Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Official Mount Adoption Feedback Thread [merged]


Recommended Posts

I suggest to everyone who wants to show her/his dissatisfaction with ANets skin rng lootboxes ingame too to advertise and join the lootbox protest near Desider Atum in Metrica Province. Go to one of Hrouda's protest stations and pick up a protest sign (this is possible even after the heart was completed and it's also visible when mounted, see screenshot below).

https://imgur.com/a/4OQ7r

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Camaro Charr.2805 said:

@Jaskar.3071 said:

@Camaro Charr.2805 said:Hey I spent 400 gems on a random mount. It came up Highland Harrier, but I do not show the option to mount the Highland Harrier in game. What gives?

Its a SKIN.there is an option to change mount skins in the hero-menu

In the hero menu it is showing as locked for me... has a lock symbol over it.

Let me guess... because I don't have the original griffon mount, then I cant use it... crap

That's right. It's another issue people have with this system. If you get 3 griffon skins in a row, for example, then you can't use them until you get the griffon mount.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Camaro Charr.2805 said:

@Jaskar.3071 said:

@Camaro Charr.2805 said:Hey I spent 400 gems on a random mount. It came up Highland Harrier, but I do not show the option to mount the Highland Harrier in game. What gives?

Its a SKIN.there is an option to change mount skins in the hero-menu

In the hero menu it is showing as locked for me... has a lock symbol over it.

Let me guess... because I don't have the original griffon mount, then I cant use it... crap

Thank you for illustrating why the current method is garbage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@pah.4931 said:

No laws were broken, and I GUARANTEE YOU they are making more money this way. If you actually love this game, you would see that and be happy that this "manipulative" (lol) business practice is keeping the lights on. OK, so you don't get the shiny raptor you want, but maybe now you might get one more expansion before the game shutters.

Just makes it clear that there's no longer any point in investing in a game that's going so broke that it's going to shut down soon. Maybe folks should have stuck to GW1's original design, that one lasted over a decade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sylv.5324 said:

@Rashagar.8349 said:

@Elyssandariel.2679 said:

@Djinn.9245 said:

@Oglaf.1074 said:Has Anet done anything other than merge the threads like this? Any response in this thread? Their social media? Anything?

Or are they just bunkering down and praying that this will blow over?

Yes, they have outright closed the thread that talks about the damage of gamble boxes instead of merging it. Interesting, huh?

Yeah, I noticed that too. All of our psychological evidence gone in one fell swoop, when they eventually clear it away. I might repost my stuff in this thread just so everyone gets a chance to see it before the other thread "disappears." I love how that merged almost ALL of the other threads, but that one.

Speaking of conspiracy theories, anyone else feeling like this ridiculous level of public blowback over a pricing plan is being engineered and puppeted by some tiny portion of unscrupulous string pullers for their own selfish ends?It's the only rational explanation.

=P

No, it's not the only rational explanation. Not everything is a conspiracy.

That sounds like something an unscrupulous string puller would say =P

(It was a joke based on the quoted post's inferred Anet conspiracy)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@AlexanderDracul.7492 said:

@Jaskar.3071 said:

@Camaro Charr.2805 said:Hey I spent 400 gems on a random mount. It came up Highland Harrier, but I do not show the option to mount the Highland Harrier in game. What gives?

Its a SKIN.there is an option to change mount skins in the hero-menu

In the hero menu it is showing as locked for me... has a lock symbol over it.

Let me guess... because I don't have the original griffon mount, then I cant use it... crap

That's right. It's another issue people have with this system. If you get 3 griffon skins in a row, for example, then you can't use them until you get the griffon mount.

Ill be on the phone with Arenanet later....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not trying to censor anyone. They aren't using "more blunt and direct" words to describe the adoption contracts, they're using incorrect words.

@troops.8276 said:So 'unfriendly sales method' then. Honestly I think that is what people should say. I understand though why people will just use a more blunt and direct word to get the point across. Why try and censor them though?

@Wolfheart.7483 said:We are not trying to piece together our own marketing plan for something, I don't think we need a fancy descriptor with a nice ring to it. It is simply a sales method that is not as customer friendly as
some
of the things Anet has done in the past. They have sold (and still do) sell several items that are worse than these adoption contracts.

.> @troops.8276 said:

So still no better descriptor for it. I don't have one either by the way. "A bit of a scam" maybe? Nah. Unfavourable sales method? That fits better but it doesn't roll off the tongue.

@fizzypetal.7936 said:

@troops.8276 said:

@Wolfheart.7483 said:.

@"Shena Fu.5792" said:Just because it's optional doesn't mean it's okay for businesses to scam and exploit their customers. Nobody likes to be cheated, and customers have all the rights to voice their dissent.

Especially in this case when many players were willing to open their wallets, provided that they get a fair deal in return. However the only thing on the devs mind is how to squeeze as much money from loyal consumers via questionable practices.

When people throw around words like "cheat" and "scam" it is completely unwarranted and yet another example of blowing it out of proportion. There is nothing that is a cheat or scam about these. You can dislike the method of sale but do not claim it is something that it is not simply to put it in a more negative light.

What is a better descriptor for it? Do you think it entirely fair from a consumer point of view? Buy them all even though most are fluff and/or unusable or gamble on getting one you like which will statistically cost the consumer more. It is clearly designed to try and drive up sales and some would say also brings in the nastier elements of gambling. Maybe a Clever Sales technique? Does it though benefit seller and buyer equally? Scam probably is to strong a word. But that's not to say it's that far from the truth either.

