Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Official Mount Adoption Feedback Thread [merged]


Recommended Posts

@WingedLass.7456 said:

@"Sir Vincent III.1286" said:

The odds of getting what you want is not even that high.

Nope, not very high odds indeed.

Mis-typed: "The odds of NOT getting..."

Then this is not about affordability. You're actually complaining about the randomness.

Yes, I am. And I'm not the only one unable (or, in other cases, unwilling) to afford a way to eliminate the randomness from the equation.

Well, it's an option and it's available. You don't even need to fork up the cash, you can convert gold to gems too.

Yes, it's cosmetic. Yes, it's optional. I'm not saying they're obligated to offer it separately. I'm saying that I'd really like to be able to buy it separately, and they don't give me the option to. For people willing to buy the bundle with everything, it's not a problem. For me it is, which I complain about.

The option is there. If you don't like the randomness, then buy the bundle. If you can't afford the bundle then try your luck on singles. Or cut the odds to 1:3 by buying the 10 pack.

That's not an option to buy the shirt separately. That's an option to buy all shirts and have 29 of them lying around in the closet, a wasted 116 bucks, and no option to even donate any of them to goodwill. That, or an option to buy a shirt and hope, pray, beg that it'll be the one I want, or keep on spending until I get it (with again, the ones I get before that one lying around in my closet, wasted money, etc.)

No different than buying an assorted pack of socks even if you're not going to use the tube socks. I doubt they will remove the randomness.

Hence, me purposely using 'figuratively'. I'm not saying they cost me limbs. I'm saying the comparison is moot because it's still not a good thing. I can say it's like stealing 10 euros vs stealing 100 euros, which is both still not okay, if it makes you feel better about approaching a literal comparison. (Before you continue - yes, I
am
aware they're also not stealing any money, I'd be spending it voluntarily. That's why it's a comparison.)

You need to work on your analogy then because those were bad examples.

I don't complain about your Ferrari, either.

I used that only because you said it's unaffordable when you clearly complaining about randomness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@troops.8276 said:

@WingedLass.7456 said:

@WingedLass.7456 said:

While WoW sells a single skin for $25, GW2 sells a skin for $5 (400 gems). $4 per skin if you buy the bundle.

1) So does GW2. You have seen the new Jackal, right? Bright side? You know exactly what you're getting.

You know exactly what you're getting. If you buy the bundle you get all 30 of them.

For the bundle, yes. For anything less (like the 10-pack or the 1 contract), no.

The odds of getting what you want is not even that high.

2) Again, I
cannot afford
to buy all of them for the few skins I want. It's a bargain,
if you get to choose
. We don't get to choose, I don't care for most of them, and so I can't/won't get any of them. I complain because there is a few I do want, and there's no reasonable way for me to get them.

If you can't afford it, then that's your problem, isn't it? I can't afford a Ferrari, but why would I waste my time complaining about it?

I'm not complaining about not being able to afford a Ferrari. A Ferrari is like the Jackal, which indeed I can also not afford. That's not my problem. My problem is not being able to afford a shirt I want because it's between a bunch of other shirts and I can only get a random one out of 30, instead of the one shirt I want.

Then this is not about affordability. You're actually complaining about the randomness.

Yes, it's cosmetic. Yes, it's optional. I'm not saying they're obligated to offer it separately. I'm saying that I'd really like to be able to buy it separately, and they don't give me the option to. For people willing to buy the bundle with everything, it's not a problem. For me it is, which I complain about.

The option is there. If you don't like the randomness, then buy the bundle. If you can't afford the bundle then try your luck on singles. Or cut the odds to 1:3 by buying the 10 pack.

3) Comparisons to other games where 'things are worse' don't do much to me. Figuratively speaking, I'll still complain about someone chopping off my hand, rather than chopping off my arm. Thanks, but just because it could've been worse doesn't mean it's okay.

That's your perception. Things in WoW isn't worst. And no, ArenaNet does not want your arm or your hand -- that's you underpricing your limbs. If I have to chop my finger, I better get $100 million for it, so if you want an arm, you better afford $250 Billion. These skins don't cost a hand or an arm, let alone a finger.

Hence, me purposely using 'figuratively'. I'm not saying they cost me limbs. I'm saying the comparison is moot because it's still not a good thing. I can say it's like stealing 10 euros vs stealing 100 euros, which is both still not okay, if it makes you feel better about approaching a literal comparison. (Before you continue - yes, I
am
aware they're also not stealing any money, I'd be spending it voluntarily. That's why it's a comparison.)

