Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Thanks for the FREE build templates ANET!!

SLOTH.5231

By SLOTH.5231
in Guild Wars 2 Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Dalec.9853

Dalec.9853

Posted
Posted

@yoni.7015 said:

@MetalGirl.2370 said:What are you thanking them for ? Thank you for not milking me and actually doing your job like you promised back in 2012?

Hold on ... what makes you think that even if this feature was released in 2012, you wouldn't be charged for it? What you are saying doesn't make sense. the timing has NOTHING to do on whether Anet is going to monetize a feature or not.

Nothing is 'milking' anyone. That's how sour people talk when they have to pay for something they want ... when they think they should be entitled enough to get it for nothing. There is absolutely NOTHING unreasonable going on here. It's an extra, QoL feature. The OP has it right ... everyone SHOULD be thankful you get access to some off a useful feature without having to pay for it.

Well of course, you're back with your kiss kitten attitude. kitten off...I'm done arguing sense with you from the last thread

Do you work for free or why do you think everyone has to work for free for you?

I don't think everyone has to work for free, having an opinion that some things are acceptable paid and some things should be core features is absolutely NOTHING like saying I wish "everyone has to work for free", especially when it was free and unlimited in GW1, it's a downgrade from a free add-on currently* and it's something that if other games can't be bothered to implement as a core feature they allow addons/mods do it for them (Actually could someone name another major MMO that charges for this feature?)

* Because if you can't do better, ban it

From reddit"This. One of the conditions to ANet allowing my templates extension was that I let it die when an official solution comes around, and that condition hasn't changed"

and

@Obtena.7952entitledYou misunderstand, not entitled to have it for free, we're entitled to call greedy bastards what they are when we see it though. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, it's ok to have yours even if it's wrong.

Who is the greedy one here that wants everything for free? Do you complain at the supermarket because you have to pay for your groceries? Again, Guild Wars 2 is not Guild Wars 2.

Do you even read? nobody said EVERYTHING for free.

And no, Guild Wars 2 certainly isn't Guild Wars 2 as we knew it anymore. * Yes I know you meant GW1, and yes it's a fair comparison considering it's their game

Do you think you are clever coming up with idiotic kitten like complaining to pay for groceries as a somehow equal comparison in your mind to complaining about a late feature that should have been part of the core game (we paid for) or accepted as an add-on if they can't be bothered.

Are you making the mistake in thinking everyone is a F2P player now?

Edit: I've probably spent more on the game than you too and I've been playing from the start so none of the game was ever free to me, so you can get this wanting everything for free nonsense out of your head - it's all about what is acceptable or not.

I have been playing from the start as well. But I want to support the game and don’t want everything for free.

Thats great! I don't want everything for free either and have paid plenty and have continued to, thanks fellow supporter of the game!Where we seem to disagree on is what is acceptable to charge for.

As you like strange comparisons like the groceries example, I assume that means you would wish to pay gems for every step you take in game? I mean being connected to the game, server costs... you don't want the devs to go hungry right?

No, I like the current model. It wasn’t a strange comparison it is exactly the mentality you and others are showing here. Everything has to be free, everyone has to work for free so that you can have it all for free.

But I didn't say everything has to be free? you are saying I'm saying it but I never said that. I don't believe that everything has to be free.I don't think a downgrade or something that is either a base feature or add-on in other games should be paid, it has to justify a cost by being better - this new system is too limited.I don't think the Core game or expansion should be F2P either, I think it was a mistake, I'd rather have paid more for the game when it was B2P if it meant better QoL/and a feature complete UI

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 200
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Aeon.4583

Aeon.4583

Posted
Posted

I am with 1st post from this thread.To Arena.net:My operating system's api hook was taken by two other overlays long before ArcDPS, so i never used any 3rd party addons for GW2, because i simply can't =)Been waiting long time for proper in-game build templates. Had enough time to prepare. Thank you, and i am ready for 29.10.19 B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tukaram.8256

Tukaram.8256

Posted
Posted

@lokh.2695 said:

@sigur.9453 said:kitten off.Ps: please permaban me, not interested in making any more business with you after all. Cu

Can I have your stuff? kthxbye

He’s not going anywhere he’s playing the game as we speak lol

I thought as much. The yelling crowd always keeps playing because without the game they would be out of things to cry over ;)

What kind of game forum would it be without doom & gloom 'end of game' kind of posters? Honestly I am surprised they ever allowed a 3rd party hack to me acceptable. I never heard of it before, and was surprised when I heard what it was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tukaram.8256

Tukaram.8256

Posted
Posted

@Gotenks Jr.3752 said:

@MetalGirl.2370 said:What are you thanking them for ? Thank you for not milking me and actually doing your job like you promised back in 2012?

