Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Official Mount Adoption Feedback Thread [merged]


Recommended Posts

RNG is so not ok. I will gladly give even 800 gems for one mount skin rather than to 'gamble' with randomness and get the skins I really don't want.When I first saw the contracts I thought I could choose which mount skin to get.I am definitely not going to buy these contracts, primarily because they are random. Kudos to design team for making the skins, but bad, bad move to make them random.We should be able to choose what we want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As has been said by countless others (I am repeating this because hopefully the powers that be will see this is a common opinion ) I will not buy these mount skins from an RNG box. If these skins were offered individually from the gem store, meaning I could purchase the one I wanted, I would be willing to pay. I realize this means that most likely it will cost considerably more than 400 gems. The fact that I would be 100% certain of getting the skin that I want and will use is worth it to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Turk.5460 said:Who would bother buying the non-shiny mount skins when they can just insta-get the most shiniest and most legendary looking ones? No one. <

Actually, I would. After previewing all the new mount skins, I prefer the more subtle ones, although some of the Raptor ones are too bland. The flashiest ones are IMO tacky and I think they look pretty ridiculous in-game. Personal opinion only; if you love them, great, but not everyone does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My 15 year old brother plays Guild Wars 2. In Australia, he is not permitted to gamble in clubs or casinos, but could easily spend all of his savings on RNG mount skins as a purely digital reward. This is gambling, pure and simple, and it's unregulated nature preys especially on young and vulnerable fans of this game.

There is a difference between paying 800? for a specific skin from the stables and gambling sets of 400? indefinitely, until you get that same one.

As an aside, I am a young adult who works part time with few overheads. I make AUD$375 a week at most, and the stable license would cost me AUD$156. This is an unacceptable price for a purely aesthetic digital reward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope A-net takes every employee in their marketing department, ties them to a chair and FORCES them to read all 33 and counting pages of this thread.

This randomization monetization horse crap needs to be fKing murdered before it begins.

And that 2000 Gem jackal skin is beyond qualifying as a sick joke. That shit is just DISGUSTING.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like a couple of the skins but I refuse to pay real money to buy gems to maybe get what I want. A better way of doing it would have been like the Zephyrite Color Swatchs. Group the skins into packs according to what mount they go on. We would then buy a pack, of say Raptor skins, and then pick the skin that we want. I would actually be willing to pay a little more if being able to pick the one that I want is an option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just my thought if the devs really want to know. I had some gems so I bought a skin to see what they were, and got a Jackalope. Go figure I have never won the RNG lottery with anything before. Love the skin, and never thought about looking at the skins first sadly, so I bought a few more assuming they were all going to be like the Jackalope. The other skins were more or less meh other than the fact that they can be dyed with more than one color. I may buy one more when I get more gems to see if I can get a raptor skin, but I'm in no rush. Good job on the Jackalope skin though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From my perspective I think the price should either be reduced slightly due to the fact it is randomized, or each mount have their own "license". This allows people to at least roll through the mounts they may want in case there is a mount they don't care to have skins for. Would feel bad if you bought licenses and got a ton of skins for a mount you didn't want additional skins for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

anet is a company and they have to maintain their employers and their family. IF you rate mount skins too expensive you can easily don't buy it. I usually don't buy skin but i can play aswell. THey are not mandatory so i don't see nothing wrong if they gain on that, it is not a p2w so it is really ok for me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Making new mount skins closed behind RNG is plain silly because in the worst case I'm gonna have to pay 125 pounds to get the skin I want. If I had an option to choose the mount I like, surely I'd buy at least 5 of them. Right now I don't feel like buying any because I don't like gambling, I prefer to pay for things I want, not a chance to get them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm also not 100% upset by this... but that's because I think I see where ANet had the idea and what went wrong with the implementation.

The mount skins are analogous to the special dye kits that occasionally get sold. Those also have a random assortment of prizes, and unlike the mount skins, you're not guaranteed to get something new. ANet looked at the dye sales, said "we're going to do the same with mount skins" and tried "fixing" it by making sure you get something you don't already have but the result is account bound. Unfortunately, this removed the reason that the dye kits worked... the reason the dyes work and the mount skins don't is that we can sell the unwanted dyes. Even with the chance of getting a dye worth practically zero (you opened a Shadow dye kit looking for the 400g Shadow Abyss dye and got the 4s gray dye), the risk is still worth it because if you need one specific special dye, you'll likely make enough from selling the other special dyes to get it on the TP.

