Official Mount Adoption Feedback Thread [merged] - Page 39 — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Official Mount Adoption Feedback Thread [merged]

1363739414261

Comments

  • pah.4931pah.4931 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @PopeUrban.2578 said:

    @pah.4931 said:
    Did anyone stop to consider that MAYBE Anet didn't have much of a choice? If sales are declining, there is no reason not to shutter the game completely? Would you rather have lootboxes or no GW2 at all?

    Did anyone stop to consider sales are declining because they go out of their way to make threadbare expansions specifically so they can offer them for reduced prices and overcharge you for gem store skins on the back end for increased profit while intentionally making a more frustrating game with less rewarding content?

    If they'd ACTUALLY moved to the expansion model and away from the "free updates subsidized by your annoyance at how few rewards are in them so you buy gem store stuff" model that was failing before they started working on HoT... has anyone considered they might be in a better place now? I mean by and large they used this model in the first game and made enough money to make a completely new game. An undertaking that costs way more time and money than making an expansion for an existing one.

    Has anyone considered "free updates" does not actually mean "free updates" and you've been relying on a fickle and transient minority of the player base buying overpriced wallet-farming loot to provide the majority of the revenue rather than focusing on making the best possible product to make it attractive to the most possible users?

    Did anyone stop to consider that the sales decline might be because they go out of their way to make a game where the point is convincing players to buy gems (or become licensed gold farmers for other players) rather than creating experiences so rich and rewarding people are happy to pay 60 bucks for expansions and tell everyone how awesome the game is?

    Your theory hinges on the position that Anet is willfully choosing to make less money?

    You know it's a lot easier said than done to "create experiences so rich and rewarding for people" ... why don't all game companies do this and make a billion dollars.?It's so obvious!!!

    Lastly, your GW1 to GW2 analogy doesn't fit because MMOs are dying. The gaming scene is WAY different than it was 15, 10, or even 5 years ago.

    I don't know why I have to keep saying this. If this method did not make more money for Anet, they wouldn't do it. As a business, why would you NOT choose to do what makes more money?

  • @therapite.3645 said:
    I'm going to chime in here with:

    I spent a little real money on something that made me happy for about an hour. I didn't do the math, I just wanted a chance at something shiny and I actually got one. The RNG Gods hate me and I actually got the thing that I wanted and I was running around on it and got told by multiple people what an awful person I was, how stupid I looked, how I was feeding the beast or whatever, and how I should be ashamed of myself.

    This isn't the community that I know and love. This isn't the people that will help anyone at the drop of a had, congratulate people at the forge for making a legendary weapon, answer questions for newbies and veterans alike. There's something fundamentally wrong with this picture and if it's the math and the business model that made it that way then please fix it.

    There are a lot of new players in this game that I've found to be fairly rude as of late, but I don't know if its just toxic people now coming to GW2 or really bitter vets that are tired of it all, but thats really a discussion for another thread.

    Greck Howlbane - Firebrand
    Sorrow's Furnace For Life

  • pah.4931pah.4931 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Malafaia.8903 said:

    @pah.4931 said:

    @Roadkill.2374 said:

    @pah.4931 said:
    Did anyone stop to consider that MAYBE Anet didn't have much of a choice? If sales are declining, there is no reason not to shutter the game completely? Would you rather have lootboxes or no GW2 at all?

    Because the harsh reality is that there are a LOT of games on the market. And most of them are BS mobile games that make WAY more money for WAY less effort than a game like GW2. I don't think our average forum poster understands how business works. It's not enough to just "make profit" ... but you have to be growing. You have to doing things that shows y-o-y revenue increases. Plenty of "profitable" companies have been closed because they aren't profitable enough. For those who don't know much (which I am assuming are most of these people complaining), it's called Return On Investment or ROI.

    Here's a simplified example. Let's say you have $10 to invest in a game. One game will take all $10, and only return $3 more dollars. But there are four smaller mobile games that only take $1 and will return $4 each, and then two other games that need a $3 investment but will return $5 each. You can invest all $10 into the first company and make a profit -- hooray! -- but it's only a $3 profit and now you have $13. On the other hands, you could have pumped that money and time into those other games and with the same $10 you could have made $25 (a profit of $15, which is more than $3). The ROI is vastly different.

    This gets even more complicated when you start talking about trends (i.e., every year, you know that big game that needed $10? well it still needs that much to develop but it has been making less and less returns, while mobile games make MORE each year).

    Long story short. Anet is beholding to overlords (ncsoft). And being profitable isn't good enough. They need to show growth. Otherwise, they will get less and less support from their overlords. They won't be able to hire more people or attract new talent when people leave. And the game will die. This happens.

    So, today, how about we all take a big, deep breath and thank Anet for a fun game that lets YOU choose how you spend your money on it... because it might be gone tomorrow.

    But why should we care how their business work. You are not their friend you are just a paying customer of their service they provide. I am more then happy to pay for the years of service they gave us but if I feel like the direction they are taking is becoming anticustomer I have the right to let me be heard.

    And I think you would be suprised how much money they make.

    But let's keep this in perspective. To pay just ONE yearly employee salary of $80,000 (not including any other benefit, and I can guarantee you, in Seattle, most salaries are much higher than this), Anet would need to sell all 30 skins (120 bucks) to 667 players. And then there is rent, advertising, insurance, etc etc etc.

    It takes a LOT of money to keep a business going. And, like I said, it doesn't matter how much money they make. They need to show growth and a decent ROI, otherwise investors money is better spent elsewhere.

    Again. You don't understand how business works. It's not as simple as you think. It's not: "Hey. We made 10 million dollars and now we have 10 million more dollars to spend on GW2 development."

    They have investors. They have numbers they have to hit. Otherwise, the game shuts down. And people seem OK with the game shutting down, as long as they get to choose their Mount Skin.

    As a business person too i have to bring the fact that you are only talking about numbers and that is a mindset of an 80's businessman.

    I am not entirely sure of what point you're trying to make, but if I were in charge of Anet and NCSoft said "You gotta get your numbers up or we'll be shutting you down" then I would much rather be an 80s businessman (is that pejorative? I can't tell) and keep a game running and my employees employed and thousands of gamers gaming.

    You, as a modern businessman, might screw the numbers and let the game slowly die, putting a few hundred people out of jobs and a few thousand people out of a game.

    Good job, modern businessman!

