[POLL] Mount Skins Distribution - A Serious Poll

[Ardid.7203]

600 gems for the specific skin I want, I'll pay. 1500 even, if it is a really great skin and I like it.

Anything RNG... no. No thanks.

[MadLass.3821]

**I'm fine with both price and RNG**

I think the RNG is fun, it makes it like a loot chest, you don't know if you are getting what you want or something else. I like it for that reason, and I think the price could be a bit lower but it's fine to me. Just my one problem is, the reforged warhound costs as much as the spooky skins. I mean, one skin should not cost as much as five other skins.

[Djinn.9245]

> @Kheldorn.5123 said:

> - Game is buy to play so microtransactions are required for it to survive

 

This is correct, but seems to imply that Anet NEEDS to use psychological tricks to TRICK players into buying things instead of simply providing nice items that players CHOOSE to buy. Yes, Anet needs to make money but this is not the way to do it.

 

 

[Euryon.9248]

> @MadLass.3821 said:

> **I'm fine with both price and RNG**

> I think the RNG is fun, it makes it like a loot chest, you don't know if you are getting what you want or something else.

 

 

Well, you are one of the gamblers I mentioned, if you don't mind paying $$$ to potentially get something useless. Many of us here actually like to know what we're getting when we shell out money. You can have your RNG fun, but give the rest of us the option to pay more to get exactly what we want. Part of the problem here is that, unlike a lot of the rarer BLC items (and I hate BLC), these items cannot be bought on the TP if you aren't lucky with your drops. You can't earn gold in game to buy them, you can't farm or grind for achieves to get them. The ONLY way to guarantee you get what you want is to pay more than the cost of the game itself to get it. That's insane.

[xisniel.8296]

Since you will not get duplicates, the RNG is fine with me and brings in some fun. Though I do think the price is a little too much, since you have no choice of which mount to select the random skin for. A friend just bought one license, and their one and only skin was for the griffon, the most expensive mount to obtain and of course the one he still won't have for a long time. Yes, there is something to look forward to since the skin was the highest tier one, but when I buy gem store items I'd like to be able to enjoy my purchases immediately.

[DaG.5103]

> @Pifil.5193 said:

> > @JADE.1702 said:

> > This Poll is a nice idea but they will never change it . Here is WHY direct from an Anet DEV direct message on Reddit ::-1:

> > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

> > Anet_Bengw2 dev [-2] sent 1 day ago

> > You are incapable of seeing it from our side because you have no idea the costs to run an MMO or the thought and market research that goes in to designing these systems. Obviously it would feel better to you to be able to pick any skin you want, and therefore spend 400 gems per mount and never anything more.

> > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

>

> Such garbage. I assume that ArenaNet employee must know that. Their "thought and market research" seems to have missed a few things like the growing anti-lootbox sentiment amongst gamers and the negative reaction from so many GW2 players specifically. So, you did a poor job there.

>

> Here's a tip for Ben: in the real world you don't get to complain because your customers aren't happy. You may feel entitled to success because you worked hard but if you worked hard producing the wrong thing, well, that's not your customers problem, is it? No one's going to buy a broken phone just because the engineers working on it really tried hard to get it to work!

>

> In this case the loot boxes are a gamble for ArenaNet, they could have sold mount skins under the same model that they used to sell glider skins but they're gambling that they'll get more money this way. That's your side ArenaNet, you want more money. I think we all see your side of it.

 

The real problem is that this "quote" is entirely fabricated. I don't know why this user made this quote up, but you can see all of Ben's posting [here](https://www.reddit.com/user/anet_ben) (and he's actually one of the absolute best at communicating with the players). Nowhere will you find such a quote from him there.

[LarsKl.6091]

It is obviously that some things went wrong and when ppl are little fed up, they all are able to talk ;)

[Corylus.8213]

Price 400 for a skin is ok, on par with gliders. But I will not spend 30 x 400 just to get that one skin I like (and I'm sure it will be 30th for me, I haven't seen any ascended chest from t4 fractals for many month, rng for me is no go).

[jokke.6239]

I'm not fine with a 2000 gems mount. But remove RNG and charge 600-800 gems for a mount seems fine to me.

[GrubySzymek.1362]

First of all **I would like to thank everyone for participating, those who already voted or will vote in next hours (or days).** The sample is huge. I dare to say this is the most populated vote these forums have ever seen. **At the moment of creation of this post 2257 accounts had voted. This is great sample to be used in providing general community opinion about the situation.**

 

The reason why I feel safe to assume the conclusions can be made already is the fact that **from the moment we reached about 150 votes, the percentage values are mostly stable, varying 1-2% max as times goes by. It is very rare for any game community to be in such agreement and this is very important for ArenaNet to understand that the situation they created cannot be taken lightly.**

 

I was told in last 2 days that some options of the poll could have been added - like "I would pay more for no RNG skin". You are correct but it's impossible to edit the poll and creating new one would provide unwanted confusion. For people sharing this opinion option (Price is fine but I don't like RNG aspect) is the closest and if anyone still wants to vote please choose this one.

