1600 Gems for a Jade Bot Skin

[DexterousGecko.6328]

1 minute ago, Batel.9206 said:

Can people stop saying this is "predatory"? It isn't. It's overpriced.

What would be "predatory" is if, for example, the jade bot was advertised as a free service that you get with leveling up the masteries in End of Dragons. And it is...for a little while, or for a limited amount of uses. If you want more/different uses, more time to use it, and/or use it in competitive modes for a stat boost, you have to pay. (That, incidentally, is pay-to-win.) Or if the advertisement was that it had x skill or y ability, but only by paying for it does it actually gain those abilities because it didn't have them in the free trial (and that wasn't obvious from marketing), that's predatory and wrong. If the jade bot or this skin was marketed as something that you absolutely need to be competitive or successful in the game (and you had to pay to get it), then it turns out its actual contribution to gameplay is so negligible as to be almost nonexistent, that's predatory.

That's not what this is.

This is a hilariously overpriced cosmetic skin for something that is used so little it may not be worth it. But it isn't predatory. It's pretty clear this is a purely cosmetic skin, like absolutely every other skin in the entire gem store. It isn't advertised or marketed in any way as to trick anyone into thinking this changes the jade bot's abilities, stats, or anything about it apart from looks. If someone wants to shell out that amount of gems for a cosmetic change - okay, go right ahead. They know what they're getting: a skin. That's not a trick, that's not a deception, that's not misleading, it's just terribly overpriced...but predatory? No.

Stop using that word - you devalue its meaning. It's like the boy who cried wolf: when/if something comes along that genuinely IS predatory pricing or marketing, no one will take it as seriously as they should because everything else has been falsely called by that term.

It's predatory.

[Sobx.1758]

22 minutes ago, Mickey.4207 said:

It is outrageous though. If could keep my jade bot out as long as i want i might even spend 1600 gems but for something you see for few seconds at a time it's crazy price

You're free to think so. I don't -and even moreso if my main take on it would be "you can barely see it!". If we can barely see it, why so many people care about its price 🤦‍♂️ Overpriced? Sure, I've said this much. But outrageous? It's just a skin for something we barely see.

13 minutes ago, DexterousGecko.6328 said:

When people defend insane pricing with "you don't NEED it" why would they price things any differently?

 

That said, I'm worried they're going to try to force jade bots into future content.

For all we know they're checking how many people will buy it and nothing anyone writes anywhere will change anything about it. If half of the community (intentionally overblown number, vast majority will probably just silently ignore it because it doesn't matter to most of them and changes nothing about how they play the game) complaints about the price being too high, but xyz people still buy it, to the point anet decides it's a good profit, they'll leave the price -or maybe include cheaper reskins like with mount skins where the price also varies. If you don't want it then sure, leave a post about it and simply don't buy it, not much else left to do. Repeating it's somehow "outrageous" (or even claiming it's "predatory", as well as claiming it deserves a lawsuit[! 🤦‍♂️ ]) because the skin you want is overpriced, while at the same time the repeated argument for the price being too high is... "we can barely see it anyways!" seems to be an effort at overdramatization to me. And I can't help but just not see it seriously -chances are neither will anet.

Edited July 20, 2022 by Sobx.1758

[notebene.3190]

It's kinda cute. I hope some day they let us keep it out, or perhaps to have it show up like Otter's Blessing. I like how it sits on my zip line platform. And the timing of the release with this LW1 episode and "Gift from Scarlet" gives you an easy way to see what it looks like during "Rescue Protocol" (it dances).

1600? Yeah, a little pricey. But when I think of all the 800 outfits I never wear because I thought they might be 'close enough' to something I'd enjoy, or even the 1600 for the 'Lord of the Rings Skiff' (which I ended up not liking and never use...though I do use my default skiff and fish still), it will passively always get used.

And goes nicely with my plush griffon. Oh, just thought of another test...

...yeah, it flaps it's wings really hard when you use Gliding Booster. I'll probably get to see that most often, as I use that a lot.

