Jump to content
  • Sign Up

How About Some Love For ArenaNet??


Recommended Posts

Just because EA is worse, doesn't suddenly make Anet a better company. :/

They have things that they can be praised for but since you are trying to make a comparison for EA's latest practices, I think "Showing Anet" love for not putting as many hairs in your soup as EA did doesn't mean there aren't hairs in the soup.

So, OP, when you or any one else goes "At least they aren't as bad as EA!" Remember, the lesser of two evils doesn't mean someone is suddenly a saint.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 159
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

@RoChan.1926 said:Just because EA is worse, doesn't suddenly make Anet a better company. :/

They have things that they can be praised for but since you are trying to make a comparison for EA's latest practices, I think "Showing Anet" love for not putting as many hairs in your soup as EA did doesn't mean there aren't hairs in the soup.

So, OP, when you or any one else goes "At least they aren't as bad as EA!" Remember, the lesser of two evils doesn't mean someone is suddenly a saint.

Crikey, perhaps I should follow this post up with a poll "did you read the Op?" but it would only require one answer. C'mon folks, don't make me start playing the devil's advocate. Once again I don't agree with loot boxes, but effectively saying that we should be happy with the "lesser of two evils" is neither naive nor hypocritical. It's obvious ANet care about their game, that publisher... Not so much. Theirs was a response showcasing a total disregard for anything other than making money off of whale oil, ANet's was an admission that they could have designed this better. Clearly, expecting ANet to change how they monetize their mounts in the future is reasonable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@nosleepdemon.1368 said:Recent events on Reddit regarding a certain other publisher certainly do put things in perspective, don't they? Have you guys seen the economy in that game? Full AAA price, with loot boxes on top that literally are pay to win. A bajillion different currencies and unlocks and crafting and cards and locked characters, all screaming at you to pay money to get passed the grind.

This really puts ArenaNet's "Here's 30 mounts have at it!" attitude into perspective. I'm not saying I agree with loot boxes in any form, but I sure am glad I threw my hat in with Gaille and her Krew, instead of those unbelievable kitten hats at that other publisher.

So, how about some love for our chums at ArenaNet? Not everything they do is always super popular, but for goodness sake, they are at least still human!

Hey i know steve hasn't been the best person and technicly he shot someone in the head but at least he's a not a mass murderer like that other guy right?Honestly if you don't care about lootboxes or you like the system and openly say that i have more respect for you when whatever this post is supposed to be. Someone else being worse does not excuse predatory sales tactics in this game, nor does it mean we should suddenly be less angry about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@ChrisLew.5492 said:

@IndigoSundown.5419 said:I've praised ANet many times when I think it is warranted. The best I can say about mount licenses is that they may well be good deals for gamblers, whales and completionists. For anyone else who has any interest in these particular mount skins, the setup is guaranteed to entice spending more than one might choose to were the skins individually priced at an amount the market would bear. In other words, the system is not friendly for what is likely a large consumer demographic.

The carefully-crafted response by Mr. O'Brien encourages the belief that the license sales were designed to be more friendly to consumers. I'd like to believe that. However, the sales plan was also carefully crafted. It comes complete with a supposedly consumer-friendly element (no repeats) which elicits purchasing more than one would be inclined to due to the psychological effect of the sunk-cost fallacy. Sunk-cost thinking is more likely to entice people to go beyond their personal limits than the gambler's fallacy does, except perhaps in people who regularly gamble. ANet completed the sales package with the limited-time bundle price and the anchoring effect of the 2K gem fiery goat skin. The overall marketing strategy, and the we-won't-do-this-again-in-the-next-planned-releases statement make it harder for me to believe ANet had overall consumer interests in mind.

So, the best I can do is to say, "Thanks for designing a mount skin purchase plan which is likely better for your big-ticket customers than other games do."

What I will also say is, "Thanks for avoiding the sale of in-game power in the gem store." That part I do appreciate.