  • pah.4931pah.4931 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited November 9, 2017

    @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?????

  • My 2 cents:

    • Is this a good move?

    Hell no. Currently, there is the free default look for mounts and that's ALL that is available to non-gem store customers. Picture this game with a single light, medium, and heavy armor skin, and literally every other armor skin behind the gem store. Or a single skin for each weapon type, and every other skin behind the gem store. That's what this is. By all means, have some of the more labor intensive, blingerific skins in the gem store, artists did have to spend time making them, and having some gem store exclusives should be expected given the cosmetics for cash business model that has kept this game alive for half a decade. It's even healthy to give those who support the game beyond the base purchases a little something to show off. But, when that is the only way to dress up something as basic to the game now as armor and weapons, it's a massive violation of the expectations created by ANet for them to keep it all behind a locked door.

    • How about that RNG distribution scheme?

    Yeah, this is why the backlash is severe AND deserved. As much as it would have annoyed many players, had we just had 30 individual skins for sale in the gem store along with some packages to get a discount on buying multiples at once (like the Halloween ones), that would have at least been arguably supportable. Mount skins were an obvious add on to the game, and would inevitably be in high demand by the slice of the player base that loves crafting their characters' looks. Keeping all but the default behind the gem store would have caused an uproar, but adding the additional layer of RNG distribution is the proverbial salt in the wound (along with some ground glass and lemon juice).

    • How does this affect me?

    Well, I'm going to keep on using my default mount skins. There are three, maybe four, of the skins I would actually want, which means 26-27 skins I wouldn't care if I had or not beyond collecting another skin unlock. The odds are not remotely in my favor buying them individually, essentially 8:1 against me. If it was a $5 lottery ticket for $1000 with those odds, sign me up, but a $5 lottery ticket for a Jackalope skin? Hahahaha, nope. At the bare minimum, if they were going to keep the RNG, we should have at least been able to aim better for what we wanted by picking the mount type we were "adopting". If I ever bought one of these licenses, it would be purely for S&Gs, and given that there are still functional gem store purchases I want, that's going to be a long time.

    This isn't rage inducing or a deal breaker for me, but it's certainly disappointing in the signal of ANet's priorities and current design philosophy. At this point, I've been with the GW franchise for over 10 years, I don't see myself ever leaving it completely unless I just quit this style of game entirely, and I like to support game development that benefits me, but I can't support such short sighted silliness as this. It's particularly frustrating in seeing how trivial it would have been to deflect: release 3-4 skins for each mount available in some way in-game first, even if it was ye old farm gold and buy it from a vendor distribution. THEN, release gem store exclusive skins with or without the egregious RNG distribution. Players would have had choices, do you want to spend gems to dress up your springer, or do you want to go collect 250 foozle tokens from some mob somewhere, or farm 30 gold, or, heck, add skins to dungeon token purchases as incentive to run them. Customization is what drives the end game in GW, it did in GW1, it does in GW2, but the degree to whether it's satisfying to the player is whether we have any agency in that customization. There is currently no player agency in customizing mounts beyond the default, we either spend, or we don't, whee!, and that's why this was such a bad move.

  • The Massively article was well written; I think it was a balanced description of the situation. Everyone is reacting differently, and my previous posts put me in the Anti-RNG camp. Honestly, I just don't like that business model, but I understand that it's not entirely new to GW2 or gaming in general.

    I think a great compromise to this entire situation is to release the mount skins individually but at higher prices. They can release them gradually, in sets, as part of events, however they wish. It would be wise to inform the player base that this is your intent moving ahead too (don't necessarily have to give a release model or schedule - just let us know that they'll eventually show up in the shop as something we can buy direct). The higher prices can be tiered as well. Anet knows which skins could be classified as "standard", "deluxe" and "legendary". I would suggest that the RNG boxes remain, since they've been released already and purchased by some. Simply add releases of these skins and more at 600 gems, 800 gems and 1000 gems. I can't get behind the 2000 gem pricing for a single skin, even if some people note that $25 is an industry standard for mounts... maybe for a mount, but not for a skin. This game has a price range on skins, tools, toys and everything else. 2000 gems has historically been bundle level pricing, so I think they should avoid tying price tags of that nature to single items.

    I hope that the community will get a response on this soon.

    Let's be neighbours.

  • Rashagar.8349Rashagar.8349 Member ✭✭✭

    @PookieDaWombat.6209 said:
    I'm getting really tired of people thinking that somehow people commenting against this RNG nonsense don't understand how business or economics work.

    How about people thinking it's illogical bandwagoning and misplaced aggression? =P

  • Matick.4132Matick.4132 Member ✭✭✭

    Hey folks...

    Just a thought – and it gets a lil complicated to get out just a single thought in a MEGA thread like this, but anyways:

    A lotta folks are stating: 'Hey, how do they make any money if they can't sell Lootboxes and stuff?!"
    Well, there was this concept once – I know, I know... old times and stuff – by BUYING a game, and the 1st EXPANSION, and the 2nd EXPANSION, and the 3rd EXPANSION ... and on top of that, do some enthusiast like me any many others of you, the** PREMIUM/DELUXE/FAN-EDITIONs** of these kits.

    THAT'S how you make a living out of something.
    Sell stuff and good service.

    I never seen my fridge company offering me any extra RNG >>> pls insert the swearword of your liking <<<, because otherwise they were starving to death!

    And I'm not gonna clap and cheer to any company who doesn't sell on this subscription-model nowadays, because it's >>> pls insert the swearword of your liking <<< in the first place and they should not drench the pockets outta small companies and home-users by giving them no choice, hence forcing them into the system. Which makes it look effective and successful, but is indifferent to some meth-dealer that fuels his customers to get going, and going, and going on.

    // ok, there is a but, like always it's grey rather then complete B&W:
    As a fan I'm ok with getting this action figure, or a shirt, or whatnot. Or a skin for my char. And paying for it, because it took extra time and effort to make those, too.
    What I'm not ok with is having diversity ONLY spread by paying extra (as in the new mount-skins) and no rewards for high level playing or support over the years and through the woods. You SHOULD get some cool stuff, if you've succeed in the hardest raid, you should get something if you've lived through the whole story and living world. Namely for example: Keys for the Lootboxes, those cool skins for amor, weapons, mounts etc., that otherwise you have to pay for, if you don't wanna make the effort of playing through the whole game. This is a concept I'm fine with.
    What's happening now, I'm not!