[Justine.6351]

3 hours ago, Ashen.2907 said:

Indeed.

300(ish) employees, $80k average dev salary for ANet's geographical area, x1.3 cost to employ multiplier for ANet's area. 2years development for the expansion. Total payroll cost for the period of the expansion's development: 62 million dollars. Now lets say only half of the team worked on the expansion. That is 31 million dollars in payroll costs alone. At 30 bucks a pop the expansion would need to sell a million copies just to cover payroll for its development. The reality is that expansions are likely loss leaders, or nearly so, where the micro (macro in some cases) transactions are where the company makes any profit at all.

Yeah I can't imagine living has gotten any cheaper for anet staff these last couple years where they are based. Anet is either paying more, paying under qualified people the same ole pay or their workers are getting poorer by the day. I too am getting offered positions I don't think I am qualified for because companies don't want to pay more for the current tier employees. It's not surprising gemstore tuesday went from every other Tuesday to every tuesday. 10$ doesn't bu what it used to. Things that havnt moved in price have just gotten smaller instead. Something like the jadebot skin are an example of things that have gotten smaller (lmao) AND more expensive. Welcome to inflation kids.

[Zephire.8049]

13 minutes ago, Batel.9206 said:

Can people stop saying this is "predatory"? It isn't. It's overpriced.

What would be "predatory" is if, for example, the jade bot was advertised as a free service that you get with leveling up the masteries in End of Dragons. And it is...for a little while, or for a limited amount of uses. If you want more/different uses, more time to use it, and/or use it in competitive modes for a stat boost, you have to pay. (That, incidentally, is pay-to-win.) Or if the advertisement was that it had x skill or y ability, but only by paying for it does it actually gain those abilities because it didn't have them in the free trial (and that wasn't obvious from marketing), that's predatory and wrong. If the jade bot or this skin was marketed as something that you absolutely need to be competitive or successful in the game (and you had to pay to get it), then it turns out its actual contribution to gameplay is so negligible as to be almost nonexistent, that's predatory.

That's not what this is.

This is a hilariously overpriced cosmetic skin for something that is used so little it may not be worth it. But it isn't predatory. It's pretty clear this is a purely cosmetic skin, like absolutely every other skin in the entire gem store. It isn't advertised or marketed in any way as to trick anyone into thinking this changes the jade bot's abilities, stats, or anything about it apart from looks. If someone wants to shell out that amount of gems for a cosmetic change - okay, go right ahead. They know what they're getting: a skin. That's not a trick, that's not a deception, that's not misleading, it's just terribly overpriced...but predatory? No.

Stop using that word - you devalue its meaning. It's like the boy who cried wolf: when/if something comes along that genuinely IS predatory pricing or marketing, no one will take it as seriously as they should because everything else has been falsely called by that term.

It is predatory pricing because predatory pricing isn't just high prices or taken in a bubble, it's how a cash store is organized and how it exploits disabilities and psychology.

• Limited/rotating stock give the illusion of scarcity and "encourage" people to buy something ASAP because there's no way to know if/when it will be available again.
• Lootboxes are RNG endorphin highs where there's no guarantee you'll get what you want even if you spend $100 on them.
• Starting high normalizes high prices and makes everything else seem reasonable when they'd be considered high if there wasn't a foundational item priced even higher.
• Items are bundled together to give them a perceived idea of value.
• Creating a behaviour loop by having the cash shop open when you want to go to the trading post.
• Highlighting the cash shop icon when there's a new item in it.
• Sending out emails telling subscribers that there's a new item to buy.
• Having sales be on the regular price even on items that are forever discounted (i.e. key bundles).

And that's just off the top of my head of the GW2 cash shop. Just because it isn't as predatory as other games doesn't mean it's not predatory. Call it what it is, don't give developers a pass because you like them.

