Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Official Mount Adoption Feedback Thread [merged]


Recommended Posts

@Ayumi Spender.1082 said:So I'm in Lion's Arch where a ton of people have those random skins.From what I'm seeing from this bunch? I'm not seeing a single good mount skin.

Is there a way to see what choices there are without buying the thing? I know the thing say I can right click to see but I kind of refuse to pay for one. Next is, if what I'm seeing are the choices, that is also even more of a reason I would never buy one as they all look atrocious at the moment.

Go into the dropdown and take a look. All of them are now there with padlocks, just like dyes or minis. Click on them to see what they look like.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

@nexidecimus.5973 said:Arenanet, I just have one question. What could have possibly possessed the entire company to go along with this and have not a single individual say "Maybe this is a bad idea. it might kitten some people off." ? edit: wow forum lords are so literal. ok lemme clear this up, i mean all the people who are responsible for letting this happen. as in, the people who actually gave this the green light. not one of them was like "uh, no how about we don't?"

It is a win/win situation for the company. There could be 2 ways out of this situation: 1) Community accepts mount lootboxes -> profit; 2) Community actively rejects lootboxes (what we have now) -> Anet says "Sorry!", removes adoption licences and gets a bunch on praise and good PR as a company that rejected filthy lootbox practices and listened to its audience (as it happened with Dauntless and Monster Hunter World recently). Additionaly they have a profit from all those who were against lootboxes, but couldn't hold themselves and already bought a bunch of them.A man who came up with this plan is very clever and calculated everything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is probably the wrong way to do the unlocks, I'm not against the usage of randomization on principal, but there need to be mitigating mechanics. For example having them not be account bound, allowing rerolls for a price, or the ability to swap it out for another skin with a small premium. As is it only seems like a deliberate choice to force players to buy content they do not want, which is never good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@GodofSlack.7460 said:This is probably the wrong way to do the unlocks, I'm not against the usage of randomization on principal, but there need to be mitigating mechanics. For example having them not be account bound, allowing rerolls for a price, or the ability to swap it out for another skin with a small premium. As is it only seems like a deliberate choice to force players to buy content they do not want, which is never good.

agreed... just like cable tv.... they make you buy a package deal and force channels on you that you would otherwise never ever watch or buy....

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Deihnyx.6318 said:

@Tuskeh.4697 said:For instance, I recently got a Tequatl's Hoard chest from the World Boss in Sparkfly Fen, which contains the player's choice of one ascended weapon from a selection. These weapons are the highest-tier items in the game. I was ecstatic, leafing through my options like a kid in a candy store. I had an incentive (kill the big dragon knowing that I had a chance to get some cool stuff), a challenge (kill the big dragon with an army of other players), and a reward (big dragon falls into the water, chest of cool stuff). There was an element of randomization here in what loot I got, but once the loot was acquired, the reward was in my hands, and I could define what that reward could be with the weapon selection.

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.

Though I can understand people disliking RNG in general, RNG with cash-for-virtual-items is not the same problem. From a business perspective, the reason to use RNG (loot boxes, mount licenses, and so forth) is to get people to spend more for an item they want than they would if the item was offered separately at a price the market would bear. This business practice depends on people who: do not analyze the potential cost to get the item(s) they want; have issues with impulse control; and/or make the gambler's assumption that they will get lucky.

As for BL Keys, I've been speaking against those almost as long as they've been in the game. Why are others who may not have taken a stance against BL Keys speaking up now? It's my guess that most everyone expected ANet to put mount skins in the store. Given past ANet practices, it seems reasonable to assume that they would be priced the same as glider skins (or, since mount skins may be more resource-intensive to make, the same as outfits -- which are pretty much the same thing as a mount skin). It also seems likely that a lot of people were waiting for the debut of more mount skins. So, people had expectations -- especially about price. These skins are obtainable via a business model that is likely to be disadvantageous to most consumers. Thus, the complaints.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When the Halloween mount skins were a bundle, I was disappointed. But the mount RNG loot-box, and the cost of one individual mount you've introduced to the gem store just puts me into a state of depression.