  • @therapite.3645 said:
    I'm going to chime in here with:

    I spent a little real money on something that made me happy for about an hour. I didn't do the math, I just wanted a chance at something shiny and I actually got one. The RNG Gods hate me and I actually got the thing that I wanted and I was running around on it and got told by multiple people what an awful person I was, how stupid I looked, how I was feeding the beast or whatever, and how I should be ashamed of myself.

    This isn't the community that I know and love. This isn't the people that will help anyone at the drop of a had, congratulate people at the forge for making a legendary weapon, answer questions for newbies and veterans alike. There's something fundamentally wrong with this picture and if it's the math and the business model that made it that way then please fix it.

    I don't care how many whales there are or how people may view them, but please do not bash people on how they choose to spend their money because you personally do not agree with it. You deserve a ban if you get so bitter that you're willing to verbally harass people who don't mind this.

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

  • @Septaryeth.1970 said:
    I said it to my guildie, and I'll just repeat it here. Sorry if the post sounds like a long rant cause I'm kind of tired... RNG items are not illegal (yet), but it is frowned upon, especially when the system is nontransparent. And I'm pretty sure most people don't see a problem in Anet making money, but it's mostly about how blatant they are in their attempt of manipulating the players. I'm no marketing expert and my experience was only limited to consulting them for proper response, but as someone who dealt with clients on the front line, I would be really angry if this is what they give us to work with. It's all about setting your clients' expectation without being overtly controlling.
    1. The 2k-gem skin is a ruse to make people believe the alternative is better.
    It's the simplest trick out there. The problem is you DON'T release it at the same time as the lottery ticket (and it only made worse due to the Halloween skin package). The ideal scenario would be to let other parties release it so they can be your scapegoats. Doing it all by yourself simultaneously just seems too desperate. It makes your consumers thinking you are using them for marketing experiments, and quite frankly they are right. When you lose that trust, most people would prefer to buy neither.
    2. Lack of assistance in providing set loss point.
    The clients usually come to you with an imaginary set loss point, i.e. the amount of money they're willing to spend before they give up. Anet didn't offer any incentive to reassure the players that they will at least achieve a somewhat rewarding milestone before obtaining the skin they want. And this scares people. There is a lower chance in obtaining better and more desirable skins. While this is completely fair, it's silly to try to cover it up with the whole "1/30" promotional gimmicks and that will only backfire. The result often is that people exaggerate the numbers in their head. It will exceeds their expected set loss point and thus they will choose not to participate at all. A good example would be the guaranteed rare card from the Yu-Gi-Oh 7-random cards-package... it's not much, but it's enough to leave people feel a little bit accomplished and just rewarding enough for some to return for another purchase. Anet could have make something like a 1.2k gem package with 1 guaranteed exotic with 2 rare and above... see, it's still 400 gem for a random skin skin but it's already more attractive than before.
    It's silly really, because people are more than happy to spend money and you want them to spend money. It's supposed to be a mutually beneficial relationship but Anet push it too far by presenting two equally undesirable options. In this situation the consumers would just have to choose to not participate and perhaps feel angry because they are missing out contents. They are angry because they are loyal customers. The worst thing you can do now is to put the blame on them. They will not stop feeling that way until you as a provider do something from your end. As for me, I personally don't care for mounts. I certainly don't want Anet to crash and burn for this, but I won't shed any tears for their mistake either. The lootbox fiasco has only just begun and anyone with some idea of PR would know to lay low for now. If you decided to jump out for a quick cash grab, you would only catch a bullet instead.

    I wanted to hit the thumbs up more than once for this, but thats not allowed, so just saying it here: great post. One of the best so far.

    Greck Howlbane - Firebrand
    Sorrow's Furnace For Life

  • Simple suggestion:
    Add a bundle which gives a X random skins and 1 selectable skin. For example, 4 random w/ 1 chosen skin for something like 2000 (5 x 400).

    Why?
    This approach is already used by 'gacha' style games as a way to entice players to spend more (buying a bundle vs. single RNG roll) especially for players who will not spend on a purely random system. The frequency of the guaranteed selection can be varied to be more or less generous. So, you still tend to get more $$$ per player and the players are guaranteed to get a skin they want. Win-Win.

    Clearly, the reason RNG skins were added is to increase the total amount a single player would spend as they chase a particular skin(s). Given that and the price of the premium 2000-gem mount currently available, I can't imagine a selectable skin option would cost less than 1000... Either add a higher cost selectable option or take a page from other games and add the bundle.

  • My chip in, as a Very casual player but fiel, since GW1:
    Gem costs for RNGs are way too high. Would I buy a single (but certain) mount skin? Maybe yes.

  • Altion.9576Altion.9576 Member ✭✭
    edited November 9, 2017

    I frikking love this game, Gw2 replaced wow in my Hearth but I wont pay for a frikking CHANCE to get something I want, I either pay for it or I dont. this mount adoption thing sucks and its stupid pricey.

  • Hi guys!

    I've been playing Guild Wars since 2005, I've always liked the game and usually the economic policies that have been followed. I think they are quite successful, compared to other games, but ...... .not this time.

    I don't think that throwing 400 gems to get a mount that you don't want is appropriate. There are people who want all, right, it's a good price for them. But it is a bad price for the one who only wants one.
    In my opinion, it is better to offer the possibility of obtaining them in two ways. For example 600 gems for a specific mount and 400 for a random mount. I also think that it is interesting to maintain a balance between the skins that are paid and those that are achieved by playing.

    On another way, 2000 gems = 25€. The last expansion costs 30€ ...... .. Is it the same or similar work to create a 1 skin vs 1 expansion? : S. I believe that you must maintain a consistent price relationship. Otherwise you do not value your work in the expansion and confuse the players, making us believe that it costs the same to develop an expansion than a skin. It is not true.

    Finally I want to say that it is fantastic that the company asks the players. To fall into errors is human (... charr, norn, asura and sylvari xD), but knowing how to rectify is wise. Guild Wars are not built only by workers. Guild Wars are all, workers, managers and players. When something is loved, you must fight for it. Do not cry, do not believe unconditionally, do not look the other way. To fight is to think, to dialogue, to criticize constructively and together to be able to improve.
    I would like this discussion to be positive and establish precedents to face together the future of the game.

    bye!

