Gem Store prices are unbalanced.

[ReaverKane.7598]

@"ZeftheWicked.3076" said:

It doesn't matter that you are buying it for the skin, they are still selli g it for convenience on top of that. I find some things too much to spend on a game, but others don't, and I don't wish to take that money from ANet. If you don't want to pay the price, move on.

Which is what i just did - rougly ~ 12 euros spent on LoL skin about half an hour ago, cause i had that amount to blow and wanted something fun. Had gem store more tame prices on tools (as i already have full set and am not desperate) i would toss that cash at a-net, but the better deal imho got my "fun fund" money today.

Just saying there are guys like me who would join in and chip in for the game, had the deals been better. If they're not, it's not that i won't spend at all. I'll just spend it elsewhere...

Exactly! IF the choice is:

• buy a new raptor skin for 25-30€or
• buy XCOM2: War of the Chosen for 39.99€ (less when Steam sales)Now guess why i'll be finishing XCOM 2 Campaign again in a couple weeks (i'm too busy to play either atm).Now if mounts were like 10€ each (~1000 gems)? I'd probably have bought 3 of them so far (Jackal, skimmer and springer, didn't like the peacock).

So i don't know their sales figures because they never show them. But i'm sure of 3 things:

• That's 3000 gems i didn't buy from Arena Net.
• I'm pretty sure (given in-game, admittedly anecdotal evidence) that they sold way less of those mounts than most gliders and outfits.
• A lot will have to change for me to buy another deluxe version of this game (i bought deluxe core (x2), Ultimate HoT (x2) and one Ultimate PoF. Plus some gems now and then.

[Ashen.2907]

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@"ZeftheWicked.3076" said:

It doesn't matter that you are buying it for the skin, they are still selli g it for convenience on top of that. I find some things too much to spend on a game, but others don't, and I don't wish to take that money from ANet. If you don't want to pay the price, move on.

Which is what i just did - rougly ~ 12 euros spent on LoL skin about half an hour ago, cause i had that amount to blow and wanted something fun. Had gem store more tame prices on tools (as i already have full set and am not desperate) i would toss that cash at a-net, but the better deal imho got my "fun fund" money today.

Just saying there are guys like me who would join in and chip in for the game, had the deals been better. If they're not, it's not that i won't spend at all. I'll just spend it elsewhere...

Exactly! IF the choice is:

• buy a new raptor skin for 25-30€or
• buy XCOM2: War of the Chosen for 39.99€ (less when Steam sales)Now guess why i'll be finishing XCOM 2 Campaign again in a couple weeks (i'm too busy to play either atm).Now if mounts were like 10€ each (~1000 gems)? I'd probably have bought 3 of them so far (Jackal, skimmer and springer, didn't like the peacock).

Agreed. I would totally buy three new cars if they were $100 each.

[ReaverKane.7598]

@Ashen.2907 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@"ZeftheWicked.3076" said:

It doesn't matter that you are buying it for the skin, they are still selli g it for convenience on top of that. I find some things too much to spend on a game, but others don't, and I don't wish to take that money from ANet. If you don't want to pay the price, move on.

Which is what i just did - rougly ~ 12 euros spent on LoL skin about half an hour ago, cause i had that amount to blow and wanted something fun. Had gem store more tame prices on tools (as i already have full set and am not desperate) i would toss that cash at a-net, but the better deal imho got my "fun fund" money today.

Just saying there are guys like me who would join in and chip in for the game, had the deals been better. If they're not, it's not that i won't spend at all. I'll just spend it elsewhere...

Exactly! IF the choice is:

• buy a new raptor skin for 25-30€or
• buy XCOM2: War of the Chosen for 39.99€ (less when Steam sales)Now guess why i'll be finishing XCOM 2 Campaign again in a couple weeks (i'm too busy to play either atm).Now if mounts were like 10€ each (~1000 gems)? I'd probably have bought 3 of them so far (Jackal, skimmer and springer, didn't like the peacock).

Agreed. I would totally buy three new cars if they were $100 each.

LOLThat's a sound logic. Does it compare to the game?No.Not even close...A car has specific costs in creating, materials, branding, distribution. And the cheapest you can buy a brand new car is usually around 10 000€.

Gem store items don't have material or distribution costs. Also, other "cars" already in the gem store, don't cost 2000 gems. Outfits are similar in scope and use, and cost one third of the mount costs. If you compare value and possible workload on all gem store items, mounts are clearly an outlier. Even permanent tools can be justified because of the savings in gathering tools.While mounts are just an outfit for a skill with some extra sounds. Compared to Character outfits that need to be redesigned 5-10 times (because racial and gender differences) the price difference is clearly exaggerated.

[Wolfheart.7483]

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Ashen.2907 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@"ZeftheWicked.3076" said:

It doesn't matter that you are buying it for the skin, they are still selli g it for convenience on top of that. I find some things too much to spend on a game, but others don't, and I don't wish to take that money from ANet. If you don't want to pay the price, move on.

Which is what i just did - rougly ~ 12 euros spent on LoL skin about half an hour ago, cause i had that amount to blow and wanted something fun. Had gem store more tame prices on tools (as i already have full set and am not desperate) i would toss that cash at a-net, but the better deal imho got my "fun fund" money today.

Just saying there are guys like me who would join in and chip in for the game, had the deals been better. If they're not, it's not that i won't spend at all. I'll just spend it elsewhere...

Exactly! IF the choice is:

• buy a new raptor skin for 25-30€or
• buy XCOM2: War of the Chosen for 39.99€ (less when Steam sales)Now guess why i'll be finishing XCOM 2 Campaign again in a couple weeks (i'm too busy to play either atm).Now if mounts were like 10€ each (~1000 gems)? I'd probably have bought 3 of them so far (Jackal, skimmer and springer, didn't like the peacock).

Agreed. I would totally buy three new cars if they were $100 each.

LOLThat's a sound logic. Does it compare to the game?No.Not even close...A car has specific costs in creating, materials, branding, distribution. And the cheapest you can buy a brand new car is usually around 10 000€.

Gem store items don't have material or distribution costs. Also, other "cars" already in the gem store, don't cost 2000 gems. Outfits are similar in scope and use, and cost one third of the mount costs. If you compare value and possible workload on all gem store items, mounts are clearly an outlier. Even permanent tools can be justified because of the savings in gathering tools.While mounts are just an outfit for a skill with some extra sounds. Compared to Character outfits that need to be redesigned 5-10 times (because racial and gender differences) the price difference is clearly exaggerated.

I would argue that regular outfits have to be priced at the lower price point in order to achieve sales goals. An outfit competes with the vast number of armor skins in the game. So a player has a huge range of appearance options for their character making it less likely that they would choose a particular outfit. Mount skins are not the same as outfits from that perspective.

[ReaverKane.7598]

@Wolfheart.7483 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Ashen.2907 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@"ZeftheWicked.3076" said:

It doesn't matter that you are buying it for the skin, they are still selli g it for convenience on top of that. I find some things too much to spend on a game, but others don't, and I don't wish to take that money from ANet. If you don't want to pay the price, move on.

Which is what i just did - rougly ~ 12 euros spent on LoL skin about half an hour ago, cause i had that amount to blow and wanted something fun. Had gem store more tame prices on tools (as i already have full set and am not desperate) i would toss that cash at a-net, but the better deal imho got my "fun fund" money today.

Just saying there are guys like me who would join in and chip in for the game, had the deals been better. If they're not, it's not that i won't spend at all. I'll just spend it elsewhere...

Exactly! IF the choice is:

• buy a new raptor skin for 25-30€or
• buy XCOM2: War of the Chosen for 39.99€ (less when Steam sales)Now guess why i'll be finishing XCOM 2 Campaign again in a couple weeks (i'm too busy to play either atm).Now if mounts were like 10€ each (~1000 gems)? I'd probably have bought 3 of them so far (Jackal, skimmer and springer, didn't like the peacock).

Agreed. I would totally buy three new cars if they were $100 each.

