431 said:
    On the plus side, these skins should be available via the Random Wardrobe Unlock... for those that happen across one or more of these, you could be pleasantly surprised! If you don't like any of the new mount skins, I'm sorry to say that your pool of potential unlocks has now been slightly diluted.

    You do realize the random wardrobe unlock is, well, random? The impact on that is to buy all these rng skins so you do not waste a wardrobe unlock on getting a bad skin instead of something you can not get through other means.

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

  • Here's my take on it. People would like to be able to contribute with upkeep but honestly .....not too many people are able to purchase $120 worth of gems and still make car payments, rent, bills and food on top of that. That being said, it would seem to me that Anet could make MORE money by not being so heavy handed. If mounts are offered the way gliders are, most people would be able to afford them and everyone comes away happy.

  • Tyger.1637Tyger.1637 Member ✭✭✭

    @Maryth.9372 said:
    Consumerism is a social and economic order and ideology that encourages the acquisition of goods and services in ever-increasing amounts. The mount skins are a super example of this in comparison to how glider skins have been offered in the past. Just some food for thought today: If you went to a store to buy a sweater or a shirt. Would you be willing to spend your money on that shirt if it was standard that you would not get the choice of color or style and instead you had to accept whatever was issued to you? We can do the same example with food. Would you be willing to spend your money on a meal that is selected for you and does not allow you the opportunity to choose?
    I'm seeing this as a test to learn about our RNG tolerance. Where Black Lion Keys have always provided this experience, will we spend real money and send the message that it is acceptable that the TP to shift to deliver more items by chance and without choice. It's just business.....not saying it's right or wrong today. Just saying this is how businesses learn about your appetite and your tolerance.

    Something to note: Argos used to sell action figures randomly back in the days of the first line of TMNT figures. Used to shop at Woolworths instead to get the ones me and my brother wanted where they were all out on the shelf to see. Even as an 8 year old I thought it was a stupid business model because I wanted one and not a chance at one. Later they started selling figures like that individually. Difference here is I can't shop for mounts in Wildstar to use them here.

  • @Anet who told you that people who want to aquire a certain skin will be happy with gambling for it? I never thought you would get so low to grab the players cash. I lost my respect for you. Shame.

  • Pittcrew.6592Pittcrew.6592 Member ✭✭
    edited November 8, 2017

    My issue with the design of this system is purely to do with the RNG. Sure, I'd love a few skins in game to be earnable as well, but that's not my main issue with it.

    I just want to be able to outright buy the skins I want, and not worry about the ones I don't.

    For me, a fair price to just out-right sell the skins would be ~400 Gems for purely re-textured skins, ~500-800 Gems for Fancy visuals/slight model changes (effects, moving textures, Springer Antlers, etc.), and ~800-1600 Gems for completely new models (such as the Warhound, or if we get a Wyvern/Dragon skin for Griffon and such).

    A few example prices for mounts: (my personal preferences do determine the prices, to some extent)

    • Spooky Mounts: 600 Gems each
    • Flamelander: 700 Gems
    • Stormridge: 700 Gems
    • Arctic Jerboa: 800 Gems
    • Desert Lop: 500 Gems
    • Elonian Jackalope: 800 Gems
    • Primal Hare: 700 Gems
    • Dajkah Lantern: 800 Gems
    • Oceanic Ray: 700 Gems
    • Crowned Ancient: 600 Gems
    • Pyroclast: 700 Gems
    • Twin Sands: 700 Gems
    • Stardust: 800 Gems
    • Fire Pinion: 800 Gems
    • Starbound: 800 Gems
    • Clouded Corvus: 500 Gems
    • (Reforged Warhound: 1600 Gems) even though this one wouldn't be changed b/c refunds
    • Basically all others, ~400 Gems
      (note that with these prices, the 15 that have non-400 prices that are from the Stables are priced at over 10k, which is more than the price of buying all of them in bulk)

    Basically, make the RNG boxes a good deal for the valuable ones, and on-par with the price for the texture-changing ones, so that finding a valuable one in the RNG boxes is more rewarding because they have set values. (And if the contract's base price is worth the price of the cheapest, then it encourages buying in bulk and you don't have to worry so much about people buying the low-value ones and stocking up the contracts for the higher-value ones to save Gems.)

    I think I'd also be fine with the outright-purchasable skins being on a rotation as well, so they aren't all available all the time. Would be a bit annoying, but if each skin is at least guaranteed to come up for like 1-2 weeks of each year, I'd be fine with it.

    As always, I personally hate any purchase above 800 Gems that cannot be bought with a direct Gem pack purchase, so another little suggestion might be to add a 1000 Gem Pack (for $12.5), because it is a fairly common amount to see. That would be perfect for Infinite tools, and the various things at multiples of 1000 Gems. Or 500 Gem options, but I imagine you don't want to make any pack under ~$10 because of the charge per transaction that would make you lose too much from a ~$6.25 charge for a 500 Gem pack.

    Also, a suggestion from Bog Otter would be to add these Contracts as a reward for some content, such as Legendary Bounties. I think that's a good idea. Perhaps 250 Elegies and 20g per pop. Maybe some sort of timegate for the purchases, and/or a daily/weekly item that you can earn needed to buy them.
    And even here, it would be nice if we could work towards particular skins. Alter the cost though, to fit value a bit more. Say, 1/20 of the Gem cost for Gold (i.e. a 500 Gem skin = 25 Gold), and 1/2-2/3 the Gem cost for Elegies.

  • I'd like a system like this:

    400 gems for a random skin
    600 gems for recolored, no model changes mount skin of your choice
    800 gems for a slight model change mount skin of your choice
    1000 gems for more elaborate, particle effects mount skin of your choice
    9600 gems for all skins

    That way if we want a specific skin we just buy it, if we want expensive skins there is a reason to gamble since we can get one for cheaper. It also makes more elaborate skins a bit rarer than others. And once we have the skins we want the most, we can freely choose to gamble for some extra skins. People who want all of them can just buy the bundle, which is still cheaper than all 10 of the more elaborate skins.

  • The salt is so overwhelming, it almost makes one think anybody will still be talking about this in 2 weeks. But we will all move on to whatever the next big thing to be a pissy toddler about is. Yeah, the RNG thing is pretty annoying. Maybe stop giving NCSoft everything they want.

  • Daelin Dwin.5698Daelin Dwin.5698 Member
    edited November 8, 2017

    While I think the price is fairly extortionate, it can largely be overlooked. What cannot be overlooked is locking the acquisition of mount skins behind Lootboxes/RNG. This can be easily fixed without the removal of such boxes, thereby screwing over those who have already purchased them, by simply adding in functionality to purchase mount skins individually at this sort of price point:

    Common: 600 Gems
    Uncommon: 800 Gems
    Rare: 1000 Gems

    This allows people to pay lower to gamble for a skin they want, or pay slightly more for the specific skin they want. This is a compromise that should in theory appease all parties.

  • Just remove the RNG aspect from it. That's fine for in-game loot, but for items that have a monetary value, even if you can change gold into gems, is predatory and anti-consumer.

    Make them more expensive, let us buy the ones we want. That's 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.