As it currently stands, players with a lot of money can buy all the skins and they'll eventually get the one they want. But those of us with less money (or more attachment to our wallets) have no sure way of getting the skins we want. ANet is unlikely to get my money or my gold for a random skin. If the mount skins could be resold, you'd have the people with gold buy a large amount of skins, take the ones they need, then sell the rest. Their turning gold to gems to buy the skins is a gold sink, as is reselling the skins on the TP. Those of us without gold pay the players that can afford to buy skins in bulk, and we get the ones we want... ANet would get my gold via the person buying the skins in bulk, plus the TP tax for the exchange.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I supposed we have to come to terms with the fact that there are players who compulsively need every mount skin and who struggle with addiction, making the lootboxes predatory. As someone who is not a compulsive gambler, I think the idea of the mount stables is fun: if you have an extra 400 gems, see what prize you get and end it there. But yeah, there are a fair number of people who struggle with compulsion loops and this is a very customer unfriendly business model

My BIGGEST problem with the mount skins is how shiny the star one are. They are so lore breaking and flashy and distracting and I would like the option to hide them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said this on reddit but I'll say it again here: it's fine to sell random mounts for 400 gems each, but players should also be able to buy the mounts they want for, say, 700 gems each.

That way, people that want a specific mount can get the one they want with no RNG, whereas people that like the lottery aspect can save money on each mount they buy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bought the 2k reforged and felt like it was pricey, but loved it.

I saw the fire griffon and gambled another 2800 gems to hopefully get it. Instead I got a bunch of dogs which I won't use. I'm walking away having spent 4800 gems with a feeling of disappointment. I'm even feeling embarrassed that I chose to participate in the fervor of the mount gamble box. If that is the kind of customer experience ArenaNet continues to cultivate, then I simply won't participate with your products any further.

You have so many talented people working on this amazing product, I know you can find another way to monetize the game which is both profitable for the game and healthy for your players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im having a hard time justifying past purchses of black lion chests to myself but this time i wont support the RNG gambling for items, the feeling it gives is not good when you spend more than you should and any skins will just remind me of that feeling. This is designed to bait you into buying more and more licenses since the odds of getting what you want will only get better and better. I dont mind spending money on gems and i have spent around half a grand a year for 4+ years and i will continue to spend money on non-RNG gemstore purchases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Coulter.2315 said:

@Rococo.8347 said:
  1. The Isle of Man actually has robust Law governing Loot boxes weirdly enough - if you care about this and are based in the UK - push your MP to look at what is probably the most enlightened modern example of gambling Law in Europe...

I'd be careful getting people to looking into the Isle of Man too much, the red scourge is currently licking its lips at all that private jet tax avoidance. I'm pretty sure the gambling law is very specifically designed for tax avoidance too xD

OMG that IS another quagmire ( tax avoidance) but far too ubiquitous and complex for us to get into!

I just want to give Anet a couple of warnings/suggestions and then I will rest my case:

  1. Ive been around the block, I was there for the Great Ascended Backlash, The Great HoT (rewards/meta/Item acquisition/difficulty) Backlash and the Veterans HoT Price Backlash, the latter was handled with swift rethink and positive action on Anets part, the former two not so much a couple of times with issues that layers are unhappy with we have been asked for feedback, then the htread has been shut down and then? ...nothing happens - I recall one thread on the old forum going for OVER A YEAR ( i wish I could remember which) and resulting in little to no change. If you are asking for feedback it needs to be acted on and it needs to be quickly, or at least a clear concise game plan of how long it will take to action.

  2. Having been through this sort of thing before ive seen so many players get caught up in the 'lesser evil' theory - what's being offered is so awful people revert to what they consider is a rationalised 'middle ground' by actually offering up solutions that are not actually what is best for the game - lets be clear, RNG and pay walled cosmetics have massively increased in the game to the now obvious detriment of cosmetics in game, when we asked for more armor in game and less in the Gem shop we didn't mean, take it all out of the gem shop then still only produce tiny amounts of armor atall, the same applies here - the 'lesser' evil here is perceived to be the lack of in game cosmetics ( that arnt in BL boxes) so people focus on the RNG issue of the mounts - that isn't the only issue here! there's been a definite veer towards game content being stripped of cosmetics, what would be best here isn't for JUST the RNG issue to be looked at...

You have 6 mount skins per mount type - put 2/3 of each type into the game and don't ignore the bad feeling here and wait for it to die down and settle for the easiest ( but long term bad) option of just removing the RNG ( or do nothing at all and add in even more) only to RNG something else and continue locking most cosmetic content and decent rewards behind pay walls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...