About the people who won't get free Curious Creatures Mount Select License after the rollback

[The Fear.3865]

From this day, I will never ever pay any gems with real money, gems are cheap, it's time to use my thousands of gold.

I'm done with anet.

[Pomdepin.7068]

I was back from a break, and brought some friends who purchased the expansions. This whole situation is so bad for a game that needs new players as it is developing a new expansion...

I had pre-purchased most expensive edition of both expansions, but I don't even know if I'll be around for the 3rd one if my friends leave. Surely won't preorder, neither will buy any deluxe thing if Amer doesn't value its players more.

[yoni.7015]

This is getting more and more ridiculous. You really get that mad because of a skin in a video game? oh boy ...

[Friday.7864]

@yoni.7015 said:This is getting more and more ridiculous. You really get that mad because of a skin in a video game? oh boy ...

Not mad, just disappointed and much less inclined to buy gems for the sole reason of supporting the game. After all, I was practically given a slap in the face for my good will of not logging into a broken game, while others got rewarded for that very reason :)I mean, my account got rolled back too so I couldn't play. I know it's silly, and I don't need the skin cuz I could've just bought it, but I easily hold grudges =)It's a matter of principle and them saying: If it's broken, come play, we'll reward you for it.

[Bladestrom.6425]

@Friday.7864 said:

@yoni.7015 said:This is getting more and more ridiculous. You really get that mad because of a skin in a video game? oh boy ...

Not mad, just disappointed and much less inclined to buy gems for the sole reason of supporting the game. After all, I was practically given a slap in the face for my good will of not logging into a broken game, while others got rewarded for that very reason :)I mean, my account got rolled back too so I couldn't play. I know it's silly, and I don't need the skin cuz I could've just bought it, but I easily hold grudges =)It's a matter of principle and them saying: If it's broken, come play, we'll reward you for it.

All should get the gift simply put, if you regularly played before the incident then you were impacted whether or not you logged on during the period, either by being forced not to logon, or logging in and getting embroiled in the mess.

From Anets perspective its far simpler, 'as a good will gesture we are giving the entire community X', rather that messing things up further by trying to cherry pick who was impacted in what way. The gifts themselves have 0 impact, its the gesture that matters.

[Lyrixx.9571]

Thank you @Greg.7086 for you in-depth description of our problem. It's very well condensed and on point. I only want to add something I am also facing due to the fix of the rollback and the interdependencies behind the scenes.When I was logged in after the roll-back happened but before Anet knew about it and started to take their measures I did something really stupid - in retrospective. At that time I though it was a smart and safe thing to do. I cancelled all my buylistings to be protected from any market irritations due to NA being online while the EU was not and because noone knew how severe the problem was and how long a fix could take. So I ran around with liquid gold in my wallet and left my selllistings where they were.

Anet then took the servers down and, unfortunately, by restoring to a point slightly before I had canceled all my orders while the TP remained unaffected I relogged into my account and all the gold from previous buylistings was lost.

Just wanted to add that since that was quite an amount for me as well. I wish you all a pleasant week-end anyways and hope for the best for all affected players.

[Ashantara.8731]

@Randulf.7614 said:It's difficult for me to comment not being affected, but if I am reading this correctly, with an item posted on Saturday and sold on Monday surely the affected party should get the item or the gold back? Otherwise there seems to be a potential discrepancy that if it sold to an EU player, then both gold and item are lost on both sides and if to a US player, the item is in the hands of the buyer yet the gold is gone for the EU sellerr? Have I understood that correctly or have I got that wrong?

You nailed it. :)

@Greg.7086 said:@Phoe.6829 As much as I totally understand your sentiment, this is the wrong thread for it. This thread started by the OP, is as far as I am concerned a whole bigger issue altogether: "Players never received Gold from items that sold during the EU server rollback/shutdown":

:+1:

One of my friends sold an Aurillium Infusion 2.5K-3K Gold: Not received, another a Legendary Wep: No gold received.

Yep, and there are plenty of people in the same boat. I know my 113+ Gold are just peanuts compared to what your friends and others have lost -- I hope support will find a way to fix this for everyone affected by this issue.

[Syrus.2174]

@The Fear.3865 said:From this day, I will never ever pay any gems with real money, gems are cheap, it's time to use my thousands of gold.

