A Message About the Mount Adoption License

[BunjiKugashira.9754]

> @Swagger.1459 said:

> This is the super EASY guide to obtaining all 30 mount skins for FREE! Guaranteed!!!

>

> 1. Gather crafting materials daily and sell them on the BLTC!

>

> 2. Exchange the gold earned from selling mats into 400 FREE gems at the end of each week!

>

> 3. Buy your 1 FREE mount license, you earned with FREE gold and FREE gems, and enjoy it!

>

> 4. Repeat steps 1-3 weekly, and you will get all 30 mount skins for FREE!

>

> Pro Tip- Don’t rush yourself, just gather casually and savor the journey to collect all 30 FREE mount skins!

>

> You are very welcome!!!

 

I'm not going to spend money on RNG. Not even someone else's money that they traded with me via gem exchange. It's easy to think gems are free when you didn't pay for them yourself, but EVERY gem in the game (except gems from AP-boxes) has been payed by someone. ANet gets their money whether you pay for your gems yourself or not. And sinking gems into this is only encouraging ANet to ramp up the RNG practices.

[pah.4931]

> @BunjiKugashira.9754 said:

> > @Swagger.1459 said:

> > This is the super EASY guide to obtaining all 30 mount skins for FREE! Guaranteed!!!

> >

> > 1. Gather crafting materials daily and sell them on the BLTC!

> >

> > 2. Exchange the gold earned from selling mats into 400 FREE gems at the end of each week!

> >

> > 3. Buy your 1 FREE mount license, you earned with FREE gold and FREE gems, and enjoy it!

> >

> > 4. Repeat steps 1-3 weekly, and you will get all 30 mount skins for FREE!

> >

> > Pro Tip- Don’t rush yourself, just gather casually and savor the journey to collect all 30 FREE mount skins!

> >

> > You are very welcome!!!

>

> I'm not going to spend money on RNG. Not even someone else's money that they traded with me via gem exchange. It's easy to think gems are free when you didn't pay for them yourself, but EVERY gem in the game (except gems from AP-boxes) has been payed by someone. ANet gets their money whether you pay for your gems yourself or not. And sinking gems into this is only encouraging ANet to ramp up the RNG practices.

 

Sinking gems into this also encourages Anet to continue developing the game GW2.

[Deihnyx.6318]

> @Djinn.9245 said:

> > @Swagger.1459 said:

> > This is the super EASY guide to obtaining all 30 mount skins for FREE! Guaranteed!!!

> >

> > 1. Gather crafting materials daily and sell them on the BLTC!

> >

> > 2. Exchange the gold earned from selling mats into 400 FREE gems at the end of each week!

> >

> > 3. Buy your 1 FREE mount license, you earned with FREE gold and FREE gems, and enjoy it!

> >

> > 4. Repeat steps 1-3 weekly, and you will get all 30 mount skins for FREE!

> >

> > 5. Don’t rush yourself, just gather casually and savor the journey to collect all 30 FREE mount skins!

> >

> > You are very welcome!!!

>

> My time isn't free.

 

Then what's the point of playing a video game, I wonder, if not sending free time to waste?

[Rodzynald.5897]

A few of my guild mates already got dope skins. Just now I heard that one of my guildies bought two licenses and got Fire Pinion and Crowned Ancient. I logged out and it left a bitter taste in my mouth. That's all I have to say.

[pah.4931]

> @Rodzynald.5897 said:

> A few of my guild mates already got dope skins. Just now I heard that one of my guildies bought two licenses and got Fire Pinion and Crowned Ancient. I logged out and it left a bitter taste in my mouth.

> Truly an amazing decision, Anet.

 

My brother makes more money than me. Thanks a lot, God.

[Astralporing.1957]

> @pah.4931 said:

>

> Sinking gems into this also encourages Anet to continue developing the game GW2.

If that's the direction they are going to develop in, then i'd rather _not_ encourage them.

 

 

[BunjiKugashira.9754]

> @pah.4931 said:

> > @BunjiKugashira.9754 said:

> > > @Swagger.1459 said:

> > > This is the super EASY guide to obtaining all 30 mount skins for FREE! Guaranteed!!!

> > >

> > > 1. Gather crafting materials daily and sell them on the BLTC!

> > >

> > > 2. Exchange the gold earned from selling mats into 400 FREE gems at the end of each week!

> > >

> > > 3. Buy your 1 FREE mount license, you earned with FREE gold and FREE gems, and enjoy it!