I wouldn't have said it was a scam or cheat either because there isn't anything hidden in the method of sale. The buyer knows what they are getting from the outset. I know my RNG luck is terrible so I'm not going to play the game.

Those that do not yet have all the mounts those skins are for will hopefully understand that while a unique skin is guaranteed, a skin might also drop for mount they don't yet possess.

Whether or not the sale method benefits the seller or buyer - that is all about perspective. The player that got their favourite skin with the first roll of the dice would be like 'hell yeah, great system!'. For others maybe not so much. Especially if the skin you really wanted didn't pop until the 30th dice roll.

@Wolfheart.7483 said:

@troops.8276 said:

@Wolfheart.7483 said:.

@"Shena Fu.5792" said:Just because it's optional doesn't mean it's okay for businesses to scam and exploit their customers. Nobody likes to be cheated, and customers have all the rights to voice their dissent.

Especially in this case when many players were willing to open their wallets, provided that they get a fair deal in return. However the only thing on the devs mind is how to squeeze as much money from loyal consumers via questionable practices.

When people throw around words like "cheat" and "scam" it is completely unwarranted and yet another example of blowing it out of proportion. There is nothing that is a cheat or scam about these. You can dislike the method of sale but do not claim it is something that it is not simply to put it in a more negative light.

What is a better descriptor for it? Do you think it entirely fair from a consumer point of view? Buy them all even though most are fluff and/or unusable or gamble on getting one you like which will statistically cost the consumer more. It is clearly designed to try and drive up sales and some would say also brings in the nastier elements of gambling. Maybe a Clever Sales technique? Does it though benefit seller and buyer equally? Scam probably is to strong a word. But that's not to say it's that far from the truth either.

Not once have I claimed they chose the best approach. This isn't all bad or all good. It is
not
a scam or cheat. It is represented in the store as exactly what it is. You may not like what it is but if someone buys an adoption contract to unlock a random new mount skin, they know exactly what they are getting: to unlock a random new mount skin.

I
agree
with the fact that it should not be RNG and skins should be sold individually. But if you
do
purchase a random skin unlock with your heart set on a specific skin(s) and do not get what you hoped for, you were not scammed, cheated or tricked. You willingly took a chance and didn't get the outcome you hoped for.

@fizzypetal.7936 said:

@troops.8276 said:So still no better descriptor for it. I don't have one either by the way. "A bit of a scam" maybe? Nah. Unfavourable sales method? That fits better but it doesn't roll off the tongue.

@fizzypetal.7936 said:

@troops.8276 said:

@Wolfheart.7483 said:.

@"Shena Fu.5792" said:Just because it's optional doesn't mean it's okay for businesses to scam and exploit their customers. Nobody likes to be cheated, and customers have all the rights to voice their dissent.

Especially in this case when many players were willing to open their wallets, provided that they get a fair deal in return. However the only thing on the devs mind is how to squeeze as much money from loyal consumers via questionable practices.

When people throw around words like "cheat" and "scam" it is completely unwarranted and yet another example of blowing it out of proportion. There is nothing that is a cheat or scam about these. You can dislike the method of sale but do not claim it is something that it is not simply to put it in a more negative light.

What is a better descriptor for it? Do you think it entirely fair from a consumer point of view? Buy them all even though most are fluff and/or unusable or gamble on getting one you like which will statistically cost the consumer more. It is clearly designed to try and drive up sales and some would say also brings in the nastier elements of gambling. Maybe a Clever Sales technique? Does it though benefit seller and buyer equally? Scam probably is to strong a word. But that's not to say it's that far from the truth either.

I wouldn't have said it was a scam or cheat either because there isn't anything hidden in the method of sale. The buyer knows what they are getting from the outset. I know my RNG luck is terrible so I'm not going to play the game.

Those that do not yet have all the mounts those skins are for will hopefully understand that while a unique skin is guaranteed, a skin might also drop for mount they don't yet possess.

Whether or not the sale method benefits the seller or buyer - that is all about perspective. The player that got their favourite skin with the first roll of the dice would be like 'hell yeah, great system!'. For others maybe not so much. Especially if the skin you really wanted didn't pop until the 30th dice roll.

@Wolfheart.7483 said:

@troops.8276 said:

@Wolfheart.7483 said:.

@"Shena Fu.5792" said:Just because it's optional doesn't mean it's okay for businesses to scam and exploit their customers. Nobody likes to be cheated, and customers have all the rights to voice their dissent.

Especially in this case when many players were willing to open their wallets, provided that they get a fair deal in return. However the only thing on the devs mind is how to squeeze as much money from loyal consumers via questionable practices.

When people throw around words like "cheat" and "scam" it is completely unwarranted and yet another example of blowing it out of proportion. There is nothing that is a cheat or scam about these. You can dislike the method of sale but do not claim it is something that it is not simply to put it in a more negative light.

What is a better descriptor for it? Do you think it entirely fair from a consumer point of view? Buy them all even though most are fluff and/or unusable or gamble on getting one you like which will statistically cost the consumer more. It is clearly designed to try and drive up sales and some would say also brings in the nastier elements of gambling. Maybe a Clever Sales technique? Does it though benefit seller and buyer equally? Scam probably is to strong a word. But that's not to say it's that far from the truth either.