Except “sunk-cost” when it applies to real gambling, or truly deplorable cash shops has literally no assurance you will ever get what you want. $120 for 30 different mount skins with no repeats isn’t the worst gouge in the world. I suggest some of you look at the actual fiascos and gambling boxes in other “buy to play” MMORPGs: ESO, Black Desert. I know for a fact you can spend $3000 in ESO trying to get a ‘special’ mount—there’s a post on their forums with someone who did just that. And failed.

Just because there are worse examples of gamble boxes doesn't meant that any gamble box is good or even ok. They ALL manipulate the customer. The fact that Anet didn't release a single reasonably priced skin at the same time as the Mount License box is purposeful: if the players had a choice between gambling or directly purchasing what they wanted, there would be no contest. Would some people purchase the gamble box? Perhaps, but the vast majority of people who have commented on them on these forums have said that even though they purchased a license they would have preferred to not have the RNG.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Cyninja.2954 said:The comparisons some people make, the pure entitlement that seeps out of some comments. Guess what, things are going to get even worse down the road.

Why? Because as GW2 grows older and the playerbase declines and revenue dries up, more drastic methods of monetisation will be required to keep the game working with this kind of monetisation method (no pay to win, cosmetics mostly from gem store, no subscription fee, living world updates inbetween expansions).

Was the mount addition not well received? Sure, it could have been handled better. I personally was/am more concerned with what this says about the state of the monetisation which arenanet are willing to try more than the:"Waaaaah, I can't get the skins I want."

You are absolutely correct - this type of scheme should signal the beginning of a kind of desperation that a company needs to dupe their customers out of more money than the customer would willingly pay. I wonder if Anet means to send this message that GW2 is going down the tubes? But whether a company is doing poorly or not, there is still no excuse to treat your customers poorly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@AegisRunestone.8672 said:

@Kheldorn.5123 said:I don't think Anet deserve anything at this point. They used lootbox mechanic for one reason only - money. If all they care is money, we owe them nothing. More cynism towards anet actions from now on.

Maybe they could use that money to invest in a better balance team.

Since they didn't do this for 5 years it's clear they have no interest to invest in this area of the game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Djinn.9245 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:The comparisons some people make, the pure entitlement that seeps out of some comments. Guess what, things are going to get even worse down the road.

Why? Because as GW2 grows older and the playerbase declines and revenue dries up, more drastic methods of monetisation will be required to keep the game working with this kind of monetisation method (no pay to win, cosmetics mostly from gem store, no subscription fee, living world updates inbetween expansions).

Was the mount addition not well received? Sure, it could have been handled better. I personally was/am more concerned with what this says about the state of the monetisation which arenanet are willing to try more than the:"Waaaaah, I can't get the skins I want."

You are absolutely correct - this type of scheme should signal the beginning of a kind of desperation that a company needs to dupe their customers out of more money than the customer would willingly pay. I wonder if Anet means to send this message that GW2 is going down the tubes? But whether a company is doing poorly or not, there is still no excuse to treat your customers poorly.

Poorly? Dupe?

The mount pricing and implementation model was very clear on how it works. At no point should there have been any confusion to a person with basic linguistic skills to understand how it works. So there is your "dupe" out the window, here read up on what to dupe actually means:

dupe - verb [ T ] uk ​ /dʒuːp/ us ​ /duːp/​to deceive someone, usually by making that person do something that they did not intend to do:

Words have meanings, use them properly and don't hyperbole.

As far as poorly, it's OPTIONAL COSMETIC CONTENT which in no way affects you as a customer or player besides maybe ruffeling your feathers because you can't purchase it the way you want. Unfortunate and yes, maybe they should have just made the individual mounts more expensive but directly purchasable (in which case people would be here crying about how overpriced they are, see the halloween mount threads on this exact topic). That's far from treating your customers poorly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Zakka.2153 said:How about no, and we stop pretending that these types of business practices are ok. Developers and Companies should strive to make their service excellent not nickel and dime their consumers any given chance.