[Ashen.2907]

2 minutes ago, Zephire.8049 said:

It is predatory pricing because predatory pricing isn't just high prices or taken in a bubble, it's how a cash store is organized and how it exploits disabilities and psychology.

• Limited/rotating stock give the illusion of scarcity and "encourage" people to buy something ASAP because there's no way to know if/when it will be available again.
• Lootboxes are RNG endorphin highs where there's no guarantee you'll get what you want even if you spend $100 on them.
• Starting high normalizes high prices and makes everything else seem reasonable when they'd be considered high if there wasn't a foundational item priced even higher.
• Items are bundled together to give them a perceived idea of value.
• Creating a behaviour loop by having the cash shop open when you want to go to the trading post.
• Highlighting the cash shop icon when there's a new item in it.
• Sending out emails telling subscribers that there's a new item to buy.
• Having sales be on the regular price even on items that are forever discounted (i.e. key bundles).

And that's just off the top of my head of the GW2 cash shop. Just because it isn't as predatory as other games doesn't mean it's not predatory. Call it what it is, don't give developers a pass because you like them.

Excepting loot boxes, no. Not predatory. Selling people something they want at a price they are willing to pay, without falsely advertising the features of the product, while delivering as promised is no more predatory than is the case of a consumer choosing to not buy somethimg that they do not want, or do not want at an existing price.

I dont say this as someone who likes these devs because I think that they are doing a horrible job developing this game and am personally looking for another game to replace this one...or may give up on MMOs completely because of ANet's handling of GW2.

[Southerncarl.2740]

Welcome to the rot that is microtransactions in MMO's.

[branwen.1049]

i just want to know why the jade bot skin is the price of a mount skin..... when we never ever see the goddamn thing. if the jade bot was something that was out all the time or at least very regularly during EoD then okay, yea, maybe it'd be worth the price? but 1.6k gems is absurd for something that we only get the smallest blip of whenever we chomp jade batteries 😕

[Justine.6351]

2 hours ago, Ashen.2907 said:

I didnt claim that it was to pay devs more, or anything of the sort. I was merely describing (in part) how much it cost to develop an expansion over the course of 2 years with a particular team size, average salaries, and average cost to employ. I really do hope that ANet has some sort of profit sharing program for its employees, or at least a good 401k matching program, but I dont have any information on that with which to make even an estimate. 

I completely understand that compensation can be excessively top heavy these days, which is particularly obnoxious when not tied to performance.

 

Lol didn't see you had a battle going on the previous page.

Imagine their surprise when anet does a big layoff in the next year and every tuesday is gemstore tuesday. If they think the jadebot skin is expensive I guess they havnt seen grocery prices explode over the past couple years?

If they don't charge more gems they are going to charge more for gems. Or they are going to keep getting fancier and fancier with gemstore skins and more frequently. We got fishing poles, jadebots, turtle mounts and skiffs this expansion to sell skins for in the gemstore. Can't wait to see what new mechanic they come up with that has monetizable skins.

[Southerncarl.2740]

Honestly I'd rather just pay a sub at this point and have everything achievable within the game. Some of the items they are adding to the store is just killing immersion. Everyone knows cat skins will sell well so obviously arena net will do it but this new cute flying cat with rainbow wings is such a blatant cash grab I can't help but lose respect for the game and the developers.

[Zephire.8049]

17 minutes ago, Ashen.2907 said:

Excepting loot boxes, no. Not predatory. Selling people something they want at a price they are willing to pay, without falsely advertising the features of the product, while delivering as promised is no more predatory than is the case of a consumer choosing to not buy somethimg that they do not want, or do not want at an existing price.

I dont say this as someone who likes these devs because I think that they are doing a horrible job developing this game and am personally looking for another game to replace this one...or may give up on MMOs completely because of ANet's handling of GW2.

It is. When there's entire methods and studies about how to trick people into spending money on virtual goods they don't own (it's a lucrative job with no shortage of companies looking to hire), it's predatory. You may think you or others have a choice but that's not the case unless you know the methods used and fight against every single one. Even grocery store layouts is better than this.