    P.s: Sorry for my English, I am Spanish, but I wanted to try to contribute in the best possible way and it is in this forum.

  • @Epoch.5396 said:
    I was speaking to friends about how well GW2 has handled their payment model a few days ago and then they linked me this. At the time I was persuading them to buy PoF as HoT hadn't gone down well.

    Now I am pretty ashamed I promoted the game. I have very strong feelings towards the lootbox proliferation and this pseudo gambling which I feel shouldn't be delivered to anyone under the age to gamble or to vulnerable adults. Its a terrible exploitative practice and I felt GW2 was above this.

    With this news I've told my buddies to keep away. This was also the game my family were playing (including my little girl who desperately wanted me to buy her PoF for a bunny) I'm pretty disgusted with this and we won't be playing or paying anymore.

    I know this sounds like a tantrum post but I have no interest in the mount skins at all but I find this exploitative gambling practices so abhorrent I cannot support the game anymore. Honestly, I can't wait for the day the UK accepts the practice as gambling and mature rates these games.

    Yeah, my wife won't even touch PoF, and the Guild Wars franchise is big for us for a lot of reasons. Things before HoT and then HoT itself left such a bad taste in her mouth that she basically loathes PoF right out of the gates and simply won't get it. Its a shame because I enjoyed playing with her, but even I don't see myself logging in much now that I've unlocked the griffon especially with this RNG thing. Its not done wonders for my view of Anet.

    Greck Howlbane - Firebrand
    Sorrow's Furnace For Life

  • Mikeskies.1536Mikeskies.1536 Member ✭✭✭

    Suggestion: Allow the option to re-roll mount skin selection up to two times for the cost of 100 gems. This way, you get three chances to get the mount skin you want, for 600 gems.

  • Witch of Doom.5739Witch of Doom.5739 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Uff da, pages and pages more of comments to read since yesterday. That's good though -- ANet must know they have a PR disaster on their hands if they don't do something quickly.

    To add to my comments earlier, which boiled down to "no RNG, make each skin buyable on its own, make the plainer ones less expensive than the fancy-flashy ones," I'd like to add something I haven't seen addressed. ANet, if you don't sell the skins individually and by choice, how do you know which ones are the most popular and which ones people REALLY want to spend their gems on? Don't you want to know which direction your artists should go, where they should be spending their time and talents?

    Sure, maybe more people want the fiery or starry ones, but will they pay more for them than the plainer ones? Personally I want a couple of the more subdued ones, especially for the Skimmer, whose default in-game appearance is less than thrilling for me. I got the Halloween Spooky pack and am glad I did, because often I just dye my mounts all black and really like it. Yeah, I'm dull. But I have gems to spend! Thank you.

  • @Mikeskies.1536 said:
    Suggestion: Allow the option to re-roll mount skin selection up to two times for the cost of 100 gems. This way, you get three chances to get the mount skin you want, for 600 gems.

    inb4 you get same one 3 times in a row :p imo its still pushing the RNG in too much, just let ppl buy what they want for 600 gems straight up

  • Why're people talking about the production costs as if that matters in whether this is a bad move or not? If they're really struggling with money, which I don't believe any second, that simply would mean the current state of the game is a failure and they need change things. If a company failed in making money with their product it's not on the customer to accept shady business practices. But I'm absolutely certain this isn't even the case and most of the profit is going into NCSoft's pockets anyway.

    But back to the topic at hand, the problem about this is that it absolutely is designed to be predatory and manipulative and literally gambling. Let's not pretend Anet or NCSoft or whoever didn't have a psychologist behind this to make it as appealing as possible to buy multiples or even the whole pack.

    • You have a 1/30 chance of getting a specific one you want, so it's entirely possible that you won't get the specific one until you buy the last box but, oh no, buying single licenses until you get the one you want could end up more expensive than buying the whole pack so you should just buy the whole pack, right? It's only a hundred bucks, what a steal!
    • Some skins are obviously more desirable and "better" than others, like those with a different mesh or special particle effect, which means you'll be inclined to try again if you only got a "boring" one. This also means they can sell simple retextures most people wouldn't consider buying otherwise.
    • Every ticket netting you an unique skin is pretty much just manipulating you into thinking it's a good deal. It's like stealing your wallet and then giving you back your ID cards you had inside, see how nice they are? This wouldn't even be needed if you could just choose what you want to buy. Plus it makes you think the next ticket is surely going to be the mount you want because the odds get raised by 1/30 every time you buy a ticket.
    • Don't like the whole RNG thing? Don't you fret because we something just for you, the forged warhound for direct purchase for just 25 bucks!

    This isn't even treating you like a player or even a customer, just some dumb cattle to milk for money again and again. It doesn't matter if it's Anet's fault, or NCSoft's or their shareholder's fault, this isn't acceptable in any way.

  • Lanhelin.3480Lanhelin.3480 Member ✭✭✭

    I bought several things in the shop before and only once a rng color pack which I regret because I got a color I already had. I could have bought more to finally get what I was hoping for, but I'm not this type of customer. Instead I decided to never ever buy such a pack again, because I do not allow any company to take advantage of desires converting them into more and more money by not satisfying them. In the worst case the wanted skin costs 12.000 gems and only if unwanted skins do not drop twice or more times. I do not support this greedy practice.

    But I'm pretty sure there are enough players who already bought and will buy them, thus encouraging ANet to continue to hide things behind rng. Because it's more profitable "earning" up to 240 $/€ from two people who can't stand not to get what they wanted, than 10 $/€ from fifteen who get what they wanted (included the two mentioned before). ANet takes advantage of unaccomplished desires and weaknesses in shopping behavior and in my opinion this is an unrighteous practice, I decide to not be a part of.

  • Lilyanna.9361Lilyanna.9361 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Distillia.9834 said:

    @Lilyanna.9361 said:

    And here we have almost struggling modes like PVP and WvW, trying to get some sort of response, but no, you guys rather scream about cash than the ACTUAL gameplay that all of you could be playing.

    Dungeons, tune-ups, quality of life changes across all modes. You wish to cry about the #Mounts. I am honestly baffled that people would cry more about this, then trying to improve the game overall.

    To fix these areas they will need to spend time coming up with a plan to bring players back to these areas. Unfortunately, there's not a lot of incentive for people to play PvP or WvW anymore, so what you have now is a community of people who truly enjoy the game mode (leaning more on my WvW love here).