Not once have I claimed they chose the best approach. This isn't all bad or all good. It is
not
a scam or cheat. It is represented in the store as exactly what it is. You may not like what it is but if someone buys an adoption contract to unlock a random new mount skin, they know exactly what they are getting: to unlock a random new mount skin.

I
agree
with the fact that it should not be RNG and skins should be sold individually. But if you
do
purchase a random skin unlock with your heart set on a specific skin(s) and do not get what you hoped for, you were not scammed, cheated or tricked. You willingly took a chance and didn't get the outcome you hoped for.

Why does it need a label? It just is what it is...a bit of a lottery that players can choose to either participate in or not. I choose not. ;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@pah.4931 said:I still find it so odd that you would quit or "never pay another dime in the game again" over this. Anet could have never even done Mount Skins at all. Two months ago, you didn't even have a mount for 5 years of the game's life. Why all of a sudden do you NEED these skins so badly? If they aren't worth it to you (I will spare you the economics lesson of supply and demand and Anet being able to set the price however they want) then just don't buy them and keep enjoying the game you blissfully enjoy in your mount skin ignorance 4 days ago...

And anyone vilifying Anet for want to make more profits, I hope to GOD you are never in a leadership position at a company where you are responsible for keeping others employed, or -- worse -- that you never own or run your own company. Yikes.

While I agree that quitting or swearing off gem purchases entirely is cutting off the nose to spite the face (the game and Anet's business practices cannot improve if you kill them entirely,) the anger arises from Anet getting into oily sales habits. Simply put, random loot of any kind exploits inherent psychological mechanisms present in everyone, and almost irresistibly strong in a small but significant subset of people. Tying that randomness to real money transactions might not make it gambling, but it makes it close, and it makes it more likely to cause harm to that significant subset of people. Now, Anet is hardly the only, or even the first, company to exploit the psychological cheat codes for profit, and certainly what they are doing is legal, at this time anyway, but it seems most people commenting here don't find it to be ethical. And taking unethical measures to make a profit is generally frowned upon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Stu Grockalot.2937 said:Personally, I love everything to do with GW2 and want it to be the best game ever.I am also mindful that Arenanet do not work on the game for FREE!!

This all costs money to pay the developers, and as a player I am happy to help support Arenanet and contribute towards the next Living World Season,(a considerable amount of content shipped for free by the way), and also balance patches, new Raid wings, new PvP content, WvW content, (again all for free).

When you look at other online role playing games that force you to have a subscription of ~£10 a month, I won't name-drop any here, but suffice to say there was a massive motion picture based on it! ; then even after that GW2 is still cheaper.

Mounts skins are optional, so if you chose to support the company that you love, to help develop the game that you love, stop your moaning.Otherwise you run the risk of sounding like a spoiled child who doesn't get their way, and how life is unfair and treats you poorly.Do the math, even if you CHOOSE to buy all the mounts, still cheaper than other online games!

For the last time, nobody is complaining about premium content/microtransactions here. The GW2 userbase has happily kept the game afloat with buyng things for Gems for years by now, so there's clearly not an issue there. The keyword being, of course, buying things. Not gambling for things.

Could you purchase these skins directly instead of this gambling nonsense, nobody would complain and it'd be business as usual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Wolfheart.7483 said:I am not trying to censor anyone. They aren't using "more blunt and direct" words to describe the adoption contracts, they're using incorrect words.

@troops.8276 said:So 'unfriendly sales method' then. Honestly I think that is what people should say. I understand though why people will just use a more blunt and direct word to get the point across. Why try and censor them though?

@Wolfheart.7483 said:We are not trying to piece together our own marketing plan for something, I don't think we need a fancy descriptor with a nice ring to it. It is simply a sales method that is not as customer friendly as
some
of the things Anet has done in the past. They have sold (and still do) sell several items that are worse than these adoption contracts.

.> @troops.8276 said:

So still no better descriptor for it. I don't have one either by the way. "A bit of a scam" maybe? Nah. Unfavourable sales method? That fits better but it doesn't roll off the tongue.

@fizzypetal.7936 said:

@troops.8276 said:

@Wolfheart.7483 said:.

@"Shena Fu.5792" said:Just because it's optional doesn't mean it's okay for businesses to scam and exploit their customers. Nobody likes to be cheated, and customers have all the rights to voice their dissent.

Especially in this case when many players were willing to open their wallets, provided that they get a fair deal in return. However the only thing on the devs mind is how to squeeze as much money from loyal consumers via questionable practices.

When people throw around words like "cheat" and "scam" it is completely unwarranted and yet another example of blowing it out of proportion. There is nothing that is a cheat or scam about these. You can dislike the method of sale but do not claim it is something that it is not simply to put it in a more negative light.

What is a better descriptor for it? Do you think it entirely fair from a consumer point of view? Buy them all even though most are fluff and/or unusable or gamble on getting one you like which will statistically cost the consumer more. It is clearly designed to try and drive up sales and some would say also brings in the nastier elements of gambling. Maybe a Clever Sales technique? Does it though benefit seller and buyer equally? Scam probably is to strong a word. But that's not to say it's that far from the truth either.

I wouldn't have said it was a scam or cheat either because there isn't anything hidden in the method of sale. The buyer knows what they are getting from the outset. I know my RNG luck is terrible so I'm not going to play the game.

