Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Official Mount Adoption Feedback Thread [merged]


Recommended Posts

@Selene.9415 said:Bit late to the party so maybe this will get buried, but my suggestion for mount skins:

Define mount skins by tier:

  • Retextures are "Fine", minor remodels are "Masterwork", combined (at least 2 out of 3) minor remodels/retextures/particles are Exotic. Major remodels/particles/sound effects like the Reforged Warhound are Ascended/Legendary.

Separate the adoption licenses by both mount and tier and make them non-rng:

  • Example: "Fine Raptor Adoption License: Choose to adopt either the Coastal Spiketail or Savannah Monitor!" (In this case, the Canyon Spiketail and Striped Trihorn would be considered Masterwork, while the Stormridge and Flamelander would be considered Exotic). I believe this would also have the benefit of creating a "future proof," uncluttered-UI for adoption licenses (if they end up similar to /u/sonysides mockup), if you do decide to remove the RNG after the backlash.

Adjust the Gemstore Price Tiers:

  • Fine Adoption License (200-400 gems)
  • Masterwork Adoption License (400-600 gems)
  • Exotic Adoption License (600-800 Gems)
  • Ascended/Legendary Mount Skins (800-1000 gems)

Add a "Fine Adoption License" as a one-time, account bound, in-game reward for each mount:

  • Allow for one "Fine Adoption License" to be earned through a collection per map, allowing players to earn at least one customization option per mount through gameplay, while allowing players to purchase the licenses through the gem store (if they want more than one, or if they don't want to do the collection).
  • Example (?): The mount collection rewards that involve helping people around the map would have been a perfect opportunity for this, if their duration/difficulty was increased. It could also be used as an incentive to seek out each map meta, as I've met a surprising amount of people who didn't even know the PoF maps had meta events.

Profitability:Using my pricing suggestions above it would cost a total of 12,000-18,000 gems to acquire all 30 skins, compared to the 12,000 gems of the current RNG licenses. If you also add the collection system, this means you would lose only 1,000 gems out of 12,000, or 2,000 gems out of 18,000 depending on the price points you pick. I don't believe this is so severe though, in that it would make players happy by adding in-game content and rewards and removing RNG. I think it would also encourage more sales from those who do not want to take their chances on RNG, and may instead straight out purchase a higher tier/price skin, compared to no skin at all. Granted that a lot more factors come into play than straight "gem earnings", but I think this would strike a good balance.

I like this solution. I think it would solve the problems a lot of people have with the current system, with the added benefit that most people who already bought mount licences aren't going to lose out, and may actually have gotten a better deal. If you got a higher tier mount already then well done - you got it cheap! If you got a lower tier one then you paid the normal price. The only way you really lose out is if you've only gotten mounts you dislike so much you refuse to ever use them, even dyed to look totally different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went with most of the time because to me 'rewarding' doesn't typically have anything to do with loot.

Most people are going to see 'rewarding' and immediately think about the loot they get, or don't get and the gold they have or don't have. I don't play for loot. I play because I find it fun. Exploring and re-exploring the maps. Doing the story. Leveling a new character. Getting my butt kicked in wvw or spvp. Trying my hand at higher level fractals. Working on achievements.

I have things I want to do and things I want to achieve and I work towards them as I play. I have an assortment of goals I want to achieve at any given time and making progress on and completing them is "rewarding" to me. Its what I enjoy, so its what I do.

Yes, I do occasionally go out to farm 'specific' things. Generally because I feel the need to upgrade armor or weapons for a character and that's about the only time I feel the game isn't 'rewarding.' For me, who doesn't play hours upon hours a day, and who absolutely isn't the most efficient in her play, this part of 'preparing to play' is the most frustrating for me. This is the only time where 'rewarding' has anything to do with loot.