You need to work on your analogy then because those were bad examples.

You very neatly explained the problem therein. There is no way to simply buy the actual product you want. It was designed deliberately to be like that. The inherent weakness that is being 'preyed' upon of the customer is being drawn into a game of chance where the odds are statistically against them. Hence people using the 'predatory' analogy.

The problem here is that people want to buy something that ArenaNet is not selling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sir Vincent III.1286 said:

No different than buying an assorted pack of socks even if you're not going to use the tube socks. I doubt they will remove the randomness.

I knew there was a reason I only buy socks I'm all going to use. (Sorry, yes, that was rather childish. True, though, I'll never get an assorted pack of socks that contains ones I know I won't use. I guess we're all different when it comes to these things.)

It might be best to agree to disagree on the subject. Clearly, we think on it differently, and I'm not sure either of us is going to convince the other. Considering the risk of this devolving into a back-and-forth, this is my final reply. Thank you for the serious discussion, though, and have a nice evening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crikey, I did think 48 hours after the patch came out that there would be some sort of response.

What this has given me an opportunity to do is expand my awareness of other youtubers than WoodenPotatoes or checking out Dulfy, and its good to see from what ive watched that its not just here that people are unhappy - check out the GW2 partners directory and a few Reddit threads. Deroir and Inks were interesting...

That said im not sure even their collective power and the gaming media is going to stop this rapid slide into mainly pay walled and RNG cosmetics, though I hope it does because my WoW sub is starting to look attractive when their next xp and classic servers comes out.

I feel even more strongly now that mount skins ( and gliders actually) and more cosmetic rewards in general need to go into the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@WingedLass.7456 said:

No different than buying an assorted pack of socks even if you're not going to use the tube socks. I doubt they will remove the randomness.

I
knew
there was a reason I only buy socks I'm all going to use. (Sorry, yes, that was rather childish. True, though, I'll never get an assorted pack of socks that contains ones I know I won't use. I guess we're all different when it comes to these things.)

It might be best to agree to disagree on the subject. Clearly, we think on it differently, and I'm not sure either of us is going to convince the other. Considering the risk of this devolving into a back-and-forth, this is my final reply. Thank you for the serious discussion, though, and have a nice evening.

You too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sir Vincent III.1286 said:

@troops.8276 said:

@WingedLass.7456 said:

@WingedLass.7456 said:

While WoW sells a single skin for $25, GW2 sells a skin for $5 (400 gems). $4 per skin if you buy the bundle.

1) So does GW2. You have seen the new Jackal, right? Bright side? You know exactly what you're getting.

You know exactly what you're getting. If you buy the bundle you get all 30 of them.

For the bundle, yes. For anything less (like the 10-pack or the 1 contract), no.

The odds of getting what you want is not even that high.

2) Again, I
cannot afford
to buy all of them for the few skins I want. It's a bargain,
if you get to choose
. We don't get to choose, I don't care for most of them, and so I can't/won't get any of them. I complain because there is a few I do want, and there's no reasonable way for me to get them.

If you can't afford it, then that's your problem, isn't it? I can't afford a Ferrari, but why would I waste my time complaining about it?

I'm not complaining about not being able to afford a Ferrari. A Ferrari is like the Jackal, which indeed I can also not afford. That's not my problem. My problem is not being able to afford a shirt I want because it's between a bunch of other shirts and I can only get a random one out of 30, instead of the one shirt I want.

Then this is not about affordability. You're actually complaining about the randomness.

Yes, it's cosmetic. Yes, it's optional. I'm not saying they're obligated to offer it separately. I'm saying that I'd really like to be able to buy it separately, and they don't give me the option to. For people willing to buy the bundle with everything, it's not a problem. For me it is, which I complain about.

The option is there. If you don't like the randomness, then buy the bundle. If you can't afford the bundle then try your luck on singles. Or cut the odds to 1:3 by buying the 10 pack.

3) Comparisons to other games where 'things are worse' don't do much to me. Figuratively speaking, I'll still complain about someone chopping off my hand, rather than chopping off my arm. Thanks, but just because it could've been worse doesn't mean it's okay.

That's your perception. Things in WoW isn't worst. And no, ArenaNet does not want your arm or your hand -- that's you underpricing your limbs. If I have to chop my finger, I better get $100 million for it, so if you want an arm, you better afford $250 Billion. These skins don't cost a hand or an arm, let alone a finger.