Those that do not yet have all the mounts those skins are for will hopefully understand that while a unique skin is guaranteed, a skin might also drop for mount they don't yet possess.

Whether or not the sale method benefits the seller or buyer - that is all about perspective. The player that got their favourite skin with the first roll of the dice would be like 'hell yeah, great system!'. For others maybe not so much. Especially if the skin you really wanted didn't pop until the 30th dice roll.

@Wolfheart.7483 said:

@troops.8276 said:

@Wolfheart.7483 said:.

@"Shena Fu.5792" said:Just because it's optional doesn't mean it's okay for businesses to scam and exploit their customers. Nobody likes to be cheated, and customers have all the rights to voice their dissent.

Especially in this case when many players were willing to open their wallets, provided that they get a fair deal in return. However the only thing on the devs mind is how to squeeze as much money from loyal consumers via questionable practices.

When people throw around words like "cheat" and "scam" it is completely unwarranted and yet another example of blowing it out of proportion. There is nothing that is a cheat or scam about these. You can dislike the method of sale but do not claim it is something that it is not simply to put it in a more negative light.

What is a better descriptor for it? Do you think it entirely fair from a consumer point of view? Buy them all even though most are fluff and/or unusable or gamble on getting one you like which will statistically cost the consumer more. It is clearly designed to try and drive up sales and some would say also brings in the nastier elements of gambling. Maybe a Clever Sales technique? Does it though benefit seller and buyer equally? Scam probably is to strong a word. But that's not to say it's that far from the truth either.

Not once have I claimed they chose the best approach. This isn't all bad or all good. It is
not
a scam or cheat. It is represented in the store as exactly what it is. You may not like what it is but if someone buys an adoption contract to unlock a random new mount skin, they know exactly what they are getting: to unlock a random new mount skin.

I
agree
with the fact that it should not be RNG and skins should be sold individually. But if you
do
purchase a random skin unlock with your heart set on a specific skin(s) and do not get what you hoped for, you were not scammed, cheated or tricked. You willingly took a chance and didn't get the outcome you hoped for.

@fizzypetal.7936 said:

@troops.8276 said:So still no better descriptor for it. I don't have one either by the way. "A bit of a scam" maybe? Nah. Unfavourable sales method? That fits better but it doesn't roll off the tongue.

@fizzypetal.7936 said:

@troops.8276 said:

@Wolfheart.7483 said:.

@"Shena Fu.5792" said:Just because it's optional doesn't mean it's okay for businesses to scam and exploit their customers. Nobody likes to be cheated, and customers have all the rights to voice their dissent.

Especially in this case when many players were willing to open their wallets, provided that they get a fair deal in return. However the only thing on the devs mind is how to squeeze as much money from loyal consumers via questionable practices.

When people throw around words like "cheat" and "scam" it is completely unwarranted and yet another example of blowing it out of proportion. There is nothing that is a cheat or scam about these. You can dislike the method of sale but do not claim it is something that it is not simply to put it in a more negative light.

What is a better descriptor for it? Do you think it entirely fair from a consumer point of view? Buy them all even though most are fluff and/or unusable or gamble on getting one you like which will statistically cost the consumer more. It is clearly designed to try and drive up sales and some would say also brings in the nastier elements of gambling. Maybe a Clever Sales technique? Does it though benefit seller and buyer equally? Scam probably is to strong a word. But that's not to say it's that far from the truth either.

I wouldn't have said it was a scam or cheat either because there isn't anything hidden in the method of sale. The buyer knows what they are getting from the outset. I know my RNG luck is terrible so I'm not going to play the game.

Those that do not yet have all the mounts those skins are for will hopefully understand that while a unique skin is guaranteed, a skin might also drop for mount they don't yet possess.

Whether or not the sale method benefits the seller or buyer - that is all about perspective. The player that got their favourite skin with the first roll of the dice would be like 'hell yeah, great system!'. For others maybe not so much. Especially if the skin you really wanted didn't pop until the 30th dice roll.

@Wolfheart.7483 said:

@troops.8276 said:

@Wolfheart.7483 said:.

@"Shena Fu.5792" said:Just because it's optional doesn't mean it's okay for businesses to scam and exploit their customers. Nobody likes to be cheated, and customers have all the rights to voice their dissent.

Especially in this case when many players were willing to open their wallets, provided that they get a fair deal in return. However the only thing on the devs mind is how to squeeze as much money from loyal consumers via questionable practices.

When people throw around words like "cheat" and "scam" it is completely unwarranted and yet another example of blowing it out of proportion. There is nothing that is a cheat or scam about these. You can dislike the method of sale but do not claim it is something that it is not simply to put it in a more negative light.

What is a better descriptor for it? Do you think it entirely fair from a consumer point of view? Buy them all even though most are fluff and/or unusable or gamble on getting one you like which will statistically cost the consumer more. It is clearly designed to try and drive up sales and some would say also brings in the nastier elements of gambling. Maybe a Clever Sales technique? Does it though benefit seller and buyer equally? Scam probably is to strong a word. But that's not to say it's that far from the truth either.

Not once have I claimed they chose the best approach. This isn't all bad or all good. It is
not
a scam or cheat. It is represented in the store as exactly what it is. You may not like what it is but if someone buys an adoption contract to unlock a random new mount skin, they know exactly what they are getting: to unlock a random new mount skin.

