Rashagar.8349

Every person that buys into this is yet another reason for ANet to not only keep it, but do it again. This is bad for the playerbase. Hurting the playerbase hurts the game in the long run. There's a saying I've loved from the first time I read it. "No single raindrop believes it is to blame for the flood." Everyone that buys into this is in part responsible for it. It also means that they don't care all that much about the impact of their choices on other players, or they simply don't have the best judgement. Hardly something you want in a teammate, right? It's like kicking people that refuse to have correct gear for a raid or high level fractal because they're okay with everyone else on the team taking on more of a burden due to them. Now, with all THAT said... bad behavior is bad behavior. Being a kitten is being a kitten. Don't be a badly behaved kitten.(We have real kittens for that, and I can guarantee they're cuter.) The thing is, with statements like And if you're kicking people from parties/guilds because they don't share your opinions that's like... Trump levels of wrong. And adding to the fire aka paying anet for a bad system does nothing to help the game. And really...really...you had to put trump into this... >.<What can I say, I thought the most bafflingly ridiculous thing I'd hear all week had come out of his mouth, but you managed to... trump him. =P

You're saying they're not at fault, but they are.... they did vote with their wallets, for a long time possibly, and here we are. Alienate the player base does do something - and it's a direct result from ANet's actions, and those that "voted"... Aka "people thinking their opinion is automatically righteous".My "vote" is equals to yours, if I didn't have a problem back, I don't have to automatically have one now because you just realized now that RNG is a thing. People blamed everything they could possibly blame. Anet of course, but also gambling itself, even though so many things in this world are subject to gambling.No selling gambling things to kids? What do you of trading cards?What do you do with RNG items you get in game with gold?What do you of ecto gambling?What do you do of BLC keys?What do you of RNG loot in general? EVERYTHING is RNG, paid or not, hidden behind "gold" (so potential irl money) or not.And yes, even if you can buy the infamous permanent bank access, given its amount, if you strictly talk gem value it's much higher than these skins, yet somehow it's still wasn't a problem back then. So KICKING people now, because somehow now the general consensus is that players decided this one wasn't going to pass, while they let it go for years, is absolutely stupid. It's stupid, it alienates players, and that's not gonna get you what you want. You can either be a silent guy who simply give the feedback that they won't buy mounts until they can select, or you can find people to blame.Blaming it on gambling in general or whales is simply unacceptable. I totally agree with you, I feel the same :angry: Oooooh trust me my good sir. I have seen to many people who have fallen into this trap today in LA. Meh... Honestly the thought of not inviting people with skins into parties/booting them from parties is kind of lingering at this point... Wait people boot people from parties because they got the new skins? Not yet - but hey that's one way to further the message. I think people are doing that now as we speak. I herd from a friend that people are being kicked from guilds because buying the RNG loot box skins is hurting the game. Congratulations, these people are hurting their own cause.Shame on Anet they said? Nope. Shame on these people. Hey love hurts as they say. Sometimes you need to have some tough love to know you did something wrong. They didn't do anything wrong for getting skins they wanted.If you want to show anet they did something that is alienating the playerbase, this is definitely the worst way of doing so, by forcing your opinion down the throat of other players.Next time start kicking people having lots of merchant express or perma bank or whatever. And see how long it lasts. Did nothing wrong? If you spend any money on something that is this type of RNG loot box corruption, taking advantage of people's addictions and so on your not helping by giving the company who made this gambling system your money. Your part of the problem or you have a problem. But hey i'm just one guy on the net. But I know who can help in this situation. Jim take it away I am addicted to gambling, I simply won't take the easy path and blame each and every company that uses gambling methods. If you actually open your eyes, gambling is everywhere and this mount thing is the least hurtful we've gotten in a while. Also it's a funny thing, you basically say that these gambling addicts are victim, but somehow it's not a problem to kick these victims in the name of revolution?Which side wins? Kicking these people or considering them victims? Also, everyone is responsible for their actions, I am responsible for my addiction as much as a smoker is responsible for his. Well I am sorry you have a gambling problem but let me be clear. The guild kicking I don't like but the party kicking like many have been saying, some people don't like to play with people who ruin the game for others. I have seen many players in LA saying they don't care what there doing is good or bad for the game so in term why should I or anyone else care if they get kicked from a party. Guild is one thing but party, there are more fish in the sea as they say. All this mentality of "I don't care I get skins now" is telling anet "hey guys they love this new system let's keep doing it". What is going to happen when the next RNG loot boxes is added? And the next one? And the next one? It will spiral out of control and who will suffer from this? People who have gambling problems and people like myself who love the cosmetics they make and it's all thanks to the people who told me today "I don't care".Well, if you can successfully delude yourself into thinking that by buying mount skins those people are ruining the game for others and are wrong to do so but your choice to ostracise them based on their gem purchases isn't ruining the game for others and you are right to do so... assuming this isn't just attention-seeking idiocy you're spouting, then I really think you would benefit from some self-reflection.