 

That being said, **the mentioned option "Price is fine but I don't like RNG aspect" is the one shared within vast majority of playerbase. When this post was created, the poll showed 1455 votes (64% of all votes) that people are fine with paying for skins but the lottery ticket is unacceptable for them.**

 

The poll is obviously followed by huge discussion, both here and in the poll thread. People suggest a lot of things but the most vocal posts seem to be the ones suggesting **direct sales for mount skins and different tiering of prices considering that mount skins do not share same "creation value".** What I mean by this is that some of the skins (a majority in current skin lottery) are just **color patterns without any significant change in comparison to basic mount model. These models have objectively the least "work value".**

 

**Some of the mounts are slight iterations of basic models** (like shiba jackal). They are something new, something different and they do not offer any additional visual effects or mount travel effects. **These should be medium tier of mount price.**

 

**The last tier is all those flashy aura mounts. They should have biggest price value**, as they add similar effect to legendary weapons, to stand out in the crowd.

 

**The forged jackal is not part of this poll as it's not RNG mount and I am not willing to mix it into this discussion.**

 

I am sure that those RNG mount boxes are big money for ArenaNet. I do not blame you for trying this path. However, please reconsider your position. Players are deeply disturbed by your actions in terms of mount monetization. Revenue is one thing but customer satisfaction and trust is the other. Look how much harm this decision did to PoF release hype. You decided to ask players to create "buzz", to use word of mouth as main marketing tool for this expansion. Look at all the positive reactions people have for the hard work your developers put into recreating and reintroducing the continent of Elona to us. I don't think it's worth to stick to this bussiness strategy just to sabotage all the good vibe you created almost 2 months ago with PoF release. Especially that all this negativity is spreading through internet.

 

I believe you know it turned out to be more serious than you expected. But with the huge sample of the poll and comments both here and in other social media related to GW2, I hope you change your decision and reitroduce mount monetization in fair model. Because people want to pay you for these skins, but not for lottery or gamble.

 

Thank you all for your time you wasted reading this ;)

[Pifil.5193]

> @DaG.5103 said:

> > @Pifil.5193 said:

> > > @JADE.1702 said:

> > > This Poll is a nice idea but they will never change it . Here is WHY direct from an Anet DEV direct message on Reddit ::-1:

> > > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

> > > Anet_Bengw2 dev [-2] sent 1 day ago

> > > You are incapable of seeing it from our side because you have no idea the costs to run an MMO or the thought and market research that goes in to designing these systems. Obviously it would feel better to you to be able to pick any skin you want, and therefore spend 400 gems per mount and never anything more.

> > > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

> >

> > Such garbage. I assume that ArenaNet employee must know that. Their "thought and market research" seems to have missed a few things like the growing anti-lootbox sentiment amongst gamers and the negative reaction from so many GW2 players specifically. So, you did a poor job there.

> >

> > Here's a tip for Ben: in the real world you don't get to complain because your customers aren't happy. You may feel entitled to success because you worked hard but if you worked hard producing the wrong thing, well, that's not your customers problem, is it? No one's going to buy a broken phone just because the engineers working on it really tried hard to get it to work!

> >

> > In this case the loot boxes are a gamble for ArenaNet, they could have sold mount skins under the same model that they used to sell glider skins but they're gambling that they'll get more money this way. That's your side ArenaNet, you want more money. I think we all see your side of it.

>

> The real problem is that this "quote" is entirely fabricated. I don't know why this user made this quote up, but you can see all of Ben's posting [here](https://www.reddit.com/user/anet_ben) (and he's actually one of the absolute best at communicating with the players). Nowhere will you find such a quote from him there.

 

He said it was a direct message on reddit (a private message) not a post. However if it turns out that it is made up then of course I will apologise for saying what I did.

[Sir Vincent III.1286]

RNG is fine since there are only 31 skins, but 400 a piece is steep. I'd take 250 a piece.

[Troboba.6453]

@"Kheldorn.5123" Thank you for the poll and your final conclusion !

[Nocturn.8904]

I have bought several outfits and gliders from the gem store because I enjoyed their aesthetics and and I knew exactly what I was purchasing. I will not put myself through the mental gymnastics required to justify gambling on something I actually want. I would also like to support the push for more in-game ways of _earning_ non-basic mount skins; for "Fashion Wars 2," it sure seems like the only way to stay up to date on your character's customization is to buy gems.

[Pandonation.7201]

Still bumping this as it's incredibly important the devs see this, imo.

[GreyWolf.8670]

> @Kheldorn.5123 said:

> > @GreyWolf.8670 said:

> > > @JADE.1702 said:

> > > This Poll is a nice idea but they will never change it . Here is WHY direct from an Anet DEV direct message on Reddit ::-1:

> > > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

> > > Anet_Bengw2 dev [-2] sent 1 day ago

> > > You are incapable of seeing it from our side because you have no idea the costs to run an MMO or the thought and market research that goes in to designing these systems. Obviously it would feel better to you to be able to pick any skin you want, and therefore spend 400 gems per mount and never anything more.

> > > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

> >

> > Wow. If that's real then it's time to walk away from GW2.

>

> As mentioned before, I can't find this post on Ben's account. Guy who posted this here also doesn't provide any link. I don't think Ben ever commented about this. They are in PR hell mode right now and it's not Ben's area of expertise to comment on.

 

Agreed. This is precisely why they should post here on their own forums and not a third party site.

 

I also don't see that post on his account assuming this is him: https://www.reddit.com/user/Anet_Ben

[jguerin.8261]

I voted to have both changed, however, if I could vote twice, I do agree with the majority.

[TheToxicFox.8710]

It's clear here how Anet has become a rinse and repeat sort of business when it comes to its marketplace and its black lion chests.

 

Completely off topic here but I heard that they reduced the drop rate of Black Lion Chest Keys. I was astonished and dismayed how a business would monetize something like this that seems like a decent incentive for map exploration and keeping casual players including vets like myself. This and now these outrageous skin prices. The bundle is 120!!!!!!!!! Are you serious? And the cream of the crop, the items locked behind black lion chests.

 

Anet, read our comments please, listen to your fanbase and playerbase and stop being greedy, please and thank you. I've poured so much money into this game and to have content like this locked behind that kinda pay wall is absolutely disgusting and inexcusable.

 

Edit: Although I voted for lower prices for skins and still stand by that decision, I would be ok with the same prices as long as we got the choice to pick and choose which skins we want or at least a way to unlock them with challenges or something.

[Silverwing.8750]

RNG advantage:

- it generates more income for the developer - like card games where people purchase multiple packs.

- it adds exclusivity for certain mounts - if they are directly purchasable lots of people will have the "flavour of the month" mount.

- it can generate excitement, like an unexpected BL chest key drop.

 

RNG disadvantage:

- players may have to spend a lot more gems/money to get what they want.

- can lead to frustration, resulting in people leaving the game.

 

Perhaps Anet should add more than one way to obtain those mounts, i.e. gem store and from BL chest wardrobe unlock or from some sort of expensive in game process like for legendary weapons or achievement rewards?

 

[Martin.4860]

I like the majority of the new Mount Skins so I bought the Set/9600 (technically 6 skins are free), and I usually hate some skins when they came out but later on I tend to like it. Anyway some of my friends like just a couple of the mount skin so I voted, No to RNG.

[GrubySzymek.1362]

One thing to mention that I forgot. Microtransactions were originally created to push multiple sales for small cash. So you are encouraged to spend more at the end. But 120$ mount skin pack being the only way to avoid RNG is not microtransaction. It's 4 PoF accounts.

[Just a flesh wound.3589]

> @Pifil.5193 said:

> > @JADE.1702 said:

> > This Poll is a nice idea but they will never change it . Here is WHY direct from an Anet DEV direct message on Reddit ::-1:

> > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

> > Anet_Bengw2 dev [-2] sent 1 day ago

> > You are incapable of seeing it from our side because you have no idea the costs to run an MMO or the thought and market research that goes in to designing these systems. Obviously it would feel better to you to be able to pick any skin you want, and therefore spend 400 gems per mount and never anything more.

> > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

>

> Such garbage. I assume that ArenaNet employee must know that. Their "thought and market research" seems to have missed a few things like the growing anti-lootbox sentiment amongst gamers and the negative reaction from so many GW2 players specifically. So, you did a poor job there.

>

> Here's a tip for Ben: in the real world you don't get to complain because your customers aren't happy. You may feel entitled to success because you worked hard but if you worked hard producing the wrong thing, well, that's not your customers problem, is it? No one's going to buy a broken phone just because the engineers working on it really tried hard to get it to work!

>

> In this case the loot boxes are a gamble for ArenaNet, they could have sold mount skins under the same model that they used to sell glider skins but they're gambling that they'll get more money this way. That's your side ArenaNet, you want more money. I think we all see your side of it.

 

I’m not sure that’s a real dev quote. There’s no link and Ben’s Reddit account is Anet_Ben. If you look that one says Anet_Bengw2. Also that quote is not on Anet_Ben’s dev tracker.

[GrubySzymek.1362]

> Microtransactions can be polarizing, and we’ve received both positive and negative feedback on the license. We won’t change the existing license in a way that would invalidate the investment players have made, but I want to confirm to you that our next planned mount skin releases will focus on individual sales like the Reforged Warhound and bundles like the Spooky Mounts Pack. We will not add any skins to the currently available Adoption License, thus not pushing down the odds of acquiring any one skin in that set.

 

Thank you for your response Mike. I expected that if you are going to adress our concerns this would be your decision. And I am fully satisfied.

 

For anyone expecting that current set is going to be changed you are really, really naive. The reason they can't change current set is explained by Mike - people already bought it on current rules. The scope of potential refunds is most likely to big to change existing set.

 

But at the end Mike says we are right and they are going to sell future mounts without RNG boxes.

 

This is the only win-win scenario here.

 

Since the situation has been handled I would like moderators to close this thread as it fullfiled its purpose.

 

Thank you everyone for voting.