Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Official Mount Adoption Feedback Thread [merged]


Recommended Posts

.> @GreyWolf.8670 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.

If the skin distribution is weighted and it doesn't say that on the store then it is absolutely a scam.

So it's ok to call it a scam based on something you have absolutely no evidence of? Seems reasonable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Wolfheart.7483 said:MO has posted regarding the adoption license:https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/15523/a-message-about-the-mount-adoption-license#latest

So he acknowledges missteps but doesn't sound sorry, and nothing's going to change. Wow. And then there's "... our next planned mount skin releases will focus on individual sales like the Reforged Warhound and bundles like the Spooky Mounts Pack." Does that mean the only way to get a skin will either be one overprice skin at a time or you have to buy a bundle? Color me SUPER DISAPPOINTED.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So he acknowledges missteps but doesn't sound sorry, and nothing's going to change. Wow. And then there's "... our next planned mount skin releases will focus on individual sales like the Reforged Warhound and bundles like the Spooky Mounts Pack." Does that mean the only way to get a skin will either be one overprice skin at a time or you have to buy a bundle? Color me SUPER DISAPPOINTED.

You just said nothing will change, and then you state what will change (they will not do it this way again and they will not add anymore skins to the adoption license system) and say you are disappointed. Which is is? Pretty much everyone who was against this said he would pay more if it was not RNG, or that he wants bundles like the halloween bundle. Mike said they will be doing exactly that in the future, and now this is once again not ok?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Shikigami.4013 said:

@Wolfheart.7483 said:MO has posted regarding the adoption license:

So he acknowledges missteps but doesn't sound sorry, and nothing's going to change. Wow. And then there's "... our next planned mount skin releases will focus on individual sales like the Reforged Warhound and bundles like the Spooky Mounts Pack." Does that mean the only way to get a skin will either be one overprice skin at a time or you have to buy a bundle? Color me SUPER DISAPPOINTED.

You just said nothing will change, and then you state what will change (they will not do it this way again and they will not add anymore skins to the adoption license system) and say you are disappointed. Which is is? Pretty much everyone who was against this said he would pay more if it was not RNG, or that he wants bundles like the halloween bundle. Mike said they will be doing exactly that in the future, and now this is once again not ok?

I meant nothing is changing in the present set; i.e. no individual skins for sale from the current batch of thirty, already bought skins that are unwanted or unuseable will not be sell-able on the Trading Post. That's what I wanted most, so yes, I am disappointed. I don't know -- none of us do -- if by future individual sales he means they'll be 2000 gems each or not. I did buy the Halloween Spooky pack and like it, but if future bundles don't contain ALL skins that I like, I won't buy those. Does that satisfy you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Shikigami.4013 said:

@Wolfheart.7483 said:MO has posted regarding the adoption license:

So he acknowledges missteps but doesn't sound sorry, and nothing's going to change. Wow. And then there's "... our next planned mount skin releases will focus on individual sales like the Reforged Warhound and bundles like the Spooky Mounts Pack." Does that mean the only way to get a skin will either be one overprice skin at a time or you have to buy a bundle? Color me SUPER DISAPPOINTED.

You just said nothing will change, and then you state what will change (they will not do it this way again and they will not add anymore skins to the adoption license system) and say you are disappointed. Which is is? Pretty much everyone who was against this said he would pay more if it was not RNG, or that he wants bundles like the halloween bundle. Mike said they will be doing exactly that in the future, and now this is once again not ok?

The mount adoption license format isn't being changed, it's not being removed, it's not being altered. It just may not reappear.Obviously OP would like to be able to pick the specific skin for a reasonable price. Or at least that's my interpretation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They couldn't really change the loot ticket system for the current set of 30 skins, it wouldn't be fair to the people who already got the skins they wanted (aside from doing a full cash refund to everyone who bought gems to use on skins, which would probably be infeasable). It's a bit of a disappointment but at least they aren't continuing the system in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've had some time now to think about what happened. Why things blew out of proportion they did, what could've been done better and what can still be done for damage control. Mind you, this will be a little lengthy analysis coupled with some constructive feedback. So here goes:

What would have been the perfect way to introduce the mount skins

This train is gone. This is just "what if we could turn back time and do things differently".