    Dungeons, I used to do a daily dungeon run of all the dungeons. I have zero reason to do a dungeon again except for nostalgia. The only thing that would bring me back to them is CONTENT.

    Only content can swing the player base. And a lot of the content players enjoy are cosmetic. Which a very large pile of it exists inside of the gemstore, rather than through gameplay.

    Anyway, the gripes you seem to have have nothing to do with this thread, and should probably be taken elsewhere since it seems your contribution was only to complain that other people are complaining about what you feel is the wrong area of the game to complain about.

    No I'm going to talk about.
    Because while this large group could be advocating for All aspects of the game and ALL content for end game, people sit here, creating a bad name for Anet, doing their hardest to try and either put them out of business or just give them publicity either way.

    No, I am not going to stop, because where the people writing articles for PVP, where are the articles for WvWing, where are the articles for the dungeons and other problems.

    Oh heavens be, when people's fashion gets in danger, THAT is the last straw, not our loss of Esports or actual other fun because dressing up. Don't get me wrong, I am a long time going RPer, WvWer, PVer, PVPer. I do it all. But, I have never seen a game so manhandled or so one-sided by the PVE community. Never have I seen a game where the vast, vast majority has dictated what WvWers and PVPers get because of how loudly you scream.

    Maybe it is not directly anyone's fault here, but question here is: Where are the voices in the /right/ spots, because right now you are making all of the other sets of people that don't care about this little aspect bitter at YOU all. No one else. This community is dividing not even because of Anet's anymore, it's because all of the other small voices are bitter because you won't take action anywhere else and rather murder this game, instead of lending a hand anywhere else.

    This game was not just catering to PVErs, but catering to everyone, but now it is catering to one audience: the ever-screaming, ever wanting more and money flinging casuals.

    People have said Anet should not quiet their voice, don't quiet ours for the ones who had been suffering way long than this crappy lootbox discussion even came into play . There's more people suffering than you even to begin to understand and Anet needs to see just that instead of PVErs just now waving their wants to dictate actual outcomes of the game's future. Think about that.

  • Ewon.5903Ewon.5903 Member ✭✭

    I believe part of the reason these RNG mounts are going over so poorly is that quite a few of the mount skins feel low effort, and have minimal changes to them. I could easily reduce the number of mount options down to 10 or fewer. Having all those extra ones come a cross like a money grab to make these RNG boxes a thing.

    I apologize to the those who created those low effort skins if they do feel they are great skins.

  • Zakka.2153Zakka.2153 Member ✭✭✭

    I would not mind the RNG mount loot boxes Anet if you would be kind enough to do at least the following.

    Have some form of in game achievement skin unlock for each mount that has four color dye channels
    Have two dye color channels on the default skins
    Have mount skins that you can buy in the store that don't cost more then 700 gems (and you know what your buying).

    But as it stands it just doesn't feel right, I bought 2 licences and that is all I am buying, because I honestly don't want to end up with 4 different skimmer skins...etc

  • Pittcrew.6592Pittcrew.6592 Member ✭✭
    edited November 9, 2017

    @Cronos.6532 said:
    also why don't you get a deal on gems for buying more at once? seems like it's the only company that does this

    It's because they don't want to twist your arm into buying more than you want/need. They just let you get what you want (if you don't want everything/don't have enough money at any given time to buy in bulk). Oh wait... what are these Mount Adoption Licenses you speak of?

    It's one of the things I actually love the most about the Gem Store. Gems are a reliable value, so I don't have to worry about the Gems going on sale and only buying them at that time. I can reliably know that any time something comes up on the store that I want, I can just pay a little bit to get exactly that and nothing else (except maybe a few hundred spare), always at the same real-world cost (disregarding inflation).

    It also is kind of odd to me that the 30 pack of these is discounted more than the 10 pack (especially since it's limited time). People who are going to buy them all are likely the whales in the first place, who would be the most able to pay without a discount. Most people will just buy them 1 or 2 at a time though, which hurts them because they have to pay more. And since this is all account bound and not sellable on the TP, it will actually get less money out of whales than it might, in the long term, out of normal players who chip away at it.

  • @wolfyrik.2017 said:

    Not sure if this has already been posted but as usual, Jim kitten Sterling son, delivers.

    Sums up the thread nicely, methinks.

    Sums it up nicely. Though it's not the first scam just the most visible. The curtain has been pulled back & now everyone can see it's rigged. Pretty much all their loot boxes are like that. There are dozens of 50+ blc chests opening on reddit & youtube with terrible drops (ones with special account bonuses like peachy are the exception to the rule). One opened over 550 during pof beta with zero rare drops. And there will be those who get a rare valuable drop on their 3rd key, but that's how gambling works. Those are rare & far between, and the consumer is tricked into thinking due to the categories that the odds are equal for each item within a grouping when that is far from the truth.

  • Ending my years long lurker status to tell people from ArenaNet, that I am not purchasing any loot boxes and never will.
    Statistical point over and out.

  • id like a moderator tto give us a response....

  • Hephaustus.8547Hephaustus.8547 Member
    edited November 9, 2017

    I cannot believe how tonedeaf this action is. PoF in full swing, new players and old returning ones coming in droves, distaste and anger towards lootbox MT systems in games at an all time high... And you all choose NOW to attempt something like this? What planet does Anet live on? Is the whole show run by lizard people? Or maybe politicians?

    Well, go on then. Do your damage control, appease the masses. Then go ahead and do the thing; try it again in a more insidious and predatory way. I'm sure we won't notice. I am sure we won't get pissed. It'll all work out. You'll get your money and we'll all be too stupid to realize you are duping us. There's is no way it'll backfire AGAIN. Test the waters until the whole thing drowns. All will be well.

    Here is some feedback: Don't do it.

  • @Ewon.5903 said:
    I believe part of the reason these RNG mounts are going over so poorly is that quite a few of the mount skins feel low effort, and have minimal changes to them. I could easily reduce the number of mount options down to 10 or fewer. Having all those extra ones come a cross like a money grab to make these RNG boxes a thing.

    I apologize to the those who created those low effort skins if they do feel they are great skins.

    I'm sure this is completely deliberate. They can sell triple the skins for much less work.
    The regular retexture skins should just be in a seperate pack like the halloween packs. Buy a pack, choose one retexture for each of your mounts. That way the people buying those will be the people who actually like and want those, instead of making people hate them because it's only a hurdle on their way to the super special sparkly skin.