See, this kind of attitude is precisely why developers are forced into exploring various monetization methods.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Feanor.2358 said:

@nosleepdemon.1368 said:Recent events on Reddit regarding a certain other publisher certainly do put things in perspective, don't they? Have you guys
seen
the economy in
that
game? Full AAA price, with loot boxes on top that literally are pay to win. A bajillion different currencies and unlocks and crafting and cards and locked characters, all screaming at you to pay money to get passed the grind.

This really puts ArenaNet's "Here's 30 mounts have at it!" attitude into perspective. I'm not saying I agree with loot boxes in
any
form, but I sure am glad I threw my hat in with Gaille and her Krew, instead of those unbelievable kitten hats at that
other
publisher.

So, how about some love for our chums at ArenaNet? Not everything they do is always super popular, but for goodness sake, they are at least still human!

I'm just going to throw one more thing about the 30 mount skins. You know, as food for thought.> @Zakka.2153 said:

How about no, and we stop pretending that these types of business practices are ok. Developers and Companies should strive to make their service excellent not nickel and dime their consumers any given chance.

See, this kind of attitude is precisely why developers are forced into exploring various monetization methods.

Forced? Anet is doing better than expected financially. This means that new mount license is motivated only by greed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Kheldorn.5123 said:

@Feanor.2358 said:

@nosleepdemon.1368 said:Recent events on Reddit regarding a certain other publisher certainly do put things in perspective, don't they? Have you guys
seen
the economy in
that
game? Full AAA price, with loot boxes on top that literally are pay to win. A bajillion different currencies and unlocks and crafting and cards and locked characters, all screaming at you to pay money to get passed the grind.

This really puts ArenaNet's "Here's 30 mounts have at it!" attitude into perspective. I'm not saying I agree with loot boxes in
any
form, but I sure am glad I threw my hat in with Gaille and her Krew, instead of those unbelievable kitten hats at that
other
publisher.

So, how about some love for our chums at ArenaNet? Not everything they do is always super popular, but for goodness sake, they are at least still human!

I'm just going to throw one more thing about the 30 mount skins. You know, as food for thought.> @Zakka.2153 said:

How about no, and we stop pretending that these types of business practices are ok. Developers and Companies should strive to make their service excellent not nickel and dime their consumers any given chance.

See, this kind of attitude is precisely why developers are forced into exploring various monetization methods.

Forced? Anet is doing better than expected financially. This means that new mount license is motivated only by greed.

You do know that these kind of decisions are made months before the content even gets added into the game right?

As a business, it's ones responsibility to make sure the monetisation works. Months or even weeks beforehand no one could have known how successful PoF would have been or how well player retention would be. Especially with how people reacted to HoT and the changes coming with that expansion.

It's the developers (and publishers) responsibility to make sure the game stays fanancially viable and functional so that:

A. share- and stakeholders are happy (putting this first because quite frankly, this is a business)B. the companys staff and all involved are payed (putting this 2nd because again, peoples livehood>peoples leisure time)C. the customers are happy which first and foremost means the game has to stay alive and well. optional non essential content is way way way further down the list than keeping the game and servers as well as further developement alive and working

They tried something different, people did not like it. Fine. Future mount releases will be priced higher but individually purchasable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Kheldorn.5123 said:

@Feanor.2358 said:

@nosleepdemon.1368 said:Recent events on Reddit regarding a certain other publisher certainly do put things in perspective, don't they? Have you guys
seen
the economy in
that
game? Full AAA price, with loot boxes on top that literally are pay to win. A bajillion different currencies and unlocks and crafting and cards and locked characters, all screaming at you to pay money to get passed the grind.

This really puts ArenaNet's "Here's 30 mounts have at it!" attitude into perspective. I'm not saying I agree with loot boxes in
any
form, but I sure am glad I threw my hat in with Gaille and her Krew, instead of those unbelievable kitten hats at that
other
publisher.