First of all I want to congratulate ANet to the Halloween Skin-Pack. That one was good. It was reasonably priced at the upper end of what people were comfortable with spending on what was basically a 5-pack of seasonal re-skins with some particle effects tacked on top. I can't even blame ANet for only selling them as a package. Sure, many people would've only bought the Jackal or Raptor skin if they had the choice, but this way at least you didn't feel cheated. Even though you did fork over more gems than you would have just for the Raptor or Jackal.

Continuing this trend the best way to introduce the skins would've been releasing a package of 5 every week until Wintersday hits. ANet could've started with the less impressive ones and released the shiny skins later. That way many people would've surely bought multiple sets. I realize that this is also a kinda shady trick to make people buy more, but I can guarantee that the outrage and bad publicity would've simply not existed. Those of us blessed with strong self-control and the far-sight to see past the trick would've waited until a skin appears that we like while those compulsive buyers would've still double and triple bought sets. The major difference is: They would've happily bought them.

I'm not going to completely condemn the idea of RNG-boxes either. Christmas is usually the time of the year when our wallets sit pretty loose. Either because we are looking for presents for someone else, or because we want to blow all the cash we got for Christmas. If ANet had introduced them around Christmas with a red ribbon around them, people would've celebrated these boxes! The fact that you can't unlock a skin that you already have and the affordable price makes them the perfect present. That is as long as you have a non-RNG alternative to unlock these skins.

This leaves us with one last sad puppy. Let's face it: No matter how much work went into that skin and how proud the designer who made this is of this skin, it just isn't worth 2000 gems for most of us. It's cool that it's a complete re-model, but at the same time you got to admit that it looks kinda ugly. Ok, that's subjective, but I'm sure I'm not alone with this opinion. A lower price would've really helped here.

What led to the disastrous decision to release the skins the way they were released

This is making educated guesses at best and purely speculative at worst.

I'm not going to rule out the possibility that this whole mess is just a tragic accident. The possibility is still there that ANet just so happened to complete 30 mount skins at once and just didn't want to keep us waiting. And to make sure we all run around with different skins, because who doesn't like a little variety, they introduced these randomized tickets. The tickets would even make sure the less used mounts see some love, because who doesn't want to show off their new awesome skin, even if they only bought a single ticket, right?

If you still have a shred of respect and/or trust for ANet left, just pretend the above is what happened and it's all a big misunderstanding. Just stop reading at this point, because what I'm about to point out is going to be dark.

Taking a look at outfits and glider skins we can see that most of them are being sold directly in the gem shop. Besides the regular item rotations, which are supposed to trigger a buying impulse from indecisive players, there are no tricks applied. Ok, some items are deliberately priced so you have some gems left over after a purchase to make subsequent purchases more likely. To put those remaining gems to good use. And while those tricks are designed to grab some money, they still left us smiling. It was easy to tell our selves that we're not affected. That we've seen through the trick like any rational person would.

But then something changed. Someone made the conscious decision to not put the skins in the gem store directly. Someone proposed RNG-boxes. And on first sight this makes sense: RNG-boxes are proven to generate more revenue than just selling the desired item directly. People who want a specific item will just keep rolling the dice until they either hit their personal limit or get the desired item. Even if this personal limit is far above what they would've perceived as a fair price for that item.

This was the initial trick, but the second follows quick. How do you make a person raise their personal limit way beyond what they'd usually spend on a game in a single month? The key-word here is Sunk-Cost Fallacy. The fact that you can't get duplicates means that every skin you get brings you a step closer to the desired skin. A person who has already spent 2000 gems on RNG will likely not stop there, because now the skin seems closer than ever before. Sunk-Cost Fallacy is something even the greatest minds with the best self-control tend to succumb to. Companies went bankrupt over this and wars have been fought because once a soldier's life is lost, it's impossible to withdraw the troops. Once that trap of Sunk-Cost Fallacy has sprung, there is no going back, even if it means starving until the next paycheck.

Which brings me to the third trap in this perfidious patch. I'm talking about the 1 week limited discount. Any person who wants a specific skin or a batch of skins has eyed that package at least once. How easy it would be to just circumvent all that randomness and get what you want while saving a bunch of gems over what we would have to pay buying the skins license by license. This item is limited to 1 week for the same reason that other items leave the gem shop on a regular basis. To create a sense of urgency. To make us stop thinking. To remove any shackles we might've placed on the impulsive buyer within us. And while having a guaranteed way to unlock our desired skins seems like a contradiction to the whole RNG trick, in reality it's just another package that cashes in on Sunk-Cost Fallacy. It plays with our fear of sinking a huge amount of gems into the licenses without getting our desired skins.