Do I feel the cash shop is killing the game?No, I don't. If I like something, I buy it. If I don't, or I don't agree with the item, then I dont. For example, I will never ever buy an instant lvl 80 scroll. I will never ever buy the waypoint unlock. But other people do, and it therefore doesn't matter if I dont like them. Its an income for Anet that keeps the game that I enjoy running, so I can deal with it. Obviously enough people demanded the item that Anet felt it was worth the time and effort to add it, and in the grand scheme of things it really doesn't affect me at all. Example - One more person on a lvl 80 that doesn't know how to play their class or doesn't know a certain mechanic makes no difference in the bigger picture. There are plenty of people that leveled the normal way and don't know those things too.

In the end it simply boils down to "it doesn't affect me, it doesn't affect my play" There is nothing in there that affects me if another player has it. So what if there is a skin in there that I want, but its RNG. I either take my chances and work on it like any other goal, or I move on. Its a want, not a need and that's what makes all the difference for me.

(I don't think the poll this was part of should have been merged with this thread necessarily, but it did)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Shirlias.8104 said:If you are leaving, the reason is more likely that you don't like the game anymore.

And i am not defending or accusing ANET about the recent mount bundle, but if you have fun in a game and you drop that game because you can't have some skins in a fair and proper way, well... that speaks for itself.

I think that's a bit presumptuous. I like the game. I've been playing since it came out, and I really enjoyed the PoF story and the content that was added along with it. However, I'm still a person that deserves respect and should be valued for more than just my wallet. If a company just sees me as a source of income and doesn't actually appreciate me, then I can choose to take my business elsewhere.

This kind of stuff preys on people liking the game, because they know those players will be too invested and """loyal""" to quit. I have integrity and dignity, and I know what i"m worth. If I'm going to be treated like garbage just to make more money then it doesn't matter if I like the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a lot of hours in GW2, and regularly buy gems in order to support the game. However, I do have a problem with the current mount adoption system implementation, and so despite having enough disposable income to buy them, I have not got them all.

Good things:

  • The addition of new styles of mounts with full dye channels is positive
  • The fact that you cannot get duplicates is also good
  • The amount of mounts is good, bringing more mount diversity style to the game

My issues are:

  • The only way to get the adoption certificates is through the gem store. Unlike black lion chest boxes/keys, you cannot get them in the game world.
  • The cost is prohibitively high at 400 gems each, and I am not impressed overly with many of the mounts on offer and would never use most, making the cost even more of an issue due to the rng of getting the skin you want. If the cost was lower, say 150 gems, even 200, it might not be such a massive deal, but to throw such a high cost at it seems really greedy, considering the overall cost is more than double or even triple that of the expansion if you buy them all (depending if you bulk buy). As someone that buys gems regularly, if the cost had been half, I would likely have bought the entire set, but at that price, it left a bad taste in my mouth. It feels money-grabbing and greedy of the game, and I don't like having that feeling when purchasing an item.
  • Some of the skins in the adoption pack are very much just the basic mount skin with more dye channels. There should have been an update, or at least a cheap pack of full-dye-channel mounts (like the spooky ones, but cheaper), and any in the adoption pack should have been far more different than we saw.
  • Trying to buy gems with in-game gold would be horrific, especially for casual players, of whom the game is designed for mostly. Especially with the fact that the gold-to-gem economy fluctuates on demand.
  • The new mounts have a tendency to focus more on a neon aspect, or at least eye-catching. From a design point of view, I like the variety, and it can be argued that clothing and gliders already do this. However, the sheer amount of neon mounts these days is horrible to see. An option for disabling seeing other people's shiny mounts, to see them as default would be better by far.

