NotASmurf.1725 Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 > @Kichwas.7152 said: > Note that GW2 is the only game with an up-tick after relative stability in all of that. That uptick is called an expansion, and it's a rather small uptick for that to be honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astralporing.1957 Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 > @Noa.7490 said: > So, does this mean that the loot box skins are locked and won't be available as individual purchase? Yes, they straight out said that nothing's gonna change on the current lootbox in the future, so do not expect any other way to get those skins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ohoni.6057 Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 > @Noa.7490 said: > So, does this mean that the loot box skins are locked and won't be available as individual purchase? For now, but they still need to fix that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drecien.4508 Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 Thank you to the wonderful artists that made such gorgeous skins for us to enjoy. I have no issue forking over money for such a superior product. Thanks for giving us free content to play with our gem purchases. It's sad when people can't even play a game and be thankful for all that you guys do for us. Keep up the great work! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ohoni.6057 Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 > @Drecien.4508 said: > Thank you to the wonderful artists that made such gorgeous skins for us to enjoy. I have no issue forking over money for such a superior product. Thanks for giving us free content to play with our gem purchases. It's sad when people can't even play a game and be thankful for all that you guys do for us. Keep up the great work! You do understand that the people who are upset about this are upset because they *can't* purchase and enjoy the lovely mount skins that the artists made because tyhey're locked behind RNG loot boxes, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oglaf.1074 Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 > @Drecien.4508 said: >I have no issue forking over money for such a superior product. As do I. The problem is - you can't! You literally cannot buy these mount skins. You have to gamble for them - and therein lies the problem everyone is so riled up about. Maybe read up on the issue before looking down on other people, calling them "sad", in the future? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tekoneiric.6817 Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 > @dukenukem.9072 said: > Make a Mount tab in black lion. Sell each skin separately for 700 gems each. At least it would make me happy and I gauruntee ANET would make some money off it Instead of cluttering up the gem store they could do the skin sales via the list of skins on the hero panel. There is precedence for this in that you can buy character bag slot expansions via the inventory panel. The player could click a locked skin in the hero panel, preview it and get an option to buy it with gems. They could have basic skins for 500 gems and premium skins that totally change the model for 1000 gems. The gem store could just be used for new or featured skins to avoid clutter. They could do this with outfits also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fire X.5184 Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 I don't want to be that guy but...guys, unless we do something so mind blowing they wont fix the loot box mounts sadly :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rococo.8347 Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 If they didn't charge enough for the expansion that they feel the need only 6 weeks after it releases to resort to these types of sales practices then that's on Anet. They had an alternative, charge the same or slightly less than they did for HoT, bang some mount skin and more armor collections into the game and keep SOME special mount skins for the Gem store. They had choices - they picked the wrong one and are doubling down on it in the face of ( expected) backlash because there is no way they didn't expect eventual backlash for relentlessly diminishing in game content... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jski.6180 Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 For an ideal of where to take mounts and gems would be to make a minily that reflect what mount you last used in both skin dye and type. So you could have "your" mount beside you at all times in all game types. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anchoku.8142 Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 I approve of the idea of monetizing skins and non-essential, non-pay-to-win items _in general._ However, I have to wonder if the way it is done is not equal toward all players. The Tuesday, November 7 update resulted in a spike in the gold-gems trade. I do hope that mount skins remain on the trading post to help stabilize the exchange rate. The game economy appeared to need a gold-sink and real money exchanges are needed to fund continued development at Arenanet. A gold-sink does not, unfortunately, directly correspond to real money gems exchanges. In some ways, I do wish expansions and living world episodes _required_ real money exchanges while game items required only gems from the exchange so that mount skins , and other such items, are not monetized. Separating gold and gems, in that aspect, might be better for the game by ensuring revenue in exchange expansion content while offering fashionable content for in-game currencies. *Please watch carefully which accounts are doing what kind of exchanges.* Monetization efforts should be _very_ carefully considered to spread real money trading across the breadth of the player base, in addition to encouraging exchanges of gold for gems in wealthier accounts to manage the exchange ratio. Please do not ever do something like the Bitterfrost Vantage Point, again, though. That was truly gambling for nearly zero reward and left a much worse memory of this game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StanleyJohny.8047 Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 > @"Mike O Brien.4613" said: > Here are some of the benefits we had in mind when designing the Mount Adoption License: > > * You get a brand-new, unique mount skin every time, for a substantial discount versus an individual purchase price. > * It uses a progressive mechanic. Every license gives you a new skin to use and increases the odds of acquiring any remaining skins. > * You’ve requested variety, and this is a way to support variety. Individual sale is a mechanic that works with a few, flashy skins. Using a grab bag mechanic gives us leeway to create skins to suit a wide range of player tastes while offering a lower price per skin. This whole part should be cut out and replaced by huge dollar sign. Why do you even try to defend RNG system? It is pointless, especially now when threads about RNG boxes in other games are hot fire. It is like spitting in front of angry crowd with pitchforks. Just cut this part out. Don't touch it. Is it really that hard to admit that licenses were a huge mistake? It is that simple. There is nothing to hide. You wanted to make money - it is ok we understand - it didn't worked as planned (at least for the community, not sure about bank accounts) - admit it - don't do it in the future. This is how you should have planned this answer. > we should have anticipated that a new system with a random element would cause alarm. Should? I wont believe that no one saw that coming. You have to be completely out of touch with whole gaming world to not predict it. If some sales manager is getting paid for it then I'm not going to give him a single penny from my wallet. I was led down by ANet with these mount licenses for the first time since I started playing in 2012. Now is the second time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burnfall.9573 Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 > @OnyX.9027 said: > @Mike Obrien Using a grab bag mechanic gives us leeway to create skins to suit a wide range of player tastes while offering a lower price per skin. > > I had to post just to laugh at the particular line, someone could get a mount for minimum coin, but you could also get it for the maximum statistical sum of money and the ONLY winners are the people selling > > it is worse than the people that Raffle a $50,000 car with 5,000 tickets of $100 each, some one is guaranteed to get the prize for the minimum amount but the person selling is DEFINITELY going to get a ridiculous sum for it > > **but then again after seeing NcSoft quarterly report they are probably trying to cash grab everything they can atm in GW2 as** it is 4th in NcSofts Revenue earnings in the quarter they launched PoF too which gave it a 49& income boost, which doesn't exactly bode well for its finances lol > >  > Someone gets it~! Anet is losing, they will try anything and will do anything it takes to squeeze customers to increase profits and revenues. There is a term called, "cash cows" This shouldn't be too hard to know what's happening here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Djinn.9245 Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 > @Ashen.2907 said: > > @OmskCamill.6412 said: > > > @Ashen.2907 said: > > > > @troops.8276 said: > > > > > @Ashen.2907 said: > > > > > > @OmskCamill.6412 said: > > > > > > > @Abelisk.4527 said: > > > > > > > I think that the license isn't as bad as people make it out to be. The difference between this and other RNG lootboxes from other MMOs is that there is a 100% chance of obtaining a unique mount skin, for a pretty cheap price, and best of all you do not need to pay IRL money, if you don't want to to obtain the skins. Other MMOs put in filler items, or bad items that nobody needs at all in lootboxes > > > > > > > > > > > > Like Black Lion Chests, yes, we know. > > > > > > Anet's target audience is people who don't like other MMOs to begin with. > > > > > > Anet overall is a fundamentally "good" company with business model that I like and support, and over the years they build their loyal and passionate audience with their benevolent business practices. > > > > > > The flipside of which is naturally negative and disproportional response to the attempts of being dicked. Many other companies' audience would be totally OK with that - part of people would shrug and open their purses, another part would shrug and move to another title, case closed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Reforged Warhound on the other hand is overpriced. 