And then, in a silent corner of the gem shop, sits the fourth trap. The 2000 gems jackal skin. It's no coincidence that this skin appeared at the same time as the RNG-license. What we're seeing here is the applied use of the Anchoring Effect. The price of a single skin is being anchored at 2000 gems. Getting cool skins at 400, 800 or even 1200 gems (considering the bland ones losses) seems like a rip-off in comparison. The only reason this skin appeared at the same time as the RNG license and is set at such a high price is to make the license look cheap. It's the concept of an item being 20% off even though it's the first time it ever hit the shelves, just on a bigger scale.

Looking at all these carefully crafted traps, I just can't think of an accident anymore. This was planned big scale. Remains the question: Did ANet predict this amount of player backlash? I'm pretty sure ANet predicted at least some amount of player backlash. It's not the first time players are complaining about items that are only obtainable via RNG. Also, 2017 being the year of the loot-box, other companies had player backlashes for similar practices pretty recently. And if ANet didn't predict this magnitude of a backlash, then that only shows how disconnected ANet is with it's player base. GW2 has been known and perceived as a consumer friendly game. Many people here have switched games because their previous games have pulled similar stunts. Couple this with the hype for mount skins and the content drought after an expansion and you have a highly explosive mixture. Under these circumstances mount skins could only be a big success or a big disaster. Most of us knew it was going to be a big disaster the moment we saw the gem shop. This means ANet, who should have at least the same amount of insight as your average player, should've known about the impeding disaster well before the patch.

So what made ANet roll out this patch anyways? My guess is that ANet tried to cash in on the currently bloated player population. Predating PoF was a big marketing campaign led by Fans on basically all social networks and media. At this moment ANet was sitting on a huge amount of new or returning players and statistically only a fraction of those would stay and become long term players. Most of them would become bored of the game before ever spending on the gem shop. So the idea was to cash in on those players as long as they're still here. The player backlash was a calculated downside. Now that the big cow has been milked, let's look to the future.

What can be done for damage control

ANet probably already has plans for this, so this is basically a sneak-peek.

For the long term ANet can't afford to loose too many players. Long term players, who are important to keep the game interesting, are hard to come by after all. So the first step will basically be to do what players demand. In the near future we will see some way to unlock the skins we're looking for without RNG. Most likely it will be in packages with 1 skin for each mount. It's entirely possible we will have more than 30 mount skins when that happens, because ANet adds the missing ones for each set (for example a fiery Skimmer). The packs will be priced at around 1600 gems for the bland ones and up to 3000 gems for the more fancy sets. This patch will be followed by a public announcement along the lines of: "We heard your feedback and your concerns and this is what we came up with to make everyone happy." Been there, done that. It's nothing new for ANet.

I might sound negative here, but look at it from this angle: Even if all of this was just part of an extremely disgusting greater plan, in the end we will get exactly what we've asked for. Directly purchasable skins without RNG. Just... don't get your trust up too much when the damage control comes. The next faux pas is sure to come once everything has settled and the incident is almost forgotten. Probably next summer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@atomy.3817 said:They couldn't really change the loot ticket system for the current set of 30 skins, it wouldn't be fair to the people who already got the skins they wanted (aside from doing a full cash refund to everyone who bought gems to use on skins, which would probably be infeasable). It's a bit of a disappointment but at least they aren't continuing the system in the future.

Exactly, I can understand them not changing this one even if I personally want it to change because people have already bought it. The paperwork and legal matters involved is a major deterrent to change the current system. I am just glad MO promised to not do it again, and they will have more singles and bundles instead which is what we were asking for.

Is it a shame I won't be getting any of the ones in the 30 pack? Sure. I can get over that though if it means the lootboxes will not be coming back to plague us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's rather easy to just create an npc or something where players could return their unwanted skins for 400 gems and do with their returned gems as they please. Yeah I know you can't convert the gems back into actual money but let's be real they're going to spend them anyway. If they were going to spend them on rng they'll spend them on guaranteed goods as well. So the whole thing about it wouldn't be fair to the people who bought them already is a lame excuse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Gaile Gray.6029" said:Please see Mike O'Brien's comments on this subject here.

Thank you very much for your effort!

