A Message About the Mount Adoption License

[Rococo.8347]

Im glad you got back to us but PR speak can be abit dense to get to the meat so I read, re read had a think then read again and...

 

..I cant see any major change here unless ( and I hope this is correct?) your next 'bundle' will be a much smaller amount like the Halloween ones, with 1 or 2 of each mount, and you can individually buy them or get a small discount for getting all 5 or 10, no more RNG. That's workable I guess But -

 

- you sound like you are doubling down on very expensive single mounts when they have bigger changes - 2000 gems is a lot, more than im prepared to pay

- I, like many liked 1/2/3 only of the current mount bundle, and will not risk the RNG for only 3 max, so that's 1200 gems not going to you I wanted to pay

- still no agreement that some mount skins and some more unique skins/weapons/armor will go into the actual game, which presumably means you will continue to diminish rewards in game to boost micro transaction - making actually playing end game fashion wars will mainly now happen via the Gem store

- what exactly did my £26 for POF go to if all development of live content is only via micro transaction? -

 

I just don't feel all that ecstatic about it, the cost of me buying PoF and getting unlucky and having to pay the full 12,000 gems for 30 ( not that I can even afford this option) is actually the same cost as a sub to WoW for 18 months, and the most recent xp which includes the previous 2 xp's I missed and ide never be caught up in this having to play - to earn gold - to convert to gems - to buy things in a digital shop that I actually want to earn in game

[daLira.6078]

"for a substantial discount versus an individual purchase price."

Figures, in reality you mean milking the cash cow as hard as possible, since there's no alternative way of getting ANY skin.

 

It's mindblowing how wasteful the possibilities are with this. But no... just gonna take the money. Ah nevermind, we can still exchange ingame currency... nevermind, this fixes everything.

[Atlas.4509]

Thanks for taking the time to address the issue Mo, I was a little miffed at the system at first, but it helps trying to understand things from your point of view and thinking of it as a long term goal to work on slowly.

[Tsakhi.8124]

[sigh] This is how I was raised: Like what you get or go without. No compromises, no arguments, that way of life was sealed in stone. Maybe I still don't understand, but considering we got a response at all tells me that A-Net cares. I've played many games where we had no response or the response: "You'll get it when you get it; you can just wait your turn or get out. " I'm seeing here a solution, an answer, it is not what we wanted, but what we got. If they decide to do something else, great, if not...I don't know what to say; this has been very...trying. Although, it maybe 'cause I'm dumb or something, I just don't understand how this blew into a sandstorm of poo. :/

 

[Edited: What is grammar? Baby don't hurt me, don't hurt me, no more...]

[Penarddun.6827]

Edited - Wrong thread.

[Menadena.7482]

> @Jordo.5913 said:

> > @BrotherHolmes.5941 said:

> > I really don't see why people are blowing this out of proportion. I love that GW2 doesn't have monthly fees, even though I spend more on gems than a monthly fee would cost. The people at ArenaNet need to make money some how. I like the fact that this mount thing is a guaranteed unlock. I bought the 30 pack so I could bypass the randomness. I do think that limiting the 30 pack to only 7 days is kinda mean though. Some people need time to save up the money. I REALLY wish that the gem store dye packs were a guaranteed unlock. I bought some of those once and just got dyes that I have had for years already. Despite little issues like that though, I think they are doing a very good job, and ArenaNet has my support! ..... On a side note: Please bring back the kite maker! I bought a kite on the gem store and then I found out the NPC was removed.

>

> I'd rather pay 15 bucks a month and be able to earn these skins in game but ALSO be able to target which one I want. Get the kitten RNG out of this game.

 

Exactly, a major reason why I spend so much here is out of appreciation for not having a subscription fee. Because of that I probably spend what I would spend on a sub game anyway, but it is nice knowing that I can elect not to do so any time I need the money for something else. Good job anet, I am sure I am not the only one like this who is now not going to be spending as much as before. I hope you are happy with the short term money that came with the bad pr (which means less future revenue) you also got from this fiasco.