Hence, me purposely using 'figuratively'. I'm not saying they cost me limbs. I'm saying the comparison is moot because it's still not a good thing. I can say it's like stealing 10 euros vs stealing 100 euros, which is both still not okay, if it makes you feel better about approaching a literal comparison. (Before you continue - yes, I
am
aware they're also not stealing any money, I'd be spending it voluntarily. That's why it's a comparison.)

You need to work on your analogy then because those were bad examples.

You very neatly explained the problem therein. There is no way to simply buy the actual product you want. It was designed deliberately to be like that. The inherent weakness that is being 'preyed' upon of the customer is being drawn into a game of chance where the odds are statistically against them. Hence people using the 'predatory' analogy.

The problem here is that people want to buy something that ArenaNet is not selling.

Well that is one way of looking at it. Have you considered why it is something Anet is not selling. Maybe if you do then you might understand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the biggest, shameless money grabbing scheme I have ever seen...There is not 1 single sane reason you can justify this with, not 1!

You disgust me with this Anet... I once spoke so full of praise of Anet, ever since GW1.. But after a few horrible balance patches, Scourge in general, Reaper shroud decay and the insane amount of "give me all your money" gem store items I now loathe what you have become...

Listen to your community, your loyal player base, read the official forums, hear our voices and show us you still care!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Anet, I'm adding my feedback here in the hopes it adds some form of confirmation, or at least, perspective. Ensue long personal feedback (context included).

First off, I love the addition of the mounts. And I am a massive fan of the wardrobe system and overall customization options of this game. But that being said, this is what I didn't like about the latest addition of mount adoptions:

Why I Didn't Like It

  • It's expensive. Of course it's expensive. They're skins, and you guys need to make money somehow. But these are REALLY expensive. There's multiple reasons why, but for this particular bullet point I'll say it's because it costs so much more than anything else in the gem store. Where historically the "pricey" gem store packages, bundles, and items haven't exceeded 2,000 gems, seeing a whopping 9,600 gems was jaw-dropping. It felt like a massive paywall was thrown up. $120 worth of gems to buy the 30 pack? Ouch.
  • It "feels" too expensive. When it's cheaper to buy both expansions than it is to buy a bundle of skins, the priorities seem off.
  • It's too much. I was chomping at the bit for new mount skins and was thrilled when the spooky pack released, but almost immediately following that up with not 5, but 30 more felt like way too much. It was overwhelming, to say the least, and not in a good way. Instead of the slow release of small batches of content, which is what we're accustomed to, this felt like way, way too much.
  • It's too soon. Arguable, but still - PoF hasn't even been out for 2 months yet. Dumping this much content out so quickly after launch almost feels insulting to both players who bought the expansion, and those who haven't yet. It's not incentive to buy the expansion. Mounts alone were very capable of that. The timing seems off when I've been waiting on a new asura face for over a year now. And to add insult to injury, it's on an NPC and has been used in multiple promotional banners. So how come existing [skin/appearance] content can't be turned out in over a year, and way then this much "extra" can be turned out within a month? (It's a rhetorical question, however the point still stands.)
  • It divides the playerbase. Historically, Black Lion Chests and Dye Kits also use rng, and of course there's exclusive gem store items. So when people got these skins, it felt like an accomplishment they were proud to display, more often to celebrate than to brag. But there should never, EVER be a clearly-defined wall between players with loads of cash and players with none. The rng in combination with the price and exclusivity of the mount adoption licenses means that, more likely than not, players with "nice" skins poured a lot of money into the gem store to get them. The reception - salty. Extremely salty. As in, I've seen players actively insulting and attacking other players for getting them in the first place. I've seen players with nice mounts actually hiding while "trying them on" to avoid the backlash. This should NEVER be a problem, and is extremely "un-Anet" in character. I haven't seen a situation like this created that divided the playerbase, even casually, so aggressively since the Mordrem Invasion.
  • It's unfulfilling. The pool is too wide, and there's no clearly-defined rarities. For the price they are (either through high gold conversion or putting a minimum of $10 into the game, since there are no $5 intervals in the gem store), it's extremely high-risk. In comparison to previous pools, it feels like a money grab over a genuine chance at a mount someone wants.

That being said, here's the constructive feedback:

How It Can Be ImprovedIn this player's humble opinion, of course.