I appreciate that MO himself made a statement, and while I still think the adoption license system is not the most rewarding way to pay for mount skins due to the rng, i can understand the decision to not change it now.I also appreciate the announcement that the coming mount skins will not be affected by rng. Looking forward to spend my money on those :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something tells me this fiasco would have been avoided had they actually let you CHOOSE what skin you wanted instead of making it random. At least that way people would be able to get the skins they want without having to gamble to get them. And to be blunt, there's no reason why they couldn't make an adjustment to the current license system instead of waiting to the next set of skins since each skin has a set value since there is no chance to get a duplicate with the system each skin has a set value. If you want all 30 skins, you buy the license 30 times. So nobody could rightfully complain about getting rid of the RNG type system since no value would technically be lost if someone now has the ability to selectively choose what skin they want out of the system due to the fact that people who spent more than they planned still have skins that have the same price attached to them as all the other skins (Unlike CS:GO, H1Z1, and numerous other games that have actual gambling style lockboxes that can have duplicate drops)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off -- I love the idea of mount skins:

  • It promotes ways to customize a player mount like outfits do for the player character
  • It enables a way for Anet to get funding for the game we love via gem sales

From what MO posted, I see that the 30 mount license was kind of a new thing for Anet to try and that they are no longer going to pursue that model -- What I do not understand is how an individual mount costs 2000 gems. Anet -- can you help me understand what went into the 2000 gem price? Does it really take 2000 gems worth of work while outfits only take 700(ish) gems?

The price is super steep relative to items that I would identify as being in the same boat, but only costing 700 - 800 gems (outfits).

P.S. The Reforged Warhound is cool AF!!!!! But why 2000 gems?!?!?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Wolfheart.7483 said:.> @GreyWolf.8670 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.

If the skin distribution is weighted and it doesn't say that on the store then it is absolutely a scam.

So it's ok to call it a scam based on something you have absolutely no evidence of? Seems reasonable.

If you want to counter what I suggested the burden is on you to show that it is fair, which you also cannot do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Witch of Doom.5739" said:I meant nothing is changing in the present set; i.e. no individual skins for sale from the current batch of thirty, already bought skins that are unwanted or unuseable will not be sell-able on the Trading Post. That's what I wanted most, so yes, I am disappointed. I don't know -- none of us do -- if by future individual sales he means they'll be 2000 gems each or not. I did buy the Halloween Spooky pack and like it, but if future bundles don't contain ALL skins that I like, I won't buy those. Does that satisfy you?

Was that a rhetorical question? I am not sure what you would need to post to "satisfy" me. All I said is that they listened to the community feedback and won't do it again, which is good. Changing the mechanics of the current skin sale is obviously a no-go because this would cause another huge ruckus from those people who already gave in and bought the skins although they disliked the system, despite having chosen to do so themselves. It would basically be "Shitstorm 2.0" and cause Arenanet a ton of work with a massive amount of support tickets when they offer choosable skins for a higher price while offering to reimburse people who already bought skins. It would also be very unfair because only those who got undesired skins would have them exchanged, while people who by luck got skins they wanted would keep them and have an advantage. For example there was a stream on twitch by Aurora_Peachy where she freaked out over ONE SPECIFIC skin which she totally liked, bought ONE LICENSE and then by chance got exactly that skin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@atomy.3817 said:They couldn't really change the loot ticket system for the current set of 30 skins, it wouldn't be fair to the people who already got the skins they wanted (aside from doing a full cash refund to everyone who bought gems to use on skins, which would probably be infeasable). It's a bit of a disappointment but at least they aren't continuing the system in the future.

Notice, that Mo didn't actually say they are abandoning that system. He only said that the next already planned releases will not be rng-pack-like. What happens after then? Who knows?

@"Doctor Hide.6345" said:Exactly, I can understand them not changing this one even if I personally want it to change because people have already bought it. The paperwork and legal matters involved is a major deterrent to change the current system.

They've already done that once (after they've released a flae-themed reskin of a human cultural armor in a gemshop and forums exploded), and compared to this one, that was a much smaller protest.

All in all, MO's response (and Anet's reaction) seems to be just pure damage control without actually addressing the problem at all.

"yes, you've caught us red-handed, so we'll not do that again... for a while anyway"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@atomy.3817 said:They couldn't really change the loot ticket system for the current set of 30 skins, it wouldn't be fair to the people who already got the skins they wanted (aside from doing a full cash refund to everyone who bought gems to use on skins, which would probably be infeasable). It's a bit of a disappointment but at least they aren't continuing the system in the future.