Hold on ... what makes you think that even if this feature was released in 2012, you wouldn't be charged for it? What you are saying doesn't make sense. the timing has NOTHING to do on whether Anet is going to monetize a feature or not.

Nothing is 'milking' anyone. That's how sour people talk when they have to pay for something they want ... when they think they should be entitled enough to get it for nothing. There is absolutely NOTHING unreasonable going on here. It's an extra, QoL feature. The OP has it right ... everyone SHOULD be thankful you get access to some off a useful feature without having to pay for it.

As far I'm concerned I'd be less upset (I'd have still been upset) if was charged for back in 2012, the hardest content PvE wise was dungons, which were great (and still are albeit neglected and bizarely not being utilised).

Why would I have still been upset, well in GW1 I could have as many build templates as I wanted, I was only limited by the amount of txt files I could store on my PC.

This doesn't make much sense ... you would be upset if you were charged for templates in GW2 because in GW1 you got unlimited ones for free? How is GW1 related to what happens in GW2? It's not, like even remotely. It's in fact, completely irrelevant. Two different games, two completely different business models. The ONLY thing that ties those games together is the lore ... and that ain't no good reason to think Anet shouldn't charge players for useful features and items.

I'd have been upset because of that yeah, I'd however have been much less upset because it didn't really matter that much to me back then either xD also its a Sequel and they used similar business models.

In GW we also got Heroes, we do not have them in GW2. Am I mad? No. Do I expect them? No. Do I want them. Oh, yes! ha ha

And if they ever did introduce them - it would either be in an expansion, or gem store add-on. I would not expect it for free. Same with builds. They are giving us some for free, and more are available if you want them.

Thank you Arenanet for the hard work you do, and for 7 years of no monthly fees! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Soaring Spirit.9170

Soaring Spirit.9170

Posted
Posted

@Tukaram.8256 said:

@"MetalGirl.2370" said:What are you thanking them for ? Thank you for not milking me and actually doing your job like you promised back in 2012?

Hold on ... what makes you think that even if this feature was released in 2012, you wouldn't be charged for it? What you are saying doesn't make sense. the timing has NOTHING to do on whether Anet is going to monetize a feature or not.

Nothing is 'milking' anyone. That's how sour people talk when they have to pay for something they want ... when they think they should be entitled enough to get it for nothing. There is absolutely NOTHING unreasonable going on here. It's an extra, QoL feature. The OP has it right ... everyone SHOULD be thankful you get access to some off a useful feature without having to pay for it.

As far I'm concerned I'd be less upset (I'd have still been upset) if was charged for back in 2012, the hardest content PvE wise was dungons, which were great (and still are albeit neglected and bizarely not being utilised).

Why would I have still been upset, well in GW1 I could have as many build templates as I wanted, I was only limited by the amount of txt files I could store on my PC.

This doesn't make much sense ... you would be upset if you were charged for templates in GW2 because in GW1 you got unlimited ones for free? How is GW1 related to what happens in GW2? It's not, like even remotely. It's in fact, completely irrelevant. Two different games, two completely different business models. The ONLY thing that ties those games together is the lore ... and that ain't no good reason to think Anet shouldn't charge players for useful features and items.

I'd have been upset because of that yeah, I'd however have been much less upset because it didn't really matter that much to me back then either xD also its a Sequel and they used similar business models.

In GW we also got Heroes, we do not have them in GW2. Am I mad? No. Do I expect them? No. Do I want them. Oh, yes! ha ha

And if they ever did introduce them - it would either be in an expansion, or gem store add-on. I would not expect it for free. Same with builds. They are giving us some for free, and more are available if you want them.