So, how about some love for our chums at ArenaNet? Not everything they do is always super popular, but for goodness sake, they are at least still human!

I'm just going to throw one more thing about the 30 mount skins. You know, as food for thought.> @Zakka.2153 said:

How about no, and we stop pretending that these types of business practices are ok. Developers and Companies should strive to make their service excellent not nickel and dime their consumers any given chance.

See, this kind of attitude is precisely why developers are forced into exploring various monetization methods.

Forced? Anet is doing better than expected financially. This means that new mount license is motivated only by greed.

You do know that these kind of decisions are made months before the content even gets added into the game right?

As a business, it's ones responsibility to make sure the monetisation works. Months or even weeks beforehand no one could have known how successful PoF would have been or how well player retention would be. Especially with how people reacted to HoT and the changes coming with that expansion.

It's the developers (and publishers) responsibility to make sure the game stays fanancially viable and functional so that:

A. share- and stakeholders are happy (putting this first because quite frankly, this is a business)B. the companys staff and all involved are payed (putting this 2nd because again, peoples livehood>peoples leisure time)C. the customers are happy which first and foremost means the game has to stay alive and well. optional non essential content is way way way further down the list than keeping the game and servers as well as further developement alive and working

They tried something different, people did not like it. Fine. Future mount releases will be priced higher but individually purchasable.

I'm okay with them going away with this in the future. But I see no reason to praise them for anything. Not to mention showing "sum luv". This is bussiness. It's cynical. They don't love you or me, they want our money. And they deserve nothing more but the same in return - cynical customers that value their money.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Kheldorn.5123 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Kheldorn.5123 said:

@Feanor.2358 said:

@nosleepdemon.1368 said:Recent events on Reddit regarding a certain other publisher certainly do put things in perspective, don't they? Have you guys
seen
the economy in
that
game? Full AAA price, with loot boxes on top that literally are pay to win. A bajillion different currencies and unlocks and crafting and cards and locked characters, all screaming at you to pay money to get passed the grind.

This really puts ArenaNet's "Here's 30 mounts have at it!" attitude into perspective. I'm not saying I agree with loot boxes in
any
form, but I sure am glad I threw my hat in with Gaille and her Krew, instead of those unbelievable kitten hats at that
other
publisher.

So, how about some love for our chums at ArenaNet? Not everything they do is always super popular, but for goodness sake, they are at least still human!

I'm just going to throw one more thing about the 30 mount skins. You know, as food for thought.> @Zakka.2153 said:

How about no, and we stop pretending that these types of business practices are ok. Developers and Companies should strive to make their service excellent not nickel and dime their consumers any given chance.

See, this kind of attitude is precisely why developers are forced into exploring various monetization methods.

Forced? Anet is doing better than expected financially. This means that new mount license is motivated only by greed.

You do know that these kind of decisions are made months before the content even gets added into the game right?

As a business, it's ones responsibility to make sure the monetisation works. Months or even weeks beforehand no one could have known how successful PoF would have been or how well player retention would be. Especially with how people reacted to HoT and the changes coming with that expansion.

It's the developers (and publishers) responsibility to make sure the game stays fanancially viable and functional so that:

A. share- and stakeholders are happy (putting this first because quite frankly, this is a business)B. the companys staff and all involved are payed (putting this 2nd because again, peoples livehood>peoples leisure time)C. the customers are happy which first and foremost means the game has to stay alive and well. optional non essential content is way way way further down the list than keeping the game and servers as well as further developement alive and working

They tried something different, people did not like it. Fine. Future mount releases will be priced higher but individually purchasable.

I'm okay with them going away with this in the future. But I see no reason to praise them for anything. Not to mention showing "sum luv". This is bussiness. It's cynical. They don't love you or me, they want our money. And they deserve nothing more but the same in return - cynical customers that value their money.