 

[AlexanderDracul.7492]

> @Lolinda.1674 said:

> Oh my gawd, you people are like little demanding spoiled kiddos in the candy shop, "I want this and that and NOW!" I am ashame to even read it...

 

It's spoiled and demanding to want to know what you purchase instead of RNG?

[Hanako.1827]

So basically you're still going to be making a majority of the mount skins earned through the gem store?

 

You're killing one of the cornerstones of MMO rewards and reason for progression because people consider mounts just as important if not more than having high level gear in those other MMO's, when people see other people on a cool mount, it usually means they did something dope to earn it making it rare, sought after, more visually appealing since you're not consistently bored of it and lets me actually play your barren expansion with nothing to do. You did the same stuff with gliders too, its pathetic and depressing.

 

If you want to go be a free MMO that I don't have to pay for every expansion, then go ahead because you don't get to charge for an expansion that gives me so little to do in terms of earning endgame rewards, which in your game consists ENTIRELY of cosmetics.

 

This mount skin system could have been implemented with raising new breeds, finding rare mats and crafting item akin to legendary in order to incubate an egg or something like that. Really cool stuff could have been done with this. But instead you would rather charge me 2000 gems because you want literally every skin on the gem store. I would happily pay more for an expansion if it meant you give me something to earn and do.

[Stormcrow.7513]

" 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 "

 

Too little, too late.

I fear for the franchise and unfortunately have moved on.

[Licht Sieger.8496]

I'm glad that there was finally a response on the matter, but am really disheartened to see that you at Arenanet are going to effectively do nothing. You have made promises as to what you will do with future releases, but you have lost a LOT of trust from your community over this situation, and I know I am not the only one who is not certain that I can take those promises at face value. It may have introduced work for you, sure, but you could have done SOMETHING about the current Adoption License situation instead of just promising about how you will handle future situations. It really sucks just coming off the tail end of the release of an expansion, but you've definitely lost player trust, if not a portion of your playerbase after all this. You asked us to spread word of mouth about Path of Fire? Right now any word of mouth I can think of to share will be negative. I know I at least am going to have to think about it for a while and decide if guild wars is something I want to keep in my life anymore, and I hate that this situation has made me feel that way about a game I have loved and wholeheartedly supported for so long.

[Avelione.6075]

Oh well.. I play A LOT, and I do mean, much too much. I guess I get what's your intention by now. At least you admit to a mistake - though not straightforward. But you don't lie like any marketing-corpo-crap would do. I appreciate that. I still have kinda mixed feelings, but honestly, what a problem to have! ;] Just chillout people.

So yeah. I'm a gambling junkie ;) randomness is ok for me, just make it a bit less random, if you know what I mean ;]

 

And a Choya mount for me ;p

[Tamasan.6457]

Arenanet, you have not addressed my primary concern. Nor have you apologized. Calling my concerns valid and then not doing anything is not sufficient. Randomized loot boxes, even ones that avoid duplication and have "progression", are fundamentally manipulative and abusive towards your customers. You cannot hide behind some positive feedback like a cigarette company claiming they had no evidence that smoking caused cancer. I cannot in good conscience support GW2 while they exist within the gem store. You must fix this to regain any of my trust.

 

As I have said previously, I have spent well over $1000 on gems in the past 5 years. I purchased both HoT and PoF Ultimate Editions within hours of them being available for pre-purchase. I supported Arenanet because I believed they were better than other companies running no-subscription MMOs. You have shattered that belief.

 

I am taking the following actions:

-I had 6205 gems on my account. I have converted 6202 into gold. I will not buy any more gems. I will not convert any gold into gems.

-I will no longer recommend GW2 to anyone.

-I will not purchase any future content from Arenanet, including expansions.

-I will be cutting back on my play time. I'm not prepared to fully quit yet, as I hope you will come to your senses, but I can now see a time when I stop logging in at all. A week ago I couldn't have imagined it.

 

If you decide to reassess your use of manipulative practices, I will reassess my stance. Until then, I am prepared to die on this hill.