Thank you Arenanet for the hard work you do, and for 7 years of no monthly fees! :)

The Heroes system isn't a very good example for comparison in my opinion, but yeah I already kinda said I was disappointed they were not a thing but don't put words in my mouth. I would purely have been disappointed to a much lesser degree. They were not really needed at launch so them not being there wasn't a big deal, it was literally this. "Oh no builds feature. disappointment. Oh well."

As for this, my only issue with monitisation is in "Build" templates, when it comes to "Gear" templates I'm certainly on board, its clearly a lot of effort and my only gripe is that 2 Gear Templates by default is simply not enough, just by popping it up to 3 at least allow for "Generic PvE, Generic WvW and some specialised build". Beyond that I'm fine with monetisation of it. The actual systems really cool its had a lot of thought put into it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Heibi.4251

Heibi.4251

Posted
Posted

ANeT could have denied the use of any third party programs like arcdps and no one would have had build templates. Instead they allowed players to use arcdps and use the free build templates. You should be grateful they allowed it for so long. Now they will finally have an in game template that I will use.(I didn't want to use the third party program) People keep wanting everything for free seem to forget that ANeT is a company and must make money in some way to stay in business so they can listen to people complain about their game. Like has been stated you can use gold to buy gems or real money, it is all up to you.

At some point you have to either pay for something or it will be gone and you won't have a game to play. Nothing in life is free.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
zealex.9410

zealex.9410

Posted
Posted

@Astralporing.1957 said:If you can't see that standards have changed in those 7 years, it's just because you don't really remember how it was then. I mean, it was easy not to notice, seeing as that change was very slow and gradual

Respectfully disagree, the last couple of years there has been a noticable and agressive push towards monetisation. It can be traced back to se3 when they increased the gemstore patches and gradually introduced more and more gameplay affecting microtransactions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Blaeys.3102

Blaeys.3102

Posted
Posted

@Heibi.4251 said:ANeT could have denied the use of any third party programs like arcdps and no one would have had build templates. Instead they allowed players to use arcdps and use the free build templates. You should be grateful they allowed it for so long. Now they will finally have an in game template that I will use.(I didn't want to use the third party program) People keep wanting everything for free seem to forget that ANeT is a company and must make money in some way to stay in business so they can listen to people complain about their game. Like has been stated you can use gold to buy gems or real money, it is all up to you.

At some point you have to either pay for something or it will be gone and you won't have a game to play. Nothing in life is free.

I share this opinion10000%.

Im also going to go out on a limb here and say that 99% of the people complaining didn't bother to watch the dev talk and demo about this yesterday. I did watch it, and can say that it looks extremely well polished. It is above and beyond what I expected them to develop.

This new system will be welcome addition to my game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Astralporing.1957

Astralporing.1957

Posted
Posted

@zealex.9410 said:

@Astralporing.1957 said:If you can't see that standards have changed in those 7 years, it's just because you don't really remember how it was then. I mean, it was easy not to notice, seeing as that change was very slow and gradual

Respectfully disagree, the last couple of years there has been a noticable and agressive push towards monetisation. It can be traced back to se3 when they increased the gemstore patches and gradually introduced more and more gameplay affecting microtransactions.For me it started with a watchwork mining pick. And when i mentioned on forums that i see this kind of stuff leading to dangerous ideas for anet, i got shouted down.

Although i do agree, that it's gotten way worse lately and it is still gaining momentum.

@Blaeys.3102 said:Im also going to go out on a limb here and say that 99% of the people complaining didn't bother to watch the dev talk and demo about this yesterday. I did watch it, and can say that it looks extremely well polished. It is above and beyond what I expected them to develop.I have watched it, and it didn't improve my mood even one bit. Because this stream only confirmed all the things i was complaining about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Firebeard.1746

Firebeard.1746

Posted
Posted

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@Firebeard.1746 said:This is why they had to lay off 1/3rd of their staff.No. They had to lay off 1/3 of their staff because they decided to use the money GW2 earned for them, not to further improve the game and thus make sure people will continue playing (and paying), but on some unrelated stuff that didn't pay off.