2k Gems in contrast to your typical 500 Gem glider? Nearly 4x the price compared to a glider. > > > > > > > > > > > > Warhound's main purpose is **not to be sold**, making direct sells is a side effect. Its core purpose is exactly to sit on display and be overpriced. > > > > > > It's the purest form of **[contrast principle](https://colejoshua.wordpress.com/2012/09/09/contrastprinciple/ "contrast principle")**. It's a form of exploitation of human cognitive bias that all shops in the world use, ever. > > > > > > > > > > > > By putting this one skin at 2000 gems price tag, Anet tried to make you compare their 400 gems lottery tickets against that 2000 gems skin, so that you think "wow! Those lottery tickets cost five times less than an actual mount skin! By Ogden's hammer, what savings!" Your perceived expenses go down significantly, because you compare the price to the next-in-line item. > > > > > > > > > > > > In reality, the real price of a skin formula is simple: 9600 gems divided by the amount of skins that you wanted **before ** purchase. So if you wanted one skin for each of your 5 mounts, you still spend 9600 gems for a bundle of 5 skins (and one skin costs 1920). > > > > > > > > > > > > > @SansSariph.9548 said: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Losing a gamble feels bad. Mike seems to argue that you never "lose" - you always get a brand new skin! We all know that getting a skimmer skin with slight model updates is not the same as getting a griffon with particle effects. The player hoping for the griffon is going to be sad when they get a more simple skin for a mount they use less often. > > > > > > > > > > > > Saying that you can't lose because worst case scenario you still get a skin that you don't want is like saying you can't lose in a lottery because worst case scenario you still got a scrap of paper. It's hypocricy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would happily buy 30 powerball tickets for a guaranteed multimillion dollar payout. > > > > > > > > > > I dont think your analogy works. > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean because it would actually be the equivalent of buying 0.00000001 adoption tickets and getting a guaranteed payout? (a skin you actually want). > > > > > > > > Disclaimer: I'm not actually going to work out precisely how many zeros should come after the decimal point. That was just a made up number. > > > > > > I mean because the person I quoted compared the current mount system to buying lottery tickets. > > > > > > The current mount system means that for 30 payments you are guaranteed 100% of the potential yield. Id happily drop $5 x 30 for 100% of the potential yield of the powerball jackpot. > > > > Please google what "analogy" and "principle" is before proceeding. In fact, the level of your miscomprehention of both the principle and the argument is beyond hilarious. Lottery is a **principle**, your arbitrary and incorrect analogy is irrelevant. Your desire or absence of desire to participate in a lottery with different prize pool/distribution has nothing to do with the fact that both a lottery and Mount Adoption License fall under definition of gambling. The fact that even if you lose you end up with **something** (piece of paper or undesired mount) does not change the fact that you still **lose**, and the whole scheme is there to make you spend more money that you were initially going to. > > A 100% chance of getting what you want is not gambling But we're not talking about 100% chance of getting what I want. If I buy one license, and don't get what I want, I've lost my money. That is gambling pure and simple. What do you think happened to players who got griffon skins and don't have griffons? And what if their priority isn't to get a griffon because they want to spend their gold on Ascended armor or a legendary weapon, etc.? Yes, this gamble box is gambling just like any other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Djinn.9245 Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 > @Rashagar.8349 said: > > @Djinn.9245 said: > > > @yann.1946 said: > > > I do wonder why people are neglecting the fact that their may be people who enjoy the gamble. I understand it sucks if you gamble and don't get what you want but their should be no reason to not have both systems at the same time. One where you can gamble and the other where you can buy the skins outright. > > > > There's a reason why some people like to gamble: > > > > http://www.pcgamer.com/behind-the-addictive-psychology-and-seductive-art-of-loot-boxes/ > > > Because gamble boxes manipulate a person psychologically and chemically (Dopamine) is why many people object to locking items behind them that you can't get in any other way. > > Same as why some people like coffee or chocolate, yeah. The substance manipulates them psychologically and chemically. > (Just giving some context as to why those words aren't as sinister as they might appear, and it's all down to how it's being utilised/implemented). > > Now, understand that I'm not saying everyone should be forced to drink coffee. But, crucially, you aren't being forced to here. You can just choose not to buy it, and wait til the vendor starts selling fruit smoothies. You can complain that the vendor only sold coffee originally when you wanted a fruit smoothie, and wouldn't it be better to offer both simultaneously, and I'd personally agree. But insisting that the vendor never sell coffee again, or demonising the vendor for selling coffee in the first place, or blaming the people who like coffee because they're getting their coffee before you're getting your fruit smoothie, these aren't exactly the right way to go about things. (I'm also not saying that you are personally engaging in these activities, because I don't know your post history by heart). It also doesn't make sense to buy a drink of coffee and then complain that you don't like the taste, because you knew you were buying coffee, it says it right there on the label. > > In this analogy, I think mount skins are akin to... being in a state of thirst? Which I suppose works since the community does have a powerful thirst for mount skins right now haha! > > Now if you'll excuse me I'm going to go picketing places that sell coffee for being manipulative enablers of addicts. They don't even have to specialise in coffee, they just have to have it in stock somewhere. > > Edit to elaborate: > It's like people taking a moral stance against coffee, the substance. > When they should be taking a moral stance against coffee, the exploitative billion dollar industry. > Because let's face it, Arenanet is as close to fair trade coffee as there is to get. And lumping it under the umbrella of "coffee" and demonising the whole concept of the drink is a) not rational, and b) directly harmful to fair trade coffee while leaving the exploitative billion dollar industry version largely intact. Interesting, I didn't know you were a doctor to be making definitive statements comparing gambling with coffee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Djinn.9245 Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 > @Drecien.4508 said: > Thank you to the wonderful artists that made such gorgeous skins for us to enjoy. I have no issue forking over money for such a superior product. Thanks for giving us free content to play with our gem purchases. It's sad when people can't even play a game and be thankful for all that you guys do for us. Keep up the great work! I would love to fork over money for their product - but only for the skins I choose. By locking them inside a gamble box, they are forcing me not to buy them. Shame. And why do I need to "play a game and be thankful"? I paid for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaddynnStarr.5201 Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 They have plenty of options and opportunity to score big and help with the communities issues with this.... St this point they wont see anymore of my money....and less of my time as well. I will not be helping advertise this game either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drako.4936 Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 For all the hard work ArenaNet put into this game, they don't deserve the awful backlash that just occurred. And all for cosmetics, too. I agree they look really cool, and I would really like some of the skins, so I will get them eventually. To get them: I'll just do some gold farming every once in a while, save up 80 - 90 gold when the price of gems drops, and buy a mount adoption occasionally. Just like making legendary weapons and armor, it will take a long time to collect all the skins, but the rewards will be worth it in the end. In comparison, Twilight (which I am saving up to craft atm) costs around 3k gold on the TP. It is a legendary weapon people want mostly for the awesome effects it has, for the cosmetics. Buying all 30 of the new skins costs 12k gems, or 2,700 gold if 400 gems costs 90 gold (which is about average) And buying all of the skins has multiple great mount skins that are equivalent to a legendary in my opinion (Stardust Jackal, Starbound Griffon, etc), so you get more cool cosmetics for your gold. Think long term. You don't need them right this instant. And who knows? You might even get your favorite skin the first time. Thank you so much for creating this wonderful game, it means so much to me. The community and people here are amazing. It's just a little toxic right now, and I hope it will clear up soon. I understand both sides of this issue, but honestly...I don't see much to complain about. Especially since I