Official Mount Adoption Feedback Thread [merged]

[Ayumi Spender.1082]

I didn't plan on touching a single one of those things when it's set to random.The problem is, I know Quaggan well that my choice won't do a dent to this situation.

[Magnus Godrik.5841]

The price is fine. Shit the price for the war mount is fine as well. I get it you need to make money somehow and do so. But I will NOT buy this and hope I get what I want. And if I do I'll spend the 100 to get the 30 pack, which will be around after xmas. Oh wait there only 7 days left, too bad for you. Great idea bad implementation. I'll wait for the dragon/horse mount to come out. Regardless you guys do a great job. Just stop with this RNG dolyak shit, just stop it, STOP IT. Really cut it out.

[Atrak.6840]

I am hoping by asking for feedback you might listen to it so here is mine. I'm sorry but I personally hate RNG-based systems like the one just implemented to purchase mount skins and won't be spending any money on them.

It's strange because when I started playing GW2 I thought, wow here is a company that understands the people who play these games, now I'm not so sure that's the case.I really hope you take the feedback given around these skins, because I like this game and would hate to see it move even further towards the RNG-style loot box systems.

Regards.

[Zaklex.6308]

By definition it is not a gamble:
"verb1.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, back the horses, game; informalplay the ponies"he started to gamble more often"2.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; Morenoun1.an act of gambling; an enterprise undertaken or attempted with a risk of loss and a chance of profit or success."You are guaranteed an item, therefore it is not a chance, it's not risky, nor is there a chance of loss or profit(see item guarantee).

[Valento.9852]

You know, before I leave I'd like to make a suggestion. I don't care if it will stick, but whatever: set a portion of GemStore to require a different currency only acquired through money, not gold->gem conversion, while offering a way to exchange this golden gem to the normal gem. This way you won't be affected by extreme farming, and can be more flexible because you will be earning real money for this set of things. As angsty as the playerbase may get, you need to stop with RNG and still make money; setting apart Real Money-only items from those ultimately acquired in-game is a decent way of doing so.

Free yourself as a company, ANet, and free your playerbase. Serious players will understand. Stop pushing it. Just, stop... before you're left in the dust.

[GolgoXIII.8536]

@Halbarz.3854 said:

suggestion 1 :What Anet should be selling is RNG packs based on the mount. This way it takes a way people can select the mount they want a skin for but it remains 100% random what skin you get. Doing this should increase the price of said box/ticket to 500/600 gems to compensate.

• jackel box
• Bunny box
• etc...

I have to disagree with you there with the price increase, why is that needed in the first place? They seem to be of the opinion that 400 gems is a reasonable price and changing it to 500 to 600 would make people less likely to buy it. The way I see it the price and the fact that you have so many skins you could get from a single pack is more discouraging to people actually spending their money on the mount skins then making it more accessible by having mount specific rng boxes, I would bet that they would probably make more money of people purchasing a mount specific box than taking the chance that they are going to get multiples of the same type of mount i.e raptor then getting at least one of each mount so they could have a bit of variety in their stable.

Oh and before you ask I have not bought any of these adoption licence's, if they had mount specific crates at the 400 gems I would have been yelling here take my money and gotten 1 to 2 of each mount box but as it stands I am not willing to hand over my cash for something that probably won't give me a bit of variety with all my mounts.

[tekfan.3179]

-Don't cut pieces off the mounts as part of the design. It hurts my eyes, seeing the corvus-griffon fly without it's tail, while the head is exactly what I yearned for on a griffon-Springer skins are somewhat underwhelming-I'm kinda OK with 400ish gems for a mount skins, as long as you turn down the RNG

Suggestion:How about you bring us real stables? LA should have some room for a nice building. You could even spin some lore in: Evon Gnashblade saw the many refugees with expertise on elonian mounts, the demand in mounts and put the two together.Let is see some mounts playing in their pens, so we can see the mounts actually ingame, not just in the skin-preview.The stables should have two sections with five pens each. One section handles normal mounts without elemental aspects(everything that isn't a walking flashbang) and the other wing specializes on those flashy kinds. Each of the pens is then dedicated to the specific mounts.Now just add 13 NPCs: one trainer for each pen, one overseer for each section and a headmaster.The headmaster sells the current adoption item for 300 gems. The overseers sell adoption items with elemental/non-elemental mounts for 350 gems. The trainers then sell adoption items for specific mounts(Raptor/Springer/Skimmer/Jackal/Griffon) with elemental/non-elemental design for 400 gems.