  • Release mounts in smaller batches. I would have much more incentive to spend if the batch released was smaller. Not only does it look more affordable and thus "a better deal", but getting these skins over e.g. a period of 6 months also would have given the impression that regularly designing mount skins was a priority at Anet, similar to how new gliders or Black Lion weapon skins are released. (Goodness knows I only need 1 glider but I've happily bought several this way.)
  • Release "license types". If you want to stick with rng, consider releasing mount-specific adoption license packages. For example: A "Jackal Adoption License" or license pack that would pick from a pool of 6 jackal skins. Because it's way easier to throw more money at something if it feels like you have a better chance of getting it. This also removes undesirable skin types players won't want, INCLUDING players who will never unlock griffons and thus have no use for griffon skins. I believe the ratio of players who would take a risk with 2,400 gems to get a skin they REALLY wanted (per single mount) far exceeds the profits of players who would, or could even afford to pour $120 into the game for a 30 pack (which you could even still offer under this suggestion, btw). If anything you'd be catering to your community and its loyalty instead of giving the impression you only want their money. You're giving players what they want (a shiny skin) AND you get more money. To implement this while players have existing licenses, treat it similar to Town Clothes and let an NPC convert the (random) license to a specific license type.Counterpoint: "That makes 2,000 gems for a single skin in the gem store feel like a rip off." Possible, but I also consider the adoption license mounts "reskins" whereas the 2,000 gem mounts are completely new models. For a good new model, I'd still pay that much even with the proposed new license types.
  • Wait on BLC exclusives. The rng "lootbox" aspect has already done a lot of damage. Wait before potentially releasing a BLC-exclusive skin also determined by rng.
  • Let some skins be earnable. There's two aspects to this. First off (1), especially if you are sticking with the "lootbox" system you've got currently with adoption licenses, players should be able to earn licenses through gameplay. This is true of pretty much any game that uses loot boxes. Just like Black Lion keys are an extremely rare drop, and sometimes a reward, so too can license adoptions be. Consider potentially tying this to mastery levels (post level-80 aka expansion gameplay) or overall achievement chests. Second (2), I'd love to see the addition of an actual Breeder NPC. Perhaps you could go on extra quests/adventures/etc and fulfill requirements, similar to collections achievements, to earn a specific skin, and introduce more over time. You could even offer them as festival rewards. And these mount skins could, for example, only be available during a set period of time. Consider introducing certain skins per region, especially to old map regions! Bring new life to older vanilla maps this way. Or even as new rewards for Season 4.

Those are some of my suggestions. I hope it offers both ideas and perspective, as I'm sure several others have echoed before me in this thread, with the consideration that you want to promote player/customer loyalty while also making money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Rococo.8347 said:I feel even more strongly now that mount skins ( and gliders actually) and more cosmetic rewards in general need to go into the game.

They are in the game. You can convert gold to gem. I farmed this one randomly dropped mount from an old dungeon in WoW so many times. I made a lot of gold wishing that there's a way to use the gold to just buy the mount instead of wasting my time resetting and running the same dungeon over and over. Is that what you like to do, to run the same content hoping for a random drop? Then GW2 has it. To me, there's not difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see people defending the system with a couple different arguments. I'd like to make my case against some of those.

1: It brings in more money to Arenanet, allowing them to create more great content for us.

Does it though? As I mentioned in my previous post, most people can't afford that. If, instead of Guild Wars 2, I played an mmo with a subscription fee, that mmo would have made far more money off of me by now than gw2 probably ever will. Does that mean that subscription mmos have a better business model in regards to making money off of me? No, because I don't play those, I play gw2. I can't afford that, and neither can many other players. In the same way, I can totally afford to drop some money on one cool skin -- maybe I'll even ask for it for Christmas or my birthday, as I've done in the past. However, putting what I want behind an RNG system that will most likely take quite a bit of money before giving me what I want just means I won't get it at all. It's not the difference between players spending more or less money to get what they want, it is, for many of us, the difference between players bothering to buy what they want at all.

2: This stops everyone from just immediately getting the "coolest" one and swamping Lion's Arch with a billion people all running around on only the lightning raptor or fiery griffon.

Well if the fiery griffon is the only mount skin that people want, why not let them have it? A key practice of a good business is figuring out what your customers want, and giving it to them. We're all paying players, if we want our griffons to be on fire 24/7, there's no good reason to say we shouldn't all be able to buy that. I'll bring up the topic of gliders again. Think of your favorite glider skin. Now, is that glider skin EVERYONE'S favorite? No! Of course not, there are all sorts of types and styles of gliders, and when a squad jumps off a cliff, everyone doesn't pull out the same glider. If there's really only one skin that's the "coolest", maybe Arenanet missed the mark of what players want with their other skins. RNG isn't how you "diversify" what skins players use, making many more cool skins is. And, well, if they make a bunch of cool skins and everyone still thinks the lightning raptor is the best, is that really so bad? It's what the players want, and they're still supporting the game by buying it. If you don't want your character to ride that mount, that's your choice! You can have a different mount!