LOLThat's a sound logic. Does it compare to the game?No.Not even close...A car has specific costs in creating, materials, branding, distribution. And the cheapest you can buy a brand new car is usually around 10 000€.

Gem store items don't have material or distribution costs. Also, other "cars" already in the gem store, don't cost 2000 gems. Outfits are similar in scope and use, and cost one third of the mount costs. If you compare value and possible workload on all gem store items, mounts are clearly an outlier. Even permanent tools can be justified because of the savings in gathering tools.While mounts are just an outfit for a skill with some extra sounds. Compared to Character outfits that need to be redesigned 5-10 times (because racial and gender differences) the price difference is clearly exaggerated.

I would argue that regular outfits have to be priced at the lower price point in order to achieve sales goals. An outfit competes with the vast number of armor skins in the game. So a player has a huge range of appearance options for their character making it less likely that they would choose a particular outfit. Mount skins are not the same as outfits from that perspective.

Well, by that logic gliders would also be sold for 2000 gems, since there's hardly any in-game sources of gliders (only exception is legendary backs), also that very factor is what gives it a more sinister and shady perspective. Since it gives the appearance (intended or not) that Mountfits are a bit extortionist, since they give you no alternative but buy RNG loot boxes, or crazy expensive alternatives, since they deliberately stunted your ability to customize your base mount.I'm not trying to imply that's the actual intention, but that's the interpretation that a lot of people give it. Since Arena Net so far has been unsuccessful in justifying their choices. I mean all we got were very generically, and a bit condescending statements by MO, that mostly read as "You should be thanking us for pricing it like this" and "We're right and you're wrong".

What stinks the most is that Gliders were done the same way, the basic glider is really bland, and only has one dye slot when it could easily have two and allow for more customization. But even with that, they made gliders affordable, and it's as rare to see someone with the basic glider as it is to see someone with the 2000 gem mount skins.

Not to mention that, unless their sales goals were not to sell many mounts, then they arguably failed them?

[Ashen.2907]

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Ashen.2907 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@"ZeftheWicked.3076" said:

It doesn't matter that you are buying it for the skin, they are still selli g it for convenience on top of that. I find some things too much to spend on a game, but others don't, and I don't wish to take that money from ANet. If you don't want to pay the price, move on.

Which is what i just did - rougly ~ 12 euros spent on LoL skin about half an hour ago, cause i had that amount to blow and wanted something fun. Had gem store more tame prices on tools (as i already have full set and am not desperate) i would toss that cash at a-net, but the better deal imho got my "fun fund" money today.

Just saying there are guys like me who would join in and chip in for the game, had the deals been better. If they're not, it's not that i won't spend at all. I'll just spend it elsewhere...

Exactly! IF the choice is:

• buy a new raptor skin for 25-30€or
• buy XCOM2: War of the Chosen for 39.99€ (less when Steam sales)Now guess why i'll be finishing XCOM 2 Campaign again in a couple weeks (i'm too busy to play either atm).Now if mounts were like 10€ each (~1000 gems)? I'd probably have bought 3 of them so far (Jackal, skimmer and springer, didn't like the peacock).

Agreed. I would totally buy three new cars if they were $100 each.

LOLThat's a sound logic. Does it compare to the game?No.Not even close...A car has specific costs in creating, materials, branding, distribution. And the cheapest you can buy a brand new car is usually around 10 000€.

Gem store items don't have material or distribution costs. Also, other "cars" already in the gem store, don't cost 2000 gems. Outfits are similar in scope and use, and cost one third of the mount costs. If you compare value and possible workload on all gem store items, mounts are clearly an outlier. Even permanent tools can be justified because of the savings in gathering tools.While mounts are just an outfit for a skill with some extra sounds. Compared to Character outfits that need to be redesigned 5-10 times (because racial and gender differences) the price difference is clearly exaggerated.

I was agreeing with you. Of course we, as consumers, would want prices to be lower so that we could buy more.

Are you sure that game production doesnt have specific costs?

Anet, last I heard, had between 300 and 350 employees. In their neck of the woods the average pay for a game dev is in the ballpark of $70k per year. The cost to employ is beteen 1.2 and 1.3. So (potentially):

70,000 x 350 x 1.3 = $31,850,000 in payroll alone.

[Cuddy.6247]

Came in here expecting a different rant. So I'll just throw in my opinion anyway: I don't think prices are that unfair. But I do think they need to rethink the increments they sell gems. 2000 gems for a mount, right? Well, I get the goat springer for myself. But I'm stuck at 1600 or 2800. My solution was to buy 4000 so I can get another mount (the datamined griffon looks like a solid winner already)...but it feels kind of sleazy that you can't tailor your shopping cart.

[Cuddy.6247]

@Wolfheart.7483 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Ashen.2907 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@"ZeftheWicked.3076" said:

It doesn't matter that you are buying it for the skin, they are still selli g it for convenience on top of that. I find some things too much to spend on a game, but others don't, and I don't wish to take that money from ANet. If you don't want to pay the price, move on.

Which is what i just did - rougly ~ 12 euros spent on LoL skin about half an hour ago, cause i had that amount to blow and wanted something fun. Had gem store more tame prices on tools (as i already have full set and am not desperate) i would toss that cash at a-net, but the better deal imho got my "fun fund" money today.

Just saying there are guys like me who would join in and chip in for the game, had the deals been better. If they're not, it's not that i won't spend at all. I'll just spend it elsewhere...

Exactly! IF the choice is:

• buy a new raptor skin for 25-30€or
• buy XCOM2: War of the Chosen for 39.99€ (less when Steam sales)Now guess why i'll be finishing XCOM 2 Campaign again in a couple weeks (i'm too busy to play either atm).Now if mounts were like 10€ each (~1000 gems)? I'd probably have bought 3 of them so far (Jackal, skimmer and springer, didn't like the peacock).

Agreed. I would totally buy three new cars if they were $100 each.

LOLThat's a sound logic. Does it compare to the game?No.Not even close...A car has specific costs in creating, materials, branding, distribution. And the cheapest you can buy a brand new car is usually around 10 000€.

Gem store items don't have material or distribution costs. Also, other "cars" already in the gem store, don't cost 2000 gems. Outfits are similar in scope and use, and cost one third of the mount costs. If you compare value and possible workload on all gem store items, mounts are clearly an outlier. Even permanent tools can be justified because of the savings in gathering tools.While mounts are just an outfit for a skill with some extra sounds. Compared to Character outfits that need to be redesigned 5-10 times (because racial and gender differences) the price difference is clearly exaggerated.

I would argue that regular outfits have to be priced at the lower price point in order to achieve sales goals. An outfit competes with the vast number of armor skins in the game. So a player has a huge range of appearance options for their character making it less likely that they would choose a particular outfit. Mount skins are not the same as outfits from that perspective.

It's also a regular price on the market as far as I can tell. WoW mount skins that are in the store cost as much, if not more.

[ReaverKane.7598]

@Ashen.2907 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Ashen.2907 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@"ZeftheWicked.3076" said:

It doesn't matter that you are buying it for the skin, they are still selli g it for convenience on top of that. I find some things too much to spend on a game, but others don't, and I don't wish to take that money from ANet. If you don't want to pay the price, move on.

Which is what i just did - rougly ~ 12 euros spent on LoL skin about half an hour ago, cause i had that amount to blow and wanted something fun. Had gem store more tame prices on tools (as i already have full set and am not desperate) i would toss that cash at a-net, but the better deal imho got my "fun fund" money today.

Just saying there are guys like me who would join in and chip in for the game, had the deals been better. If they're not, it's not that i won't spend at all. I'll just spend it elsewhere...

Exactly! IF the choice is:

• buy a new raptor skin for 25-30€or
• buy XCOM2: War of the Chosen for 39.99€ (less when Steam sales)Now guess why i'll be finishing XCOM 2 Campaign again in a couple weeks (i'm too busy to play either atm).Now if mounts were like 10€ each (~1000 gems)? I'd probably have bought 3 of them so far (Jackal, skimmer and springer, didn't like the peacock).