[Myhr.9108]

Then how do you call the fact that you can buy something and not get what you're aiming for? I want X Skins, but I have to buy Y tickets to get them, where Y is a random number between X and, in this case, 30ish.

@Zaklex.6308 said:

2.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; More**If fits perfectly, because the risk is not getting what you want, and not getting "nothing". It's not about the objective result, it's about consumer expectations, and those are also important in any business. Fact is, there is a random variable in the price you'll pay to get what you want, with the sole exception of wanting every single skin.

[Noomix.2937]

My thoughts; I rarley complain but this sucks. Rng have never been a friend of mine. If I could choose the skin I would happily pay between 400 and 700 gems per skin. Never will I pay for rng skin.

[kiranslee.4829]

Maybe if they add rng for for the price of keys, for ppl who love to gamble , and insta selected buy for those who done , for somewhat higher price, plus , bundles.

[Mrs Lana.2506]

@Zaklex.6308 said:2.take risky action in the hope of a desired result.

You defined exactly what it is. Cheers for that.

[Myhr.9108]

There is, check "Mount skins Distribution : a serious poll".

[Lydiaalin.9275]

@Myrdreth.6829 said:What happens if you already got a certain skin and get it again?

It was said that there is no way you will get a skin you already have, you always get one that you don't have

[SlaYer.2138]

They should rename this as Mount Lottery Ticket. Adoption license is a false advertising name. In real life, the adopter gets to choose which pet they want to adopt, not the other way around.

[RockinTalvin.9824]

I won't definitely buy something with an RNG-Component in it. Nope! I bought some Glider Wings for 800 Gems.

But 400 Gems for something, I cannot choose... no freaking way!

[FinalForce.2950]

The Amount of Disappointment i feel for this Game is undescribable with words. I want to continue to Support You. But this time you just pulled pure Bullshit. RNG Lootboxes for Mount Skins? Are u kidding me? Unless you take it OUT OF THE GAME. Im not spending another dime on this game ever again.

[Turin.6921]

I will not get into discussions about this being gambling cause its not. And really its not that bad in the long run. At least you never get duplicates which is a a good feature.

But it is RNG based. I spend money on this game regularly but I generally do it on things that i know what I am getting. I cannot in good conscience spend money that I feel might be wasted, even if i want to support this game. I would have no issue paying even 600 gems for a skin i can choose (maybe even more) but i would never spend gems that i might not get a return for no matter how cheaper they may be.

I and ppl like me might not matter much financially if we do not spend money, if whales that do not care about RNG do. And you might continue with the strategy as it actually makes profits.

But there is also sth else that is important.There is also the issue of image. You directly want to focus your marketing on word of mouth, which is a great decision imo. But gemstore strategies like this can really hurt the word of mouth image of the game. Even though the actual implementation is not as bad as in most games information between ppl on and offline is so distiled that such details are lost and only false impressions remain. It can very easily result in ppl that have never played the game to falsely think that the game now includes lootbox schemes. And it would make attracting new player more difficult. I am not sure how much you are actually reviewing this thread but i had to put this out there.

[Matick.4132]

@Kidel.2057 said:

Their marketing guys took economy lessons from Donald Trump.

Word!

But it would be funnier if it wasn't true, aye?!