[JaddynnStarr.5201]

> @Tsakhi.8124 said:

> [sigh] This is how I was raised: Like what you get or go without. No compromises, no arguments, that way of life was sealed in stone. Maybe I still don't understand, but considering we got a response at all tells me that A-Net cares. I've played many games where we had no response or the response: "You'll get it when you get; you can just wait your turn or get out. " I'm seeing here a solution, an answer, it is not what we wanted, but what we got. If they decide to do something else, great, if not...I don't know what to say; this has been very...trying. Although, it maybe 'cause I'm kitten or something, I just don't understand how this blew into a sandstorm of poo. :/

 

Tsakhi... to understand this you have to know a little bit about the nature of addictive gaming, impulse control, and the opposite sides of those which is just being a decent human being and not preying on said vices. I will break it down into a few things for you.

 

1) businesses (especially those in the gaming business) are always looking for ways to maximize their intake of funds (to either appease shareholders or to further game development... usually a combination of both)

2) thru the use of lootboxes they have discovered that a certain portion of gamers have extremely addictive tendancies towards games and its instant reward mechanics (which by the way promotes further addiction as it releases dopamine that we crave)

3)game makers have moved to a microtransaction way of selling their services, which slowly trickles money away from players.

4) by slowly increasing that amount, they hope you wont notice that you have spent more then you normally would on any given game in one large purchase.

5)now that they have you into the game, with a great deal of time invested (and a fair amount of cash I might add too), they know you aren't just going to walk away from it except in the most extreme cases(i.e. mommy finds out you used her Credit card to buy pixels and freaks out at the $1200 bill starring her in the face).

6) those unfortunate enuff to have addictive personalities (and no guardian or parent to help them control their behaviors) find themselves caught up in these practices and get themselves into financial troubles.

7) games now up the ante buy now making those microtransactions RNG instead of giving you what you want outright (I.E. LOOTBOXES).

8) this makes the person caught in this trap anxious and leads them to spend even more money to try to acquire the thing they are craving.

9) while it is true that the person spending all their money being caught up in this system is responsible for their own actions, game companies are partially to blame for tailoring business policies and mechanics, to take advantage of people

10)Anet has now done this and crossed this line... which has left a very.... VERY sour taste in everyone's mouth.

11) MO has doubled down on this by saying that future transactions will be looked at (but not guaranteed to be changed), the current one in place will remain as a "Predatory practice", because they have already received a lot of money from those addicted to the game, and they don't want to give ANY of it back.

12)they know that they can pawn off alot of crappy artwork coupled with a few good looking skins because of these addictive personalities.

13)in the past they have always allowed you to buy the skins you wanted directly from the store.

 

TL;DR

anet started taking advantage of folks to milk them for money, got caught cuz the community isn't as stupid as they think it is, and has told us to EFF off we aint changing it.

[Fade.5904]

More reasonable would have been

Raptor Pack - 2000 gems all 6 Raptor skins

Jackal Pack - 2000 gems all 6 Jackal Skins

Griffon Pack - 2000 gems all 6 Griffon skins

Skimmer Pack - 2000 gems all 6 Skimmer skins

Bunny Pack - 2000 Gems all 6 bunny skins

And the option to be able to buy from each pack 1 random skin 400 gems

Then keep your 30 skins pack - Whale Pack all 30 skins 9600 germs.

 

This way for 2000 gems you know you're going to get the skin you want for that mount species or 400 gems for a bit less of a gamble than 1/30

Also this would stop people who don't have any intention of getting the griffon from getting skins they can't even use.

[Just a flesh wound.3589]

Still not happy, because, Kitten it, there are some skins I want to buy but I still have the choices of either paying 9600 gems at one go or paying 400 gems over and over and over.... until I get the ones I want. It’s a resolution but it’s one where your customers don’t get what they want if they wanted one or more of these skins without RNG or high prices.

 

If you had really wanted to resolve this and get some happy people you could have spent the last couple of days making mount packs out of those 30 and announcing you're putting them in the Gemstore tomorrow, instead of only coming to the forum and saying, oops. my bad.