> > >

> > > 4. Repeat steps 1-3 weekly, and you will get all 30 mount skins for FREE!

> > >

> > > Pro Tip- Don’t rush yourself, just gather casually and savor the journey to collect all 30 FREE mount skins!

> > >

> > > You are very welcome!!!

> >

> > I'm not going to spend money on RNG. Not even someone else's money that they traded with me via gem exchange. It's easy to think gems are free when you didn't pay for them yourself, but EVERY gem in the game (except gems from AP-boxes) has been payed by someone. ANet gets their money whether you pay for your gems yourself or not. And sinking gems into this is only encouraging ANet to ramp up the RNG practices.

>

> Sinking gems into this also encourages Anet to continue developing the game GW2.

 

You could also sink gems into non-RNG things. That would encourage further development too, without encouraging RNG practices. You could for example buy that totally awesome mount skin at a reasonable price... that has yet to be released.

[Rodzynald.5897]

> @pah.4931 said:

> > @Rodzynald.5897 said:

> > A few of my guild mates already got dope skins. Just now I heard that one of my guildies bought two licenses and got Fire Pinion and Crowned Ancient. I logged out and it left a bitter taste in my mouth.

> > Truly an amazing decision, Anet.

>

> My brother makes more money than me. Thanks a lot, God.

 

I don't think that it's RNG in this case :D

My issue is that I don't have time to farm nor money to buy gems (as a college student I like to have money for food and accommodation).

If I manage to farm up gold for gems after a month or two, it's still a huge piece of RNG that I do not have any control over. I would gladly farm up more for 800 gems per skin, but let me choose.

[GreyWolf.8670]

> @Djinn.9245 said:

> > @Cynn.1659 said:

> > Loot boxes are here to provide players with a sense of pride and accomplishment for acquiring different mount skins.

>

> How does having to pay for skins you didn't choose give you a sense of pride?

>

> Edit: upon seeing the gif I guess there is some meme you are referring to that I am unaware of.

 

Do a web search for it. Hint: It's the #1 most downvoted comment in Reddit history. ;)

[Djinn.9245]

> @Deihnyx.6318 said:

> > @Djinn.9245 said:

> > > @Swagger.1459 said:

> > > This is the super EASY guide to obtaining all 30 mount skins for FREE! Guaranteed!!!

> > >

> > > 1. Gather crafting materials daily and sell them on the BLTC!

> > >

> > > 2. Exchange the gold earned from selling mats into 400 FREE gems at the end of each week!

> > >

> > > 3. Buy your 1 FREE mount license, you earned with FREE gold and FREE gems, and enjoy it!

> > >

> > > 4. Repeat steps 1-3 weekly, and you will get all 30 mount skins for FREE!

> > >

> > > 5. Don’t rush yourself, just gather casually and savor the journey to collect all 30 FREE mount skins!

> > >

> > > You are very welcome!!!

> >

> > My time isn't free.

>

> Then what's the point of playing a video game, I wonder, if not sending free time to waste?

 

The time I have to spend playing a game is precious - I don't have a lot of it. So I'm not going to waste that time grinding for a random mount skin. If the only way I can get a mount skin is from a gamble box, I just won't get one. I will spend my time in games having fun.

[pah.4931]

Even though I am against all the salt and rage over this (and applaud Anet for one of the best cash shops I've seen), and despite my sometimes flippant remarks and rebuttals, I really hope everyone who is upset gets a skin they love in the future without the RNG.

[Substance E.4852]

> @pah.4931 said:

> Sinking gems into this also encourages Anet to continue developing the game GW2.

 

Sinking gems into this does nothing but encourage more of this.

 

Mobile games make a disgusting amount of money and use literally all of it to just make more digital Skinner boxes to take advantage of people with poor self control and high time preference.

[Deihnyx.6318]

> @Djinn.9245 said:

> > @Deihnyx.6318 said:

> > > @Djinn.9245 said:

> > > > @Swagger.1459 said:

> > > > This is the super EASY guide to obtaining all 30 mount skins for FREE! Guaranteed!!!

> > > >

> > > > 1. Gather crafting materials daily and sell them on the BLTC!

> > > >

> > > > 2. Exchange the gold earned from selling mats into 400 FREE gems at the end of each week!

> > > >

> > > > 3. Buy your 1 FREE mount license, you earned with FREE gold and FREE gems, and enjoy it!