3: Now you have something to work towards, instead of just something to buy.

You're not "working towards" it though. Working towards something implies a stream of steady progress based on your own time and effort put into it. This isn't that, it's a gamble. It's not "instead of something to buy", because it still IS something you buy, it's just not guaranteed that you'll actually get what you want. The only sort of thing you could possibly be "working towards" is completing your collection of mount skins, and if that's what you want to do, you'll probably do it regardless of how mounts are "packaged" in the gem store. If you want something to work towards in the game, legendaries and collections (think of the griffon collection!) fill that niche much better, and perhaps more of those should be requested -- mount skins locked behind achievements or collections would be a better way of implementing that sort of thing.

4: You can just buy them with gold if you don't want to spend real money.

Well that rather takes away from the whole point about supporting Arenanet, hm? While this is true, my earlier point is still relevant. Players might not necessarily have that much gold, especially if they're new to the game and are just starting to throw themselves into the vanity showcase that is Fashion Wars 2. And if they do, just like with real money, they might be willing to trade it for gems if they knew they were getting what they wanted, but if you're guaranteed nothing, why even bother? Even with gold, it's still not just worth it for many players who otherwise would have gladly purchased skins.

In conclusion, Arenanet's time and money will be most profitably spent giving people what they want, without pulling any RNG tricks, and players' time and money is more likely to be spent on guaranteed rewards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My problem with this gemstore release isn't simply the rng system or pricing of new mounts. My problem is that 90% of GW2's endgame experience revolve simply around "How much money can i make per hour", since there are far too less prestigious rewards too work for in specific areas and instead you just have to look for the next gold->gem conversion to buy something from the gemstore. Especially now after PoF many players are already unpleased by what the new expansion has to offer as cool stuff to go for. And exactly in this time such a gemstore update with 30+ mount skins in a loot box gets slapped right in our face. As a player i don't get the sense of a reward in this game anymore just because most endgame just happens in the gemstore and therefore cripple you for everything that does not generate a good amount of gold per hour. This is by no means an enjoyable reward structure and this frustrates me as i wander the fields of Tyria for 10 years now. Why is not a single one of those mount skins achievable in game for doing mount specific adventures for instance? Or why do other rewards like gen-2 legendaries take way over 2 years to implemenent completely? I adored GW2's gemstore system at launch where it was really optional, but those times are long gone and this slowly but surely kills my enjoyment for this game.TLDR: Fashion endgame when every new cool stuff only makes it to the gemstore is just frustrating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's my personal testimony, for what it's worth:The skins are awesome. There are a few I really want, a few I like well enough, and a few I don't want and would never use. I would spend $20 immediately if I could pick the ones I want, but as it is I won't spend any money because the risk of disappointment is too high.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sir Vincent III.1286 said:

@Rococo.8347 said:I feel even more strongly now that mount skins ( and gliders actually) and more cosmetic rewards in general need to go into the game.

They are in the game. You can convert gold to gem. I farmed this one randomly dropped mount from an old dungeon in WoW so many times. I made a lot of gold wishing that there's a way to use the gold to just buy the mount instead of wasting my time resetting and running the same dungeon over and over. Is that what you like to do, to run the same content hoping for a random drop? Then GW2 has it. To me, there's not difference.

The more people do that the worse the exchange rate will become thus effectively increasing the grinding time which in turn makes paying with real money more enticing. They thought this through you know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Same as many here. I don't post often at all. My two cents is that it's not that I disagree with the gem store at all I know you guys need some way to turn a profit without sub fees and all. But please, in game rewards suck compared to the gem store. I also don't want to have to pay the worth of a legendary to try and get the one or two mount skins I want if I get screwed by RNG. I love this game I do. But friends of mine are leaving over this crap. There needs to be balance between the two. Hell even the legendary backpack gliders don't hold a candle to the gem store ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@troops.8276 said:

@Rococo.8347 said:I feel even more strongly now that mount skins ( and gliders actually) and more cosmetic rewards in general need to go into the game.

They are in the game. You can convert gold to gem. I farmed this one randomly dropped mount from an old dungeon in WoW so many times. I made a lot of gold wishing that there's a way to use the gold to just buy the mount instead of wasting my time resetting and running the same dungeon over and over. Is that what you like to do, to run the same content hoping for a random drop? Then GW2 has it. To me, there's not difference.