  • Pifil.5193Pifil.5193 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited November 9, 2017

    @Azure The Heartless.3261 said:

    @BlakThornArrow.2389 said:
    id like a moderator tto give us a response....

    Note: When working with angry hornets, do not stick your head in their nest as a peace offering. They're watching, but they're probably also looking at metrics to see if people are actually offended.

    Exactly, there will be no response until there's an official response probably carefully written by a number of people and posted by Mike O'Brien.

    Nothing anyone else can say would do anything more than fan the flames.

  • @Azure The Heartless.3261 said:

    Note: When working with angry hornets, do not stick your head in their nest as a peace offering. They're watching, but they're probably also looking at metrics to see if people are actually offended.

    It doesn't even really matter if a majority of people don't like it because these kinds of microtransactions are sustained by a minority of wealthy whales anyway. Browser games did it more than ten years ago, mobile games have been doing it the whole time and only a few years ago did the AAA industry realize how much cash they're missing out on.

  • @BunjiKugashira.9754 said:>
    The fastest way for an MMO to shut down isn't making a little less than anticipated, it's alienating the core player-base. Players are content. In fact players are the most important content an MMO has. Every guild leader or popular commander with a certain follower-base who quits the game costs GW2 more and more players. And in contrast to mobile games or even shooters, player fluctuation in MMOs is incredibly low. MMO players tend to stick to a single game for years. Keeping the existing players happy is thus the most important thing to increase player numbers and player investment. Only a player who invested time and emotions into the game opens his wallet at all. In the long term I'd wager the RNG-boxes hurt ANet more than the short term revenue can make up for.

    There is only one situation in which alienating the player base over a quick cash grab is more lucrative than keeping the players happy is if the game is scheduled to be shut down anyways. But knowing ANet and GW2 we would have had leaks about that.

    Very true. I bought gw2 for $15 about 9 months before HOT release. Stopped playing before HOT then came back last year when I bought HOT. When I came back so many people were gone. Turns out HOT release took everything players had put into their guilds & put it behind this paywall. Sure you can use your banners etc but you wont be able to make more etc. Ofc it turned out just as well for anet as it did when destiny tried pull that stunt. Then you have tangled depth which is a massive pain in the kitten map for the first hour until you have the first few glide masteries unlocked. Personally it looked to me like they tried really hard to design levels that player could enjoy using the new abilities, maybe even a little showing off, just got lost in the idea & not the practicality. Still kind of what you want dev to aim for. By comparison POF feels like you are paying for a bunch of mounts & new lws maps. Bounties are just world boss trains on steroids. Big open maps like central tyria but without the filler.

  • Erasculio.2914Erasculio.2914 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Azure The Heartless.3261 said:
    Note: When working with angry hornets, do not stick your head in their nest as a peace offering. They're watching, but they're probably also looking at metrics to see if people are actually offended.

    But which metrics?

    If a lot of people have bought the mounts? I doubt they thought a lot of people would buy them anyway. This is one of those things in which only a small number of players buy what is being offered, but each one of those players buy a lot. We already know some players have bought a lot of those "licences", so the result was probably what ArenaNet thought it would be, as far as this metric is concerned.

    If a lot of people have stopped playing the game? I doubt this has had an impact on the number of active players. And honestly, even it it did, it would be hard to tell how many players have stopped playing because of this, and how many have stopped playing after completing all of the PoF content.

    If people are buying less from the Gem Store? Meh, there isn't much being offered right now, other than the mounts.

    How enraged people are? This is hard to measure.

    "Tomorrow my master chokes on his own whip!" - Lore of Skaen, PoE

  • I applaud ArenaNet for submitting an instant way to quite literally have money gushing from people's wallets (including my own) into theirs by making such impressively stylized mounts right after making the only mount skins (Spooky Series) in the course of a bit yonder a month's time.. But that isn't why I am inquiring right now. The Mount Adoption License is certainly a good form of 'playing the feud' but.. Why is it possible to obtain a skin of a mount you do not own? You can be picky all you'd like about what mounts you use but at the end of the day the game's required set for exploring in-game content is Raptor, Springer, Skimmer and Jackal. Why should I be able to obtain a skin for a mount that I have zero intention of buying- and by addition could've been bought with the gems I used to purchase the feudee? Not to mention I'm already having my hands full with the creation of two legendaries- I would like some form of feedback of this and I am certain there exist many who do not want griffon skins to rot away in their inventories not even able to be sold.. I've heard multiple a claims that I shall in fact get a griffon in the future because they are apparently 'that desirable', but it undermines certain aspects of the game that I've come to enjoy! Who can forget the last inclusion to Guild Wars 2- GLIDING! Well you can kiss that goodbye because why should you bother gliding when you have a griffon~? I mean you can probably buy a griffon and still glide about but then what staves you from wanting to justify that griffon purchase than using it in all the words that define efficiency?! THOSE GLIDER SKINS THAT YOU INVESTED UPON?! And upon closer inspection- You can make the counterargument that people may not get Jackals because they are 30 Gold, but getting a Jackal actually has exclusive usage for the desert map via the mastery needed to utilize sand portals and even grant the new mechanic of barriers. Griffons.. Don't do anything that I cannot perform with my self-driven mountain climbing skills. Yes, they fly around but.. It's the luxurious empty space of the world's sky box- what am I to venture that would be fulfilling up yonder if not some steep mountain or perhaps the asuran magnum-opus, Rata Sum?
    But now now, that's enough drivel from me- we need an answer!

    THE SOLUTION? Easy.
    Raptor Adoption License.
    Springer Adoption License.
    Skimmer Adoption License.
    Jackal Adoption License.
    Griffon Adoption License.

    If that isn't the cup of RNG tea that would allow for the great cash yield of casino-play, just enable the prior License to only unlock a mount the player has in their arsenal. You can say that it can be exploitable for people to simply selectively obtain certain mounts as they play, but there still remains chance that you will not get the desired mount skin you wanted- after all there are a whopping 6 additional skins per mount and it's 400 gems each- 3400 gems if you're feeling unlucky.

    Annd that's about all I can ramble for- thank's for reading! Us non-griffon owners that got two griffon skins for their first two adoption papers'll just be here.. Sigh.