What was I expecting for mount skins? Well, unfortunately, I already knew you wouldn't introduce skins as in-game rewards since you never did that with gliders, but here is how I expected the Gem Store to look:

  • Recolored/4 dye channel skins: 400 gems
  • Skins with particle effects or model changes: 800 gems
  • Skins with SIGNIFICANT model changes (the Balthazar one for example): 1200 gems
  • Skins with skeleton/animation changes: 2400 gems

It's insane for me to think you guys wouldn't be making enough money from that pricing scheme to keep GW2 running strong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@joshc.3129 said:You all do realize when they "combine" one topic into one official thread that just means they are going to completely ignore it and all feed back on it. Nothing is going to change with it and by the grace of God they do start selling each skin individually, I want back the gold I used to get 6 contracts so I can actually get the raptor skins I want.

That's fine. I'll completely ignore the gem store, then. Not down with this type of predatory marketing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

At this point - even before you start looking at how you are going to resolve RNG pay walls and loot boxes in general (because this isn't the first example) I think a massive turn around in feeling about this could be alleviated by:

  1. Mailing the simple Raptor skin to everyone
  2. Confirm 2 skins from each group of mounts will be earned in game in PoF or a certain amount of the loot boxes can be earned by normal play
  3. Confirm all RNG boxes going forward will contain tradable items not the recent account only option that have been creeping in

The RNG issue in general and increasing lack of in game cosmetics though needs a serious rethink - at least the above will build a bridge in the mean time...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to come out and say "Good Job on the mount skins, Anet"I mean that, not in a sarcastic way, but sincerely .You guys could have just as easily jumbled the skins into the BLTC and just be done with it, but no, it's a separate purchase that guarantees a skin you don't already have, yes, it ultimately means you have to pay $120 for all the skins. But why would you need all those skins?This was done in a smart way, a lot better then it could have been, like what other mmo's handle this. and I have to give you props for this decision

Link to post
Share on other sites

@"John Valdea.5879" said:TOP 5 SOLUTIONS

  1. Make loot boxes obtainable: IE weekly or daily achievements.
  2. Put mounts up seasonally in a cycled system for higher cost. You can buy random tickets any time but to buy specific mount pay 1200 gems when it pops up in gem store.
  3. Make loot boxes mount specific.
  4. Lower Loot box cost considerably.
  5. Replace loot boxes with choose your skin options, and refund players.

Generally I like what you've said, but I definitely will argue against a price of 1200 on the rotational sales. I really don't feel like any skin should be worth more than $10, so I say 800. It also makes it easier to buy, instead of having to buy an odd Gem Pack to get $15 worth of Gems.But fundamentally, I just don't think you can make RNG have such a vastly cheaper price than the out-right price while having the out-right prices really be used by many at all. If they made each mount $15 (personally, I think based on the "coolness" of each, they should cost 400-800 Gems), then if you have even 10 that you may at some point want to get, it just makes so much more sense to go all in for the RNG and just buy them with that. And that way you get those extra ones that aren't super nice but that are always nice to have (plus it would reduce the pool for RNG if they add more mounts in the future). So there just has to be a balance, and the balance has to be related to the average amount of desirable skins to various players. I mean sure, this may be another tool to manipulate players into just going for the RNG choice, and getting them to spend more because the individual mounts are so expensive, but I really just want to feel good about buying the skins and supporting the game, and at $15/per, I wouldn't feel good about that.Just my opinion, but wanted to say it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is predatory gem store behaviour really a good idea in an MMO that needs a stable player base to remain profitable? I do not think so. People that don't like gambling will feel resentful. People that bought a few contracts and didn't get anything they liked will be resentful. They will share their resentment with their friends, on the forums, on reddit, potentially scaring off future customers.