Every person that buys into this is yet another reason for ANet to not only keep it, but do it again. This is bad for the playerbase. Hurting the playerbase hurts the game in the long run. There's a saying I've loved from the first time I read it. "No single raindrop believes it is to blame for the flood." Everyone that buys into this is in part responsible for it. It also means that they don't care all that much about the impact of their choices on other players, or they simply don't have the best judgement. Hardly something you want in a teammate, right? It's like kicking people that refuse to have correct gear for a raid or high level fractal because they're okay with everyone else on the team taking on more of a burden due to them. Now, with all THAT said... bad behavior is bad behavior. Being a kitten is being a kitten. Don't be a badly behaved kitten.(We have real kittens for that, and I can guarantee they're cuter.) The thing is, with statements like And if you're kicking people from parties/guilds because they don't share your opinions that's like... Trump levels of wrong.

I totally agree with you, I feel the same :angry: Oooooh trust me my good sir. I have seen to many people who have fallen into this trap today in LA. Meh... Honestly the thought of not inviting people with skins into parties/booting them from parties is kind of lingering at this point... Wait people boot people from parties because they got the new skins?Well that's a disgusting behaviour. And just when I thought my opinion of some people couldn't get any lower.

And if any gets to the end - WP has a point... Vote with your wallet. Engage with those that have bought into various cash-shop systems. Realistically, we are to blame, because as he's saying, people are already running around with those damned skins... Personally, and this has been for awhile for me, in any game, when i see a player having something from a cash shop - i think "that's the kitten that's encouraging the publishers/game-companies to keep doing cash shops" The problem is, there are far too many credit card warriors running around. When it comes to various gemstore cosmetics, if I see someone I can generally think "Well, that person supported the game for future content." The more of these people you see running around, the more game developers can push what their player base will accept. Is gw2 the worst offender? Not by a long shot. Should they be getting the amount of anger they are? Probably not. This is a hot topic in other gaming communities right now, so seeing it here shouldn't be totally unexpected. That's because the "anti credit card warriors" assume their fight is rightful and we should all agree to it.When it went live in Tuesday I didn't see it as a problem, because unlike a lot of people only waking up now because they want these skins really hard, I'm quite used to this RNG thing being pulled by anet and other companies in general, and this new one is much, much friendlier than others already in place in game.And I see this as a collection where you gotta catch them all. Criticizing us "credit card warriors" will do them no good, if you look at every page there's always a few people (minority but still) saying they don't really understand why it's getting that huge. Even in game many people have these skins. It's not a conspiracy, we vote with our vallet, and I voted that it didn't bother me that much, and as equals my "vote" has to be respected just like anyone else's. If more people vote no, they'll just the change the way they do things, that's fine by me, but in the meantime I wish people would stop blaming other players for that. I do it for supporting the game as much as for the skins, and I don't feel ashamed for that. I do however feel sad for some people in this community taking every opportunity to use big words and try to put anet down, we're supposed to all love this game. I even got in trouble in private just because I didn't have a HUGE issue with this, even though I directly said yeah sure they could add selectable mounts. That's how crazy it's getting and it's not healthy.The funny thing is, while earlier in this thread I said the mount price point was a bit rich for my blood, I'm getting more and more tempted to buy some at this price the more I'm exposed to this overblown poorly thought out outrage.