I
agree
with the fact that it should not be RNG and skins should be sold individually. But if you
do
purchase a random skin unlock with your heart set on a specific skin(s) and do not get what you hoped for, you were not scammed, cheated or tricked. You willingly took a chance and didn't get the outcome you hoped for.

Why does it need a label? It just is what it is...a bit of a lottery that players can choose to either participate in or not. I choose not. ;)

If you say so but that's why a asked you what the correct word was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sylv.5324 said:

@pah.4931 said:

No laws were broken, and I GUARANTEE YOU they are making more money this way. If you actually love this game, you would see that and be happy that this "manipulative" (lol) business practice is keeping the lights on. OK, so you don't get the shiny raptor you want, but maybe now you might get one more expansion before the game shutters.

Just makes it clear that there's no longer any point in investing in a game that's going so broke that it's going to shut down soon. Maybe folks should have stuck to GW1's original design, that one lasted over a decade.

GW1 may as well have been launched on a different planet. Gaming, let alone MMOs, was completely different then. Smart phones weren't even a thing. But I still can't wrap my head around people being able to 1) not buy mount skins this way if they don't like and live with it (3 months ago you didn't even have a mount!), and 2) be happy a game they like is making more money to develop more of the game they like.

I don't like lottery boxes. I think they are terrible (when using $$$ - but I try to live on a very tight budget so I can retire young and rich -- though I guess that makes me a greedy bastard???). I don't find them all that fun. I think the Skins should be able to be sold on the TP. I think it would be fun if you could earn a few lottery boxes in game doing some quests or as drops(because if I am not using my money, I do think lottery boxes are fun). I will not spend any of my money on them (cash or gold). But I support Anet's decision to attempt to create more profits without ANY negative impact on game design.

And frankly, if you like this game, you should too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Totally stupid, not gonna spend 400gems sooo hmm arould 240 gold I think for a random mounts, enough of paying for anything like a cow! I rather prefer the good old olg gw2 when everything was accessible for you apart gems, outfits and instruments! I'm not gonna spend 300 gold for a worthless griffon and not more for a mounts furthermore, a totally random one. Whether you make a clear specific mount adoption for this amount of gem whether if YOU can't, you make it accessible like the four first mount in crystal desert! More and more A "pay to get" game... Foolish with this mount adoption item, a ton people will get away from the game. NO RANDOM LOOT BOXESBTW what about these mordrem blooms? I can't even get the scarlet briar gloves and shoulder pads now from mordrem specialist! Find a solution like trading them for toxic spores!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@pah.4931 said:

And frankly, if you like this game, you should too.

Of course I like this game, that's why I'm ticked off that the reason I bought this xpac was gated behind 'gamble or pay a further $120 for a limited time to get the skin you want'. I already paid for the ultimate edition, why was this not included, if they were that desperate for cash?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since you seem hellbent on trying to assign a single word label to this for some reason, how about: unsatisfactory.

.> @troops.8276 said:

@Wolfheart.7483 said:I am not trying to censor anyone. They aren't using "more blunt and direct" words to describe the adoption contracts, they're using
incorrect
words.

@troops.8276 said:So 'unfriendly sales method' then. Honestly I think that is what people should say. I understand though why people will just use a more blunt and direct word to get the point across. Why try and censor them though?

@Wolfheart.7483 said:We are not trying to piece together our own marketing plan for something, I don't think we need a fancy descriptor with a nice ring to it. It is simply a sales method that is not as customer friendly as
some
of the things Anet has done in the past. They have sold (and still do) sell several items that are worse than these adoption contracts.

.> @troops.8276 said:

So still no better descriptor for it. I don't have one either by the way. "A bit of a scam" maybe? Nah. Unfavourable sales method? That fits better but it doesn't roll off the tongue.

@fizzypetal.7936 said:

@troops.8276 said:

@Wolfheart.7483 said:.

@"Shena Fu.5792" said:Just because it's optional doesn't mean it's okay for businesses to scam and exploit their customers. Nobody likes to be cheated, and customers have all the rights to voice their dissent.

Especially in this case when many players were willing to open their wallets, provided that they get a fair deal in return. However the only thing on the devs mind is how to squeeze as much money from loyal consumers via questionable practices.

When people throw around words like "cheat" and "scam" it is completely unwarranted and yet another example of blowing it out of proportion. There is nothing that is a cheat or scam about these. You can dislike the method of sale but do not claim it is something that it is not simply to put it in a more negative light.

What is a better descriptor for it? Do you think it entirely fair from a consumer point of view? Buy them all even though most are fluff and/or unusable or gamble on getting one you like which will statistically cost the consumer more. It is clearly designed to try and drive up sales and some would say also brings in the nastier elements of gambling. Maybe a Clever Sales technique? Does it though benefit seller and buyer equally? Scam probably is to strong a word. But that's not to say it's that far from the truth either.

I wouldn't have said it was a scam or cheat either because there isn't anything hidden in the method of sale. The buyer knows what they are getting from the outset. I know my RNG luck is terrible so I'm not going to play the game.

Those that do not yet have all the mounts those skins are for will hopefully understand that while a unique skin is guaranteed, a skin might also drop for mount they don't yet possess.