This has been ramping up since the outrage at Oblivion's horse armour DLC and only gotten worse as mobile games are able to experiment and tweak practices that have been adopted by console/PC gaming with companies seeing what they can get away with and customers thinking this sort of thing is normal.

[Southerncarl.2740]

4 minutes ago, Zephire.8049 said:

It is. When there's entire methods and studies about how to trick people into spending money on virtual goods they don't own (it's a lucrative job with no shortage of companies looking to hire), it's predatory. You may think you or others have a choice but that's not the case unless you know the methods used and fight against every single one. Even grocery store layouts is better than this.

This has been ramping up since the outrage at Oblivion's horse armour DLC and only gotten worse as mobile games are able to experiment and tweak practices that have been adopted by console/PC gaming with companies seeing what they can get away with and customers thinking this sort of thing is normal.

 

I think it's too late now microtransactions will probably get worse from here. A lot of people growing up now don't remember when games weren't monetized it's become the norm for them. For every 1 player who thinks games shouldn't be monetized this way there's 1000 other players lining up ready to buy a faerie cute flying cat skin for 20 dollars off the cash store.

[jamesg.7128]

On 7/20/2022 at 3:19 AM, Ashen.2907 said:

I honestly dont think that ANet ever expected very many people to be interested in this so they priced it to generate as much revenue as possible from those few who would be inclined to buy it. 

But if they priced it for half that, would twice as many buy it? The nett result would be the same. 

[Ashen.2907]

35 minutes ago, jamesg.7128 said:

But if they priced it for half that, would twice as many buy it? The nett result would be the same. 

Sure, but if they dont think that twice as many people would buy it....

[Ashen.2907]

1 hour ago, Zephire.8049 said:

It is. When there's entire methods and studies about how to trick people into spending money on virtual goods they don't own (it's a lucrative job with no shortage of companies looking to hire), it's predatory. You may think you or others have a choice but that's not the case unless you know the methods used and fight against every single one. Even grocery store layouts is better than this.

This has been ramping up since the outrage at Oblivion's horse armour DLC and only gotten worse as mobile games are able to experiment and tweak practices that have been adopted by console/PC gaming with companies seeing what they can get away with and customers thinking this sort of thing is normal.

Nope.

I have never been convinced to buy something that I do not want and consider to be worth the listed price (excepting some lootboxes which I completely agree are another matter entirely because they are a form of gambling that children can participate in). It doesnt matter that the milk is at the back of the grocery store and that I have to walk past snack foods to get to it, if I am not interested in buying the junk food I dont. No one in such a situation is tricked into buying anything, they are offered things and decide that those things are worth the listed price for them.

Edited July 20, 2022 by Ashen.2907

[DexterousGecko.6328]

3 minutes ago, Ashen.2907 said:

Nope.

I have never been convinced to buy something that I do not want and consider to be worth the listed price (excepting some lootboxes which I completely agree are another matter entirely because they are a form of gambling that children can participate in). It doesnt matter that the milk is at the back of the grocery store and that I have to walk past snack foods to get to it, if I am not interested in buying the junk food I dont. No one in such a situation is tricked into buying anything, they are offered things and decide that those things are worth the listed price for them.

So you're saying that the 10s/100s of millions of dollars corporations pay yearly in advertising/studies are completely pointless? And that psychological manipulation in marketing isn't really a thing?

[Ashen.2907]

Just now, DexterousGecko.6328 said:

So you're saying that the 10s/100s of millions of dollars corporations pay yearly in advertising/studies are completely pointless? And that psychological manipulation in marketing isn't really a thing?

Said nothing of the sort.

[DexterousGecko.6328]

2 minutes ago, Ashen.2907 said:

Said nothing of the sort.

I'm all ears to your clarification then.

your quote:

Quote

It doesnt matter that the milk is at the back of the grocery store and that I have to walk past snack foods to get to it, if I am not interested in buying the junk food I dont. No one in such a situation is tricked into buying anything, they are offered things and decide that those things are worth the listed price for them.