don't have to pay a subscription fee. I would not be able to play if that were the case, so thanks again :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rashagar.8349 Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 > @Djinn.9245 said: > > @Rashagar.8349 said: > > > @Djinn.9245 said: > > > > @yann.1946 said: > > > > I do wonder why people are neglecting the fact that their may be people who enjoy the gamble. I understand it sucks if you gamble and don't get what you want but their should be no reason to not have both systems at the same time. One where you can gamble and the other where you can buy the skins outright. > > > > > > There's a reason why some people like to gamble: > > > > > > http://www.pcgamer.com/behind-the-addictive-psychology-and-seductive-art-of-loot-boxes/ > > > > > Because gamble boxes manipulate a person psychologically and chemically (Dopamine) is why many people object to locking items behind them that you can't get in any other way. > > > > Same as why some people like coffee or chocolate, yeah. The substance manipulates them psychologically and chemically. > > (Just giving some context as to why those words aren't as sinister as they might appear, and it's all down to how it's being utilised/implemented). > > > > Now, understand that I'm not saying everyone should be forced to drink coffee. But, crucially, you aren't being forced to here. You can just choose not to buy it, and wait til the vendor starts selling fruit smoothies. You can complain that the vendor only sold coffee originally when you wanted a fruit smoothie, and wouldn't it be better to offer both simultaneously, and I'd personally agree. But insisting that the vendor never sell coffee again, or demonising the vendor for selling coffee in the first place, or blaming the people who like coffee because they're getting their coffee before you're getting your fruit smoothie, these aren't exactly the right way to go about things. (I'm also not saying that you are personally engaging in these activities, because I don't know your post history by heart). It also doesn't make sense to buy a drink of coffee and then complain that you don't like the taste, because you knew you were buying coffee, it says it right there on the label. > > > > In this analogy, I think mount skins are akin to... being in a state of thirst? Which I suppose works since the community does have a powerful thirst for mount skins right now haha! > > > > Now if you'll excuse me I'm going to go picketing places that sell coffee for being manipulative enablers of addicts. They don't even have to specialise in coffee, they just have to have it in stock somewhere. > > > > Edit to elaborate: > > It's like people taking a moral stance against coffee, the substance. > > When they should be taking a moral stance against coffee, the exploitative billion dollar industry. > > Because let's face it, Arenanet is as close to fair trade coffee as there is to get. And lumping it under the umbrella of "coffee" and demonising the whole concept of the drink is a) not rational, and b) directly harmful to fair trade coffee while leaving the exploitative billion dollar industry version largely intact. > > Interesting, I didn't know you were a doctor to be making definitive statements comparing gambling with coffee. Interesting, I didn't know you needed to hold a doctorate to be able to make a definitive statement. I must have glossed over where you presented your's. Your initial condition was "manipulate a person both psychologically and chemically". Caffeine has been shown to literally alter your brain's chemical makeup through regular use, and it's effect on your mood is well documented, thus satisfying your initial conditions of manipulating a person both psychologically and chemically. But since you shifted the goal posts to instead be "a definitive comparison between gambling and coffee made by a doctor", and I'm already here, I may as well do my best to pander to your latest request for definitive comparisons, so: they both affect dopamine levels in your brain (and adrenaline levels for that matter) and both have the requisite effects (being both rewarding and positively reinforcing) to potentially induce a state of addiction. There, definitive comparisons made. So, the more you know. I hope this has been educational. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Djinn.9245 Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 > @Drako.4936 said: > For all the hard work ArenaNet put into this game, they don't deserve the awful backlash that just occurred. For all the hard work Anet put into this game they got paid. They got backlash for being greedy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Djinn.9245 Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 > @Rashagar.8349 said: > > @Djinn.9245 said: > > > @Rashagar.8349 said: > > > > @Djinn.9245 said: > > > > > @yann.1946 said: > > > > > I do wonder why people are neglecting the fact that their may be people who enjoy the gamble. I understand it sucks if you gamble and don't get what you want but their should be no