That is your right as a consumer.

Many players feel differently especially when it comes to gaming. Most know that especially as far as developers are concerned, a lot of individuals working in the industry do so out of passion and with a gaming background themselves. Showing some support for a developer which has potentially provided you with unbelievable amounts of hours of entertainment for a price which broken down is cents per hour for most, while not mandatory, can be seen as common decency. Especially on forums where people often only come to complain because otherwise they'd be happily gaming away.

You are correct though, arenanet is a business and deserves to be treated as such. In that case though, don't come to the forums in the future complaining about how this evil evil business is trying to make money. It's a 2 way street.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Kheldorn.5123 said:

@Feanor.2358 said:

@nosleepdemon.1368 said:Recent events on Reddit regarding a certain other publisher certainly do put things in perspective, don't they? Have you guys
seen
the economy in
that
game? Full AAA price, with loot boxes on top that literally are pay to win. A bajillion different currencies and unlocks and crafting and cards and locked characters, all screaming at you to pay money to get passed the grind.

This really puts ArenaNet's "Here's 30 mounts have at it!" attitude into perspective. I'm not saying I agree with loot boxes in
any
form, but I sure am glad I threw my hat in with Gaille and her Krew, instead of those unbelievable kitten hats at that
other
publisher.

So, how about some love for our chums at ArenaNet? Not everything they do is always super popular, but for goodness sake, they are at least still human!

I'm just going to throw one more thing about the 30 mount skins. You know, as food for thought.> @Zakka.2153 said:

How about no, and we stop pretending that these types of business practices are ok. Developers and Companies should strive to make their service excellent not nickel and dime their consumers any given chance.

See, this kind of attitude is precisely why developers are forced into exploring various monetization methods.

Forced? Anet is doing better than expected financially. This means that new mount license is motivated only by greed.

How do you know that? You don't have information about their revenues, nor you have information about their expenses. You're just guessing and drawing conclusions from it.

Additionally, it is utterly arrogant to say what the devs should strive to do. Do you have any idea what it is like to be passionate about a game in development, to do your best about it, to end up with a good game that the users love but that barely pays for its development? Let me say that as a developer, I'm quite disillusioned about the playerbase. Users want polished and entertaining games, they want content, but they want it free. Sorry, you can't have that. Gamedev is a business, not a charity.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Kheldorn.5123 said:

@Cyninja.2954 said:

@Kheldorn.5123 said:

@Feanor.2358 said:

@nosleepdemon.1368 said:Recent events on Reddit regarding a certain other publisher certainly do put things in perspective, don't they? Have you guys
seen
the economy in
that
game? Full AAA price, with loot boxes on top that literally are pay to win. A bajillion different currencies and unlocks and crafting and cards and locked characters, all screaming at you to pay money to get passed the grind.

This really puts ArenaNet's "Here's 30 mounts have at it!" attitude into perspective. I'm not saying I agree with loot boxes in
any
form, but I sure am glad I threw my hat in with Gaille and her Krew, instead of those unbelievable kitten hats at that
other
publisher.

So, how about some love for our chums at ArenaNet? Not everything they do is always super popular, but for goodness sake, they are at least still human!

I'm just going to throw one more thing about the 30 mount skins. You know, as food for thought.> @Zakka.2153 said:

How about no, and we stop pretending that these types of business practices are ok. Developers and Companies should strive to make their service excellent not nickel and dime their consumers any given chance.

See, this kind of attitude is precisely why developers are forced into exploring various monetization methods.

Forced? Anet is doing better than expected financially. This means that new mount license is motivated only by greed.

You do know that these kind of decisions are made months before the content even gets added into the game right?

As a business, it's ones responsibility to make sure the monetisation works. Months or even weeks beforehand no one could have known how successful PoF would have been or how well player retention would be. Especially with how people reacted to HoT and the changes coming with that expansion.