In general, I feel the marketing of this has been poor, damaging people's enthusiasm for mounts in the game. Lots of people were really hyped about the mounts, even myself who had been a sceptic of them in the game, but I don't think people are going to forget this marketing ploy any time soon, and it is intrinsically linked now to the expansion, and the game as a whole. Things like this, where short term monetizing of things in a game can harm it long term. I hope Anet learns from this situation and avoids it in future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just throwing in my hat into the arena of the discussion but a lot of what I say will probably have already been said. It is gambling, in that you indirectly put real world money into a slot machine, in everything but legal definition so by that notion it is worse because it doesn't have any regulations surrounding it. Moreover, as more and more companies do this it will eventually lead it to legislation and Anet is now part of their own downfall in that matter, in fact here in the UK it is starting to be looked at by members of Parliament. I would have easily bought these skins if they were direct purchase and the same price as the glider skins, say, but I won't gamble on it because there are only like 4-5 skins I actually want. So you've lost money from me and probably countless others in trying to exploit other people. Moreover, I actually regret buying the expansion now because it has lead to this, it gave Anet a way of delivering this kind of system. I know Black Lion chests were in before, but there have been ways around it, such as getting skins off the TP, direct purchasing some of the things from the chests, and you could farm keys for free (although only one a week now). I started to get a little uneasy when exclusive, time limited gliders were stuck in the Black Lion chests and had a feeling it might go this way... I know it is "just cosmetic " but a lot of what this game is about is how your character looks and feels, the cosmetics are part of the game, a lot of the achievements surround armor or weapon sets for example which have no better stats than before but are for a specific look. This is about exploiting that, exploiting envy and exploiting the haves and have nots. People use dyes as a comparison too, but again you can buy them off the TP and can get cheaper, similar looking dyes quite easily, nothing on par with these mount skins. I breathed a little sigh of hope when the Halloween pack was released with the spooky mount skins and thought if they did them in packs like that, then that would be alright, but no... this had to happen... From a game that 'poked' at WoW for having a subscription with a campaign, from a game which micro transactions were fair enough, which had a lot of respect in the gaming community because of it, despite it also having an entry fee we know that updating an MMO has to be paid for, but Anet simply doesn't HAVE to make us gamble, they can and do make money from direct micro transactions. To make my point here, Dauntless a free to play game with micro transactions just took their loot boxes out, this is a game with no entry fee and no big established brand around it, if they can do it, then Anet can too and unless this changes I won't be spending a penny more on this game. Which is sad, because I love it a lot... Disappointed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Chickenooble.5014 said:So I looked up the definition. "take risky action in the hope of a desired result."

So joining a fractal pug is gambling?So running in WvW using a berzerker solo build is gambling?Getting double hits on Claw of Jormag or Tequatl is gambling?Picking the wrong squad for Labs is gambling?

The entire game is a casino apparently!

Yes, each of those is a gamble.

Everything is a gamble to some extent, when you use the very general sense of the word. Life itself is a gamble. Just sitting in your chair is a gamble. You run the risk of it breaking and dropping you on the floor, potentially hurting you in the process. Or the ceiling falling on your head. Or even your desk suddenly collapsing into your lap. All of these things are highly unlikely, but the risk exists. No one likes to look at it from that perspective though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ohoni.6057 said:

@"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:You did a nice job of paraphrasing what I said: the game gives a lot of loot; it can't possibly be "good" loot as other games have, because we don't need special gear to succeed; and we dismiss the coin-value of "trash" loot as different from collectible tokens.

But there is plenty of "good loot" that is in the game already, it's just poorly distributed. Right now there are hundreds of items that people might consider "good loot" that are either A: omega rarity drops that most people will never see in the wild, or B: only earnable through completing specific content that not everyone cares to do. They could add a lot of value to the game by presenting better paths to save up for those sorts of items via more practical ingame activities. Let people save up for Black Lion Keys. Let people save up for PvP/WvW specific armors via PvE play. Let people save up for Envoy Armors and similar items through general activities.

And before you suggest that in at least some cases gold could fill this role, remember that gold is subject to the whims of the market, so the more people have, the less it is worth. This needs to be a non-market currency that retains full value regardless of how much of it exists.

If you think that there's any way to distribute loot evenly and have it feel like it's good loot, even after seeing the math, then I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing. The game already has rewards that we earn gradually; people think of those as grindy. There are lots of ways to save up for shinies; people are impatient. Take ascended trinkets: people used to value these as drops and now we don't, because they are so easily obtained from an hour or three of LS3 map farming.