Whether or not the sale method benefits the seller or buyer - that is all about perspective. The player that got their favourite skin with the first roll of the dice would be like 'hell yeah, great system!'. For others maybe not so much. Especially if the skin you really wanted didn't pop until the 30th dice roll.

@Wolfheart.7483 said:

@troops.8276 said:

@Wolfheart.7483 said:.

@"Shena Fu.5792" said:Just because it's optional doesn't mean it's okay for businesses to scam and exploit their customers. Nobody likes to be cheated, and customers have all the rights to voice their dissent.

Especially in this case when many players were willing to open their wallets, provided that they get a fair deal in return. However the only thing on the devs mind is how to squeeze as much money from loyal consumers via questionable practices.

When people throw around words like "cheat" and "scam" it is completely unwarranted and yet another example of blowing it out of proportion. There is nothing that is a cheat or scam about these. You can dislike the method of sale but do not claim it is something that it is not simply to put it in a more negative light.

What is a better descriptor for it? Do you think it entirely fair from a consumer point of view? Buy them all even though most are fluff and/or unusable or gamble on getting one you like which will statistically cost the consumer more. It is clearly designed to try and drive up sales and some would say also brings in the nastier elements of gambling. Maybe a Clever Sales technique? Does it though benefit seller and buyer equally? Scam probably is to strong a word. But that's not to say it's that far from the truth either.

Not once have I claimed they chose the best approach. This isn't all bad or all good. It is
not
a scam or cheat. It is represented in the store as exactly what it is. You may not like what it is but if someone buys an adoption contract to unlock a random new mount skin, they know exactly what they are getting: to unlock a random new mount skin.

I
agree
with the fact that it should not be RNG and skins should be sold individually. But if you
do
purchase a random skin unlock with your heart set on a specific skin(s) and do not get what you hoped for, you were not scammed, cheated or tricked. You willingly took a chance and didn't get the outcome you hoped for.

@fizzypetal.7936 said:

@troops.8276 said:So still no better descriptor for it. I don't have one either by the way. "A bit of a scam" maybe? Nah. Unfavourable sales method? That fits better but it doesn't roll off the tongue.

@fizzypetal.7936 said:

@troops.8276 said:

@Wolfheart.7483 said:.

@"Shena Fu.5792" said:Just because it's optional doesn't mean it's okay for businesses to scam and exploit their customers. Nobody likes to be cheated, and customers have all the rights to voice their dissent.

Especially in this case when many players were willing to open their wallets, provided that they get a fair deal in return. However the only thing on the devs mind is how to squeeze as much money from loyal consumers via questionable practices.

When people throw around words like "cheat" and "scam" it is completely unwarranted and yet another example of blowing it out of proportion. There is nothing that is a cheat or scam about these. You can dislike the method of sale but do not claim it is something that it is not simply to put it in a more negative light.

What is a better descriptor for it? Do you think it entirely fair from a consumer point of view? Buy them all even though most are fluff and/or unusable or gamble on getting one you like which will statistically cost the consumer more. It is clearly designed to try and drive up sales and some would say also brings in the nastier elements of gambling. Maybe a Clever Sales technique? Does it though benefit seller and buyer equally? Scam probably is to strong a word. But that's not to say it's that far from the truth either.

I wouldn't have said it was a scam or cheat either because there isn't anything hidden in the method of sale. The buyer knows what they are getting from the outset. I know my RNG luck is terrible so I'm not going to play the game.

Those that do not yet have all the mounts those skins are for will hopefully understand that while a unique skin is guaranteed, a skin might also drop for mount they don't yet possess.

Whether or not the sale method benefits the seller or buyer - that is all about perspective. The player that got their favourite skin with the first roll of the dice would be like 'hell yeah, great system!'. For others maybe not so much. Especially if the skin you really wanted didn't pop until the 30th dice roll.

@Wolfheart.7483 said:

@troops.8276 said:

@Wolfheart.7483 said:.

@"Shena Fu.5792" said:Just because it's optional doesn't mean it's okay for businesses to scam and exploit their customers. Nobody likes to be cheated, and customers have all the rights to voice their dissent.

Especially in this case when many players were willing to open their wallets, provided that they get a fair deal in return. However the only thing on the devs mind is how to squeeze as much money from loyal consumers via questionable practices.

When people throw around words like "cheat" and "scam" it is completely unwarranted and yet another example of blowing it out of proportion. There is nothing that is a cheat or scam about these. You can dislike the method of sale but do not claim it is something that it is not simply to put it in a more negative light.

What is a better descriptor for it? Do you think it entirely fair from a consumer point of view? Buy them all even though most are fluff and/or unusable or gamble on getting one you like which will statistically cost the consumer more. It is clearly designed to try and drive up sales and some would say also brings in the nastier elements of gambling. Maybe a Clever Sales technique? Does it though benefit seller and buyer equally? Scam probably is to strong a word. But that's not to say it's that far from the truth either.

Not once have I claimed they chose the best approach. This isn't all bad or all good. It is
not
a scam or cheat. It is represented in the store as exactly what it is. You may not like what it is but if someone buys an adoption contract to unlock a random new mount skin, they know exactly what they are getting: to unlock a random new mount skin.

I
agree
with the fact that it should not be RNG and skins should be sold individually. But if you
do
purchase a random skin unlock with your heart set on a specific skin(s) and do not get what you hoped for, you were not scammed, cheated or tricked. You willingly took a chance and didn't get the outcome you hoped for.