It's the developers (and publishers) responsibility to make sure the game stays fanancially viable and functional so that:

A. share- and stakeholders are happy (putting this first because quite frankly, this is a business)B. the companys staff and all involved are payed (putting this 2nd because again, peoples livehood>peoples leisure time)C. the customers are happy which first and foremost means the game has to stay alive and well. optional non essential content is way way way further down the list than keeping the game and servers as well as further developement alive and working

They tried something different, people did not like it. Fine. Future mount releases will be priced higher but individually purchasable.

I'm okay with them going away with this in the future. But I see no reason to praise them for anything. Not to mention showing "sum luv". This is bussiness. It's cynical. They don't love you or me, they want our money. And they deserve nothing more but the same in return - cynical customers that value their money.

If we're going to be cynical, gaming is one of the cheapest entertainments around. MMOs are often played for hundreds, even thousands of hours. And the amount paid for all that entertainment is pitiful. If you measure the cost per hour of entertainment for watching a movie at the theater, you'll end up with orders of magnitude larger number. Granted, movies in general are also more expensive to produce, but not by the same factor. The cynical truth is, gamers pay less than they should. So the industry is trying to squeeze out fairer prices for their product. I can't blame them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@TheRandomGuy.7246 said:

@Feanor.2358 said:Users want polished and entertaining games, they want content, but they want it free.

Users pay polished and entertaining games.

Only if they have no other choice. But as evidenced, they choose to complain while paying, even though they are still paying less than they should.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@TheRandomGuy.7246 said:

@Feanor.2358 said:Users want polished and entertaining games, they want content, but they want it free.

Users pay polished and entertaining games. This is why anet had to add the system that makes people spend way more than they would.

Compared to other games which are buy to play or free to play, GW2 monetisation is a blessing.

So what you are saying is: the game is of so high quality that arenanet was not forced to resort to any pay to win practices so far and was able to live purely off of optional cosmetic content?

I agree.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Feanor.2358 said:

@TheRandomGuy.7246 said:

@Feanor.2358 said:Users want polished and entertaining games, they want content, but they want it free.

Users pay polished and entertaining games.

Only if they have no other choice. But as evidenced, they choose to complain while paying, even though they are still paying less than they should.

The high-polish, low "pay"-spam philosophy is a method of attracting and retaining customers. It's a business decision aiming their game at people for whom these things are important.

Businesses are cold, cynical and inhumane. Everything they do is aimed at money.That said, if you want to say thanks for being relatively ethical, then I'll sign up to that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Kheldorn.5123 said:

@Feanor.2358 said:

@nosleepdemon.1368 said:Recent events on Reddit regarding a certain other publisher certainly do put things in perspective, don't they? Have you guys
seen
the economy in
that
game? Full AAA price, with loot boxes on top that literally are pay to win. A bajillion different currencies and unlocks and crafting and cards and locked characters, all screaming at you to pay money to get passed the grind.

This really puts ArenaNet's "Here's 30 mounts have at it!" attitude into perspective. I'm not saying I agree with loot boxes in
any
form, but I sure am glad I threw my hat in with Gaille and her Krew, instead of those unbelievable kitten hats at that
other
publisher.

So, how about some love for our chums at ArenaNet? Not everything they do is always super popular, but for goodness sake, they are at least still human!

I'm just going to throw one more thing about the 30 mount skins. You know, as food for thought.> @Zakka.2153 said:

How about no, and we stop pretending that these types of business practices are ok. Developers and Companies should strive to make their service excellent not nickel and dime their consumers any given chance.

See, this kind of attitude is precisely why developers are forced into exploring various monetization methods.

Forced? Anet is doing better than expected financially. This means that new mount license is motivated only by greed.

People keep saying this. But the better than expected is not Anet or NcSoft's expecations only a stock company that makes predictions. It did better than that cmpany expected. No one here knows how much profit the game makes or doesn't make.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...