Technically you're right that gold is subject to the whims of the market, but that's not true in a practical sense in this game. The value of gold in GW2 has stayed extremely strong, thanks to the massive gold sink of TP fees (among other things that were setup well in the first place). There are all sorts of fantastic shinies available on the TP, many that have decreased in price over time (even as its' become easier to obtain gold). And sure, some shinies have legendary-like (or legendary-lite) prices, but even those can be saved up for. It's really up to the player how much they are willing to play, how efficiently, how much grind they want, and willing they are to set money aside for a long-term goal rather than spend on the cheaper shinies in front of them.

The instant you change rewards into non-market currency is exactly the same point that people start to call it grindy, because now there's only one way to earn the reward (or two or three ways), versus gold, which is earned by anything we do except sneezing or chatting. (And even then, with the right build, you can still be earning.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Chickenooble.5014 said:So I looked up the definition. "take risky action in the hope of a desired result."

So joining a fractal pug is gambling?So running in WvW using a berzerker solo build is gambling?Getting double hits on Claw of Jormag or Tequatl is gambling?Picking the wrong squad for Labs is gambling?

The entire game is a casino apparently!

Aww aye, I forgot you've to spend real world money on each of those every time you want a try. Sod off with your facetious rubbish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The amount of overdramatic responses to the concerns people have about these new skins is almost beyond belief. I have no problem with people having an opinion and posting it but the sheer amount of hyperbole and dramatization makes it hard to take what people are saying seriously.

The 2 biggest offenders I've seen posted are that Anet is evil and preying on it's customers and that this new skin acquisition method is gambling and preys on those with gambling addiction/weakness.

Anet is not evil. It's not preying on it's customers. Don't get me wrong. I'm no white knight and I think Anet has many faults in regards to it's gem shop and micro-transactions but I do not feel it's evil or preying.

At the most Anet is guilty of using these mount skins to hit harder on those with impulse control. This is not unique to Anet as every, and I do mean every, single merchant out there uses impulse items in it's marketing. All those items around the checkout are not there just because you might need them, they are there to get you to impulse buy them. You've shopped the big box store and are now thirsty, hungry, or bored while waiting in line. Well they have a nice cooler with 20oz bottles of water/soda for your thirst, a huge rack full of candy for your hunger and numerous magazines there to read while you're bored and waiting. How many of those items did you truly need? Probably very few but you've bought them due to the placement of the items and your lack on control on your impulses. They could and usually do have these items somewhere else in the store and you could go and get them if you wanted but they sell more when they are at a place where impulse kicks in.

It's the same with these mount skins. Most are unsatisfied with the lack of dye channels on the core mounts and want to make themselves look unique or at least different than the rest of those we see in game. So we purchase a chance at getting the skin we want. it's this chance that has people comparing it to gambling.

The biggest issue I have with those comparing the new mount acquisition method to gambling is that, unlike true gambling, this method has an end point and final cost. You have a maximum expenditure of 12,000 gems. That's it. No more can be spent on getting a mount via this method. It's not gambling when you have a guaranteed result, you spend 12,000 gems you WILL get the mount you want. That is not gambling. It's not even close. You cannot buy more than 30 chances. You cannot spend more than 12,000 gems. Sure you may get lucky early on and not have to spend as much but there is an end point and maximum expenditure. It's not gambling when you have those two points.

Most of would argue that 12,000 gems for a single skin is too much and I would agree. This is where the impulse control comes in. Do you buy a chance for the skin you want or do you wait? Do you want the skin so badly that you are not able to wait until you have the gems to buy them all or do you take a chance now? It's up to you.

The way I look at it is almost like an installment plan. You have a purchase you want to make and it costs 12,000 gems. Some people have more money than others and they are given a discount of 2,400 gems by buying all of the skins at once. Anet gets the immediate influx of money from those people and due to the amount of instant cash, they are given a discount. This is the same as every major purchase you ever make in life. Want to buy a house and don't have the cash for the full purchase price, well you can get a loan. Sure it costs more than if you paid in full at purchase but it helps you out. Yeah, I know , real life vs games but the point holds in this case. 12,000 gems is a major in game purchase. Anet has actually made this easier as they have given us a number of advantages. We have no required installment payment, we have no time limit (as of yet). We can choose to pay if we want, when we want and how often we want.

