kharmin.7683

That's more of a work-around than an actual fix. Point being, there should need to be a fix. Freezing the zoom angle should be an existing option.

How do they exclude players?

I have yet to see anyone advocating for this change detailing at what point the price limit should be set.

Topic has been brought up several times. Forums search function is really helpful in that regard.

Why would we need heroes? It's an MMO. Ok Heroes was a bad comparison. It would be an alternate character you are able to swap to at a push of a button, with its own stats, race, weapons, armor, etc. your main character takes a bench, and you control the alt character.Kinda like the existing template system, to a degree?

No big deal to you, perhaps, but I can imagine a lot of players complaining about not having their Tengu able to be represented by past content.

Since nothing in them is required to play the game, there is no compelling reason for anyone to have to purchase them. They become completely optional.

Why would we need heroes? It's an MMO.

Personally, I find the entire thing silly. Items in the BLC are not required to play the game. So Anet survival depends on lootboxes?I have written a contribution like this somewhere else here ... sarcastically. But if anet really depends on lootboxes it would be really sad. And it's really sad that you guys are supporting this in my opinion.Where did I even say that? I said that "BLK are perhaps one of the larger income streams". Only their internal financials can tell the true story of how much impact BLK have. It's a non-sub based game; they have to get their money from somewhere and looking at the consistent gold -> gems conversion ratio, people haven't really been buying gems with cash.

Personally, I find the entire thing silly. Items in the BLC are not required to play the game.

/endthread

Remind yourself, there is no gem store based gear progression in this game. Exotic is plenty for open PvE. Ascended IS needed for upper-tier Fractals and easy to craft. Legendary gear is more decorative (in some cases) but primarily only offers stat swapping at no cost and is earned by participating in top tier content and investing time after you have the personal skill. Like any good RPG, you earn it by playing the game, not putting down $$$. You can obtain all of that stuff with gem->gold purchases, and save lots of time.You could in theory, pay for 800 gems, convert to gold, and pay for a team to complete your T4 daily fractals. It could easily be more efficient than actually playing the game. OK ... But none of those things indicates the game is expensive. Whether you can get something with in-game or RL currency is irrelevant to how you can progress; the paths are the same and benefit players ability to make choices based on their RL circumstatnces ... but that's a different thread. You know, I've had some time to think about it .. it's pretty weird that you have a big problem with how the game business structure exists because of how financially irresponsible addicts would spend money in it, making it 'expensive' for them ... but you have absolutely no problem with a subscription-based business model that makes the game expensive to a much wider, more responsible segment of players. Sounds like you have an agenda for change ... based on an invalid argument of reducing overall game expense to players. Don't worry, we will point these little discrepancies out as they are made. I find that most of these types of threads are veiled attempts to get support to change GW2 to a subscription model so that the players get everything for their monthly fee, not understanding that it would be cheaper in the long run to preserve the model that is currently in place. /smh Are you trying to infer that Guild Wars 2 would not do well under a subscription model and wouldn't have the potential to fund a greater amount of content if the game was worthy of the price to players?I am not an expert in this field and I doubt that anyone else in this thread is either. Anet has decided upon the existing model using metrics and information that none of us have. Also, who determines what is a "worthy" price? I play GW2 because there is no subscription fee. That is a worthy price to me.Are you also happy to avoid the topic of how a gemstore looks to casual gamers looking to play?I don't understand how you believe that I am avoiding anything related to the gemstore. I am probably the epitome of a GW2 casual player. The gemstore looks fine to me as it contains NOTHING that I need to play GW2 or progress in the game. I can choose to purchase cosmetics or other QoL items as I see fit. This allows me to spend what I want when I want to spend it. @Obtena.7952 said: Remind yourself, there is no gem store based gear progression in this game. Exotic is plenty for open PvE. Ascended IS needed for upper-tier Fractals and easy to craft. Legendary gear is more decorative (in some cases) but primarily only offers stat swapping at no cost and is earned by participating in top tier content and investing time after you have the personal skill. Like any good RPG, you earn it by playing the game, not putting down $$$. You can obtain all of that stuff with gem->gold purchases, and save lots of time.You could in theory, pay for 800 gems, convert to gold, and pay for a team to complete your T4 daily fractals. It could easily be more efficient than actually playing the game. OK ... But none of those things indicates the game is expensive. Whether you can get something with in-game or RL currency is irrelevant to how you can progress; the paths are the same and benefit players ability to make choices based on their RL circumstatnces ... but that's a different thread. You know, I've had some time to think about it .. it's pretty weird that you have a big problem with how the game business structure exists because of how financially irresponsible addicts would spend money in it, making it 'expensive' for them ... but you have absolutely no problem with a subscription-based business model that makes the game expensive to a much wider, more responsible segment of players. Sounds like you have an agenda for change ... based on an invalid argument of reducing overall game expense to players. Don't worry, we will point these little discrepancies out as they are made. I find that most of these types of threads are veiled attempts to get support to change GW2 to a subscription model so that the players get everything for their monthly fee, not understanding that it would be cheaper in the long run to preserve the model that is currently in place. /smh Are you trying to infer that Guild Wars 2 would not do well under a subscription model and wouldn't have the potential to fund a greater amount of content if the game was worthy of the price to players? It might do better, but that's a moot point as it's completely speculative and likely not worth the risk to player retention for Anet to try to implement it anyways. Actually, personally would be thrilled to explore this topic because as a Casual gamer, I'm MORE willing to spend my leisure money on individual items from a store that I can CHOOSE based on how I find value in those items as opposed to being constantly pinged with a constant monthly sub where the value of my TIME is variable from month to month. In fact, I find I spend MORE money with this GS model because I get more value from buying things I want as opposed to paying constant access to a service I might not be able to use consistently. Exactly my point, Obtena.