I have made that decision quite some time ago already, mainly though because all the items that I would have bought are locked behind the Black Lion Chest gamble, which I will not get into. But this whole fumble surely didn't make me more happy about spending money on the game.

It's quite sad, I like the game, but there are so many bad decisions being made, it's like they want me to hate them.

@"yoni.7015" said:This is getting more and more ridiculous. You really get that mad because of a skin in a video game? oh boy ...

Some of us just don't accept unfairness and stupid decisions sitting down silently. Some of us still care about the game and what impact the dev's actions have.I wouldn't call it "mad" though, that's such an overused word these days, people are disappointed.But I feel like you don't really care. You logged in to see what was going on ingame. You didn't lose anything in the rollback, but that doesn't matter, you still got your mount skin, right?

[Kodama.6453]

@titje.2745 said:why would you resist yourself. you don't want it so keep that to yourself, you don't get better if you make sure someone else gets his or her item or not. let someone have something nice, without stopping it.

Because Anet is still a company that needs to make money for this game to keep running. And if people are demanding from Anet to lose money that could get put into the development of the game, even if they don't have any right for that claim (you keep saying that you have a right for that mount skin, but you don't at all), then I will point out that these claims are not justified.

[Astralporing.1957]

I'd say that creating a bad PR situation, due to (again) being completely out of touch with the community, is far more likely to lose Anet money than giving away one digital item which costs nothing to "produce", but hey, what do i know.

[Kodama.6453]

@"Astralporing.1957" said:I'd say that creating a bad PR situation, due to (again) being completely out of touch with the community, is far more likely to lose Anet money than giving away one digital item which costs nothing to "produce", but hey, what do i know.

The only bad PR I can see here is that this situation showcases the selfishness of some people of this community you will encounter while playing this game.

[Luthan.5236]

I see only a small part of the community being selfish (the ones that want to prevent others from getting the skin as well).;)

[Kodama.6453]

@Luthan.5236 said:I see only a small part of the community being selfish (the ones that want to prevent others from getting the skin as well).;)

Fair enough, it's your right to see it that way.My point of view is: people want Anet to willfully lose money. The people working at Anet have to eat and live, too, so their company needs to make money.

How I see it, this is more important than giving players some shiny pixels for free. Not having that mount skin doesn't affect you in the slightest, it is just a cosmetic. Losing sells and therefore money does affect Anet. So I prefer to go that route.

[coso.9173]

@Luthan.5236 said:I see only a small part of the community being selfish (the ones that want to prevent others from getting the skin as well).;)

You speak as if only those who got the skin are against others getting it. Many of us didn't get it and still think we shouldn't get it.

[Luthan.5236]

@"coso.9173" said:You speak as if only those who got the skin are against others getting it. Many of us didn't get it and still think we shouldn't get it.Yeah. That's okay too. If you think ArenaNet should not have given skins out at all. (If you think they should remove them from others that have gotten it.)Problem are those people who make up reasons as to why it was okay to give skins to some and not ot others. (And the ones that got them should keep them.)

There are a lot that ignore that some that got the skin did not lose any progress at all.

Also the sales thing is not really a good argument. As someone explained already: Further giving out skins does not cost additional money. Could only mean lost sales. Then again the bad handling of the situation might make players that otherwise would have paid money ever now and then stop paying.

If 100 people get the skin and 80 don't care about skins and 15 think it is too expensive to pay for it ... then the 5 people that would have paid for it will be "lost sales". If they don't give the skin to those 100 and 50 think that ArenaNet did no thandle the situation well and because of that buy less gems for real money ... now that might be a different thing. ;)

Of course only ArenaNet knows those numbers. They can only guess now. (They will know once a bit time has passed.)

[Friday.7864]

@coso.9173 said:

@Luthan.5236 said:I see only a small part of the community being selfish (the ones that want to prevent others from getting the skin as well).;)

You speak as if only those who got the skin are against others getting it. Many of us didn't get it and still think we shouldn't get it.

Destroy it if you don't like getting treated equally. Problem solved.Just because I didn't log into a broken game doesn't mean I wasn't affected. Lost SAB dailies and weekly trades among other things due to this mess.

[coso.9173]

@Friday.7864 said:

@coso.9173 said:

@Luthan.5236 said:I see only a small part of the community being selfish (the ones that want to prevent others from getting the skin as well).;)

You speak as if only those who got the skin are against others getting it. Many of us didn't get it and still think we shouldn't get it.