Youtube has several GW2 personalities already responding to this, generally not in a positive way. Even Jim Sterling, a noted anti-micro transactions crusader jumped on board and covered the issue. This can have a negative effect on future player growth, because people remember the negative way longer than the positive. GW2 is not a multiplayer shooter with a new iteration every year, allowing your marketing department to rehype their public for their new 'game'. These practices will stick to the GW2 name like tar.

In the past many people have posted how they buy gems to support Anet and the game, give positive word of mouth, and are generally willing to overlook minor issues like the loot boxes, since a lot of the negatives from those loot boxes were mitigated due to being able to buy the skins through the TP, etc. You are now undermining that good will with this predatory behaviour. Will you make an initial killing? No doubt.

But I predict you're also damaging the goodwill that's out there, and the positive word of mouth both from players, and from positive Youtube vids. I'm personally stopping with buying gems. That will prevent any urge to gamble (which makes me feel dirty, really) until these adoption contracts are changed to an outright buy per skin.

Pix

Link to post
Share on other sites

@"Pretty Pixie.8603" said:Is predatory gem store behaviour really a good idea in an MMO that needs a stable player base to remain profitable? I do not think so. People that don't like gambling will feel resentful. People that bought a few contracts and didn't get anything they liked will be resentful. They will share their resentment with their friends, on the forums, on reddit, potentially scaring off future customers.

Youtube has several GW2 personalities already responding to this, generally not in a positive way. Even Jim Sterling, a noted anti-micro transactions crusader jumped on board and covered the issue. This can have a negative effect on future player growth, because people remember the negative way longer than the positive. GW2 is not a multiplayer shooter with a new iteration every year, allowing your marketing department to rehype their public for their new 'game'. These practices will stick to the GW2 name like tar.

In the past many people have posted how they buy gems to support Anet and the game, give positive word of mouth, and are generally willing to overlook minor issues like the loot boxes, since a lot of the negatives from those loot boxes were mitigated due to being able to buy the skins through the TP, etc. You are now undermining that good will with this predatory behaviour. Will you make an initial killing? No doubt.

But I predict you're also damaging the goodwill that's out there, and the positive word of mouth both from players, and from positive Youtube vids. I'm personally stopping with buying gems. That will prevent any urge to gamble (which makes me feel dirty, really) until these adoption contracts are changed to an outright buy per skin.

Pix

Reddit link with dulfy calling out anet on this

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll do my best to keep this as polite as possible, but seeing what has been presented made me look at Anet as if it were the fabied Nigerian prince that I keep telling to kitten off.

First, lets start with what Anet set as the standard. That would be the Halloween mount set where the price was about 400 gems per mount. 400 gems, with a guarantee of what you were getting.

Now... what did we get presented with?

For 2000, you could get a special mount. Wait, did I say special? I mean a reskined jackel that you were guaranteed to get. I can't say that a 500% increase in cost is something I'd ever consider. There is just the one skin. Nothing for the others, nothing special per race. (And while I don't know this one for fact yet as I have seen zero posts) I doubt that it moves faster, recovers endurance faster, has more porting possibilities, or even more HP to justify this extravagant price. So point blank. Unless the majority of monies gained from such a sale/purchase was going to a charity I support, I will never buy such a mount, ever, at that price.

So lets flip the table now.

For 400, you could get a random mount. Not a random jackel, not a random griffon, not a random skimmer, just a random mount. For the same price that we payed for getting a known mount???You know I'm fine with BLC being random. I know what I'm getting, there is some guarantee, and some chance. A gamble if you want something directly out of there, sure, but hey... we can also farm such keys in game. But this???

Have any of your managers ever gone and bought something they ride/drive? I want Anet to actually do an internal poll. How many ever said "Get me an automobile for $20,000." You could end up with a truck, jeep, mini, sedan, etc. heck, by that requirement alone you could have a complete ruined car. Nothing said it had to run. So... how many people at anet said they did that. None huh? So why the hell are you doing that to your players? Some of the mechanics in the game that are forced on us is to "mimic real life" as it were. "It would be logical for X to happen to players." While we grumble, we deal. By that same logic, NEVER have I ever seen a player or real person just buy an animal without ever looking it over that they themselves were going to own, ride, etc. And even if they did, they were strict about what they wanted.