The idea of playable tengu has been discussed a LOT lately on the forum. A search on the term would have found other threads on this topic.

Remind yourself, there is no gem store based gear progression in this game. Exotic is plenty for open PvE. Ascended IS needed for upper-tier Fractals and easy to craft. Legendary gear is more decorative (in some cases) but primarily only offers stat swapping at no cost and is earned by participating in top tier content and investing time after you have the personal skill. Like any good RPG, you earn it by playing the game, not putting down $$$. You can obtain all of that stuff with gem->gold purchases, and save lots of time.You could in theory, pay for 800 gems, convert to gold, and pay for a team to complete your T4 daily fractals. It could easily be more efficient than actually playing the game. OK ... But none of those things indicates the game is expensive. Whether you can get something with in-game or RL currency is irrelevant to how you can progress; the paths are the same and benefit players ability to make choices based on their RL circumstatnces ... but that's a different thread. You know, I've had some time to think about it .. it's pretty weird that you have a big problem with how the game business structure exists because of how financially irresponsible addicts would spend money in it, making it 'expensive' for them ... but you have absolutely no problem with a subscription-based business model that makes the game expensive to a much wider, more responsible segment of players. Sounds like you have an agenda for change ... based on an invalid argument of reducing overall game expense to players. Don't worry, we will point these little discrepancies out as they are made. I find that most of these types of threads are veiled attempts to get support to change GW2 to a subscription model so that the players get everything for their monthly fee, not understanding that it would be cheaper in the long run to preserve the model that is currently in place. /smh

Are RSS feeds still a thing? I thought that they died out with the introduction of Twitter/Facebook

Respectfully, I disagree. But, I've been down this path before on previous threads so I'll just leave it at that.

If a shop does something one of the customers doesn't like, it's that customer's problem. If a shop does something a large part of its customers do not like, it's the shop's problem. That's the cost of doing business. In the long run, cutting them off will be cheaper than attorneys trying to differentiate from "truly predatory" and "but I don't like it". But do let's keep it in context with what happened in Belgium. The boxes that were originally posted about here give a random mount skin that you don't already own. So you're guaranteed a new skin, even if it's not the one you want. If one truly doesn't like that option, such as me, for example, who's never bought one, and never will, then they had the option to talk with their wallet, and simply not buy it. Now that option has been removed, Belgium stepped in and said "Our citizens cannot control their spending, so we're going to pass a law that forces them to do so". This is what the argument always hinges on; "but they may have a "gambling" problem" or "but little Jonny got mom's credit card and went nuts". The former is a problem that needs to be dealt with in the home, or with the family of the afflicted. The latter? None of the cases of this that have been provided in this discussion across the years ever explained how little Jonny gained access to that card, but it's a fairly safe bet that he got it because his mom gave it to him, but didn't think to limit what he could do with it. In either instance, the end result is the government stepping in to deal with a citizen's private life. Not something I want in my life, I have enough government interaction as it is. However, since it's so much easier to say "It's someone else's fault", this is what we get. There is no gaming company that should have to foot the bill for someone else's personal problems, whether that's "gambling", or an inability to monitor what their children are doing. So if their government wants to pass a law forbidding the sale within their borders, the business should stop selling it within their borders. Win/Win. The people complaining got what they wanted, loot boxes removed, and the government got what they wanted, their citizens can no longer legally purchase them. The only thing missing, in so far as I can tell, is that if their government catches them using a VPN to make these purchases anyway, they should arrest the player for violating their law. This. The law in questions is essentially a statement by the Belgian government that they think their citizens are all children incapable of making decisions for themselves.No, that's not it at all. What happened is, the Belgian Gaming Commission brought a case before court claiming that the systems used in loot boxes fall under the same already existing laws that govern online gambling. The court ruled in their favor, resulting in the legal position that gaming companies were running online gambling without the required license. This has nothing to do with government interference. It's simply about illegal business practices. Or, it's about getting the license fees and taxes. These things are always about the money. Turns out exploiting diseased and children cost money to society and the responsible should at the very least pay their part.Who is responsible?

These things are always about the money. Completely agree

Well, at least one person didn't consider Primordus it would seem

My guess is that ANet is really trying to gin up interest.

Not for me, thanks. I would avoid areas/zones during times of this type of weather. I'd imagine many other players might, too. Not sure that is what Anet would like to have happen.

Or a hurricane that comes off of the sea and wipes LA clean.