[Khisanth.2948]

> @"Lord Metatron.4985" said:

> Here's the thing

>

> There is a way to make this work without invalidating what people have already invested in this system. To do this we have to look at another game with micro transactions. That game is Path of Exile. They have a lootbox as well that contains random rewards, all cosmetic of course for a small price per box. The catch is if you wait for their cyclical content to hit the next league or release they will introduce a new lootbox with new cosmetics and the old lootbox contents, that is everything you could get out of that particular lootbox randomly goes up for sale on their cash shop for a higher price but no random elements present. In all the discussions i've seen about this I have not once seen anyone mention this as a possible solution. There is no way to make everyone 100% happy but I think this will make the most people happy while allowing Anet to maximize their profits off this product. People who buy mount adoptions early pay less but have to deal with the random element. If you are patient and willing to wait you can pay a higher price later and get the exact skin(s) you want. This would also allow Anet to double dip their profits in a way as well.

>

> Not changing the current adoption system at all just means a not insignificant portion of your playerbase will never touch it all thus losing not only potential revenue there but a healthy amount of goodwill.

>

> Just my two cents.

 

I have mentioned that though not on the forum. Although I am pretty sure they are not randomly up for sale. They are put up for sale and they are available for a discount at random times. I don't think PoE does the random availability thing, just random daily discount.

 

I don't know why more people don't follow PoE's example. Especially the supporter packs. https://www.pathofexile.com/purchase $30(same price as PoF ...) for the lowest tier which contains a cape, a sword and a portrait frame. Granted part the reason they can do that is probably due to the goodwill they accumulated since they started and managed to hold on to.

[madamred.1463]

they are pretty dang pricey to be rng. I dont really care though i dont plan on buying them i just wvw would be a waste for me

[Agrotera.1254]

So if I understand this correctly if I want to get any of those mount skins that I want I still have to buy the pack of 30 or take a 1/30 chance?

 

I'm sorry Anet I don't have a money tree in my back yard. I had to scrimp and save just to afford PoF. I have always recommended this game. I have always been willing to tell people what an amazing game this is with awesome support and a company that listens to it's community. I am so absolutely disappointed that I cannot even put it into words. I will not be recommending this game to anyone in the future. I still have some gems but once I spend them I will not be getting any more. You will not be getting any more of my hard earned money. Not. one. single. dollar!

 

The minute I find another game I am gone. This is so wrong on so many levels. I am so angry right now and I don't even want to log in to the game.

 

Shame on you Anet!

[Afterburn.4820]

Time to uninstall this rng game, resub to WoW and get the new expansion.

 

At least I know I'm getting screwed over with them.

[Tsakhi.8124]

> @JaddynnStarr.5201 said:

> > @Tsakhi.8124 said:

> > [sigh] This is how I was raised: Like what you get or go without. No compromises, no arguments, that way of life was sealed in stone. Maybe I still don't understand, but considering we got a response at all tells me that A-Net cares. I've played many games where we had no response or the response: "You'll get it when you get; you can just wait your turn or get out. " I'm seeing here a solution, an answer, it is not what we wanted, but what we got. If they decide to do something else, great, if not...I don't know what to say; this has been very...trying. Although, it maybe 'cause I'm kitten or something, I just don't understand how this blew into a sandstorm of poo. :/

>

> Tsakhi... to understand this you have to know a little bit about the nature of addictive gaming, impulse control, and the opposite sides of those which is just being a decent human being and not preying on said vices. I will break it down into a few things for you.

>

> 1) businesses (especially those in the gaming business) are always looking for ways to maximize their intake of funds (to either appease shareholders or to further game development... usually a combination of both)

> 2) thru the use of lootboxes they have discovered that a certain portion of gamers have extremely addictive tendancies towards games and its instant reward mechanics (which by the way promotes further addiction as it releases dopamine that we crave)

> 3)game makers have moved to a microtransaction way of selling their services, which slowly trickles money away from players.