Why does it need a label? It just is what it is...a bit of a lottery that players can choose to either participate in or not. I choose not. ;)

If you say so but that's why a asked you what the correct word was.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Rashagar.8349 said:

@wolfyrik.2017 said:

@MailMail.6534 said:I urge everyone to watch WP’s video on the issue. Logic, integrity and rationality in the midst of this embarrassingly dramatic time is needed. Shame on the gw2 community for pushing a nasty narrative against anet devs, fellow players etc.

Shame on you for your hasty generalisation of everybody who's against the Gambling mount skins as "pushing a nasty narative".

That's an act of propaganda.

Shame on you.

Overblown false outrage because you think anything less than that wouldn't get noticed and you desperately want to get your own way is also an act of propaganda.

Getting youtubers with very little personal ties to the game but a large audience to weigh in on something they know very little about is also an act of propaganda.

Bullying people in-game who disagree with your view point is also an act of propaganda.

All these things are way more shameful than the comment you quoted.

THANK YOU!

And btw, a hasty generalization it was not. Take a look at reddit or twitter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Been away from game on holiday a week and you managed to burn down your own house with a little thought through solution, Anet. Just imagine if you had dropped the adoption licenses with option to pick your skin instead of the rng... you'd have avoided 95% of the shitstorm, which is highly warranted given how you chose to implement this.I've yet to return from holiday and haven't even seen the 30 skins but the few i saw even look like hardly any change in model, and i can't fathom anyone would buy even half of them... in which case the rng element seems to conceal anothrr worrying trend; like BL chests that it is ok to reward cash gambling with "trash" items...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@pah.4931 said:But I support Anet's decision to attempt to create more profits without ANY negative impact on game design.

This right here is where you and others differ strongly. If this method actually does make the money for Anet you believe it will, what are the odds of us being able to get mounts any other way? They won't give us achievement mount skins when they can make money from the same art team effort. And face the fact, this is not a game about skill, it is a game about cosmetics, so access to those cosmetics really does impact the game design.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sylv.5324 said:

@pah.4931 said:

And frankly, if you like this game, you should too.

Of course I like this game, that's why I'm ticked off that the reason I bought this xpac was gated behind 'gamble or pay a further $120 for a limited time to get the skin you want'. I already paid for the ultimate edition, why was this not included, if they were that desperate for cash?

OK. First of all. Anet never promised Mount Skins with the expansion at all. I can't recall a single marketing device that stated mounts would even have skins. So you can't claim that first point. You bought PoF as it was advertised.

Second of all, if they indeed are "strapped for cash" then why would they include something for free in a package that you bought without them including it? You see how that's silly right? (I still feel like most of you need business lessons ... "making money" isn't enough when you have bosses and investors and boards of directors)

Now let me ask you something. Would you have bought PoF if they announced there would never be any mount skins? If you still would have, then just go ahead and pretend there aren't any mount skins. Boom. Have fun!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@pah.4931 said:

@Galactic.6453 said:

@pah.4931 said:I still find it so odd that you would quit or "never pay another dime in the game again" over this. Anet could have never even done Mount Skins at all. Two months ago, you didn't even have a mount for 5 years of the game's life. Why all of a sudden do you NEED these skins so badly? If they aren't worth it to you (I will spare you the economics lesson of supply and demand and Anet being able to set the price however they want) then just don't buy them and keep enjoying the game you blissfully enjoy in your mount skin ignorance 4 days ago...

And anyone vilifying Anet for want to make more profits, I hope to GOD you are never in a leadership position at a company where you are responsible for keeping others employed, or -- worse -- that you never own or run your own company. Yikes.

This isn't about needing to have anything. This is about wanting to be able to buy what you want to buy. No one is villifying Anet for wanting earn money. Doesn't mean people will be fine with them doing it with any means necessary. This is just a bad and manipulative business practice and calling them out for bad and manipulative business practice. It's as simple as that.

No laws were broken, and I GUARANTEE YOU they are making more money this way. If you actually love this game, you would see that and be happy that this "manipulative" (lol) business practice is keeping the lights on. OK, so you don't get the shiny raptor you want, but maybe now you might get one more expansion before the game shutters.

I don't want to go into another ROI business lesson in this thread, so suffice it to say... "making money" doesn't prevent companies from going under. They need to make "enough money" ... when budget time comes around and NCSoft has a few million to invest, it's looking more and more like that's going to be going to their mobile games which make about 400% more ROI than a huge, lunking, aging game like GW2. If I got 2 bucks to invest, why get a $.50 return when i could get a $4.25 return?? "Profitable" can still go under, guys.

(p.s. calling someone bad and manipulative is kind of the exact definition of vilifying...)

Yeah sure no laws were broken but that's completely irrelevant. No one is asking any government to shut them down.This makes more money you say, and have you thought why? Why would someone suddenly be inclined to buy more mount skins if they were in loot boxes than if they were sold outright? It's the same product inside. They aren't selling more because their product is better. What a mystery! Is it because, oh gosh, the mechanisms of a lootbox system flicks the right switches in people's brains to make them spend more and on things they would have not bought? And look, there's a word for controlling people for your own gain, it's manipulation.