And then lets look at that term that anet put on those. Mount ADOPTION. Always in an adoption you know EXACTLY which "being" (as one can adopt both animals and humans) is being adopted. There may be a portfolio of candidates for adoption, but always the adoptee chooses the one they are willing to adopt.

While under legal terms, what anet is offering is not a scam, but to me it sure as heck is a scam. I can't buy a convince I want, but I can buy a CHANCE at a convince that I desire? This has gambling and scam written all over it in my perception.

Heck, what I see here is barter. Anet I charge you with conning players. I can't say that you are conning players into giving you monies because you do have the method built in of converting gold to gems. You have two opening bids now in an attempt to negate your first opening bid.

You have decided to say that 400 to get a directly known mount was too little. So now you have stated, you can spend 2,000 gems for a mount of your choice, or 400 for any random mount out of a set that you don't own yet.

I honestly was expecting something like 400 gems, maybe even 500 gems for a mount of my choosing due to your actual opening offers, and the fact you sell combos of gliders with backpacks for 700.

So this is my counter. 100 gems for a mount of my choosing. (if you actually have a clue, you understand what I'm doing and meaning.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not gonna read all of these to see if anyone else mentioned it but wanted to offer a couple of thoughts.

1) You obviously have a pipeline for making skins now. Make some themed for some of the metas and put them as tradable drops at a low rate (pls not as low rate as the chak aura thingy as my guild runs that every night and I've yet to see anyone get it). That will incentive new content as rare drops for neat stuff is a big part of why people keep running HOT metas.2) I spend money on your shop. I wanna support you. Your pricing was off on this push and you've kicked a hornets nest. Make amends quickly. 200-300 I would think would be better for the random route if you really wanna go that way. The standalone single skin for 2k is way high.3) Make a 6th anniversary skin for next year for long time players with a pick one like the weapons skins and back skins. It's a good long term incentive.4) Make at least one skin unlocked by content with new living story episodes

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mounts just came out, but the first pair of skins came in a bundle only, where you can't even buy any of them individually "which is uncommon and pretty unfavorable to most players" and now the second wave of mount skins come out and it's even more outrageous with the RNG Factor. Personally the Gem Store is adding more RNG than ever before, and I'm disliking it; I know I don't have to buy it and, I don't but in my opinion It's starting to leave a bad taste in my mouth and pushing me more and more to keep focus on other games other than GW2 to rid of possibly getting into that gem store shenanigans.

PS: In the Gem Store I've never bought Chest Keys with my own gems, but now there's unobtainable stuff in the Black Lion Chest, that cannot be traded so that's more of a reason for me to not buy it; mostly because I'm not interested in RNG and I don't support it. I buy a lot of bag slots, couple character slots, some other stuff and I love it because I don't have to roll a die to get what I want.

Edit: Reading other opinions and thinking about it myself, It's very true that I very much didn't mind shelling out some money for this game and it's hard-working staff because it's very unique and likable at that. But putting more and more of this type of RNG in your gem store is making me less and less trusting of the game and the gem store.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd think fixing this mess up would be ANet's priority 1 at the moment but as far as I can tell there isn't a peep from ANet about how upset people are on this.

If they are worried about overloading the gem store by allowing people to choose the skins they want then they could do it from the mount skin section of the hero panel. They could make it so we could just click on a skin you want and buy it with gems there. We can already buy bag slot expansions outside of the gem store from the Inventory Panel.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's talk about the audience/customer base for mount skins - and let's keep in mind anyone buying a mount skin is already a paying customer, because they bought Path of Fire.

Completionists will be unhappy because $120 for all 30 skins is a very high asking price for a single purchase. Can you even buy that many gems at once through the UI? Maybe that's fine because being a completionist in this game is already a quick route to bankruptcy.

