Foefire skins

[Tikaru.7539]

I can buy a set for 500 gems - OR - I could buy each piece of Foefire for the same price as a set? What happened, are people not spending enough money in the store anymore?

Edited October 15, 2021 by Tikaru.7539

[anonei.2714]

I am so frustrated.. I already bought gems only to realize too late medium armor got the skirt included... now I have no use for that chest skin, which is the only thing I wanted. I thought I had previewed on medium too... I'm so mad at myself for not doublechecking before and at Anet for their way to handle medium armor skins, please give us more options that let us skip the trench coats, skirts and buttcapes already, this is so annoying and limiting.

Edit - 
Don't want to remove my comment but it was dumb, I just got really excited to see the really cool skin [because it really is awesome!], but a mayor reason I wanted it was for medium armor characters. Anyway I didn't spend the gems so I was able to get my money back, I just hope they'll eventually make more skins that give Medium armor some variety.

Edited October 17, 2021 by anonei.2714

[Obtena.7952]

On 10/15/2021 at 4:14 PM, Vancho.8750 said:

I like how they forgot about their "promise" of not selling new armor skins and now they are selling them one by one on the price of a whole set, the whole point was to have outfits replace the armors.   

This complaint is inaccurate. There was no 'promise' of not selling new armor skins. They basically said they couldn't sell them at a price that made them profitable. The fact they selling the individual pieces for the price of the few existing full sets they do offer exactly supports that statement. If you consider that they need to sell a single piece for 500 gems, it's not hard to deduce that the whole sets being offered at the same price are WAY undervalued. 

Edited October 16, 2021 by Obtena.7952

[Sobx.1758]

On 10/15/2021 at 6:48 PM, Fueki.4753 said:

I don't even understand why Arenanet felt the need to make individual models for the different armour weights.

Having one model to fit all would be better and they wouldn't have needed to introduce a fourth model for the outfits.

I can only guess but since a lot of the medium [upper] armors are trenchcoats with parts going below the waste, suddenly having pants -instead of armors- with added buttcapes for that weight would result in all sorts of bad clipping, which would make it unusable with most medium armor skins. Basically "we did it for so long that now we pretty much have to keep doing it the same way or it won't fit with anything else and might as well be an outfit".

Edited October 17, 2021 by Sobx.1758

[Vancho.8750]

1 minute ago, Obtena.7952 said:

This complaint is inaccurate. There was no 'promise' of not selling new armor skins. They basically said they couldn't sell them at a price that made them profitable. The fact they selling these individual pieces for the price of the existing full sets exactly supports that statement. 

Pretty kitten sure it was PR speak, cause they pissed people off with the Flame whatever retexture. Argue semantics all you want, there was an mutual agreement between people and Arenanet that they will not kitten up the game with the gem store. But with time and bit by bit they have been putting rewards that should have been in game but are in the gem store or even worse in the lootbox, and since they did it slowly and there was not big pushback and it became the status quo. Cool they have padded their bottom line profits but kittened up their retention, all these profit schemes will cost them in the long term .
The question is to who are they trying to sell these schemes? kitten up after kitten up , mount gamble box, templates and legendary skins in the gem store/lootboxes. I don't think the kitten up schemes were worth the negatives. As I said they should Lie to me properly, it is all about presentation and spinning the narrative.

And also dude, really, why are you doing the Ackchyually. I'm pretty kitten sure you know what I meant with every single word I wrote, cause I'm certain you have smart head on your shoulders.        

[Obtena.7952]

10 minutes ago, Vancho.8750 said:

Pretty kitten sure it was PR speak, cause they pissed people off with the Flame whatever retexture. Argue semantics all you want, there was an mutual agreement between people and Arenanet that they will not kitten up the game with the gem store. But with time and bit by bit they have been putting rewards that should have been in game but are in the gem store or even worse in the lootbox, and since they did it slowly and there was not big pushback and it became the status quo. Cool they have padded their bottom line profits but kittened up their retention, all these profit schemes will cost them in the long term .
The question is to who are they trying to sell these schemes? kitten up after kitten up , mount gamble box, templates and legendary skins in the gem store/lootboxes. I don't think the kitten up schemes were worth the negatives. As I said they should Lie to me properly, it is all about presentation and spinning the narrative.       

None of this makes sense to me, primarily because you aren't describing any problem here. Whether you think this is PR speak or not isn't really relevant. What is the problem with Anet selling things on the GS? Have you forgot that you can buy ANYTHING on the GS with gold, so whatever issue you seem to be indicating exists because "stuff on the GS" is made irrelevant by this? There isn't any lie here. 

You ask who they are trying to sell GS content to ? The players ... what kind of weird question is that? Seriously ... I don't get the outrage, this isn't an attempt at me being obtuse. You want an armor skin on the GS, you can buy in it TWO ways, RL money or gold. You can't ask for a more accommodating business model. 

Edited October 16, 2021 by Obtena.7952

[Vancho.8750]

5 minutes ago, Obtena.7952 said:

None of this makes sense. Whether you think this is PR speak or not, you aren't describing any problem here. See, the thing you are forgetting here is that you can buy ANYTHING on the GS with gold, so whatever issue you seem to be indicating exists with "stuff on the GS" is made irrelevant by this. There isn't any lie here. 

You ask who they are trying to sell GS content to ? The players ... what kind of weird question is that?

How the kitten do you not see the problem here, the reward system is breaking apart, they have put more sets in the gem store over the ones that are in game for the duration of the last living world. Trading gold for gems is fineish, but putting everything in there is not.
And the problem is there is no lie, there is no sales pitch, there is nothing to tickle your fancy.

Ok I'll simplify it for you even more "Which players?". I'll even give you an example, for which players were the build templates, since everyone that would have bought them solved their build problem by buying Character slots before the implementation, and after they didn't need to buy the templates since character slots are just better value for the price.    

[Obtena.7952]

38 minutes ago, Vancho.8750 said:

How the kitten do you not see the problem here, the reward system is breaking apart, they have put more sets in the gem store over the ones that are in game for the duration of the last living world. Trading gold for gems is fineish, but putting everything in there is not.
And the problem is there is no lie, there is no sales pitch, there is nothing to tickle your fancy.

Well, you ARE being sensational. EVERYTHING does not go on the GS. We have lots of items and skins that are ingame that were added in IBS that will NEVER be put in the GS.

There doesn't need to be a sales pitch ... if players want GS stuff, they don't need to be pitched to buy them. There is no 'breaking apart' reward system just because Anet puts items on the GS. That's absurd. Anet has been adding skins to the GS for almost a decade ... reward system is still intact. 

And as for your example ... nothing stops a player from choosing Character Slots OR build templates ... so what you are describing with your example isn't a problem at all. It's in fact, MORE choice for players. Some might prefer characters, some might like build templates. In this game, player gets to decide AND they can decide how to pay for them. Again, how is this a problem? What are you actually outraged about here? That you get choice? Yeah, that's SOO awful!!!!

Honestly, not trying to be obtuse here, but it's not clear what problem you are describing. Are you complaining that Anet is selling items on the GS at the expense of adding more ingame rewards? You realize that doesn't make sense considering you can buy GS items with ingame gold and that the number of ingame skins far outweighs the skins available on the GS ... right?

Edited October 16, 2021 by Obtena.7952

[Fueki.4753]

7 hours ago, Sobx.1758 said:

I can only guess but since a lot of the medium [upper] armors are trenchcoats with parts going below the waste, suddenly having pants -instead of armors- with added buttcapes for that weight would result in all sorts of bad clipping, which would make it unusable with most medium armor skins. Basically "we did it for so long that now we pretty much have to keep doing it the same way or it won't fit with anything else and might as well be an outfit".

They should have had only one model from the start, instead of three.

Arenanet could have put trenchcoats and slim trousers onto one model with all the other armour.

Clipping is no excuse. Other, games have clipping as well and leave most of that issue to the players to work around.

Arenanet should have addressed this issue by putting resources into bringing all skins to one model. Instead they chose going the easy way and introduced yet another model to try to mask over the issue.

Edited October 17, 2021 by Fueki.4753

[Funky.4861]

I would have insta-bought the lot apart from one thing: the chest makes all of my chars look like belly-dancers. That's a hard no from me. Charr is the exception, but only because they are hunched-over. If the angle of the cloth pieces was horizontal it would probably have been better in my opinion.

[Sobx.1758]

12 hours ago, Fueki.4753 said:

They should have had only one model from the start, instead of three.

Arenanet could have put trenchcoats and slim trousers onto one model with all the other armour.

Clipping is no excuse. Other, games have clipping as well and leave most of that issue to the players to work around.

Arenanet should have addressed this issue by putting resources into bringing all skins to one model. Instead they chose going the easy way and introduced yet another model to try to mask over the issue.

You call it "masking over the issue", others will call it "expected differences between the armor weights". I think trying to tack a whole trenchcoat to trousers skin would be weirder tbh -at least the buttcape going down from the waste can still be easly seen as the part of upper armor, but suddenly having a whole trenchcoat going from the very arms of the character as part of the lower armor? That would make less sense imo 😄

 

Actually they probably should do this like they did with Flame Legion Vestments, where the armor overrides pants anyways and there doesn't seem to be any clipping issues. So what I wrote in my previous post (and above in this one) probably wasn't the actual reason.

Edited October 17, 2021 by Sobx.1758