 

[SDSkuld.9352]

1600 gems is too high a price for something we see so rarely and I will not purchase any jade bot skins at this price point. 

[Ashen.2907]

2 minutes ago, DexterousGecko.6328 said:

I'm all ears to your clarification then.

your quote:

 

My quote stands, what do you need clarification on? No one is tricked into buying those cheezits while walking to the dairy section to buy their yogurt. Are they reminded of the existence of the crackers? Maybe (And I say maybe because studies have made it very clear that modern humans notice only a tiny fraction of their surroundings). But tricked? No. Deceived? No. Offering options is not manipulation even if placement of those options is designed to have a greater chance of being noticed than something else.

Ask yourself this, when was the last time you left the grocery store with one of everything you had to walk past on your way to dairy?

[Sobx.1758]

2 hours ago, DexterousGecko.6328 said:

So you're saying that the 10s/100s of millions of dollars corporations pay yearly in advertising/studies are completely pointless? And that psychological manipulation in marketing isn't really a thing?

As you can see plenty of people hold strong opinions about their perceived value of individual items/skins. If by some reason you're suddenly forgetting that the item you've (generic you btw) previously  deemed to be worth 500-800 gems is still not worth it for you when the price go down from 1600 to -lets say- 1200, then all I can assist you with is an advanced combination of pen and paper. Perhaps even a windows notepad. Using this simple trick no filthy predatory discount of an overpriced item can get you against your will. 🙌

Or -you know- just remember what you think it's worth to you and don't buy it if you think it's still overpriced even after the price reduction 🙃

Edited July 21, 2022 by Sobx.1758

[DexterousGecko.6328]

20 minutes ago, Ashen.2907 said:

Ask yourself this, when was the last time you left the grocery store with one of everything you had to walk past on your way to dairy?

Well, if you need to go straight to appeal to extremes, I think I'll just move on.

[crosknight.3041]

the big issue i have with monitization is that "it supports the devs" is probably one of the biggest lies in the gaming industry at the moment. we all know the devs will be lucky to get any of the scraps left by the suits/execs/shareholders. if it didn't we wouldn't have so many reports of publishers cutting hundreds of jobs every year while simultaneously having record profits (looking at you activision). maybe if anets publishers were like nintendo where the execs actually are willing to take paycuts to prevent mass layoffs i wouldn't be so grump'd about the pricing of the jadebot, but nintendo is the exception to the rule.
 

The prices of monetization also goes up to try to push that unsustainable infinite growth shenanigans as well for the shareholders. and as the recession hits harder people are going to cutback on needless spending harder. putting out a digital product that is worth nothing in reality for 4 times a reasonable price is gonna make people shut their wallets harder.

[AliamRationem.5172]

11 hours ago, ShroomOneUp.6913 said:

when are people gonna learn that skins are p2w in this industry? google "the haves and the have nots"

I don't need google to tell me that P2W doesn't apply to cosmetics.  Thanks, though.

[Caitybee.3614]

On 7/19/2022 at 12:19 PM, Lottie.5370 said:

Holy kitten. I almost did not believe this one when someone mentioned it in the guild discord.

 

This price is just excessive and outrageous, especially considering just how little we see the jade bot - it's not like there is a toggle to show it all the time. Despite all of this - I probably would have bought it if it was 400-800 gems (I honestly thought it would have been in-line with mail carriers).

 

Curious what others' thoughts on this are?

 

Agreed, 1600 for Jade Bot skins is too high. Cut it to 600-800 gems then I'd consider buying them; and/or implement a toggle so we can have the Bot flying around with us similar to a Miniature.

I'm a mount skin buyer, so if they made a skin for the Jade Bot I really liked, I'd consider getting it, but not for such a steep price. I'd rather buy an exclusive mount skin for 1600 gems, or a whole pack of multiple skins for that.