> 4) by slowly increasing that amount, they hope you wont notice that you have spent more then you normally would on any given game in one large purchase.

> 5)now that they have you into the game, with a great deal of time invested (and a fair amount of cash I might add too), they know you aren't just going to walk away from it except in the most extreme cases(i.e. mommy finds out you used her Credit card to buy pixels and freaks out at the $1200 bill starring her in the face).

> 6) those unfortunate enuff to have addictive personalities (and no guardian or parent to help them control their behaviors) find themselves caught up in these practices and get themselves into financial troubles.

> 7) games now up the ante buy now making those microtransactions RNG instead of giving you what you want outright (I.E. LOOTBOXES).

> 8) this makes the person caught in this trap anxious and leads them to spend even more money to try to acquire the thing they are craving.

> 9) while it is true that the person spending all their money being caught up in this system is responsible for their own actions, game companies are partially to blame for tailoring business policies and mechanics, to take advantage of people

> 10)Anet has now done this and crossed this line... which has left a very.... VERY sour taste in everyone's mouth.

> 11) MO has doubled down on this by saying that future transactions will be looked at (but not guaranteed to be changed), the current one in place will remain as a "Predatory practice", because they have already received a lot of money from those addicted to the game, and they don't want to give ANY of it back.

> 12)they know that they can pawn off alot of crappy artwork coupled with a few good looking skins because of these addictive personalities.

> 13)in the past they have always allowed you to buy the skins you wanted directly from the store.

>

> TL;DR

> anet started taking advantage of folks to milk them for money, got caught cuz the community isn't as stupid as they think it is, and has told us to EFF off we aint changing it.

 

This makes sense on a logical/economics level; it is appalling to feel as though we're being deprived of something good just to make an extra buck. Exploitation has always been an issue with me in the gaming industry, I don't like it and I will call people out on it. It's just that, on a personal level, even with an answer, I feel like maybe we're missing something; losing the forest because of the trees scenario. It could very well be just as you say, I just want people to consider both sides of a story and not just the side they want to be on. As for addictive personalities, I get that painfully well, but there are times people need to step back, consider their options, and then make a decision. Then again, my husband is an impulse shopper so. [laughs] He told me not to kill him for spending $2400 on Perfect World. I said: "I'll tell you something darling: What you do with your money is entirely up to you, but don't be dippin' your hand in our savings." and he nodded. XD

[TexZero.7910]

> @pallas.8150 said:

> I can see where people might be disappointed with the outcome but seriously... THIS DOES NOT IMPACT YOUR GAME PLAY IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM. Some of the comments on here are coming from grown *** adults. I'm floored.

>

> And to those who are screaming and crying about quitting over this... you won't.

 

Ironically it does impact gameplay.

 

We have 0 longterm goals in the game to work for when it comes to the cosmetic aspects of both gliders and mounts. The company could stand to evaluate that and add them to normal gameplay as rewards and you see a lot less complaints about a lack of content/replayability. Same thing can be said for armor/armor sets. Frankly, its sickening to see that this is what the industry has become, what was once a passion project has been turned into a corporate grab happy milking machine.

[michelada.2947]

The lootboxes sytem is bad for GW2, i'm glad that they decided to not continue with this method, for the ppl that still is complaining about the 30 mount skins remember that none of those skins are needed to advance in the game, let it go

[Necrotic.7820]

I think a reset would be the best way of handling this, as others have said: Refund all gems spent on the Adoption licenses and disable all skins acquired from them. Although I suspect that last part is what would be difficult.

[JaddynnStarr.5201]

> @Tsakhi.8124 said:

> > @JaddynnStarr.5201 said:

> > > @Tsakhi.8124 said:

> > > [sigh] This is how I was raised: Like what you get or go without. No compromises, no arguments, that way of life was sealed in stone. Maybe I still don't understand, but considering we got a response at all tells me that A-Net cares. I've played many games where we had no response or the response: "You'll get it when you get; you can just wait your turn or get out. " I'm seeing here a solution, an answer, it is not what we wanted, but what we got. If they decide to do something else, great, if not...I don't know what to say; this has been very...trying. Although, it maybe 'cause I'm kitten or something, I just don't understand how this blew into a sandstorm of poo. :/

> >

> > Tsakhi... to understand this you have to know a little bit about the nature of addictive gaming, impulse control, and the opposite sides of those which is just being a decent human being and not preying on said vices. I will break it down into a few things for you.