Notice, that Mo didn't actually say they are abandoning that system. He only said that the next already planned releases will not be rng-pack-like. What happens after then? Who knows?

So if something like this happens again we know how to act, don't we? But until this happens, if ever, there is no reason to be overdramatic as our concerns has been adressed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Astralporing.1957 said:Notice, that Mo didn't actually say they are abandoning that system. He only said that the next already planned releases will not be rng-pack-like. What happens after then? Who knows?

I'm sure it wont be the last we hear of RNG on Gem Store. It has always been there. We had different kinds of RNG lootboxes throughout the years. Not to mention the Black Lion Chest having special account bound skins that change every x amount of time. Somehow just because it includes mounts now it became a more touchy subject.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Kheldorn.5123 said:

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@atomy.3817 said:They couldn't really change the loot ticket system for the current set of 30 skins, it wouldn't be fair to the people who already got the skins they wanted (aside from doing a full cash refund to everyone who bought gems to use on skins, which would probably be infeasable). It's a bit of a disappointment but at least they aren't continuing the system in the future.

Notice, that Mo didn't actually say they are abandoning that system. He only said that the next already planned releases will not be rng-pack-like. What happens after then? Who knows?

So if something like this happens again we know how to act, don't we? But until this happens, if ever, there is no reason to be overdramatic as our concerns has been adressed.

With praise and rejoicing that multiple different purchase preferences are still being catered to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@GreyWolf.8670 said:

@Wolfheart.7483 said:.> @GreyWolf.8670 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.

If the skin distribution is weighted and it doesn't say that on the store then it is absolutely a scam.

So it's ok to call it a scam based on something you have absolutely no evidence of? Seems reasonable.

If you want to counter what I suggested the burden is on you to show that it is fair, which you also cannot do.

Not true at all. People calling it a scam are the ones making an accusation and the burden of proof lies with them. For everything we know, each skin has an equal chance to drop. So the mount adoption contract that guarantees you unlock a mount skin is giving you exactly what it says.

Something not being fair is a matter of opinion for something like this. But just because you don't see something as fair does not immediately make it a scam or a cheat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Kheldorn.5123 said:

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@atomy.3817 said:They couldn't really change the loot ticket system for the current set of 30 skins, it wouldn't be fair to the people who already got the skins they wanted (aside from doing a full cash refund to everyone who bought gems to use on skins, which would probably be infeasable). It's a bit of a disappointment but at least they aren't continuing the system in the future.

Notice, that Mo didn't actually say they are abandoning that system. He only said that the next already planned releases will not be rng-pack-like. What happens after then? Who knows?

So if something like this happens again we know how to act, don't we? But until this happens, if ever, there is no reason to be overdramatic as our concerns has been adressed.

Yeah, we know how to act. Make a big protest, wait for MO's response, then calm down again. Until it happens again. And again. And again. Except, of course, that accomplishes exactly nothing.

Seriously, there's nothing in MO's post showing they feel they are at fault or that they intend to change anything in the long run. The only thing they seem to be sorry about is that they've been called on their behaviour.

So, no, contrary to what you may think, our concerns haven't been addressed in the slightest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@Kheldorn.5123 said:

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@atomy.3817 said:They couldn't really change the loot ticket system for the current set of 30 skins, it wouldn't be fair to the people who already got the skins they wanted (aside from doing a full cash refund to everyone who bought gems to use on skins, which would probably be infeasable). It's a bit of a disappointment but at least they aren't continuing the system in the future.

Notice, that Mo didn't actually say they are abandoning that system. He only said that the next already planned releases will not be rng-pack-like. What happens after then? Who knows?

So if something like this happens again we know how to act, don't we? But until this happens, if ever, there is no reason to be overdramatic as our concerns has been adressed.

Yeah, we know how to act. Make a big protest, wait for MO's response, then calm down again. Until it happens again. And again. And again. Except, of course, that accomplishes exactly nothing.

Seriously, there's nothing in MO's post showing they feel they are at fault or that they intend to change anything in the long run. The only thing they seem to be sorry about is that they've been called on their behaviour.

So, no, contrary to what you may think, our concerns haven't been addressed in the slightest.

This is PR edited message that goes not only to players but also to shareholders. They can't just come here and say "yo we f-ed up, take your moeh back". Technically, they did nothing wrong. It's all legal (currently) and RNG nature of mount adoption is very clear. They agreed people don't like and gonna change it for the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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