20 Dollars For Mount Skins?!?!

[Fallesafe.5932]

> @Vyrulisse.1246 said:

> > @Fallesafe.5932 said:

> > > @wrathmagik.3518 said:

> > > Are you high?

> > >

> > > On top of that they all look the same! (they are 2000 gems on "sale" for 1600 atm)

> > > You can almost buy POF for the same price as mount skins!

> > > We all knew that mounts were anets new cash cow but i didn't think they'd price gouge this badly.

> >

> > OMG, it's the price of a pizza. YOU GREEDY, CORPORATE FIENDS!!! OCCUPY WALL ST!!!!

>

> You miss the point just like everyone else who defends this idiocy. It's overpriced nonsense that companies get away with because people make false equivalent comparisons such as this and carry their banner proudly. The utter lack of self-respect is stunning to me when I see people so fervently defending these practices.

 

Easy solution... don't buy it lol. They look like garbage anyway.

[Ayumi Spender.1082]

> @Vyrulisse.1246 said:

> > @Fallesafe.5932 said:

> > > @wrathmagik.3518 said:

> > > Are you high?

> > >

> > > On top of that they all look the same! (they are 2000 gems on "sale" for 1600 atm)

> > > You can almost buy POF for the same price as mount skins!

> > > We all knew that mounts were anets new cash cow but i didn't think they'd price gouge this badly.

> >

> > OMG, it's the price of a pizza. YOU GREEDY, CORPORATE FIENDS!!! OCCUPY WALL ST!!!!

>

> You miss the point just like everyone else who defends this idiocy. It's overpriced nonsense that companies get away with because people make false equivalent comparisons such as this and carry their banner proudly. The utter lack of self-respect is stunning to me when I see people so fervently defending these practices.

 

Seen it for years.

"Omg you're complaining a skin for a weapon is $1? Just don't get some french fries one day and you can get them easily".

I've seen this argument countless times.

 

The problem isn't the price, is that it adds up and it's not beneficial or good for anyone except the company exploiting people.

The skin for one sword might be $1.... but if there's 99 more skins, you're spending over $100 on a game you originally spend $50/$60/$70 on.

 

Only difference here of course is GW2 is a free to play game with no subscriptions so I can understand Arenanet has to find ways to get money off people, but even after that... the argument and comparison thing is never a decent or good comparison.

It's usually people trying to defend their purchase because they're psychologically fighting themselves.

 

One end is like "I like this. Really good." the other end is like "YOU GOT RIPPED OFF! IT'S NOT WORTH IT! WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU?!"

[TheQuickFox.3826]

> @Nilson.9865 said:

> [...] This game is nothing like some Korean mmos and still dozen guys keep on whining. Anet will not continue create this world without money. Why is that not obvious for you?

 

Have you ever wondered where NCSOFT is from, who are the owners of ArenaNet?

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

> @ROMANG.1903 said:

> > @Lokki.1092 said:

> > I never doubt people's desire to complain over the price of anything and everything.

> >

> > If you don't like the skins don't buy them, if you cannot afford the skins don't buy them. The rest of us will enjoy them.

>

> The major problem is, they made the base mounts poorly customizable to force us to buy the gem store ones if we want more colours. I don't like the spooky mounts. If I ever buy them (which I highly doubt), it will be for the dye slots, hoping I can hide both the skeleton and the aura.

 

The base glider can't be customized easily either. You have to spend gems if you want anything other than ugly.

[Matick.4132]

The fact that** OTHER games** are even more mental in their Gem-Shop, doesn't make this a good decision in the first place.

Spending gems to support the Devs and get customising and a lil extra for the fans, is ok. But at a _fair price tag_.

Not as a _rip-off _guys!

[Belgarion.8523]

The problem is not to pay 2000 gems or 1600 gems on sale for a Skins set for every mount. The problem now is to pay 2000 gems for just one skin. Basically I like to skin my mounts in the same Style so it fits my character which uses the mounts. For excample I would like to have damon skin of skimmer on all mounts for my necro etc.

 

Further I think if they would put the skins on a reasonable price they would make way more money with it. Because more ppl would buy them. I would buy them if its a set for every mount on the actual price or the price would be 400 - 500 Gems per single Skin but never for 2000 Gems for just one skin. Everyone I talk to think the price of 200 Gems is a complete rip off.

 

And lets be honest I play quite a lot and don't see mount Skins for 2000 gems very often. But that is of course a feeling I get.

[Tolmos.8395]

We are lucky in some regards. Black Desert Online charges $30 for their armor skins, and those skins also give minor in game boosts to movement speed, experience, etc.

 

I’d take an expensive mount skin a month over something like that.

 

Also, I would much rather drop a solid $20 on a mount skin that I am guaranteed to get, than drop $20 in black lion keys to get absolutely nothing because of RNG. Nothing hurts worse than flushing money down the toilet for consumables and materials from chests. At least I know exactly what I’m getting with these skins

[Demented Sheep.1642]

I wouldn't mind that they have expensive premium mount skins but they also made the other mounts skins goddamn RNG, they have 0 in game skins to unlock, they only gave you single dye channel for the default ones and this is all part of expansion content you paid for.

 

Anet is so stingy with ingame cosmetic rewards. It's past the point were I consider it fair and it is negatively affecting player enjoyment. Yeah they are a business and they need to make money but that is not a catch all excuse for everything.

[Biff.5312]

The issue isn't whether you have to buy them or not. The issue is that for people who'd like them, they are overpriced. I find it hard to believe they wouldn't increase revenues by lowering these prices - but maybe they've done the research. All I know for sure is that I've gone without buying a lot of stuff just because the price was too high, and if they had been lower I'd have bought at least some of the things I didn't. So they'd have more of my money than they do now. Maybe I'm in the minority, but I doubt it.

[BunjiKugashira.9754]

I've come to terms with this.

When the first skins were released I was ready to throw money at the game for a nice set of skins.

However I don't want seasonal bound skins. They need to please me all year around.

I refuse to gamble on skins. I decided to just act as if the adoption license didn't exist.

The only available skins on the gemshop are 2000 gems each. However I have yet to see a skin that is worth 2000 gems to me.

By now I've spent the money that was supposed to go into mount skins on new computer parts. I'll just use the default skins forever.

[Gehenna.3625]

It's pricey for items that you rent, but it's not unusual in cash shops that such items cost around 20 bucks. For a game that has no subs I also find that GW2 has a very reasonable approach to their cash shop and to be honest, considering the revenue that keeps dropping for them I think it's necessary that they make a bit more money from the cash shop. I mean really, if you like this game and want it to go on, spending 20 bucks here and there on an item to support is not really something evil.

 

What I do not like is RNG things. Direct sales are cool, you know what you get and what you pay, but beyond that I think it's perfectly normal that a company wants to make some money. I prefer paying a sub because it's more steady income and it's easier to filter out gold sellers and such, but this is the model they chose and I really don't think it's anything outrageous.