> >

> > 1) businesses (especially those in the gaming business) are always looking for ways to maximize their intake of funds (to either appease shareholders or to further game development... usually a combination of both)

> > 2) thru the use of lootboxes they have discovered that a certain portion of gamers have extremely addictive tendancies towards games and its instant reward mechanics (which by the way promotes further addiction as it releases dopamine that we crave)

> > 3)game makers have moved to a microtransaction way of selling their services, which slowly trickles money away from players.

> > 4) by slowly increasing that amount, they hope you wont notice that you have spent more then you normally would on any given game in one large purchase.

> > 5)now that they have you into the game, with a great deal of time invested (and a fair amount of cash I might add too), they know you aren't just going to walk away from it except in the most extreme cases(i.e. mommy finds out you used her Credit card to buy pixels and freaks out at the $1200 bill starring her in the face).

> > 6) those unfortunate enuff to have addictive personalities (and no guardian or parent to help them control their behaviors) find themselves caught up in these practices and get themselves into financial troubles.

> > 7) games now up the ante buy now making those microtransactions RNG instead of giving you what you want outright (I.E. LOOTBOXES).

> > 8) this makes the person caught in this trap anxious and leads them to spend even more money to try to acquire the thing they are craving.

> > 9) while it is true that the person spending all their money being caught up in this system is responsible for their own actions, game companies are partially to blame for tailoring business policies and mechanics, to take advantage of people

> > 10)Anet has now done this and crossed this line... which has left a very.... VERY sour taste in everyone's mouth.

> > 11) MO has doubled down on this by saying that future transactions will be looked at (but not guaranteed to be changed), the current one in place will remain as a "Predatory practice", because they have already received a lot of money from those addicted to the game, and they don't want to give ANY of it back.

> > 12)they know that they can pawn off alot of crappy artwork coupled with a few good looking skins because of these addictive personalities.

> > 13)in the past they have always allowed you to buy the skins you wanted directly from the store.

> >

> > TL;DR

> > anet started taking advantage of folks to milk them for money, got caught cuz the community isn't as stupid as they think it is, and has told us to EFF off we aint changing it.

>

> This makes sense on a logical/economics level; it is appalling to feel as though we're being deprived of something good just to make an extra buck. Exploitation has always been an issue with me in the gaming industry, I don't like it and I will call people out on it. It's just that, on a personal level, even with an answer, I feel like maybe we're missing something; losing the forest because of the trees scenario. It could very well be just as you say, I just want people to consider both sides of a story and not just the side they want to be on. As for addictive personalities, I get that painfully well, but there are times people need to step back, consider their options, and then make a decision. Then again, my husband is an impulse shopper so. [laughs] He told me not to kill him for spending $2400 on Perfect World. I said: "I'll tell you something darling: What you do with your money is entirely up to you, but don't be dippin' your hand in our savings." and he nodded. XD

 

yep, I get it... I'm sure there is more going on here then just what you and I have spoken here. I'm even sure there are some sincere intent in the words MO spoke... But for a large majority of us, that line has always been a safe haven for us. We all knew we could count on Anet here to do whats right by us. This is the second time we have been burned as a community now. For a lot of folks that loved this simple aspect of the game, and relied on it to be their safety net so to speak, that trust has now been violated. Time will tell whether this franchise will survive.

[JaddynnStarr.5201]

> @zealex.9410 said:

> > @Afterburn.4820 said:

> > Time to uninstall this rng game, resub to WoW and get the new expansion.

> >

> > At least I know I'm getting screwed over with them.

>

> Complains about optional rng and then goes to wow....

 

posts a response about irony... but ironically doesn't get the OP's ironic post on irony....