Ohhh no, people are actually using that phrase for this? God. Gamers in general really have to get over the fad of using x-gate to describe things.But I like WP, time to see if he's any more rational about this whole thing than a depressingly sizeable cross section of people here are.

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

Your very words; this is gambling. Spending 400 gems is risky in that I would hope for a desired result, and it is risky in that I would most likely end up with a skin I don't want and cannot gift or sell. Haha! You've made the same mistake I was making for ages there thinking GreyWolf and WolfHeart are the same person. It made the conversation between the two of them particularly confusing to follow. Edit Also, using that definition of gambling to define the things that gambling addiction etc. refers to and equate it to slot machines (not something I'm accusing you of doing but GreyWolf and others were trying to make that point) isn't accurate, because that definition is broad enough to fit almost every activity imaginable inside it. Driving to work, for example, is a gamble ie. a risky action in the hope of a desired result. But it's not equivalent to "predatory" loot boxes or slot machines, just as these randomised mount skins aren't equivalent to predatory loot boxes and slot machines.*Note: since I can't follow your previous comment thread this reply isn't intended to refute whatever you were previously saying in some unquoted comment somewhere, it's just a general answer to the people who have been trying to swing this argument of late.

How is it NOT gambling? It's a slot machine just like the BLCs. The only difference is that you will eventually get all of the skins if you keep buying. Which is a fairly big difference. I don't know of any slot machine that will eventually give me all of the money if I keep playing. Nope, that's not what that means. gam·ble[ˈɡambəl]VERBgambling (present participle)play games of chance for money; bet:"she was fond of gambling on cards and horses"synonyms: bet · place/lay a bet on something · stake money on something · [more]bet (a sum of money) on a game of chance:"he was gambling every penny he had on the spin of a wheel"take risky action in the hope of a desired result:"the British could only gamble that something would turn up"synonyms: take a chance · take a risk · stick one's neck out · go out on a limb You said it's a slot machine with a difference.I said the difference is important.The above copy/paste does not refute my claim. Yes it does. It is most certainly gambling by the third meaning. But go ahead, you buy them while everyone else doesn't and see how long it keeps the game afloat.Well now I'm forced to believe that you're being wilfully intransigent in the hopes of some kind of personal gain.

How is it NOT gambling? It's a slot machine just like the BLCs. The only difference is that you will eventually get all of the skins if you keep buying. Which is a fairly big difference. I don't know of any slot machine that will eventually give me all of the money if I keep playing. Nope, that's not what that means. gam·ble[ˈɡambəl]VERBgambling (present participle)play games of chance for money; bet:"she was fond of gambling on cards and horses"synonyms: bet · place/lay a bet on something · stake money on something · [more]bet (a sum of money) on a game of chance:"he was gambling every penny he had on the spin of a wheel"take risky action in the hope of a desired result:"the British could only gamble that something would turn up"synonyms: take a chance · take a risk · stick one's neck out · go out on a limbYou said it's a slot machine with a difference.I said the difference is important.The above copy/paste does not refute my claim.

How is it NOT gambling? It's a slot machine just like the BLCs. The only difference is that you will eventually get all of the skins if you keep buying. Which is a fairly big difference. I don't know of any slot machine that will eventually give me all of the money if I keep playing.

Mount separate contracts: still gross, but it lowers the % in which you'll get a mount that you don't care about if you're after specific mounts.A flat price based on quality of skin and then cheaper gamble contracts: still psychologically beneficial for what they want to achieve and doesn't bother those who want to catch em' all.Release mounts by smaller proportion: gives chase rare mounts per 'grouping', in this instance at least the percentage in which you'll get what you want is better than the initial 3.33%. This also again, doesn't hurt those who want to catch em' all and benefits those who want to roll the more friendly dice for the skin. Overall what they chose to do was bundle it all together (30) – give no mounts to any form of achievement, raid ect – and laugh to the bank. I've read your reply a couple of times now and I'm having difficulty figuring out where we disagree hehe.

See the thing is, tonedeaf is exactly how I feel the community's reaction to it is too. Like, you can think it's too expensive. That's fair enough. Everyone has different ideas about what "too expensive" is for them and there's no wrong answer.You can say you'd prefer to only buy the thing you want (most likely for a higher price) instead of it being randomised. That's fair enough. It's a preference, and it's a preference that probably should be catered for (though from the sounds of it when it is being catered for there are a lot of people here who won't be happy with how it'll be implemented, those expecting to spend 400 gems on the shiniest of shinies for example). But things like trying to justify that preference by calling the alternative predatory behaviour and all that just seems to show a fundamental lack of understanding of what makes the other instances of predatory game behaviour actually deserve the label. And I just wish people would be smarter about throwing those words around, because when it's applied in the wrong instances (like this one) it detracts from the severity of the actual instances of predatory behaviour. And then I start wondering why people are deliberately misusing the label and what they're trying to gain by manipulating current gamer trends to their own ends, and it's not a happy line of thinking.

How about people thinking it's illogical bandwagoning and misplaced aggression? =P

For what it's worth, I'm really sorry you experienced that level of abuse, but I think those people will have to take responsibility for their own shameful behaviour.

So, since this is the amalgamated thread I may as well state my opinion for the Anet record. I like lucky dips for cheaper prices. I really like that you're never going to get duplicates from multiple tries at the lucky dip. If these skins being account bound is the price I pay for that then I'm more than happy to pay it. I love that the only way to get these adoption tickets isn't through black lion chests. I like that this randomised element could result in a nice variety of skins on display instead of an overabundance of only the flashiest available. I'm relatively ok with the price point for a randomised mount skin. For me personally I'd favour the 250-350 kind of price mark but I'm in no rush for the skins so I'll wait for a sale. As it is, it's cheap enough that saying to myself "I'll just try once and see what happens" is possible, but not cheap enough that I'd be tempted to try a 2nd time if I was underwhelmed with the 1st result. The 2k gems price mark for the warforged jackal is... not something I'll personally ever be spending. Unless it turns out that it can do the job of all the other mounts combined by tucking it's legs in and sprouting a jetpack I'd consider it quite a bit overpriced. The skin is very cool and I'm happy it exists but I won't be using it. The level of backlash over the randomised mount skins is... cartoonishly overblown is about the nicest thing I can say about it.

Yeah... I feel like the only reason why this time it's creating all that drama is because people actually REALLY REALLY want theses skins because there is no other skin available in game.. whereas seasonal rng items... only a few people care about them (i'm one of them sadly).This backslash is a bit too extreme imho. This "concept" was already in game, for years, and it's only now that people are calling "shame" on anet, not because it's new but because this time more people want the premium skins. if you don't want to pay that amount, you aren't the target of these premiums. Now yes you can try to discuss about getting alternative ways like paying more to select a specific mount. You can also discuss the fact that this is supposed to be a game, and there none of these mounts are actually earn able in game (this is the actual issue imho, rng isn't nearly as bad as other lootboxes). But please, stop with the extreme language. Anet doesn't have to be ashamed for this. There is no subscription fee, these are purely cosmetic items, Anet still doesn't sell pay to win items like they always say they wouldn't. (At Anet: Next time you do that, add a merchant and sell mounts with gold, people won't see "gems" on the price and half of them won't be complaining (aka ecto gambling) This post is like a breath of fresh air.

Ages ago I remember suggesting a necro spec with a detachable shroud that functioned like a customisable ranger pet/spectral minion thing, that got a shield as the new weapon to make up for losing the defensive aspect of shroud, but sand shades kind of already take up that design space so let's see, what else might I like to see... They could go the valkyrie/shepherd of the dead kind of route. Assuming that we won't be getting land spears in the future then hammer would probably be best, functioning as a melee power/support kind of hybrid role with some form of increased mobility on the skills. Might share too much design space with guardians but it could still be cool. They could go back to Marjory's detective roots and give us a pistol and a (trilby/fedora)? I really loved their necromancer detective idea so going back to that could be a lot of fun. I'd visualise a ranged weapon with a bit more mobility/shadow magic vibe. Besides, named bullets and cursed rounds are great. Couple that with some padfoot flavour and I'd be in love. I'd still like to see a shield as an option for some necro elite spec but I can't think what else I'd like it to come with (besides still being full of bias enamoured with my original idea haha!) I think I'll pick pistol.