This isn't what the ncsoft ceo said. It falls in line with what i said:

Songyee Yoon, the CEO of Korean publisher NCSoft West, which owns ArenaNet, e-mailed employees this afternoon with the news. “Our live game business revenue is declining as our franchises age, delays in development on PC and mobile have created further drains against our revenue projects, while our operating costs in the west have increased,” she wrote. “Where we are is not sustainable, and is not going to set us up for future success.”I see nothing in this that conflicts with what i said. the problem is, as i said, that "delays in development on PC and mobile have created further drains against our revenue projects". For Arenanet, the delays in development (on PC and mobile) he mentions is about those undisclosed projects they were doing. The revenue against which this was a drain is GW2. So, exactly what i said earlier - they decided to develop other projects at a cost to gw2, and those other projects didn't pay off and ended up being only a revenue drain. Thus, layoffs.

Then by that logic what you're saying doesn't conflict with what i'm saying. They still needed money but didn't have it. If anyone enjoys their brand, they should be willing to support them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Firebeard.1746

Firebeard.1746

Posted
Posted

@Konig Des Todes.2086 said:

@SLOTH.5231 said:Seeing there is some negativity in regards to this I wanted to start a thread to show my appreciation for the free templates.

I also look forward to purchasing more slots for my character to support this great game people love to hate ?

When ArenaNet added build templates to GW1, there was no limit, no slots. Just a file that gets put in your /Guild Wars folder on your computer. Each build was a file, and you could have as many of them as you want, or even make folders in that folder for organization. The limit is literally the size of your hard drive.

When ArenaNet added build templates to GW2, they monetized the everliving kitten out of it by splitting it in two and creating limits to how many builds you could save without buying more.

I'm glad they've finally added it. But holy kitten this just goes to show how drastically the philosophy of ArenaNet has changed since their manifesto video for GW2, let alone from 2008. It makes me
glad
that they've stopped development on GW1, because if they didn't it would be just as horrible at this point, I feel.

In all fairness, it's an added feature for people not running arcdps. It's extra storage space and more ways to save your builds

I wish they would come forward and say it's okay for arcdps to keep its templates as is. I assume people with money would still eventually switch over as there's probably more integration between the two types of templates and it'd be a really easy way to manage builds with the extra storage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cuks.8241

Cuks.8241

Posted
Posted

I certainly see an issue for people that were used to having unlimited templates via ArcDps and now will have to pay for it. I doubt many really require more than ~ 5, I am sure those are minority but there are some and it sucks for them. I guess those are mostly raiders which tailor builds for each encounter. Maybe some WvW players although I don't really go beyond 3 in WvW per class.So to at least put some bandage for those using large variety of builds Anet could add some additional slots as raid, raid achievements rewards.In general I am ok with what we get. Have to see exactly how they will function between different game modes and how much they will cost (I think they should be relatively cheap otherwise just buy another character slot).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Astralporing.1957

Astralporing.1957

Posted
Posted

@Firebeard.1746 said:Then by that logic what you're saying doesn't conflict with what i'm saying. They still needed money but didn't have it. If anyone enjoys their brand, they should be willing to support them.That's not what you said. You said the layoffs happened because ungrateful players were against aggressive monetization. I said, that layoffs happened because Anet tried to finance other projects at a cost to GW2 (and those projects turned out to be unsuccesful).

And no, if anyone enjoys their brand, they should be willing to prevent Anet from destroying it. They should not support them on their way towards the cliff ahead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Firebeard.1746

Firebeard.1746

Posted
Posted

@Astralporing.1957 said:

@"Firebeard.1746" said:Then by that logic what you're saying doesn't conflict with what i'm saying. They still needed money but didn't have it. If anyone enjoys their brand, they should be willing to support them.That's not what you said. You said the layoffs happened because ungrateful players were against aggressive monetization. I said, that layoffs happened because Anet tried to finance other projects at a cost to GW2 (and those projects turned out to be unsuccesful).

And no, if anyone enjoys their brand, they should be willing to prevent Anet from destroying it. They should
not
support them on their way towards the cliff ahead.