Agreed. I would totally buy three new cars if they were $100 each.

LOLThat's a sound logic. Does it compare to the game?No.Not even close...A car has specific costs in creating, materials, branding, distribution. And the cheapest you can buy a brand new car is usually around 10 000€.

Gem store items don't have material or distribution costs. Also, other "cars" already in the gem store, don't cost 2000 gems. Outfits are similar in scope and use, and cost one third of the mount costs. If you compare value and possible workload on all gem store items, mounts are clearly an outlier. Even permanent tools can be justified because of the savings in gathering tools.While mounts are just an outfit for a skill with some extra sounds. Compared to Character outfits that need to be redesigned 5-10 times (because racial and gender differences) the price difference is clearly exaggerated.

I was agreeing with you. Of course we, as consumers, would want prices to be lower so that we could buy more.

Are you sure that game production doesnt have specific costs?

Anet, last I heard, had between 300 and 350 employees. In their neck of the woods the average pay for a game dev is in the ballpark of $70k per year. The cost to employ is beteen 1.2 and 1.3. So (potentially):

70,000 x 350 x 1.3 = $31,850,000 in payroll alone.

You need to read again what i posted, because i was very specific.

@Cuddy.6247 said:

@Wolfheart.7483 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Ashen.2907 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@"ZeftheWicked.3076" said:

It doesn't matter that you are buying it for the skin, they are still selli g it for convenience on top of that. I find some things too much to spend on a game, but others don't, and I don't wish to take that money from ANet. If you don't want to pay the price, move on.

Which is what i just did - rougly ~ 12 euros spent on LoL skin about half an hour ago, cause i had that amount to blow and wanted something fun. Had gem store more tame prices on tools (as i already have full set and am not desperate) i would toss that cash at a-net, but the better deal imho got my "fun fund" money today.

Just saying there are guys like me who would join in and chip in for the game, had the deals been better. If they're not, it's not that i won't spend at all. I'll just spend it elsewhere...

Exactly! IF the choice is:

• buy a new raptor skin for 25-30€or
• buy XCOM2: War of the Chosen for 39.99€ (less when Steam sales)Now guess why i'll be finishing XCOM 2 Campaign again in a couple weeks (i'm too busy to play either atm).Now if mounts were like 10€ each (~1000 gems)? I'd probably have bought 3 of them so far (Jackal, skimmer and springer, didn't like the peacock).

Agreed. I would totally buy three new cars if they were $100 each.

LOLThat's a sound logic. Does it compare to the game?No.Not even close...A car has specific costs in creating, materials, branding, distribution. And the cheapest you can buy a brand new car is usually around 10 000€.

Gem store items don't have material or distribution costs. Also, other "cars" already in the gem store, don't cost 2000 gems. Outfits are similar in scope and use, and cost one third of the mount costs. If you compare value and possible workload on all gem store items, mounts are clearly an outlier. Even permanent tools can be justified because of the savings in gathering tools.While mounts are just an outfit for a skill with some extra sounds. Compared to Character outfits that need to be redesigned 5-10 times (because racial and gender differences) the price difference is clearly exaggerated.

I would argue that regular outfits have to be priced at the lower price point in order to achieve sales goals. An outfit competes with the vast number of armor skins in the game. So a player has a huge range of appearance options for their character making it less likely that they would choose a particular outfit. Mount skins are not the same as outfits from that perspective.

It's also a regular price on the market as far as I can tell. WoW mount skins that are in the store cost as much, if not more.

WoW's standard is also that they have like 100 mounts available in quests and drops, and only 10 in the store.Also pretty much all items on the WoW store cost similar money. They have single head-gear items for 15€.While in GW2 you have whole outfits for 800 gems. You have bundles with outfits, a weapon skin, back and glider skin for 2000 gems. And then a mount for 2000 gems. It's a matter of consistency.

Anyway, no use making excuses or trying to question prices any more. Time will tell who was right.

@Cuddy.6247 said:Came in here expecting a different rant. So I'll just throw in my opinion anyway: I don't think prices are that unfair. But I do think they need to rethink the increments they sell gems. 2000 gems for a mount, right? Well, I get the goat springer for myself. But I'm stuck at 1600 or 2800. My solution was to buy 4000 so I can get another mount (the datamined griffon looks like a solid winner already)...but it feels kind of sleazy that you can't tailor your shopping cart.That's part of the marketing strategy as far as i can see.

[Wolfheart.7483]

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Wolfheart.7483 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Ashen.2907 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@"ZeftheWicked.3076" said:

It doesn't matter that you are buying it for the skin, they are still selli g it for convenience on top of that. I find some things too much to spend on a game, but others don't, and I don't wish to take that money from ANet. If you don't want to pay the price, move on.

Which is what i just did - rougly ~ 12 euros spent on LoL skin about half an hour ago, cause i had that amount to blow and wanted something fun. Had gem store more tame prices on tools (as i already have full set and am not desperate) i would toss that cash at a-net, but the better deal imho got my "fun fund" money today.

Just saying there are guys like me who would join in and chip in for the game, had the deals been better. If they're not, it's not that i won't spend at all. I'll just spend it elsewhere...

Exactly! IF the choice is:

• buy a new raptor skin for 25-30€or
• buy XCOM2: War of the Chosen for 39.99€ (less when Steam sales)Now guess why i'll be finishing XCOM 2 Campaign again in a couple weeks (i'm too busy to play either atm).Now if mounts were like 10€ each (~1000 gems)? I'd probably have bought 3 of them so far (Jackal, skimmer and springer, didn't like the peacock).

Agreed. I would totally buy three new cars if they were $100 each.

LOLThat's a sound logic. Does it compare to the game?No.Not even close...A car has specific costs in creating, materials, branding, distribution. And the cheapest you can buy a brand new car is usually around 10 000€.

Gem store items don't have material or distribution costs. Also, other "cars" already in the gem store, don't cost 2000 gems. Outfits are similar in scope and use, and cost one third of the mount costs. If you compare value and possible workload on all gem store items, mounts are clearly an outlier. Even permanent tools can be justified because of the savings in gathering tools.While mounts are just an outfit for a skill with some extra sounds. Compared to Character outfits that need to be redesigned 5-10 times (because racial and gender differences) the price difference is clearly exaggerated.

I would argue that regular outfits have to be priced at the lower price point in order to achieve sales goals. An outfit competes with the vast number of armor skins in the game. So a player has a huge range of appearance options for their character making it less likely that they would choose a particular outfit. Mount skins are not the same as outfits from that perspective.

Well, by that logic gliders would also be sold for 2000 gems, since there's hardly any in-game sources of gliders (only exception is legendary backs), also that very factor is what gives it a more sinister and shady perspective. Since it gives the appearance (intended or not) that Mountfits are a bit extortionist, since they give you no alternative but buy RNG loot boxes, or crazy expensive alternatives, since they deliberately stunted your ability to customize your base mount.

I'm not trying to imply that's the actual intention, but that's the interpretation that a lot of people give it.

Since Arena Net so far has been unsuccessful in justifying their choices. I mean all we got were very generically, and a bit condescending statements by MO, that mostly read as "You should be thanking us for pricing it like this" and "We're right and you're wrong".

What stinks the most is that Gliders were done the same way, the basic glider is really bland, and only has one dye slot when it could easily have two and allow for more customization. But even with that, they made gliders affordable, and it's as rare to see someone with the basic glider as it is to see someone with the 2000 gem mount skins.

Not to mention that, unless their sales goals were not to sell many mounts, then they arguably failed them?

They haven't been unsuccessful at justifying their prices. They stated their justification which simply is what it is. It is up to each individual if that justification is acceptable. You could try to argue that their justification failed in the eyes of the player base as a whole but that simply isn't true.

Regarding gliders, I understand your logic but I don't equate gliders to mounts. Even a simple mount skin would take more effort/development time than a glider skin. The two are not equal.

[ReaverKane.7598]

@Wolfheart.7483 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Wolfheart.7483 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Ashen.2907 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@"ZeftheWicked.3076" said:

It doesn't matter that you are buying it for the skin, they are still selli g it for convenience on top of that. I find some things too much to spend on a game, but others don't, and I don't wish to take that money from ANet. If you don't want to pay the price, move on.

Which is what i just did - rougly ~ 12 euros spent on LoL skin about half an hour ago, cause i had that amount to blow and wanted something fun. Had gem store more tame prices on tools (as i already have full set and am not desperate) i would toss that cash at a-net, but the better deal imho got my "fun fund" money today.

Just saying there are guys like me who would join in and chip in for the game, had the deals been better. If they're not, it's not that i won't spend at all. I'll just spend it elsewhere...

Exactly! IF the choice is:

• buy a new raptor skin for 25-30€or
• buy XCOM2: War of the Chosen for 39.99€ (less when Steam sales)Now guess why i'll be finishing XCOM 2 Campaign again in a couple weeks (i'm too busy to play either atm).Now if mounts were like 10€ each (~1000 gems)? I'd probably have bought 3 of them so far (Jackal, skimmer and springer, didn't like the peacock).

Agreed. I would totally buy three new cars if they were $100 each.

LOLThat's a sound logic. Does it compare to the game?No.Not even close...A car has specific costs in creating, materials, branding, distribution. And the cheapest you can buy a brand new car is usually around 10 000€.

Gem store items don't have material or distribution costs. Also, other "cars" already in the gem store, don't cost 2000 gems. Outfits are similar in scope and use, and cost one third of the mount costs. If you compare value and possible workload on all gem store items, mounts are clearly an outlier. Even permanent tools can be justified because of the savings in gathering tools.While mounts are just an outfit for a skill with some extra sounds. Compared to Character outfits that need to be redesigned 5-10 times (because racial and gender differences) the price difference is clearly exaggerated.

I would argue that regular outfits have to be priced at the lower price point in order to achieve sales goals. An outfit competes with the vast number of armor skins in the game. So a player has a huge range of appearance options for their character making it less likely that they would choose a particular outfit. Mount skins are not the same as outfits from that perspective.

Well, by that logic gliders would also be sold for 2000 gems, since there's hardly any in-game sources of gliders (only exception is legendary backs), also that very factor is what gives it a more sinister and shady perspective. Since it gives the appearance (intended or not) that Mountfits are a bit extortionist, since they give you no alternative but buy RNG loot boxes, or crazy expensive alternatives, since they deliberately stunted your ability to customize your base mount.

I'm not trying to imply that's the actual intention, but that's the interpretation that a lot of people give it.

Since Arena Net so far has been unsuccessful in justifying their choices. I mean all we got were very generically, and a bit condescending statements by MO, that mostly read as "You should be thanking us for pricing it like this" and "We're right and you're wrong".

What stinks the most is that Gliders were done the same way, the basic glider is really bland, and only has one dye slot when it could easily have two and allow for more customization. But even with that, they made gliders affordable, and it's as rare to see someone with the basic glider as it is to see someone with the 2000 gem mount skins.

Not to mention that, unless their sales goals were not to sell many mounts, then they arguably failed them?

They haven't been unsuccessful at justifying their prices. They stated their justification which simply is what it is. It is up to each individual if that justification is acceptable. You could try to argue that their justification failed in the eyes of the player base as a whole but that simply isn't true.

Regarding gliders, I understand your logic but I don't equate gliders to mounts. Even a simple mount skin would take more effort/development time than a glider skin. The two are not equal.

Well, if you're going in equality of effort, then mounts shouldn't really be twice the cost of a single outfit. Or twice the price of the garden patches, since the amount of effort required for either one of those is arguably at least equivalent to the effort of designing a mount skin.

Outfits vs mounts:Conceptualization: should yield equivalent efforts, or be significantly higher cost on outfits that change entirely with race and gender.3D design: 5-10 instances of the same model vs 1 instance of the same model.Animation rigging should be similar, since it's a matter of attaching the same skeleton to the models. But might even be more work-intensive for outfits, because the number of variances is greater.Some outfits also have extra effects (like grasping hands when you stand still on ghostly outfit), but that doesn't seem to increase their price? So i'm assuming that cost isn't very significant for mounts.Now mounts have different sound effects (which outfits don't), but then again so do gliders, and that doesn't seem to justify a huge increase in value? Also stuff like the "doesn't-shut-up-o-tron" have a ton of dialog and interactions, but it doesn't make it significantly more expensive than any other back item.

Garden patches, in addition to designing the 5 different models for the patches, adding models for the 4 new plants. Making changes to the homes to add teleporters and stuff. They also had to create new icons for the extra seeds, code the collection behaviour, a new merchant, recipes and the behaviour of the dye unlocks.

So they banked on the mount hype to justify an outrageous price, and by all appearances have missed the mark. And the recurrence of these kinds of posts does demonstrate a malaise regarding the gem store price inconsistencies, which can be detrimental to the game.

[Linken.6345]

@Cuddy.6247 said:Came in here expecting a different rant. So I'll just throw in my opinion anyway: I don't think prices are that unfair. But I do think they need to rethink the increments they sell gems. 2000 gems for a mount, right? Well, I get the goat springer for myself. But I'm stuck at 1600 or 2800. My solution was to buy 4000 so I can get another mount (the datamined griffon looks like a solid winner already)...but it feels kind of sleazy that you can't tailor your shopping cart.

or you buy 1600 gems with cash and 400 gems with gold done.

[IndigoSundown.5419]

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@"Cuddy.6247" said:Came in here expecting a different rant. So I'll just throw in my opinion anyway: I don't think prices are that unfair. But I do think they need to rethink the increments they sell gems. 2000 gems for a mount, right? Well, I get the goat springer for myself. But I'm stuck at 1600 or 2800. My solution was to buy 4000 so I can get another mount (the datamined griffon looks like a solid winner already)...but it feels kind of sleazy that you can't tailor your shopping cart.That's part of the marketing strategy as far as i can see.

It certainly is. The strategy is based on the old saying about money "burning a hole in your pocket." Psychologically, people see leftover gems and the usual thought is going to be, "Those are going to waste if I don't spend them." Rarely, the extra gems will be enough to get something without a further gem purchase. ANet doesn't care whether the consumers that does not apply to buy more gems with cash or sinks some gold into the exchange to fill out the needed amount.

[Ashen.2907]

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Ashen.2907 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Ashen.2907 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@"ZeftheWicked.3076" said:

It doesn't matter that you are buying it for the skin, they are still selli g it for convenience on top of that. I find some things too much to spend on a game, but others don't, and I don't wish to take that money from ANet. If you don't want to pay the price, move on.

Which is what i just did - rougly ~ 12 euros spent on LoL skin about half an hour ago, cause i had that amount to blow and wanted something fun. Had gem store more tame prices on tools (as i already have full set and am not desperate) i would toss that cash at a-net, but the better deal imho got my "fun fund" money today.

Just saying there are guys like me who would join in and chip in for the game, had the deals been better. If they're not, it's not that i won't spend at all. I'll just spend it elsewhere...

Exactly! IF the choice is:

• buy a new raptor skin for 25-30€or
• buy XCOM2: War of the Chosen for 39.99€ (less when Steam sales)Now guess why i'll be finishing XCOM 2 Campaign again in a couple weeks (i'm too busy to play either atm).Now if mounts were like 10€ each (~1000 gems)? I'd probably have bought 3 of them so far (Jackal, skimmer and springer, didn't like the peacock).

Agreed. I would totally buy three new cars if they were $100 each.

LOLThat's a sound logic. Does it compare to the game?No.Not even close...A car has specific costs in creating, materials, branding, distribution. And the cheapest you can buy a brand new car is usually around 10 000€.

Gem store items don't have material or distribution costs. Also, other "cars" already in the gem store, don't cost 2000 gems. Outfits are similar in scope and use, and cost one third of the mount costs. If you compare value and possible workload on all gem store items, mounts are clearly an outlier. Even permanent tools can be justified because of the savings in gathering tools.While mounts are just an outfit for a skill with some extra sounds. Compared to Character outfits that need to be redesigned 5-10 times (because racial and gender differences) the price difference is clearly exaggerated.

I was agreeing with you. Of course we, as consumers, would want prices to be lower so that we could buy more.

Are you sure that game production doesnt have specific costs?

Anet, last I heard, had between 300 and 350 employees. In their neck of the woods the average pay for a game dev is in the ballpark of $70k per year. The cost to employ is beteen 1.2 and 1.3. So (potentially):

70,000 x 350 x 1.3 = $31,850,000 in payroll alone.

You need to read again what i posted, because i was

very

specific.

@Cuddy.6247 said:

@Wolfheart.7483 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Ashen.2907 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@"ZeftheWicked.3076" said:

It doesn't matter that you are buying it for the skin, they are still selli g it for convenience on top of that. I find some things too much to spend on a game, but others don't, and I don't wish to take that money from ANet. If you don't want to pay the price, move on.

Which is what i just did - rougly ~ 12 euros spent on LoL skin about half an hour ago, cause i had that amount to blow and wanted something fun. Had gem store more tame prices on tools (as i already have full set and am not desperate) i would toss that cash at a-net, but the better deal imho got my "fun fund" money today.

Just saying there are guys like me who would join in and chip in for the game, had the deals been better. If they're not, it's not that i won't spend at all. I'll just spend it elsewhere...

Exactly! IF the choice is:

• buy a new raptor skin for 25-30€or
• buy XCOM2: War of the Chosen for 39.99€ (less when Steam sales)Now guess why i'll be finishing XCOM 2 Campaign again in a couple weeks (i'm too busy to play either atm).Now if mounts were like 10€ each (~1000 gems)? I'd probably have bought 3 of them so far (Jackal, skimmer and springer, didn't like the peacock).

Agreed. I would totally buy three new cars if they were $100 each.

LOLThat's a sound logic. Does it compare to the game?No.Not even close...A car has specific costs in creating, materials, branding, distribution. And the cheapest you can buy a brand new car is usually around 10 000€.

Gem store items don't have material or distribution costs. Also, other "cars" already in the gem store, don't cost 2000 gems. Outfits are similar in scope and use, and cost one third of the mount costs. If you compare value and possible workload on all gem store items, mounts are clearly an outlier. Even permanent tools can be justified because of the savings in gathering tools.While mounts are just an outfit for a skill with some extra sounds. Compared to Character outfits that need to be redesigned 5-10 times (because racial and gender differences) the price difference is clearly exaggerated.

I would argue that regular outfits have to be priced at the lower price point in order to achieve sales goals. An outfit competes with the vast number of armor skins in the game. So a player has a huge range of appearance options for their character making it less likely that they would choose a particular outfit. Mount skins are not the same as outfits from that perspective.

It's also a regular price on the market as far as I can tell. WoW mount skins that are in the store cost as much, if not more.

WoW's standard is also that they have like 100 mounts available in quests and drops, and only 10 in the store.Also pretty much

all

items on the WoW store cost similar money. They have single head-gear items for 15€.While in GW2 you have whole outfits for 800 gems. You have bundles with outfits, a weapon skin, back and glider skin for 2000 gems. And then a mount for 2000 gems. It's a matter of consistency.

Anyway, no use making excuses or trying to question prices any more. Time will tell who was right.

@Cuddy.6247 said:Came in here expecting a different rant. So I'll just throw in my opinion anyway: I don't think prices are that unfair. But I do think they need to rethink the increments they sell gems. 2000 gems for a mount, right? Well, I get the goat springer for myself. But I'm stuck at 1600 or 2800. My solution was to buy 4000 so I can get another mount (the datamined griffon looks like a solid winner already)...but it feels kind of sleazy that you can't tailor your shopping cart.That's part of the marketing strategy as far as i can see.

Payroll costs are as integral to, "creating," a product as materials.

Having access to a single mount in WoW costs as much as $180 per year in rent.

[Linken.6345]

@Ashen.2907 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Ashen.2907 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Ashen.2907 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@"ZeftheWicked.3076" said:

It doesn't matter that you are buying it for the skin, they are still selli g it for convenience on top of that. I find some things too much to spend on a game, but others don't, and I don't wish to take that money from ANet. If you don't want to pay the price, move on.

Which is what i just did - rougly ~ 12 euros spent on LoL skin about half an hour ago, cause i had that amount to blow and wanted something fun. Had gem store more tame prices on tools (as i already have full set and am not desperate) i would toss that cash at a-net, but the better deal imho got my "fun fund" money today.

Just saying there are guys like me who would join in and chip in for the game, had the deals been better. If they're not, it's not that i won't spend at all. I'll just spend it elsewhere...

Exactly! IF the choice is:

• buy a new raptor skin for 25-30€or
• buy XCOM2: War of the Chosen for 39.99€ (less when Steam sales)Now guess why i'll be finishing XCOM 2 Campaign again in a couple weeks (i'm too busy to play either atm).Now if mounts were like 10€ each (~1000 gems)? I'd probably have bought 3 of them so far (Jackal, skimmer and springer, didn't like the peacock).

Agreed. I would totally buy three new cars if they were $100 each.

LOLThat's a sound logic. Does it compare to the game?No.Not even close...A car has specific costs in creating, materials, branding, distribution. And the cheapest you can buy a brand new car is usually around 10 000€.

Gem store items don't have material or distribution costs. Also, other "cars" already in the gem store, don't cost 2000 gems. Outfits are similar in scope and use, and cost one third of the mount costs. If you compare value and possible workload on all gem store items, mounts are clearly an outlier. Even permanent tools can be justified because of the savings in gathering tools.While mounts are just an outfit for a skill with some extra sounds. Compared to Character outfits that need to be redesigned 5-10 times (because racial and gender differences) the price difference is clearly exaggerated.

I was agreeing with you. Of course we, as consumers, would want prices to be lower so that we could buy more.

Are you sure that game production doesnt have specific costs?

Anet, last I heard, had between 300 and 350 employees. In their neck of the woods the average pay for a game dev is in the ballpark of $70k per year. The cost to employ is beteen 1.2 and 1.3. So (potentially):

70,000 x 350 x 1.3 = $31,850,000 in payroll alone.

You need to read again what i posted, because i was

very

specific.

@Cuddy.6247 said:

@Wolfheart.7483 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Ashen.2907 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@"ZeftheWicked.3076" said:

It doesn't matter that you are buying it for the skin, they are still selli g it for convenience on top of that. I find some things too much to spend on a game, but others don't, and I don't wish to take that money from ANet. If you don't want to pay the price, move on.

Which is what i just did - rougly ~ 12 euros spent on LoL skin about half an hour ago, cause i had that amount to blow and wanted something fun. Had gem store more tame prices on tools (as i already have full set and am not desperate) i would toss that cash at a-net, but the better deal imho got my "fun fund" money today.

Just saying there are guys like me who would join in and chip in for the game, had the deals been better. If they're not, it's not that i won't spend at all. I'll just spend it elsewhere...

Exactly! IF the choice is:

• buy a new raptor skin for 25-30€or
• buy XCOM2: War of the Chosen for 39.99€ (less when Steam sales)Now guess why i'll be finishing XCOM 2 Campaign again in a couple weeks (i'm too busy to play either atm).Now if mounts were like 10€ each (~1000 gems)? I'd probably have bought 3 of them so far (Jackal, skimmer and springer, didn't like the peacock).

Agreed. I would totally buy three new cars if they were $100 each.

LOLThat's a sound logic. Does it compare to the game?No.Not even close...A car has specific costs in creating, materials, branding, distribution. And the cheapest you can buy a brand new car is usually around 10 000€.

Gem store items don't have material or distribution costs. Also, other "cars" already in the gem store, don't cost 2000 gems. Outfits are similar in scope and use, and cost one third of the mount costs. If you compare value and possible workload on all gem store items, mounts are clearly an outlier. Even permanent tools can be justified because of the savings in gathering tools.While mounts are just an outfit for a skill with some extra sounds. Compared to Character outfits that need to be redesigned 5-10 times (because racial and gender differences) the price difference is clearly exaggerated.

I would argue that regular outfits have to be priced at the lower price point in order to achieve sales goals. An outfit competes with the vast number of armor skins in the game. So a player has a huge range of appearance options for their character making it less likely that they would choose a particular outfit. Mount skins are not the same as outfits from that perspective.

It's also a regular price on the market as far as I can tell. WoW mount skins that are in the store cost as much, if not more.

WoW's standard is also that they have like 100 mounts available in quests and drops, and only 10 in the store.Also pretty much

all

items on the WoW store cost similar money. They have single head-gear items for 15€.While in GW2 you have whole outfits for 800 gems. You have bundles with outfits, a weapon skin, back and glider skin for 2000 gems. And then a mount for 2000 gems. It's a matter of consistency.

Anyway, no use making excuses or trying to question prices any more. Time will tell who was right.

@Cuddy.6247 said:Came in here expecting a different rant. So I'll just throw in my opinion anyway: I don't think prices are that unfair. But I do think they need to rethink the increments they sell gems. 2000 gems for a mount, right? Well, I get the goat springer for myself. But I'm stuck at 1600 or 2800. My solution was to buy 4000 so I can get another mount (the datamined griffon looks like a solid winner already)...but it feels kind of sleazy that you can't tailor your shopping cart.That's part of the marketing strategy as far as i can see.

Payroll costs are as integral to, "creating," a product as materials.

Having access to a single mount in WoW costs as much as $180 per year in rent.

It dont anymore since you can play earn items with fancy skins from old dungeons and raids sell those on ah and buy your gametime for ingame gold there now.

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

@Linken.6345 said:

@Cuddy.6247 said:Came in here expecting a different rant. So I'll just throw in my opinion anyway: I don't think prices are that unfair. But I do think they need to rethink the increments they sell gems. 2000 gems for a mount, right? Well, I get the goat springer for myself. But I'm stuck at 1600 or 2800. My solution was to buy 4000 so I can get another mount (the datamined griffon looks like a solid winner already)...but it feels kind of sleazy that you can't tailor your shopping cart.

or you buy 1600 gems with cash and 400 gems with gold done.

Or purchase a Gem Card that gives you 2000 Gems. No Gems left over. You can often get a discount on the cost of the Gem Card (from Authorized Retailers), as well.

[Linken.6345]

@Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:

@Linken.6345 said:

@Cuddy.6247 said:Came in here expecting a different rant. So I'll just throw in my opinion anyway: I don't think prices are that unfair. But I do think they need to rethink the increments they sell gems. 2000 gems for a mount, right? Well, I get the goat springer for myself. But I'm stuck at 1600 or 2800. My solution was to buy 4000 so I can get another mount (the datamined griffon looks like a solid winner already)...but it feels kind of sleazy that you can't tailor your shopping cart.

or you buy 1600 gems with cash and 400 gems with gold done.

Or purchase a Gem Card that gives you 2000 Gems. No Gems left over. You can often get a discount on the cost of the Gem Card (from Authorized Retailers), as well.

I was under the impression that the guy could only buy 1600 gem cards or 2800 gem cards.

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

@Linken.6345 said:

@Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:

@Linken.6345 said:

@Cuddy.6247 said:Came in here expecting a different rant. So I'll just throw in my opinion anyway: I don't think prices are that unfair. But I do think they need to rethink the increments they sell gems. 2000 gems for a mount, right? Well, I get the goat springer for myself. But I'm stuck at 1600 or 2800. My solution was to buy 4000 so I can get another mount (the datamined griffon looks like a solid winner already)...but it feels kind of sleazy that you can't tailor your shopping cart.

or you buy 1600 gems with cash and 400 gems with gold done.

Or purchase a Gem Card that gives you 2000 Gems. No Gems left over. You can often get a discount on the cost of the Gem Card (from Authorized Retailers), as well.

I was under the impression that the guy could only buy 1600 gem cards or 2800 gem cards.

As far as I know, Gem Cards only come in 2000 and 1200 denominations, for $25 and $15, respectively. I have them sitting on my desk.

[PookieDaWombat.6209]

@Ardenwolfe.8590 said:

@PookieDaWombat.6209 said: more people will be willing to put more money down with realistic pricing, but Anet doesn't follow that business model.

Not to point out the obvious, but that argument makes no sense since more than enough people bought and continue to buy items at the current prices. Not even going to touch that toothbrush/gum disease analogy. Because . . . you know . . . people do buy various toothbrushes between a dollar to two-hundred dollars. And as far as I know? None of them cure gum disease.

All said, it still doesn't answer the question of how anyone expects ANet to make money otherwise. Cheaper doesn't mean more people will buy. Demand first before supply, friend.

Fair enough.

Vanity shopping its the more apropos comparison.

Paintings come in all manner of types, sizes and prices. Most people are not going to art galleries and buying some painting for 10K. Most people might be picking up art for their walls at the 20-50 dollar range or even cheaper if they are on a budget. Most people aren't going to drop say 200K on a house and then turn around and pay for art with a price tag of 100K for that same house. That kind of price disparity is what is being discussed here. They are more likely to but that art at a way more affordable price.

Now we can continue to be obtuse and try to split hairs regarding my analogy/analogies or you can admit that the the price disparity in the gem store between game/expac cost and the in game vanity items is obviously ridiculous or you can continue to excuse this behavior from anet simply because there are a few whales willing to throw money at Anet until they feel burned. Ultimately its not a tenable position for Anet to keep taking. Financially its just not viable for the long run as with each iteration of whales the pool will be smaller, forcing their prices higher, and their tactics shadier just to try to make up the loss.

And if we want to see how this plays out in the real world, just look at how many businesses failed to survive against the likes of Walmart simply because they were providing better and more attractive prices which in turn drove demand. This is basic economics. Which is better for making money: higher prices that fewer will pay, or more reasonable prices that more people will be willing to pay well into the future?

[Leo G.4501]

@Cynn.1659 said:

@ZeftheWicked.3076 said:

As things are on more then one occasion i chose to grind for ingame gold and exchange it for gems, rather then throw a few $ at you, because of the high prices and low real money:gem ratio...

Spoiler by buying with gold you still support anet pricing methods. Since all those gems on gold exchange are already paid for by other players, anet loses nothing by having people buy with gold. In fact it encourages even more people to spend money on gem to sell for gold. Gems on the exchange are not infinite, more players buy, prices go up. Prices go up more people buy gems to sell for gold.

Ergo, the cheaper items are on the gem store, the fewer gems are necessary to buy things and thus the incentive to purchase gold with gems plummets because you only need 800 gems to buy the featured stuff you want thus Anet needs to pump out even MORE junk you don't need or want so complain about and then later we wonder why NCSoft has announced the closure of GW2 in the next half a year or put on auto-mode by Anet.

Either that, or Anet can do some shady things like make the gem store items cheaper (500 gems for a harvesting tool, 800 for a premium mount, 200 for an outfit) but artificially alter the exchange rate for gold-to-gems so players aren't easily capable of affording half the gemstore with an easy afk farm for a day or so.

[Malediktus.9250]

Almost everything in the shop is overpriced when compared to buying new games on steam. Doubt companies will ever learn. Microtransactions do not exist.

Stopped buying gems with real money about a year ago already and now buying significantly less in general with gold to gems. Worst of all are the 2k gems mount skins.

[ReaverKane.7598]

@Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:

@Linken.6345 said:

@Cuddy.6247 said:Came in here expecting a different rant. So I'll just throw in my opinion anyway: I don't think prices are that unfair. But I do think they need to rethink the increments they sell gems. 2000 gems for a mount, right? Well, I get the goat springer for myself. But I'm stuck at 1600 or 2800. My solution was to buy 4000 so I can get another mount (the datamined griffon looks like a solid winner already)...but it feels kind of sleazy that you can't tailor your shopping cart.

or you buy 1600 gems with cash and 400 gems with gold done.

Or purchase a Gem Card that gives you 2000 Gems. No Gems left over. You can often get a discount on the cost of the Gem Card (from Authorized Retailers), as well.

Well, in Portugal at least, none of the two authorized retailers sell gem cards. So it's not a widespread option. > @Ashen.2907 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Ashen.2907 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Ashen.2907 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@"ZeftheWicked.3076" said:

It doesn't matter that you are buying it for the skin, they are still selli g it for convenience on top of that. I find some things too much to spend on a game, but others don't, and I don't wish to take that money from ANet. If you don't want to pay the price, move on.

Which is what i just did - rougly ~ 12 euros spent on LoL skin about half an hour ago, cause i had that amount to blow and wanted something fun. Had gem store more tame prices on tools (as i already have full set and am not desperate) i would toss that cash at a-net, but the better deal imho got my "fun fund" money today.

Just saying there are guys like me who would join in and chip in for the game, had the deals been better. If they're not, it's not that i won't spend at all. I'll just spend it elsewhere...

Exactly! IF the choice is:

• buy a new raptor skin for 25-30€or
• buy XCOM2: War of the Chosen for 39.99€ (less when Steam sales)Now guess why i'll be finishing XCOM 2 Campaign again in a couple weeks (i'm too busy to play either atm).Now if mounts were like 10€ each (~1000 gems)? I'd probably have bought 3 of them so far (Jackal, skimmer and springer, didn't like the peacock).

Agreed. I would totally buy three new cars if they were $100 each.

LOLThat's a sound logic. Does it compare to the game?No.Not even close...A car has specific costs in creating, materials, branding, distribution. And the cheapest you can buy a brand new car is usually around 10 000€.

Gem store items don't have material or distribution costs. Also, other "cars" already in the gem store, don't cost 2000 gems. Outfits are similar in scope and use, and cost one third of the mount costs. If you compare value and possible workload on all gem store items, mounts are clearly an outlier. Even permanent tools can be justified because of the savings in gathering tools.While mounts are just an outfit for a skill with some extra sounds. Compared to Character outfits that need to be redesigned 5-10 times (because racial and gender differences) the price difference is clearly exaggerated.

I was agreeing with you. Of course we, as consumers, would want prices to be lower so that we could buy more.

Are you sure that game production doesnt have specific costs?

Anet, last I heard, had between 300 and 350 employees. In their neck of the woods the average pay for a game dev is in the ballpark of $70k per year. The cost to employ is beteen 1.2 and 1.3. So (potentially):

70,000 x 350 x 1.3 = $31,850,000 in payroll alone.

You need to read again what i posted, because i was

very

specific.

@Cuddy.6247 said:

@Wolfheart.7483 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Ashen.2907 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@"ZeftheWicked.3076" said:

It doesn't matter that you are buying it for the skin, they are still selli g it for convenience on top of that. I find some things too much to spend on a game, but others don't, and I don't wish to take that money from ANet. If you don't want to pay the price, move on.

Which is what i just did - rougly ~ 12 euros spent on LoL skin about half an hour ago, cause i had that amount to blow and wanted something fun. Had gem store more tame prices on tools (as i already have full set and am not desperate) i would toss that cash at a-net, but the better deal imho got my "fun fund" money today.

Just saying there are guys like me who would join in and chip in for the game, had the deals been better. If they're not, it's not that i won't spend at all. I'll just spend it elsewhere...

Exactly! IF the choice is:

• buy a new raptor skin for 25-30€or
• buy XCOM2: War of the Chosen for 39.99€ (less when Steam sales)Now guess why i'll be finishing XCOM 2 Campaign again in a couple weeks (i'm too busy to play either atm).Now if mounts were like 10€ each (~1000 gems)? I'd probably have bought 3 of them so far (Jackal, skimmer and springer, didn't like the peacock).

Agreed. I would totally buy three new cars if they were $100 each.

LOLThat's a sound logic. Does it compare to the game?No.Not even close...A car has specific costs in creating, materials, branding, distribution. And the cheapest you can buy a brand new car is usually around 10 000€.

Gem store items don't have material or distribution costs. Also, other "cars" already in the gem store, don't cost 2000 gems. Outfits are similar in scope and use, and cost one third of the mount costs. If you compare value and possible workload on all gem store items, mounts are clearly an outlier. Even permanent tools can be justified because of the savings in gathering tools.While mounts are just an outfit for a skill with some extra sounds. Compared to Character outfits that need to be redesigned 5-10 times (because racial and gender differences) the price difference is clearly exaggerated.

I would argue that regular outfits have to be priced at the lower price point in order to achieve sales goals. An outfit competes with the vast number of armor skins in the game. So a player has a huge range of appearance options for their character making it less likely that they would choose a particular outfit. Mount skins are not the same as outfits from that perspective.

It's also a regular price on the market as far as I can tell. WoW mount skins that are in the store cost as much, if not more.

WoW's standard is also that they have like 100 mounts available in quests and drops, and only 10 in the store.Also pretty much

all

items on the WoW store cost similar money. They have single head-gear items for 15€.While in GW2 you have whole outfits for 800 gems. You have bundles with outfits, a weapon skin, back and glider skin for 2000 gems. And then a mount for 2000 gems. It's a matter of consistency.

Anyway, no use making excuses or trying to question prices any more. Time will tell who was right.

@Cuddy.6247 said:Came in here expecting a different rant. So I'll just throw in my opinion anyway: I don't think prices are that unfair. But I do think they need to rethink the increments they sell gems. 2000 gems for a mount, right? Well, I get the goat springer for myself. But I'm stuck at 1600 or 2800. My solution was to buy 4000 so I can get another mount (the datamined griffon looks like a solid winner already)...but it feels kind of sleazy that you can't tailor your shopping cart.That's part of the marketing strategy as far as i can see.

Payroll costs are as integral to, "creating," a product as materials.

Having access to a single mount in WoW costs as much as $180 per year in rent.

Well, again, i didn't say there were no costs. Only no material costs. Digital goods, sold through digital distribution have no "cost per item" only the initial development cost. After that is paid, everything else is profit. I could argue that even as little as 100 mounts sold for 1000 gems would probably cover the development costs of the mounts. All else is profit.

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:

@Linken.6345 said:

@Cuddy.6247 said:Came in here expecting a different rant. So I'll just throw in my opinion anyway: I don't think prices are that unfair. But I do think they need to rethink the increments they sell gems. 2000 gems for a mount, right? Well, I get the goat springer for myself. But I'm stuck at 1600 or 2800. My solution was to buy 4000 so I can get another mount (the datamined griffon looks like a solid winner already)...but it feels kind of sleazy that you can't tailor your shopping cart.

or you buy 1600 gems with cash and 400 gems with gold done.

Or purchase a Gem Card that gives you 2000 Gems. No Gems left over. You can often get a discount on the cost of the Gem Card (from Authorized Retailers), as well.

Well, in Portugal at least, none of the

two

authorized retailers sell gem cards. So it's not a widespread option. > @Ashen.2907 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Ashen.2907 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Ashen.2907 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@"ZeftheWicked.3076" said:

It doesn't matter that you are buying it for the skin, they are still selli g it for convenience on top of that. I find some things too much to spend on a game, but others don't, and I don't wish to take that money from ANet. If you don't want to pay the price, move on.

Which is what i just did - rougly ~ 12 euros spent on LoL skin about half an hour ago, cause i had that amount to blow and wanted something fun. Had gem store more tame prices on tools (as i already have full set and am not desperate) i would toss that cash at a-net, but the better deal imho got my "fun fund" money today.

Just saying there are guys like me who would join in and chip in for the game, had the deals been better. If they're not, it's not that i won't spend at all. I'll just spend it elsewhere...

Exactly! IF the choice is:

• buy a new raptor skin for 25-30€or
• buy XCOM2: War of the Chosen for 39.99€ (less when Steam sales)Now guess why i'll be finishing XCOM 2 Campaign again in a couple weeks (i'm too busy to play either atm).Now if mounts were like 10€ each (~1000 gems)? I'd probably have bought 3 of them so far (Jackal, skimmer and springer, didn't like the peacock).

Agreed. I would totally buy three new cars if they were $100 each.

LOLThat's a sound logic. Does it compare to the game?No.Not even close...A car has specific costs in creating, materials, branding, distribution. And the cheapest you can buy a brand new car is usually around 10 000€.

Gem store items don't have material or distribution costs. Also, other "cars" already in the gem store, don't cost 2000 gems. Outfits are similar in scope and use, and cost one third of the mount costs. If you compare value and possible workload on all gem store items, mounts are clearly an outlier. Even permanent tools can be justified because of the savings in gathering tools.While mounts are just an outfit for a skill with some extra sounds. Compared to Character outfits that need to be redesigned 5-10 times (because racial and gender differences) the price difference is clearly exaggerated.

I was agreeing with you. Of course we, as consumers, would want prices to be lower so that we could buy more.

Are you sure that game production doesnt have specific costs?

Anet, last I heard, had between 300 and 350 employees. In their neck of the woods the average pay for a game dev is in the ballpark of $70k per year. The cost to employ is beteen 1.2 and 1.3. So (potentially):

70,000 x 350 x 1.3 = $31,850,000 in payroll alone.

You need to read again what i posted, because i was

very

specific.

@Cuddy.6247 said:

@Wolfheart.7483 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Ashen.2907 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@"ZeftheWicked.3076" said:

It doesn't matter that you are buying it for the skin, they are still selli g it for convenience on top of that. I find some things too much to spend on a game, but others don't, and I don't wish to take that money from ANet. If you don't want to pay the price, move on.

Which is what i just did - rougly ~ 12 euros spent on LoL skin about half an hour ago, cause i had that amount to blow and wanted something fun. Had gem store more tame prices on tools (as i already have full set and am not desperate) i would toss that cash at a-net, but the better deal imho got my "fun fund" money today.

Just saying there are guys like me who would join in and chip in for the game, had the deals been better. If they're not, it's not that i won't spend at all. I'll just spend it elsewhere...

Exactly! IF the choice is:

• buy a new raptor skin for 25-30€or
• buy XCOM2: War of the Chosen for 39.99€ (less when Steam sales)Now guess why i'll be finishing XCOM 2 Campaign again in a couple weeks (i'm too busy to play either atm).Now if mounts were like 10€ each (~1000 gems)? I'd probably have bought 3 of them so far (Jackal, skimmer and springer, didn't like the peacock).

Agreed. I would totally buy three new cars if they were $100 each.

LOLThat's a sound logic. Does it compare to the game?No.Not even close...A car has specific costs in creating, materials, branding, distribution. And the cheapest you can buy a brand new car is usually around 10 000€.

Gem store items don't have material or distribution costs. Also, other "cars" already in the gem store, don't cost 2000 gems. Outfits are similar in scope and use, and cost one third of the mount costs. If you compare value and possible workload on all gem store items, mounts are clearly an outlier. Even permanent tools can be justified because of the savings in gathering tools.While mounts are just an outfit for a skill with some extra sounds. Compared to Character outfits that need to be redesigned 5-10 times (because racial and gender differences) the price difference is clearly exaggerated.

I would argue that regular outfits have to be priced at the lower price point in order to achieve sales goals. An outfit competes with the vast number of armor skins in the game. So a player has a huge range of appearance options for their character making it less likely that they would choose a particular outfit. Mount skins are not the same as outfits from that perspective.

It's also a regular price on the market as far as I can tell. WoW mount skins that are in the store cost as much, if not more.

WoW's standard is also that they have like 100 mounts available in quests and drops, and only 10 in the store.Also pretty much

all

items on the WoW store cost similar money. They have single head-gear items for 15€.While in GW2 you have whole outfits for 800 gems. You have bundles with outfits, a weapon skin, back and glider skin for 2000 gems. And then a mount for 2000 gems. It's a matter of consistency.

Anyway, no use making excuses or trying to question prices any more. Time will tell who was right.

@Cuddy.6247 said:Came in here expecting a different rant. So I'll just throw in my opinion anyway: I don't think prices are that unfair. But I do think they need to rethink the increments they sell gems. 2000 gems for a mount, right? Well, I get the goat springer for myself. But I'm stuck at 1600 or 2800. My solution was to buy 4000 so I can get another mount (the datamined griffon looks like a solid winner already)...but it feels kind of sleazy that you can't tailor your shopping cart.That's part of the marketing strategy as far as i can see.

Payroll costs are as integral to, "creating," a product as materials.

Having access to a single mount in WoW costs as much as $180 per year in rent.

Well, again, i didn't say there were no costs. Only no material costs. Digital goods, sold through digital distribution have no "cost per item" only the initial development cost. After that is paid, everything else is profit. I could argue that even as little as 100 mounts sold for 1000 gems would probably cover the development costs of the mounts. All else is profit.

All else is profit only when all content is monetized. But, since we get a decent amount of content we don't have to lay out any cash for, then the items that do sell for cash must cover that, as well as the item itself.

[Fremtid.3528]

@Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:

@Linken.6345 said:

@Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:

@Linken.6345 said:

@"Cuddy.6247" said:Came in here expecting a different rant. So I'll just throw in my opinion anyway: I don't think prices are that unfair. But I do think they need to rethink the increments they sell gems. 2000 gems for a mount, right? Well, I get the goat springer for myself. But I'm stuck at 1600 or 2800. My solution was to buy 4000 so I can get another mount (the datamined griffon looks like a solid winner already)...but it feels kind of sleazy that you can't tailor your shopping cart.

or you buy 1600 gems with cash and 400 gems with gold done.

Or purchase a Gem Card that gives you 2000 Gems. No Gems left over. You can often get a discount on the cost of the Gem Card (from Authorized Retailers), as well.

I was under the impression that the guy could only buy 1600 gem cards or 2800 gem cards.

As far as I know, Gem Cards only come in 2000 and 1200 denominations, for $25 and $15, respectively. I have them sitting on my desk.

The best buy near me doesn't sell the $15 ones anymore :( it's only $25 ones for me from here on out. Or of course ingame gems. What i used to like is they didn't used to charge tax here for the first couple years if i bought gem cards so i would buy all my gems in cards to avoid the "tax" fee. But some sneaky lawmaker figured that one out and now they have to charge tax. It was nice though because buying them in store I would get best buy rewards on them as well so I would get like a $5 gift certificate every x amount spent on them. I'm close to one now even.

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

@Fremtid.3528 said:

@Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:

@Linken.6345 said:

@Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:

@Linken.6345 said:

@"Cuddy.6247" said:Came in here expecting a different rant. So I'll just throw in my opinion anyway: I don't think prices are that unfair. But I do think they need to rethink the increments they sell gems. 2000 gems for a mount, right? Well, I get the goat springer for myself. But I'm stuck at 1600 or 2800. My solution was to buy 4000 so I can get another mount (the datamined griffon looks like a solid winner already)...but it feels kind of sleazy that you can't tailor your shopping cart.

or you buy 1600 gems with cash and 400 gems with gold done.

Or purchase a Gem Card that gives you 2000 Gems. No Gems left over. You can often get a discount on the cost of the Gem Card (from Authorized Retailers), as well.

I was under the impression that the guy could only buy 1600 gem cards or 2800 gem cards.

As far as I know, Gem Cards only come in 2000 and 1200 denominations, for $25 and $15, respectively. I have them sitting on my desk.

The best buy near me doesn't sell the $15 ones anymore :( it's only $25 ones for me from here on out. Or of course ingame gems. What i used to like is they didn't used to charge tax here for the first couple years if i bought gem cards so i would buy all my gems in cards to avoid the "tax" fee. But some sneaky lawmaker figured that one out and now they have to charge tax. It was nice though because buying them in store I would get best buy rewards on them as well so I would get like a $5 gift certificate every x amount spent on them. I'm close to one now even.

They don't charge tax (or shipping) from my Best Buy. I also use my rewards for Gem Cards (they have both online). I don't remember if I've ever bought them in-store, as the Cards arrive next day when ordering online. It's a good deal.