The thing about this item is that is a true convenience item. The mounts function exactly the same whether they have a new skin or have the core skin. No one gets an advantage in game because they got these skins.

Personally I have no problem with this method or the price. Anet gets to make a lot of skins that cater to a lot of different opinions. While you may not like numerous skins but someone out there will like the ones you dislike and that person may dislike the ones you find most likeable. Everyone shares in the production cost to make everyone happy. I will buy these over time. I'm going to get a new skin with every purchase. I will eventually get them all when I decide to purchase them. I will use gem purchases and in game gold conversion to get them when I feel I have enough of either one to make the choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's sad that we've come to this point that such a thread have to exist, but here we go.Some of the mount skins look really intriguing, and I wanted to buy some gems in the near future just to support Anet and GW2. But now, here comes a new lootbox system besides black lion chests. I don't support this approach of marketing, and I don't care how great these skins look, I won't buy any (even from gold). I hope Anet gets this sorted out soon. Till then, no gems for me.

Edit: I'm a veteran GW player, I have the whole GW1 series on my shelf, and I always admired Anet for it's customer friendly policy. Just by scrolling though this topic, I can see that I'm not the only one who thinks this RNG system is a bad decision. In fact, most of the replies are against it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:Calling it gambling is a poor rhetorical device. It starts an argument about "what do we mean when we say 'gambling'" and "why is gambling considered bad". In this case, it doesn't matter what it's called, people don't like it. In some cases, because they think it's a tax on people who are bad at math or have poor impulse control. In some cases, simply because who wants to spend US$5 (or 60 gold) on rolling the dice, when there's a good chance of getting a skin they would never use.

So argue about whether this is gambling or not, if you want. It's probably not the conversation that will get ANet to rethink their pricing strategy.

I'm just getting a little annoyed at the people trying to justify their preferences with false morality claims.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very disappointed at you Anet. I'm glad Gw2 has playerbase like this, in some other games, playerbase accepts whatever the devs throw at them.

You didn't even tough about people who don't own a griffin but can get a griffin skin. Literally useless. Get it together anet, be different, don't do this. Undo it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just have to add... I used to spend a LOT in this game. Back when I had a higher paying job, I could have spent a good $1,000 on gem store purchases alone. I no longer have that high paying job but I still spend money in the gem store when I can readily afford it. This being said, I am no longer going to pay for any more gem store items until the mount RNG and forced bundles have stopped.

I've loved this game and have played since early 2013. I have 3 accounts, all 3 having both expansions. I've probably spent more on this game than what's wise, but I can't condone this behavior? It's RNG cosmetics now, but tomorrow it could be armor stats. We already have boosters that give better rewards/gold in WvW and PvP. Many MMOs start out with "innocent" cosmetic systems that are a bit unfair, but hey, just cosmetics. But then they travel further down the rabbit hole. I really do not want to see my favorite MMO become like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Bunter.3795 said:The amount of overdramatic responses to the concerns people have about these new skins is almost beyond belief. I have no problem with people having an opinion and posting it but the sheer amount of hyperbole and dramatization makes it hard to take what people are saying seriously.

The 2 biggest offenders I've seen posted are that Anet is evil and preying on it's customers and that this new skin acquisition method is gambling and preys on those with gambling addiction/weakness.

ANet may not be Evil and it may not technically be gambling, but it's not unreasonable to want to be able to get what you want without being ripped off. Why make me pay $120 USD to be guaranteed the skin I want? What if I've been saving for weeks and only have $30 to spend on the game, and I blow it all on the skins and don't get any of the ones I want? Why is that their business model? Because they don't care if you get what you want, they only care that they get what they want, which is your hard earned money. Want to make sure you get the one you want? Better pay a ridiculous amount of money for it.

And yes, it does prey on people with gambling addictions. I'm very prone to addiction myself, and if I really wanted a skin from that pack, I could very easily see myself buying one, not getting the one I want, then doing the Ol' Just One More™ until I've spent $20, $30, $60, etc... and then I finally get it after spending $120 and all I have is one skin I want, 29 I don't, and no money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello,

I think you are aware of the poll being made in addition to this official feedback:https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/14567/poll-mount-skins-distribution-a-serious-poll/

I think the stable results and amazingly huge sample size allows us to draw some conclusions.