reason to not have both systems at the same time. One where you can gamble and the other where you can buy the skins outright. > > > > > > > > There's a reason why some people like to gamble: > > > > > > > > http://www.pcgamer.com/behind-the-addictive-psychology-and-seductive-art-of-loot-boxes/ > > > > > > > Because gamble boxes manipulate a person psychologically and chemically (Dopamine) is why many people object to locking items behind them that you can't get in any other way. > > > > > > Same as why some people like coffee or chocolate, yeah. The substance manipulates them psychologically and chemically. > > > (Just giving some context as to why those words aren't as sinister as they might appear, and it's all down to how it's being utilised/implemented). > > > > > > Now, understand that I'm not saying everyone should be forced to drink coffee. But, crucially, you aren't being forced to here. You can just choose not to buy it, and wait til the vendor starts selling fruit smoothies. You can complain that the vendor only sold coffee originally when you wanted a fruit smoothie, and wouldn't it be better to offer both simultaneously, and I'd personally agree. But insisting that the vendor never sell coffee again, or demonising the vendor for selling coffee in the first place, or blaming the people who like coffee because they're getting their coffee before you're getting your fruit smoothie, these aren't exactly the right way to go about things. (I'm also not saying that you are personally engaging in these activities, because I don't know your post history by heart). It also doesn't make sense to buy a drink of coffee and then complain that you don't like the taste, because you knew you were buying coffee, it says it right there on the label. > > > > > > In this analogy, I think mount skins are akin to... being in a state of thirst? Which I suppose works since the community does have a powerful thirst for mount skins right now haha! > > > > > > Now if you'll excuse me I'm going to go picketing places that sell coffee for being manipulative enablers of addicts. They don't even have to specialise in coffee, they just have to have it in stock somewhere. > > > > > > Edit to elaborate: > > > It's like people taking a moral stance against coffee, the substance. > > > When they should be taking a moral stance against coffee, the exploitative billion dollar industry. > > > Because let's face it, Arenanet is as close to fair trade coffee as there is to get. And lumping it under the umbrella of "coffee" and demonising the whole concept of the drink is a) not rational, and b) directly harmful to fair trade coffee while leaving the exploitative billion dollar industry version largely intact. > > > > Interesting, I didn't know you were a doctor to be making definitive statements comparing gambling with coffee. > > Interesting, I didn't know you needed to hold a doctorate to be able to make a definitive statement. I must have glossed over where you presented your's. > > Your initial condition was "manipulate a person both psychologically and chemically". It wasn't my condition, it was from the PC Gamer article I linked which is written by a doctor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rashagar.8349 Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 > @Djinn.9245 said: > > @Rashagar.8349 said: > > > @Djinn.9245 said: > > > > @Rashagar.8349 said: > > > > > @Djinn.9245 said: > > > > > > @yann.1946 said: > > > > > > I do wonder why people are neglecting the fact that their may be people who enjoy the gamble. I understand it sucks if you gamble and don't get what you want but their should be no reason to not have both systems at the same time. One where you can gamble and the other where you can buy the skins outright. > > > > > > > > > > There's a reason why some people like to gamble: > > > > > > > > > > http://www.pcgamer.com/behind-the-addictive-psychology-and-seductive-art-of-loot-boxes/ > > > > > > > > > Because gamble boxes manipulate a person psychologically and chemically (Dopamine) is why many people object to locking items behind them that you can't get in any other way. > > > > > > > > Same as why some people like coffee or chocolate, yeah. The substance manipulates them psychologically and chemically. > > > > (Just giving some context as to why those words aren't as sinister as they might appear, and it's all down to how it's being utilised/implemented). > > > > > > > > Now, understand that I'm not saying everyone should be forced to drink coffee. But, crucially, you aren't being forced to here. You can just choose not to buy it, and wait til the vendor starts selling fruit smoothies. You can complain that the vendor only sold coffee originally when you wanted a fruit smoothie, and wouldn't it be better to offer both simultaneously, and I'd personally agree. But insisting that the vendor never sell coffee again, or demonising the vendor for selling coffee in the first place, or blaming the people who like coffee because they're getting their coffee before you're getting your fruit smoothie, these aren't exactly the right