[Lydiaalin.9275]

Honestly I'm not surprised, Anet has been pushing lazy cash-grabs for at least the last two years (see: outfits instead of armour sets, lazily made hairstyles, recycled skins etc.) but it's just plain stupid that they would make a move like that now with all the controversy going on about lootboxes. Not to mention that most skins are just recolors, no real changes to the model whatsoever, though again not surprising, you could see skins coming a mile away since they only gave us one channel dye for our mounts.

Even with all the backlash this seems to be getting however, there are people already buying them, so I don't have high hopes on it changing....

[Omega.6801]

Hi and thanks for opening this thread.I haven't read the whole thread so I'll just put out there what I think.I like the mount skins a lot and like the variety of them. You have more basic skins with more dye slots as well as more fancy/shiny ones wiht particle efffects and whatnot. I think, the way you sell them is guaranteed to make you a whole lot of money while not going into full lootbox, the bank always wins territory.We knew this was how it was going to be, as we saw the same things with glider skins.

The only thing I hoped for, that Anet would make different this time, is that they'd give us more skins ingame somehow. As far as I remember there are currently only 3 glider skins available without the gemstore ad I'm talking about the three legendaries here...Mount and Glider skins could be a good incentive for players to participate in content. I wouldn't want anything fancy even. Why not give us Gliders/Mounts showing our Guild's Emblem and let us buy those skins for Comissions, incentivising ppl to play guildmissions again. How about Racial mounts for Karma+Gold+whatever?

I'm Ok with the ticket system, because you can't get the same skin twice, so I'll be done some day with it. But I wished, ANetz would give us some skins ingame, beside legendaries. A simple version of the basic mount skin, maybe add a second dye channel and some banners displaying a guild emblem, or the logo of a faction. Sell all the fancy shiny mounts on the gemstore, but give the players some skins ingame to work towards to.

Thx a lot and have a nice day. :)

[Voonith.2561]

@Dianekas.4359 said:The 2k gemstore skin costs nearly the same as the PoF standard edition...let it sink in for a minute...

2k gems for a single mount skin is grotesquely fucking ludicrous.

[Chills.6802]

As long as these loot boxes stay in the game, I won't be. And enough with the BL chest comparison, those chests have 0 value and attractrion to begin with. Everybody was waiting for mount skins.

[kiranslee.4829]

@Myhr.9108 said:There is, check "Mount skins Distribution : a serious poll".

Found it and changed comment, thank you :).

[Manasa Devi.7958]

I feel that one of the reasons for the magnitude of this outcry is the simple fact that people want mount skins, but can't simply buy them based on preference.

There has never been anything like this in the game before. There are lots of armor, outfits, weapons, minis, glider and whatnot options to chose from, with only a TINY percentage of them locked behind RNG. Even that causes plenty of grumbling.

Now, with mount skins, there's only 1 skin we can buy specifically and 5 that come bundled. The other THIRTY (that's 83.3%) are hidden behind RNG, in the least attractive way possible, in that we can't even chose for which type of mount we want to cast the die.

Anyone who thought this would go down well hasn't been paying attention.

[Asum.4960]

@Sodeni.6041 said:

@Rawr.9467 said:Unfortunately you only need a few people to buy them. Boycotts don't work very well when you have whales that give in and purchase everything, further solidifying the benefits of this marketing model.

I strongly believe that if there are enough people that also

don't

buy those skins, Anet will have to change it since everyone counts as a source of money and they make less money if people don't buy those skins because of RNG aspects.

Considering gambling cash shop games get up to 90% of their revenue from around 0.2% of their player base, so called "whales", if ArenaNet want's to transition to that business model, loosing some "Dolphins" and "Minnows" or especially "non-monetizers" won't matter to them.

That doesn't mean outcry's or boycotts don't matter though, especially before it's to late, at this phase they might still turn around if public perception of Anet gets bad enough.Shame though, since I rather would have just bought the one or two mount skins I really like for a reasonable price and recommend the game to everybody thinking about getting into a new MMO instead.

But what does this small fish know?