First of all I would like to thank everyone for participating, those who already voted or will vote in next hours (or days). The sample is huge. I dare to say this is the most populated vote these forums have ever seen. At the moment of creation of this post 2257 accounts had voted. This is great sample to be used in providing general community opinion about the situation.

The reason why I feel safe to assume the conclusions can be made already is the fact that from the moment we reached about 150 votes, the percentage values are mostly stable, varying 1-2% max as times goes by. It is very rare for any game community to be in such agreement and this is very important for ArenaNet to understand that the situation they created cannot be taken lightly.

I was told in last 2 days that some options of the poll could have been added - like "I would pay more for no RNG skin". You are correct but it's impossible to edit the poll and creating new one would provide unwanted confusion. For people sharing this opinion option (Price is fine but I don't like RNG aspect) is the closest and if anyone still wants to vote please choose this one.

That being said, the mentioned option "Price is fine but I don't like RNG aspect" is the one shared within vast majority of playerbase. When this post was created, the poll showed 1455 votes (64% of all votes) that people are fine with paying for skins but the lottery ticket is unacceptable for them.

The poll is obviously followed by huge discussion, both here and in the poll thread. People suggest a lot of things but the most vocal posts seem to be the ones suggesting direct sales for mount skins and different tiering of prices considering that mount skins do not share same "creation value". What I mean by this is that some of the skins (a majority in current skin lottery) are just color patterns without any significant change in comparison to basic mount model. These models have objectively the least "work value".

Some of the mounts are slight iterations of basic models (like shiba jackal). They are something new, something different and they do not offer any additional visual effects or mount travel effects. These should be medium tier of mount price.

The last tier is all those flashy aura mounts. They should have biggest price value, as they add similar effect to legendary weapons, to stand out in the crowd.

The forged jackal is not part of this poll as it's not RNG mount and I am not willing to mix it into this discussion.

I am sure that those RNG mount boxes are big money for ArenaNet. I do not blame you for trying this path. However, please reconsider your position. Players are deeply disturbed by your actions in terms of mount monetization. Revenue is one thing but customer satisfaction and trust is the other. Look how much harm this decision did to PoF release hype. You decided to ask players to create "buzz", to use word of mouth as main marketing tool for this expansion. Look at all the positive reactions people have for the hard work your developers put into recreating and reintroducing the continent of Elona to us. I don't think it's worth to stick to this bussiness strategy just to sabotage all the good vibe you created almost 2 months ago with PoF release. Especially that all this negativity is spreading through internet.

I believe you know it turned out to be more serious than you expected. But with the huge sample of the poll and comments both here and in other social media related to GW2, I hope you change your decision and reitroduce mount monetization in fair model. Because people want to pay you for these skins, but not for lottery or gamble.

Thank you all for your time you wasted reading this ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the people who who trying to put law or just trying to put some sort ruling against lootboxes:

What is your defense?How would you make the judges pay attention?How would you make it to some form of court?Would this even go past civil court?

If you do not have a sufficient answer to any of these questions, lootboxes will never be illegal. The judges would toss this case faster than you can blink and move. Just thought I'd out there for those who were attempting to bring some sort of court against this business practice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a massive fan of Guild Wars 2. I am also not the sort of player that would just ragequit this game only to prove a point, not without giving you guys a chance to set something right. I loved Path of Fire for the most part, and I am looking forward to the next Living World Seasons, new fractals, other stuff.But I am not pleased with this business decision. I am very disappointed.Most of the community were very much looking forward to mount skins. We totally expected them, we wanted them badly. We were absolutely ready to pay for them. I was waiting for creative mount skins I could throw my money at ever since expansion release. So that is not the issue. The issue IS the RNG.You are offering a wide range of mount skins appealing to a wide range of players with a different taste. Some prefer the flashy ones like Fire Pinion and Starbound. Some prefer the more subtle ones like Canyon Spiketail. But you GUARANTEE none of those skins specifically for the money they invest, unless they invest up to FOUR TIMES THE PRICE OF THE EXPANSION. They want a new jackal skin? Well, chance is they don't get a jackal skin at their first ten tries, but always one of the four other mount skin types. They want a flashy skin? Chance is they get skins like the Ringfin for a couple of rolls straight. They want a very lore-friendly subtle skin? Chance is they get Fire Pinion and Starbound instead, and aren't even happy with that. If they want a specific skin? Well, if they have a bad day, that's 120 bucks for them.Arenanet, this entire matter is not about your players being avaricious. We really wanted those mount skins, and to pay for them, too. And I for one think, the skins you put out there ARE amazing.