Here's what the mount RNG does

  • wager and chance triggers the human dopamine system
  • it's possible to sell less valuable goods along with valuable goods
  • people who only want some skins will inevitably end up buying some they would not have bought
  • while the chance of not getting a specific skin until the end is low, it is still very much possible and people will be thinking of that.
  • this is where the limited thirty pack bundle comes in. Limited = scarcity = encourages impulse purchases. It is also cheaper than buying the whole thing, so people who're afraid of the worst case RNG are convinced into buying more than they need.
  • at the same time, they offer the 2000 gems Warhound, which makes the RNG ticket look cheap, while at the same time the RNG ticket makes the Warhound look more appealing because it's direct purchase even for its extreme price.

All of this is manipulation, there's no ways around it. And don't pretend they never thought of all that. It'd take an especially dense person to not know what's going on in the game industry, not know what their job as marketer entails and not know what they're even selling, and for it to also go through multiple instances of equally dense people who don't notice. On another note, why do you think they had gemstore sales so shortly after PoF preorders? Could it be that they wanted people to spend their preorder gems on as many impulse purchases as possible? Nah that can't be, no marketer would be smart enough to think of that, right?

And your point about profit is completely beside the point. That it's only about the numbers game to the companies is exactly why people don't like lootboxes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@pah.4931 said:

@Sylv.5324 said:

@pah.4931 said:

And frankly, if you like this game, you should too.

Of course I like this game, that's why I'm ticked off that the reason I bought this xpac was gated behind 'gamble or pay a further $120 for a limited time to get the skin you want'. I already paid for the ultimate edition, why was this not included, if they were that desperate for cash?

OK. First of all. Anet never promised Mount Skins with the expansion at all. I can't recall a single marketing device that stated mounts would even have skins. So you can't claim that first point. You bought PoF as it was advertised.

Second of all, if they indeed are "strapped for cash" then why would they include something for free in a package that you bought without them including it? You see how that's silly right? (I still feel like most of you need business lessons ... "making money" isn't enough when you have bosses and investors and boards of directors)

Now let me ask you something. Would you have bought PoF if they announced there would never be any mount skins? If you still would have, then just go ahead and pretend there aren't any mount skins. Boom. Have fun!

Responses like yours are pretty much cementing my resolve never to spend a dime on ANet again, because they have enabled and encouraged this disingenuousness and condescension. Thanks for saving me money!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Erulogos.2591 said:

@pah.4931 said:But I support Anet's decision to attempt to create more profits without ANY negative impact on game design.

This right here is where you and others differ strongly. If this method actually does make the money for Anet you believe it will, what are the odds of us being able to get mounts any other way? They won't give us achievement mount skins when they can make money from the same art team effort. And face the fact, this is not a game about skill, it is a game about cosmetics, so access to those cosmetics really does impact the game design.

Hmm. I would say since there currently is a skin for sale for 2000 gems without any RNG, that kinda kills your argument that "we won't be able to get mount SKINS any other way" ... right??

This is not a game about skill or cosmetics. It's a game about fun. If you have fun playing it, then you'll be glad that folks buying loot boxes might get you another expansion or two. If you don't have fun playing it, then why are you playing it. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@pah.4931 said:

@Galactic.6453 said:

@pah.4931 said:I still find it so odd that you would quit or "never pay another dime in the game again" over this. Anet could have never even done Mount Skins at all. Two months ago, you didn't even have a mount for 5 years of the game's life. Why all of a sudden do you NEED these skins so badly? If they aren't worth it to you (I will spare you the economics lesson of supply and demand and Anet being able to set the price however they want) then just don't buy them and keep enjoying the game you blissfully enjoy in your mount skin ignorance 4 days ago...

And anyone vilifying Anet for want to make more profits, I hope to GOD you are never in a leadership position at a company where you are responsible for keeping others employed, or -- worse -- that you never own or run your own company. Yikes.

This isn't about needing to have anything. This is about wanting to be able to buy what you want to buy. No one is villifying Anet for wanting earn money. Doesn't mean people will be fine with them doing it with any means necessary. This is just a bad and manipulative business practice and calling them out for bad and manipulative business practice. It's as simple as that.

No laws were broken, and I GUARANTEE YOU they are making more money this way. If you actually love this game, you would see that and be happy that this "manipulative" (lol) business practice is keeping the lights on. OK, so you don't get the shiny raptor you want, but maybe now you might get one more expansion before the game shutters.

I don't want to go into another ROI business lesson in this thread, so suffice it to say... "making money" doesn't prevent companies from going under. They need to make "enough money" ... when budget time comes around and NCSoft has a few million to invest, it's looking more and more like that's going to be going to their mobile games which make about 400% more ROI than a huge, lunking, aging game like GW2. If I got 2 bucks to invest, why get a $.50 return when i could get a $4.25 return?? "Profitable" can still go under, guys.

(p.s. calling someone bad and manipulative is kind of the exact definition of vilifying...)

That all most sounds like emotional blackmail.Do you honestly think investing more heavily in the cash shop (by us and Anet) will make a meaningfull dent in the much larger and primarily korean mobile gaming market to make investment in Anet seem more appealing?Can you back up your doom and gloom projection for GW2's financial future?The 3Q financial report doesn't seem to show any signs of Anet going under anytime soon.Do you believe that profit margins in a competitive market and business ethics are mutually exclusive?And why do you take the stance that anyone that doesn't agree with you has no experience in either the corporate world and/or running a successful business when some of us do? (I assume I'm not the only one)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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