  • I'm a long-time player who is more than happy to pay up for gems on a fairly regular basis. I love this game, and I love supporting its development. When pets came out, I was really excited for the skins. Don't get me wrong, I want all of those skins and I'm still prepared to pay a reasonable amount of money for them. Right now, I'm not going to buy them.

    The industry is continuing to talk about the practical effects of lootboxes on people, and I'm moving more and more towards the camp that loot boxes are inherently exploitative. Even when they're just for aesthetic items. You can make the argument that its up to people to exhibit Personal Responsibility, that they need to show restraint and self control, but the fact is that not everyone who plays games is physically able to show that kind of restraint and quite frankly we should be worried about exploitative mechanics that cost a ton of money.

    BLC keys are bad. They are! They're a horrible gamble, getting ticket scraps is awful, and I think that as laws around the world start to catch up, you might find yourself in a legal mess that's as bad as the moral mess wrt to the BLCs. You can resell the contents of those chests, and it's an effective way to build up gold/gem reserves that come towards a cash value, and that's where the gambling element starts to poke out its head.

    Adding new, randomized, paid-only loot boxes is similarly going to get you stepping into some dangerous territory. Legally, ethically, whatever. I think there are mitigation you can make - disclosing any drop rates, letting skins be transferable, dropping the price and removing the time pressure. But even with those mitigations, I think it's time to take a careful look at what's happening in the mobile game world, what's happening in Japan and China with regulations, and how people are reacting to similar mechanics in other games. A storm is brewing here. You can get caught off-guard by it, or you can be proactive and start asking what mechanics are actually dangerous and begin the move away from those.

    We love this game. We buy stuff from the Market. We will continue to buy stuff. If you see a revenue drop because you move away from RNG lootboxes, you should really interrogate why that is. Are people buying to support the game? Or are people buying to support a compulsion?

  • Rinn.2375Rinn.2375 Member ✭✭

    Ok, if it was before than I'm sorry, but I have no time to read 47 pages ;)
    So, I bought one Mount Adoption Licence to try it out. I liked it and was lucky enough to get the Storm Ridge. So I bought the 30 pack to unlock all the skins and guess what, I have an extra licence now ;) What can I do with it? Is it a waiting game for me for a new Adoptable Mount skin or is there another way to use it to unlock... something?

    @Lilyanna.9361 said:
    People have said Anet should not quiet their voice, don't quiet ours for the ones who had been suffering way long than this crappy lootbox discussion even came into play . There's more people suffering than you even to begin to understand and Anet needs to see just that instead of PVErs just now waving their wants to dictate actual outcomes of the game's future. Think about that.

    I really don't know what suffering you talking about. This is a game. Nobody forcing you to play it. People without food and fresh water are suffering in Africa, not you or any gamer. Also, I'm a casual. As your logic said, my money makes this game works and you had a chance to play PvP because of my money. Yet, you are angry at me... Of course you didn't talking about the useless builds the casual PvEr "suffer", because of the one-sided PvP balance updates :)

    Need a functional brain for asura researchers. I mean it! The last 10 story steps I made in the game were started, included or concluded with the "an asura really really kittened it up" plot twist :P

  • First time posting on GW2 forums.. I've bought so many items off of the in-game store over the years, and was excited when i found out there were new mount skins available in the store, until i saw the price for a RANDOM skin. I do not own the griffon mount nor plan on acquiring one, that being said if i were to gamble on this mount skin system, i could potentially lose $5-$30 outright, without factoring how i feel about the individual skins. The crazy thing is, had the basic mounts came with 4 dye slots, they would amount to just as much as most of these gamble skins. I will not support this system at all.

    Side note, i also don't like the idea of a single mount skin costing $25, I've seen the argument that "well other games have done it at a similar price", but from my experience with other mmorpg's such as WoW, you get a mount that can traverse almost anywhere, cross a gap, climb a mountain, fly over big bodies of water, or even just run on land, it didn't matter, the jackal of GW2 can really only run on flat land so you'll be swapping to another mount a lot of the time.

  • Fallesafe.5932Fallesafe.5932 Member ✭✭✭
    edited November 9, 2017

    @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 I 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?

  • I've been tilting from being angry to just sad and disappointed at this. Not just because of how predatory it is, but how tone deaf. I've always thought GW2 had one of the better cash shops in MMOs and while there have been problems it was never anything so hideous that I felt a need to get upset over it. To do something like this feels like a betrayal. I won't really go on about how awful it is, many others have put it in better words then I could, just wanted to echo my feelings towards the whole thing. I really hope that ANet listens to all the feedback they're getting here and never tries to pull anything this ugly again. It just makes me sad that I now I'm going to end up looking at all their future cash shop decisions with a harsher lens after this when before I never really felt the need to. I guess that's a good thing in the long term, but I wish I didn't have to feel that way about a game that I love and has brought a lot of good into my life.

  • wingedsoul.9406wingedsoul.9406 Member
    edited November 9, 2017

    PRO Mount Adaption !!!!

    Honestly, I think this is the best Lootbox, ANet has ever made.
    Reasons:
    1. No Trash as reward. - Just compare the rewards you get to BLCs for 400 Gems..... As a casual player, who doesn't invest a lot of money into the game, I instantly knew that I would buy 2 Licenses for the best chance to have a refreshing new Skin for at least 2 Mounts.
    2. F***ING SAME CHANCE FOR EVERY MOUNT - What?? No rare Skins? No super rare Skins?? Again, compare this to any other Lootbox in GW2!
    3. Some of you complained, that it would take you over a 1000 G to get all the Skins. But some of these Skins are of LEGENDARY Quality. Crazy News: Legendaries are expensive! o,O
    Other special Skins and Legendaries are also mainly cosmetics and NOBODY BATS AN EYE about their cost, but as soon as ANet releases Legendary Mounts with a small chance for everyone, to get them for cheap, EVERYONE LOSES THEIR MINDS!

    PS: GW2 yields sooo many possibilities to combine even cheap Skins and recolor them. That's off topic, but I think people just don't want to get creative on their own. I got 2 different mount skins and because of the different color channels and the huge amount of colors in GW2, i could design them unique for every one of my characters and i'm super happy about it.

    TLDR: 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).