Destroy it if you don't like getting treated equally. Problem solved.Just because I didn't log into a broken game doesn't mean I wasn't affected. Lost SAB dailies and weekly trades among other things due to this mess.

This is just repeating over and over. To me it was the easiest for of giving compensation to everyone who could have lost progress because of the rollback, while excluding those that were sure to not have lost anything, since they didn't even play. I feel it's fair. But to each their own.

[Friday.7864]

@Kodama.6453 said:

@Luthan.5236 said:I see only a small part of the community being selfish (the ones that want to prevent others from getting the skin as well).;)

Fair enough, it's your right to see it that way.My point of view is: people want Anet to willfully lose money. The people working at Anet have to eat and live, too, so their company needs to make money.

How I see it, this is more important than giving players some shiny pixels for free. Not having that mount skin doesn't affect you in the slightest, it is just a cosmetic. Losing sells and therefore money

does

affect Anet. So I prefer to go that route.

If you hate someone or have a grudge against them, would you give money to them? I wouldn't.I know of no simpler way of explaining this to you. They angered a good chunk of the players with the exclusions.

[sidecarpilot.3468]

@"Astralporing.1957" said:I'd say that creating a bad PR situation, due to (again) being completely out of touch with the community, is far more likely to lose Anet money than giving away one digital item which costs nothing to "produce", but hey, what do i know.

I know it did on my case. I put 10€ monthly on average on this game. They just lost that with this decision.

It's true, Anet is completely out of touch with it's community, they manage to create PR nightmares where there were none. And then they act as if nothing happened, just like how they are acting about the duplicate compensation, the fact that free 2 play players didn't get a compensation unless they buy PoF, or that the people that didn't login are upset and feeling betrayed.Let's face it, Aneta glory days are gone, the only thing going for them is the lack.of pay 2 win practice.

[Kodama.6453]

@Friday.7864 said:If you hate someone or have a grudge against them, would you give money to them? I wouldn't.

If you hate Anet or hold a grudge against them because you missed out on some shiny pixels, then I think you should reconsider some of your priorities.

[Luthan.5236]

@"coso.9173" said:This is just repeating over and over. To me it was the easiest for of giving compensation to everyone who could have lost progress because of the rollback, while excluding those that were sure to not have lost anything, since they didn't even play. I feel it's fair. But to each their own.

That's the main problem. Everyone has a different opinion on what is "fair" in this situatoin. I think giving out 1000 skins to 1000 random accounts (regardless of who logged in or not) would have been fair - even if only people that did not log in won them. Everyone same chances (if random selection).

Just deciding to give one part of the players the free skin while others are not getting it for free (without even having a chance) ... is bad. Just because of that "everyone who could have lost progress" you mention. (Since this means also a lot of people that did not lose any progress.)

If you think it's okay like that and more "fair" to just give it to everyone ... your opinion. I just hate it that some make it look like those people that want the skin for everyone are "selfish". Cause there are also people that did get the skin and wanted all others to get it as well. (I am one of those people. I logged in 5 minutes and logged out and lost no progress.)

Best thing would have been if they didn't give out the skin at all. Only the bonfire. (Since people with lost progress seem to get the progress restored by customer support in cases of huger losses and the mount license would be "overcompensation" in any case - even for people with lots of lost progress ... that now gets restored by support.)

[Kodama.6453]

@Luthan.5236 said:

@"coso.9173" said:This is just repeating over and over. To me it was the easiest for of giving compensation to everyone who could have lost progress because of the rollback, while excluding those that were sure to not have lost anything, since they didn't even play. I feel it's fair. But to each their own.

That's the main problem. Everyone has a different opinion on what is "fair" in this situatoin. I think giving out 1000 skins to 1000 random accounts (regardless of who logged in or not) would have been fair - even if onle people that did not log in won then. Everyone same chances (if random selection).

Just deciding to give one part of the players the free skin while others are not getting it for free (without even having a chance) ... is bad. Just because of that "everyone who could have lost progress" you mention. (Since this means also a lot of people that did not lose any progress.)

If you think it's okay like that and more "fair" to just give it to everyone ... your opinion. I just hate it that some make it look like those people that want the skin for everyone are "selfish". Cause there are also people that did get the skin and wanted all others to get it as well. (I am one of those people. I logged in 5 minutes and logged out and lost no progress.)

Best thing would have been if they didn't give out the skin at all. Only the bonfire. (Since people with lost progress seem to get the progress restored by customer support in cases of huger losses and the mount license would be "overcompensation" in any case - even for people with lots of lost progress ... that now gets restored by support.)

True, everyone defines "fair" differently.I can assure you that if they had chosen 1000 random accounts and given the skin to them, while not to others, then there also has been a massive uproar that this is unfair treatment, most likely because many active players would have claimed that they deserve a higher chance to get that skin over an account that is just online casually.

In my definition, what happened here is fair. And I understand that Anet just tries to take the easiest way of compensation while also keeping the actual money loss for themselves at a minimum. And I agree with that decision, especially since there is an expansion on the way and in my opinion they should put as many ressources into that as they can.

[Friday.7864]

@Kodama.6453 said:

@Friday.7864 said:If you hate someone or have a grudge against them, would you give money to them? I wouldn't.

If you hate Anet or hold a grudge against them because you missed out on some shiny pixels, then I think you should reconsider some of your priorities.

It's not about the pixels, I have enough money to buy everything I want from the gem store, ty for the concern.I'm just shocked they rewarded ppl who logged into a broken server (it was obvious any progress would be lost) while leaving the rest of the community that also had their accounts rolled back, dry. Plenty of people did the responsible thing and stayed away from their problematic servers.It's appaling what kind of behavior they are encouraging with this. Next time something breaks I'm logging in with everything I have and wrecking things as much as I can because according to them that's the right thing to do.

[Astralporing.1957]

@coso.9173 said:

@Friday.7864 said:

@coso.9173 said:

@"Luthan.5236" said:I see only a small part of the community being selfish (the ones that want to prevent others from getting the skin as well).;)

You speak as if only those who got the skin are against others getting it. Many of us didn't get it and still think we shouldn't get it.

Destroy it if you don't like getting treated equally. Problem solved.Just because I didn't log into a broken game doesn't mean I wasn't affected. Lost SAB dailies and weekly trades among other things due to this mess.

This is just repeating over and over. To me it was the easiest for of giving compensation to everyone who could have lost progress because of the rollback, while excluding those that were sure to not have lost anything, since they didn't even play. I feel it's fair. But to each their own.

Look at this thread:https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/105716/players-never-received-gold-from-items-that-sold-during-the-eu-server-rollback-shutdownThere are people in this thread that lost progress (gold and items) due to rollbacked TP transactions, but weren't logged in.

So, we have people that didn't lose anything being rewarded with license, and people that did lose progress not being compensated.

Yeah, i'm fairly sure that was a good solution that Anet implemented, all right [/sarcasm]

[AzureSky.3175]

@"Fire Attunement.9835" said:To those who lost progress we gifted the mount select license

The problem is, this is just plain wrong. You gifted the license to everyone who logged in, whether they lost any progress or not, which is a huge difference.

Maybe you did this because it is too labor-intensive to determine which accounts actually lost significant progress and which didn't. But person X who decided to not log in might've taken the day off to play with their friends, gave up on all their daily rewards or might have to wait an entire year more now before they can get their second red SAB-infusion. They get a bonfire. Meanwhile person Y who just quickly logged in for their daily chest anyway and left again immediately get's a mount select license for lost progress? There's absolutely no way for you to tell if the rollback impacted X or Y worse. You had the chance to simply compensate everyone inconvenienced by the server problems equally. It honestly would've even been fine to give nobody anything, but instead you started a lottery of who clicked a button and who didn't. How is a person who gave up on their log-in-chest is in any way better off than a person who lost their log-in-chest?

If something like this happens again in the future, you basically just encouraged everyone to log in, tell all their friends and spent as much time logged in as possible to qualify for gifts, when instead you should just encourage people to stay put and wait for a fix.

I know the dead-horse-memes intensify and everyone thinks "is another thread about this really necessary? :rolleyes-emoji:"

The thing is, I don't expect you to correct this or to send out additional licenses, but please at least show some understanding of why this topic sparked so much controversy and try to handle things like this with a little more finesse if it happens again. This shitshow could've easily been avoided, I even read a news article in my country about it, which was not really good publicity.