But when looking at your Adoption Contracts, one problem becomes very apparent. People DON'T want to gamble for ONE or TWO items they really want. And you are probably well aware that only a few completionist fans are really into collecting ALL 30 mount skins.I am one such completionist fan. If there had been no RNG, I would have bought every single skin you would have put out. Maybe not if all of them had been as expensive as the Reforged Warhound, which, in my opinion, deserves to be at 1600 gems, but not more - but at a reasonable price point? Sure. (And I am not a general RNG hater if I support a game; I payed a lot of money for Black Lion Keys, in the full knowledge that I may not get those exclusive chest rewards! I just don't want fangs to bite my hand if I reach out to a company I actually respect. And right now, this feels like that!)But I don't expect the entire playerbase to be like me. I know that some only want specific mount skins and won't touch the other ones at all. And that is a decent attitude to have. That is a NORMAL attitude to have from a customer. And you're basically forcing them to either gamble their gems (in many cases, their hard-earned money!) to get something they want, or to just enjoy their basic one-channel mount. Not that the base mounts are ugly, but that is still bitter. That is still just not okay.GW2 is not a game about prestige in power. It is a game about exploration, activities and cosmetics, about having fun and looking gorgeous while having it. And let's be real here, you have no plan of introducing mount skins that can be earned by playing the game. (Not talking about gold-to-gem conversion here.) That is okay. But then don't make it "gamble or bust". Introduce a nice range of mount skins to the store for a set price before releasing a feature like this. Or better yet, remove this feature entirely. Yes, you will have less profits from those "whales" that somehow have a ton of disposable income and are willing to drop it into your game if they are tempted enough.But you will regain the respect of your playerbase as a whole. And people that respect you are people that support you.It was nice of you to not add duplicates to this system, but you should not walk this path at all. You should not. It scares your players, and it makes them feel bad and bitter about giving you money, if not before spending it, then some time afterwards. What does that mean? It means they might NOT come back and spend more.Put those mount skins in the store as bundles for a cheaper price, and as standalone purchases for a higher price. But don't do the RNG thing for a feature as important as this. Treat the mount skins like the glider skins, maybe make them a little less cheap, but leave it at that. Because you are not seeing a single dime from a lot of players if they can't truly decide what mount skin they want to get for a reasonable price. And what is a company that only respects the rich, the addictive, and the careless, in regards to something as important to the community as mount skins? Is that the sort of company you want to be?I sincerely believe not. Because I still hold you in high regard, but please set this right.Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Dr Bag PHD.5406 said:

@Chickenooble.5014 said:So I looked up the definition. "take risky action in the hope of a desired result."

So joining a fractal pug is gambling?So running in WvW using a berzerker solo build is gambling?Getting double hits on Claw of Jormag or Tequatl is gambling?Picking the wrong squad for Labs is gambling?

The entire game is a casino apparently!

Aww aye, I forgot you've to spend real world money on each of those every time you want a try. Sod off with your facetious rubbish.

Chicken is not incorrect in their examples.

Additionally, you do not need to spend real world money for the mount skins either. It is more convenient to do so, for some. But the option does exist to do it entirely through exchanging gold for gems. It just requires patience and persistence as opposed to instant gratification.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Lilyanna.9361 said:For the people who who trying to put law or just trying to put some sort ruling against lootboxes:

What is your defense?How would you make the judges pay attention?How would you make it to some form of court?Would this even go past civil court?