It's exactly what I said:

"The reality is this: a one-time transaction is not enough to keep the lights on if you want more content and the servers kept on."

I'm not saying players against aggressive monetization are the problem. I'm saying players unwilling to support anet after the initial purchase are.

And tbh, this is a solid upgrade for anyone not using arcdps templates. That's hardly agressive given they're giving that much for free, i for one, am happy at the prospect of more storage space

Why were they doing those other projects? Maybe gw2 wasn't giving enough?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
zealex.9410

zealex.9410

Posted
Posted

@Firebeard.1746 said:

@Firebeard.1746 said:This is why they had to lay off 1/3rd of their staff.No. They had to lay off 1/3 of their staff because they decided to use the money GW2 earned for them, not to further improve the game and thus make sure people will continue playing (and paying), but on some unrelated stuff that didn't pay off.

This isn't what the ncsoft ceo said. It falls in line with what i said:

Songyee Yoon, the CEO of Korean publisher NCSoft West, which owns ArenaNet, e-mailed employees this afternoon with the news. “Our live game business revenue is declining as our franchises age, delays in development on PC and mobile have created further drains against our revenue projects, while our operating costs in the west have increased,” she wrote. “Where we are is not sustainable, and is not going to set us up for future success.”I see nothing in this that conflicts with what i said. the problem is, as i said, that "delays in development on PC and mobile have created further drains against our revenue projects". For Arenanet, the delays in development (on PC and mobile) he mentions is about those undisclosed projects they were doing. The revenue against which this was a drain is GW2. So, exactly what i said earlier - they decided to develop other projects at a cost to gw2, and those other projects didn't pay off and ended up being only a revenue drain. Thus, layoffs.

Then by that logic what you're saying doesn't conflict with what i'm saying. They still needed money but didn't have it. If anyone enjoys their brand, they should be willing to support them.

True, but i like less and less what my brand is becoming due to ever mkre agressive monetisation and ever less ingame support for modes i enjoy. Im supporting my brand by not supporting what they are trying to turn it into.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Firebeard.1746

Firebeard.1746

Posted
Posted

@zealex.9410 said:

@Firebeard.1746 said:This is why they had to lay off 1/3rd of their staff.No. They had to lay off 1/3 of their staff because they decided to use the money GW2 earned for them, not to further improve the game and thus make sure people will continue playing (and paying), but on some unrelated stuff that didn't pay off.

This isn't what the ncsoft ceo said. It falls in line with what i said:

Songyee Yoon, the CEO of Korean publisher NCSoft West, which owns ArenaNet, e-mailed employees this afternoon with the news. “Our live game business revenue is declining as our franchises age, delays in development on PC and mobile have created further drains against our revenue projects, while our operating costs in the west have increased,” she wrote. “Where we are is not sustainable, and is not going to set us up for future success.”I see nothing in this that conflicts with what i said. the problem is, as i said, that "delays in development on PC and mobile have created further drains against our revenue projects". For Arenanet, the delays in development (on PC and mobile) he mentions is about those undisclosed projects they were doing. The revenue against which this was a drain is GW2. So, exactly what i said earlier - they decided to develop other projects at a cost to gw2, and those other projects didn't pay off and ended up being only a revenue drain. Thus, layoffs.

Then by that logic what you're saying doesn't conflict with what i'm saying. They still needed money but didn't have it. If anyone enjoys their brand, they should be willing to support them.

True, but i like less and less what my brand is becoming due to ever mkre agressive monetisation and ever less ingame support for modes i enjoy. Im supporting my brand by not supporting what they are trying to turn it into.

See above post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bladestrom.6425

Bladestrom.6425

Posted
Posted

@zealex.9410 said:

@Firebeard.1746 said:This is why they had to lay off 1/3rd of their staff.No. They had to lay off 1/3 of their staff because they decided to use the money GW2 earned for them, not to further improve the game and thus make sure people will continue playing (and paying), but on some unrelated stuff that didn't pay off.