  • Lilyanna.9361Lilyanna.9361 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited November 9, 2017

    @Rinn.2375 said:
    Ok, if it was before than I'm sorry, but I have no time to read 47 pages ;)
    So, I bought one Mount Adoption Licence to try it out. I liked it and was lucky enough to get the Storm Ridge. So I bought the 30 pack to unlock all the skins and guess what, I have an extra licence now ;) What can I do with it? Is it a waiting game for me for a new Adoptable Mount skin or is there another way to use it to unlock... something?

    @Lilyanna.9361 said:
    People have said Anet should not quiet their voice, don't quiet ours for the ones who had been suffering way long than this crappy lootbox discussion even came into play . There's more people suffering than you even to begin to understand and Anet needs to see just that instead of PVErs just now waving their wants to dictate actual outcomes of the game's future. Think about that.

    I really don't know what suffering you talking about. This is a game. Nobody forcing you to play it. People without food and fresh water are suffering in Africa, not you or any gamer. Also, I'm a casual. As your logic said, my money makes this game works and you had a chance to play PvP because of my money. Yet, you are angry at me... Of course you didn't talking about the useless builds the casual PvEr "suffer", because of the one-sided PvP balance updates :)

    Oh you mean the two one-sided updates?

    Hm, let's look at the one-sided PVE updates over the last couple of years shalle we? I'm sure many people that played the other game modes, can gracefully prove you wrong.

    'Suffering'. Well if gamers are not suffering compared to the real life issues, then lootbox rng should not be a serious issue that should be regulated by laws as some people were suggesting eh?

    And if you are going to use the: 'Just a game' logic here, I could say the same things about the skins. It's just a game, why are you buying skins when you can put it somewhere else like family, schooling, work, cigarettes, whatever. See how pointless the argument is?

    I'm sure if you even take a moment, go look at threads on Reddit regarding any other topics besides PVE. They sink into the abyss. Now go look at things about quaggans or whatever other PVE related topics. Instantly upvoted. A 'healthy' game should be looking at all sides, not focusing on just one. Because if it was focusing in just one, this would just be a dress-up simulator.

    But oh wait, the end-game is just a dress up simulator. All of the end-tier stuff, the vertical progression? Where is it? This, in itself, is short-sighted because, at the end of the day whose is gonna come back here to put good feedback for everything else once this is said and done.

    Are you?

  • PopeUrban.2578PopeUrban.2578 Member ✭✭✭
    edited November 9, 2017

    @pah.4931 said:
    I don't know why I have to keep saying this. If this method did not make more money for Anet, they wouldn't do it. As a business, why would you NOT choose to do what makes more money?

    Because businesses are made of people, people aren't immune to making mistakes, and on average people often prioritize shot term gain at the expense of long term loss. As a business, why would Microsoft try and create a competing music player when the ipod dominated the market even though they already had a stable product and business model? The Zune is a great example here. It was an objectively pretty good piece of tech, but Microsoft misunderstood the market they were trying to break in to and lost a bunch of money in stead of doubling down on the one they were already been successful in.

    Companies don't TRY to lose money, but companies often DO lose money by placing the desires of the company for profit above the products or services that their customers actually want. In the case of GW2 specifically, they jumped on a bandwagon early, like everyone else, and failed at their "buy once play forever because we have microtransactions" model so hard they started selling expansions again to subsidize falling gem store profits.

    AND THEY LEARNED NOTHING from that experience. And doubled down on the gem store even after making a monetization move that should have rendered it obsolete, specifically because they kitten it because they were investing even more in the business model that was already failing them. People noticed. Go back to the old forums and check out the player responses to HoT, how disappointed they were with its value for the asking price.

    As for the MMO market being different, that doesn't really apply to this discussion. Part of the reason players have gravitated to the most successful current MMOs is specifically because they're more complete experiences than the free to play alternatives with even more predatory cash shops than this one. The reason GW2 is doing better than a lot of games is specifically because it relies less on microtransactions, not because it keeps adding more of them.

    The industry as a whole moved to microtransactions specifically because they saw how much money it raked in, true, but I'll remind you that the industry did the same thing after WoW's improbable success, attempting to create a whole range of subscription based WoW clones until they learned that simply doing a thing because it makes someone else money does not guarantee your competing product will also make money. How many of these new CCGs inspired by hearthstone's success do you think will be around in five years? How many games do you think will have the sheer audactiy to tie progression directly to loot box economies like battlefront 2? Businesses love to look at numbers in a vaccum and in doing so make a lot of costly mistakes. The gaming industry specifically makes SO MANY costly mistakes because more often than not the people in charge of most of the money have very little understanding of their audience and how fickle that audience is in an extremely competitive market.

    The MMO market is smaller today specifically because companies invested millions in products and business models that were derivative to chase profits. They saw short term gain from WoW's example, then lost a lot of money when they realized that just because what someone else is doing is working, doesn't mean your consumers want two of that same thing. The thing you're saying excuses increasingly more customer hostile business models is the result of customer hostile business models. Attempting to replicate some else's profit numbers while simultaneously attempting to pull customers away from the thing you are emulating is why MMOs are in a downturn. Its why everyone is trying and failing to emulate the success of Marvel's cinematic universe. People who don't understand their customers don't understand that movies and video games are not toasters. In entertainment, specifically, can't just make the same product cheaper and expect the consumer to see it as a good value, and you can't charge the users for a luxury model with options and expect them to accept the increased cost.

    If what they were doing was working... they would have simply sold skins at a similar price point to gliders. The fact that they've attempted to implement a scheme specifically designed to cost the customer more on average to obtain a similar "optional" microtransaction indicates that what they were doing is NOT making them money as well as they expected, and their response to that problem is "let's try and force them to give us more money since we're not selling as many as we want" in stead of "lets figure out what they want to buy and sell them that"

    This is why the term 'exploitative' is often used in these discussions. Rather than attempting to create new customers and retain existing once by offering a better product or service, they're banking on upscaling the cost for what they believe is a captive audience. They're raising the price of bread because they're the only deli in town, and they know you love sandwiches, which only works as long as long as you don't get tired of sandwiches made with increasingly more kitten bread and decide to switch to soup. Or, god forbid... make your OWN sandwiches.

    All the perks, none of the responsibilities.
    PopeUrban - The Papacy [POPE]
    Dude in Charge, Chief Financier, and Cave-Polisher
    It's really just a club for lazy people! Join today and get big-guild services with no-guild schedules!

©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.