Folks who want a cheap/plain skin to match their armor will be unhappy because the cost of the raffle ticket has to account for the chance of pulling a "chase" skin, and even then they might not get the particular skin they want. They might not even be happy if they end up with a flashy skin because it doesn't match their aesthetic - the particle effects are not for everyone.

Folks who want a "chase" skin with shiny particle effects will probably be unhappy because they're forced to keep rolling dice until they get the one they're after. A select few will only spend $5 and have a great time, everyone else gets to sulk - it has the potential to make the 2000 gem jackal look generous in comparison.

Folks who just want something new and don't care what it is are happy, I guess. They pay $5 and get to use a single new mount. Maybe it's a mount they use a lot, maybe it isn't. Is this a large segment? I imagine the previous three buckets are much larger.

Who "wins" here except for ArenaNet? Are any of the customers truly satisfied except the ones that are already accustomed to huge gem store purchases and can rationalize $120 to themselves, or those with enough gold to buy it outright with ingame currency?

Usually when I spend money on gaming I walk away feeling happy and like I got good value for my dollar. With this price structure I walk away feeling like I just got out of a car dealership - ultimately maybe I bought something but it was an unpleasant experience and I'm not in a hurry to go back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@nastyjman.8207 said:I'm taking a break. I've moved from anger to depression. It's just hitting me right now at how disappointing this whole rng lootbox had transpired. It really feels like grief, like your best friend just died.

Aw. Is there anything I can do for you? Being depressed is no fun at all, if you need to talk, please PM me. ^_^

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Ider.1276 said:

@nexidecimus.5973 said:Arenanet, I just have one question. What could have possibly possessed the entire company to go along with this and have not a single individual say "Maybe this is a bad idea. it might kitten some people off." ? edit: wow forum lords are so literal. ok lemme clear this up, i mean all the people who are responsible for letting this happen. as in, the people who actually gave this the green light. not one of them was like "uh, no how about we don't?"

It is a win/win situation for the company. There could be 2 ways out of this situation: 1) Community accepts mount lootboxes -> profit; 2) Community actively rejects lootboxes (what we have now) -> Anet says "Sorry!", removes adoption licences and gets a bunch on praise and good PR as a company that rejected filthy lootbox practices and listened to its audience (as it happened with Dauntless and Monster Hunter World recently). Additionaly they have a profit from all those who were against lootboxes, but couldn't hold themselves and already bought a bunch of them.A man who came up with this plan is very clever and calculated everything.

This.

It's not about "making gw2 great again"Its not about "supporting gw2" like they're a mom and pop lemonade stand.It's not about "wont anyone think about the poor starving Anet employees"It's not about "what's a fair price"It's not about "giving people new and exciting ways to play"It's about money. Maximising profits.Anet could have easily given away a bunch of skins with the ex pac. It's about seeing how much of the content can be monetized.Can, should, legal and fair are not synonymous. It's a product. Either you're willing to buy into it or you're not. Even F2P players are buying into it without spending a single penny. Ghost town mmo's don't work and you can't show off if there's no audience. Anet and NCsoft know what makes them money so you can expect a lot more of this type of grind or pay, RNG, loot box, gated content business model whether you like it or not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm really dissapointed to se A-Net follow what they started with the BL Keys in a feature FAR more requested/expected than random skins. Those at least competed with TONS of other skins that could be bought directly via the Black Lion market AND all the "free" ones you get from playing. ("free" because Im a beta player who pre - ordered the game and both expansions)

Heck, I -as most of the community- expected a "Glider" model to the mounts, with reasonable prices AND non gambling purchases if you want to pay for gems / grind them.

But this? I certainly didn't expect this. And I wont support a game with this kind of predatory mechanics anymore. I'm fucking burned by this lootbox bullshit that AAA company's are pushing out and will continue voting with my wallet against it.

PS and Edit: Heck even using the glider prices it means TONS of more money as you will want probably a skin for each mount! I cant fathom the greed that its needed to make this kind of decisions on top.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...