This isn't what the ncsoft ceo said. It falls in line with what i said:

Songyee Yoon, the CEO of Korean publisher NCSoft West, which owns ArenaNet, e-mailed employees this afternoon with the news. “Our live game business revenue is declining as our franchises age, delays in development on PC and mobile have created further drains against our revenue projects, while our operating costs in the west have increased,” she wrote. “Where we are is not sustainable, and is not going to set us up for future success.”I see nothing in this that conflicts with what i said. the problem is, as i said, that "delays in development on PC and mobile have created further drains against our revenue projects". For Arenanet, the delays in development (on PC and mobile) he mentions is about those undisclosed projects they were doing. The revenue against which this was a drain is GW2. So, exactly what i said earlier - they decided to develop other projects at a cost to gw2, and those other projects didn't pay off and ended up being only a revenue drain. Thus, layoffs.

Then by that logic what you're saying doesn't conflict with what i'm saying. They still needed money but didn't have it. If anyone enjoys their brand, they should be willing to support them.

True, but i like less and less what my brand is becoming due to ever mkre agressive monetisation and ever less ingame support for modes i enjoy. Im supporting my brand by not supporting what they are trying to turn it into.

Its funny the justifications people make for not buying a thing that they want to have.

Game is free, server time is free, game gets regular updates for free, game is as slick as any other aaa mmorpg, game has support for free, games security is maintained for free. GW2 is by far the cheapest aaa to play for the amount of content. Anet can happily apply 'monetisation as far as I'm concerned, especially when the game by design has no pay to win.' The more people support by buying from the shop, the more content we get.

Put it this way a good dev will cost 65-100k+ a year, then there's test, pm, design, analysts, marketing, devops, support etc. Who exactly is going to pay for this if there is no monetisation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sarrs.4831

Sarrs.4831

Posted
Posted

I'm really not sure what to make of this whole affair.

On the one hand, yeah, it's a bit stingy, especially as it's basically just repurposing the 3 builds you already have.On the other hand as I understand you can just use a notepad to store the codes for your builds and completely sidestep the problem.

It also seems like it'll make legendaries more complicated for people who use the legendaries across multiple alts, unless they add 'account-wide armory slots' 700 gems each on the gem store. Would actually be really useful though especially with legendary backpieces.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Astralporing.1957

Astralporing.1957

Posted
Posted

@"Firebeard.1746" said:It's exactly what I said:

"The reality is this: a one-time transaction is not enough to keep the lights on if you want more content and the servers kept on."

I'm not saying players against aggressive monetization are the problem. I'm saying players unwilling to support anet after the initial purchase are.And i disagree. It was not the players that created the problem. It was Anet misspending the money they've had. The money players gave them thinking they would go towards supporting the game.

And tbh, this is a solid upgrade for anyone not using arcdps templates.And a solid downgrade for everyone that was using it.

That's hardly agressive given they're giving that much for free, i for one, am happy at the prospect of more storage space"that much for free...". It's so much free that it would cost me potentially as much as 10 expacs to keep my current functionality (based on what i heard in the stream). Well, up to the level it would be even possible in this new system. Forgive me for not being thankful for this kind of "free" gift.

@Sarrs.4831 said:On the one hand as I understand you can just use a notepad to store the codes for your builds and completely sidestep the problem.You can't do that for gear. Only for skills/traits.

It also seems like it'll make legendaries more complicated for people who use the legendaries across multiple alts, unless they add 'account-wide armory slots' 700 gems each on the gem storeConsidering the normal per-character slot will likely cost between 400-800 gems (they said it will be similar to bag slots and bank tab unlocks), i'd say that account wide armory slot would cost way more than just 700 gems

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sarrs.4831

Sarrs.4831

Posted
Posted

@Astralporing.1957 said:Considering the normal per-character slot will likely cost between 400-800 gems (they said it will be similar to bag slots and bank tab unlocks), i'd say that account wide armory slot would cost way more than just 700 gems

That'll be for a whole set of 19 slots.I just need one slot to put my Ascension in. And also I'd like another one for my Unbound Gathering Tool but that's another deal entirely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
GuildWars2.com
ArenaNet

©2020 ArenaNet, LLC. All rights reserved. All trademarks are the property of their respective owners.

ESRB - Teen
×
×
  • Create New...