way to go about things. (I'm also not saying that you are personally engaging in these activities, because I don't know your post history by heart). It also doesn't make sense to buy a drink of coffee and then complain that you don't like the taste, because you knew you were buying coffee, it says it right there on the label. > > > > > > > > In this analogy, I think mount skins are akin to... being in a state of thirst? Which I suppose works since the community does have a powerful thirst for mount skins right now haha! > > > > > > > > Now if you'll excuse me I'm going to go picketing places that sell coffee for being manipulative enablers of addicts. They don't even have to specialise in coffee, they just have to have it in stock somewhere. > > > > > > > > Edit to elaborate: > > > > It's like people taking a moral stance against coffee, the substance. > > > > When they should be taking a moral stance against coffee, the exploitative billion dollar industry. > > > > Because let's face it, Arenanet is as close to fair trade coffee as there is to get. And lumping it under the umbrella of "coffee" and demonising the whole concept of the drink is a) not rational, and b) directly harmful to fair trade coffee while leaving the exploitative billion dollar industry version largely intact. > > > > > > Interesting, I didn't know you were a doctor to be making definitive statements comparing gambling with coffee. > > > > Interesting, I didn't know you needed to hold a doctorate to be able to make a definitive statement. I must have glossed over where you presented your's. > > > > Your initial condition was "manipulate a person both psychologically and chemically". > > It wasn't my condition, it was from the PC Gamer article I linked which is written by a doctor. That... does not change my point in the slightest... But it is good to know where the doctor bit came from heh. Thanks, that did have me puzzled. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamburger Jack.2543 Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 > @Ohoni.6057 said: > > @Drecien.4508 said: > > Thank you to the wonderful artists that made such gorgeous skins for us to enjoy. I have no issue forking over money for such a superior product. Thanks for giving us free content to play with our gem purchases. It's sad when people can't even play a game and be thankful for all that you guys do for us. Keep up the great work! > > You do understand that the people who are upset about this are upset because they *can't* purchase and enjoy the lovely mount skins that the artists made because tyhey're locked behind RNG loot boxes, right? And you also understand if people can't purchase a thing that's not Anet's fault. They're going after the people who can purchase it! And no one has to! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tekoneiric.6817 Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 > @Djinn.9245 said: > > @Drako.4936 said: > > For all the hard work ArenaNet put into this game, they don't deserve the awful backlash that just occurred. > > For all the hard work Anet put into this game they got paid. They got backlash for being greedy. To put it in perspective; someone on another forum said that the price of the 30 skins was more than their entire food budget for a month. Honestly outrage over this isn't going away and this is possibly a game killer if they don't rectify the situation asap. The holiday season is coming up and this is going to cut into their sales; especially with gem cards. I know I'm not going to buy any more gem cards or expansions unless this is adequately addressed soon. I have previously bought all the GW1 expansions twice, bought GW2 and pre-ordered the ultimate packages on both HoT and PoF even though there wasn't hardly an incentive to pre-order PoF. HoT pre-order at least got a glider skin. I'm still irritated about the lack of updrafts and other gliding support in PoF along with them not refreshing core content. I wonder if LWS4 will be content locked to people who own PoF. The only thing keeping me in the game is the investment of time I have in it. I'm hoping they'll fix this issue so we can all move on from it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ohoni.6057 Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 > @Drako.4936 said: > For all the hard work ArenaNet put into this game, they don't deserve the awful backlash that just occurred. And all for cosmetics, too. I agree they look really cool, and I would really like some of the skins, so I will get them eventually. The designers who actually made these skins do not deserve any negative backlash, and from what I've seen, they haven't had any (aside from people tending to underestimate the effort put into the "basic" skins). However, the people at the company who played any role in designing and approving the **business model** of these skins definitely deserve every ounce of backlash they have been receiving, and then some. It was a *bad move,* and deserves to be treated as such until they *fix it.* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts