Oglaf.1074

I've posted an issue with the Norn heavy cultural armour that has been around literally for as long as the game has existed in that official art issues-thread. I don't think you're looking there at all...

Gambling for premium items is always going to be inherently inferior to buying them outright. There's just no getting around that fact. That being said, RNG is not inherently bad. Whenever you swing your sword in-game, you deal with RNG to determine the damage. RNG is only bad when IRL money is involved. It is a valuable and core tool to game design otherwise.

That's extremely dissapointing and saddening. For shame, Anet. For kittening shame.

http://dulfy.net/2017/11/07/gw2-black-lion-mount-adoption-license-mount-skins/

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.

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?

Of course they're "super ok". The problem is that you don't buy them for 400 Gems, now do you? No, you spend 400 Gems to gamble for them. That is the issue here. Nobody would have an issue with these skins if you could outright purchase them.

Hahaha. Yeah, how about no? Let's not try and make Loot Box gambling "work" shall we?

@Gaile Gray.6029 So are we actually going to get a response from you guys or are you just merging threads into this one and hoping it will eventually die off..?

You're missing the point entirely. When you buy an Outift, you get the Outfit you want for Gems. When you buy one of these Mount Skin Loot Boxes, you gamble for the skin(s) you want. See the horrible, horrible difference? If you could just outright purchase the Mount Skin you want for Gems, it would be business as usual. Clearly the GW2 player base has no qualms about buying premium content for Gems. No, it is using your Gems to gamble that has everyone in an uproar.

SInce the original thread kinda got accidentally nuked just as I had posted this, here we go again: Jim Sterling's take on all of this. Warning, contains rather... colourful... language at times. Be warned.

Forgive me if it has been posted already, but here's Jim Sterling - of the Jimquisition fame - 's take on it.

As long as it gets out there, eh? If you have a YouTube account, feel free to leave a comment. I personally did as it allowed me to be a bit more... colourful... in my feedback than I would on the clean and neat official GW2 forums, heh. Venting feels good.

EDIT: Contains erh... colourful language at times. Be warned.

Problem with that is that the majority of the mount skins aren't really worth more than 400 Gems as they are pure retextures. I'd argue that a 400 Gems for those, and 600 Gems for the fancier ones with new model and/or sfx would be a much fairer deal.

I'm willing to consider siding with people against the mount adoption RNG here but only if they criticize all forms of RNG, and not just specific to gem related RNG. Either all RNG is bad or it's not, and skins that are ONLY available through RNG means should be considered bad as well.I am much more shocked at practices that gate some content like that, which is RNG AND Timegated AND Account Bound than a few mount skins that have no timegate and very "limited" RNG, and that you can simply farm gold to gems.Again, if the mount adoption licenses were in gold and sold to an in game merchant not half of the people here would complain, even though it's the exact same problem. Same with ecto gambling, it is RNG. It involves real money (it's just hidden being a gold amount, but it's basically the same), but people aren't complaining as much, even though it's been in game forever. Why are people waking up just now? Because they really, really want these skins (unlike BL weapons), and not because there's anything new with how Anet does things. That is a silly sentiment/standard to have. RNG is a perfectly fine design tool/method to have for a video game. RNG is not some inherent evil. If you cannot see the difference between "gambling with ILR money"-RNG and "in-game loot"-RNG and how one is just terrible whereas the other is a gameplay necessity... then... I dunno. I honestly don't fathom not being able to tell how they are obviously different. It boggles my mind.

400 Gems is a fair price for a guaranteed unlock when you conisder that the vast majority of them are merely retextures. Only a select few have a new model or fancy sfx.

I've been trying to get Jim Sterling's attention on this since yesterday. https://i.redd.it/ikr4781murwz.png Here it is. Thank God for Jim Sterling, Son.

I've been trying to get Jim Sterling's attention on this since yesterday.

400 Gems for those skins that are simply a retexture, 600 Gems for those that add a new model and/or special effects. I would have no problems paying either of those if I could pick the mount skin I would get.

Excellent strawman there. Worthy of a dictionary example of a strawman argument, really. Nobody is actually buying these damn things and being angry they didn't get the mount skin they want. People are being angry about the skins being "sold" via gambling rather than being directly buyable for Gems. If you're not actually going to bother reading the argument of the people you insist on arguing against, don't do it. Replies like yours do nothing but infurate people in an already loaded situation.

You can "seriously doubt it" all you want but that doesn't change the fact that, y'know, it is?

The GW2 userbase has happily kept the game alive for years by buying premium content directly, with no gambling involved whatsoever, so that is kind of a moot point.

Oh but they are. Take a look at the recent example of Shadow of War. Or Call of Duty WWII just recently released. Both are fully-priced, ranging from 60-100+ dollars entry price, with this type of loot box gambling in them. And yet, both games remained highly successful (just take a look at Steam's Best Sellers-list, Shadow of War sat at #1 for a good while, and now the new CoD sits up there). The sad fact is that apparently your average gamer happily swallows these types of business practices. I've no doubt that it is the success of these games, despite their horrendous gambling systems in them while still coming with a AAA-pricetag, is what gave Anet the "courage" to try and pull this stunt. No doubt whatsoever. 2017 is the Year of the Loot Box and there is nothing we can apparently do about it.

No, I am not favorable towards BLCs at all. I hate them like any other incarnation of the damnable Loot Box. But I've tolerated their existance because of the aforementioned reasons (such as skins being, or at least used to be, soulbound on use and that there is a chance to get keys through regular gameplay - albeit a miniscule one). TL;DR - Both Adoption Thingies and BLC suck, but it is plain to see that BLC suck less.