The more people do that the worse the exchange rate will become thus effectively increasing the grinding time which in turn makes paying with real money more enticing. They thought this through you know.

Nah, I doubt it. It might spike the exchange rate sure, but you can't ignore those who exchange gems for gold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing "predatory" about this at all. That's just an exaggeration by inappropriately labeling something they don't like.

Right, they just want to trick people into spending much more on multiple attempts at winning the skin they want, rather than just letting them buy it outright. Nothing predatory about that. /S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sir Vincent III.1286 said:

@troops.8276 said:

@Rococo.8347 said:I feel even more strongly now that mount skins ( and gliders actually) and more cosmetic rewards in general need to go into the game.

They are in the game. You can convert gold to gem. I farmed this one randomly dropped mount from an old dungeon in WoW so many times. I made a lot of gold wishing that there's a way to use the gold to just buy the mount instead of wasting my time resetting and running the same dungeon over and over. Is that what you like to do, to run the same content hoping for a random drop? Then GW2 has it. To me, there's not difference.

The more people do that the worse the exchange rate will become thus effectively increasing the grinding time which in turn makes paying with real money more enticing. They thought this through you know.

Nah, I doubt it. It might spike the exchange rate sure, but you can't ignore those who exchange gems for gold.

Yes indeed. Getting real money in is what it's all about. It's a mechanism to ensure that buying gems directly is all ways enticing and that enough people will do it. But it all ways remains that you must grind or pay. It's a very clever business model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The choice to force players to gamble this way to get mounts skins is just so incredibly disappointing. I've always been happy to buy gems in an effort to show my support for the game, you get some fancy skins and it's no pay to win, the Black Lion Chest-RNG can mostly be avoided with the TP. The way Guild Wars 2 has dealt with real money transactions has always been a big reason why it's the only MMO I play, and also a reason why I recommend the game to other people.Anet, you -know- that people really want mount skins, the mounts have become a big part of the game now, and by putting them behind a luck based lootbox paid with real money it seems like you only want to force people to pay as much as possible for the skins they want? Rather than the gem shop-skins being a reward for players who support you. It's such a cheap way to profit from the players. I'm glad to show my support with real money -when I know what I will get for them-. Not otherwise.Seeing Anet delve into this lootbox-business is disheartening.Needless to say, I won't be buying any mount skins as long as they are random.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@atomy.3817 said:

Nothing "predatory" about this at all. That's just an exaggeration by inappropriately labeling something they don't like.

Right, they just want to trick people into spending much more on multiple attempts at winning the skin they want, rather than just letting them buy it outright. Nothing predatory about that. /S

They are letting players buy them outright if you buy the bundle. It's not cheap, but it's there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sir Vincent III.1286 said:

@atomy.3817 said:

Nothing "predatory" about this at all. That's just an exaggeration by inappropriately labeling something they don't like.

Right, they just want to trick people into spending much more on multiple attempts at winning the skin they want, rather than just letting them buy it outright. Nothing predatory about that. /S

They are letting players buy them outright if you buy the bundle. It's not cheap, but it's there.

And you could win the lottery if you just buy a ticket for every possible combination of numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sir Vincent III.1286 said:

@atomy.3817 said:

Nothing "predatory" about this at all. That's just an exaggeration by inappropriately labeling something they don't like.

Right, they just want to trick people into spending much more on multiple attempts at winning the skin they want, rather than just letting them buy it outright. Nothing predatory about that. /S

They are letting players buy them outright if you buy the bundle. It's not cheap, but it's there.

Oh they're letting them, how terribly nice of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@atomy.3817 said:

@atomy.3817 said:

Nothing "predatory" about this at all. That's just an exaggeration by inappropriately labeling something they don't like.

Right, they just want to trick people into spending much more on multiple attempts at winning the skin they want, rather than just letting them buy it outright. Nothing predatory about that. /S

They are letting players buy them outright if you buy the bundle. It's not cheap, but it's there.

And you could win the lottery if you just buy a ticket for every possible combination of numbers.

this. everyone arguing "it's not gambling because you can buy them all" is wasting time on pointless semantics. except for a tiny portion of dedicated collectors and/or whales, most people only want a handful of these 30 skins, not every last one. every skin they pay for but don't want is a lost dice roll. just because there's a fixed total number of possible times to lose doesn't mean it isn't gambling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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