If you do not have a sufficient answer to any of these questions, lootboxes will never be illegal. The judges would toss this case faster than you can blink and move. Just thought I'd out there for those who were attempting to bring some sort of court against this business practice.

Y'know, something doesn't have to be illegal to for you to not do it. It's immoral, regardless of the legality. So they shouldn't be forced to stop by a judge or something, they should just stop because it's not right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@LanfearShadowflame.3189 said:

@Chickenooble.5014 said:So I looked up the definition. "take risky action in the hope of a desired result."

So joining a fractal pug is gambling?So running in WvW using a berzerker solo build is gambling?Getting double hits on Claw of Jormag or Tequatl is gambling?Picking the wrong squad for Labs is gambling?

The entire game is a casino apparently!

Yes, each of those is a gamble.

Everything is a gamble to some extent, when you use the very general sense of the word. Life itself is a gamble. Just sitting in your chair is a gamble. You run the risk of it breaking and dropping you on the floor, potentially hurting you in the process. Or the ceiling falling on your head. Or even your desk suddenly collapsing into your lap. All of these things are highly unlikely, but the risk exists. No one likes to look at it from that perspective though.

While you certainly could say everything in a game, or indeed life, is a gamble, If you apply the word to everything, it completely looses its significance and relevance. Therefore we must only use 'Gambling' as it's intended definition applies.

Spending real money, on one of a variety of options, to which the obtained outcome does not envolve the power of choice, and leaves everything to random chance, is a form of gambling. This is akin to placing a $5 bill in a casino slot machine, pressing the button, and watching the meter spin around in circles over 30 possible items before stopping on one. If that is considered gambling in a casino -and make no mistake it is- it is gambling here too.

But deffinitions aside, regardless of whether we call this "adoption" gambling or not, is irrelevant. The simple fact of the mater is I dont like it; there is huuuuge risk that ill waste a LOT of money obtaining things i dont want instead of buying something I do. Its not worth the risk, not worth the money, so I wont do it. And im not alone. Period. Simple as that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always been a lurker, never a poster but i just want to leave my feedback on the situation.For me being charged for cosmetics is not a problem, the problem, as you understood here is the RNG side of the situation.I'm more than happy to spend A LOT of gems on Guild Wars 2, but only if no RNG is involved, in fact i never purchased keys i'm just using the ones i drop.

I think skins should be more like :THIS SKIN IS AWESOME.I buy it / I farm for it.

Instead then :THIS SKIN IS AWESOME.I'll never get it because i should be very lucky to pick it from 30 other skins and plus i'll get skins i'll never use and i just don't want.

See you in Tyria <3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@LanfearShadowflame.3189 said:

@Chickenooble.5014 said:So I looked up the definition. "take risky action in the hope of a desired result."

So joining a fractal pug is gambling?So running in WvW using a berzerker solo build is gambling?Getting double hits on Claw of Jormag or Tequatl is gambling?Picking the wrong squad for Labs is gambling?

The entire game is a casino apparently!

Aww aye, I forgot you've to spend real world money on each of those every time you want a try. Sod off with your facetious rubbish.

Chicken is not incorrect in their examples.

Additionally, you do not
need
to spend real world money for the mount skins
either
. It is more
convenient
to do so, for some. But the option does exist to do it entirely through exchanging gold for gems. It just requires patience and persistence as opposed to instance gratification.

Patience and persistence. You mean banal, mindless grinding for hours on end. Not really the same thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wanted to give these a chance. I really did. So I bought 7 of them, in hopes that at least I could get 1 new skin for every mount because that's all I cared about. I didn't really even care what one I got. But instead I got 3 bunnys, 3 jackals, and 1 skimmer. I didn't even get enough to get 1 for every mount, and most especially the Raptor and Griffon are the ones I use most frequently (read: almost exclusively). That is what soured me. Why couldn't I have at least chose the mount type I wanted? What am I going to do with 3 bunnies and 3 jackals? I can't even use them in tandem because switching them is annoying and messes up dyes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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