> > > >

> > > > 4. Repeat steps 1-3 weekly, and you will get all 30 mount skins for FREE!

> > > >

> > > > 5. Don’t rush yourself, just gather casually and savor the journey to collect all 30 FREE mount skins!

> > > >

> > > > You are very welcome!!!

> > >

> > > My time isn't free.

> >

> > Then what's the point of playing a video game, I wonder, if not sending free time to waste?

>

> The time I have to spend playing a game is precious - I don't have a lot of it. So I'm not going to waste that time grinding for a random mount skin. If the only way I can get a mount skin is from a gamble box, I just won't get one. I will spend my time in games having fun.

 

Well, lots, lots of people grind for stuff that doesn't have to do with RNG stuff sold with gems (or sold with golds, since it's exact same thing). Legendary backpacks, armors or gen 2 weapons are heavily gated behind grinding.

 

You don't want to grind, fine, I don't like it too, but that's not an argument against RNG as a whole.

 

3 ways to make valuable items:

- Grinding

- RNG

- Difficulty

 

My favorite is difficulty, my least favorite is grinding.

 

Guess what people tend to prefer? Grinding. People whine about difficulty (see clock tower thread, see anti dps meters/anti raid threads, see eater of soul threads) and now whine about RNG (this whole pseudo drama).

So what's left? Just grinding easy stuff.

 

Not exactly what I want for this game either.

[Turial.1293]

> @pah.4931 said:

> Sinking gems into this also encourages Anet to continue developing the game GW2.

As a player since GW1 beta.... if the games future direction is RNG loot boxes like mobile games then I hope it goes under today, nobody should be supporting greed from a company that was founded on supporting players best interests. The RNG aspect does not support the players, loot boxes are a corrupt practice and they know it. They have screwed up big time but don't seem to care, if that is how it is, then they deserve the irreparable damage to their good name and with it a large loss in business. I wonder how their stocks are looking...

[Grey Moon.6531]

"We stand by the work our artists put into each skin, but it’s understandable to see this as pushing down the odds of acquiring any one skin, and to worry that we might add more skins to lower the chances further."

Errr I can't speak for anyone else but myself, but if I put a kitten load of effort, sweat, tears and all that other stuff into something I would like the sales numbers to be reflected by how many people chose to buy the thing I worked on. Stuffing their work into a loot box to me is just about making money not standing by the work of your artists!

[pah.4931]

> @Turial.1293 said:

> > @pah.4931 said:

> > Sinking gems into this also encourages Anet to continue developing the game GW2.

> As a player since GW1 beta.... if the games future direction is RNG loot boxes like mobile games then I hope it goes under today, nobody should be supporting greed from a company that was founded on supporting players best interests. The RNG aspect does not support the players, loot boxes are a corrupt practice and they know it. They have screwed up big time but don't seem to care, if that is how it is, then they deserve the irreparable damage to their good name and with it a large loss in business. I wonder how their stocks are looking...

 

My argument is that it's not greed. It's an attempt to keep the lights on. ArenaNet is not completely independent. If they can't prove out a decent ROI, there is no reason why it would get continued support when investments could be spent elsewhere with better returns. I could be wrong. I don't know the financials.

 

But what if... making more money through legal ways (even if you don't like it), could either get more artists and developers hired? Or, keep the lights on and the servers running??

 

That's all I am saying. This is not as simple as "Screw you greedy corporation!" ... Anet has salaries to pay and livelihoods to support. They are a company and they need to show growth in order to justify continuing. At the end of the day, these loot boxes are 100% cosmetic. This was n't some evil move and the fidelity of the game wasn't hurt (or even effected) at all.

 

EDIT: As far their stocks are concerned... it's a privately owned company, there has never been an IPO.

[Ohoni.6057]

> @Rashagar.8349 said:

> You're entitled to your perspective of the situation. Obviously I disagree. I did have a bit of a chuckle at the hypocrisy of "their perspective is as valid to them as yours is to you" followed a few posts later by "You're just wrong" though haha!

 

No, I fully grant you (not that you need it from me) the right to your *own* perspective on this situation, just not that your perspective should in any way supersede anyone else's. Basically, you're entitled to not be bothered about this, but you have no standing to tell anyone else that they are in any way wrong to be bothered themselves.

 

> I can choose to not acknowledge that the sky is blue but sticking my head in the sand doesn't change it's colour to anyone else.

 

As true a statement as it is irrelevant to the topic at hand.

 

>I was not saying "this skin is for these players, not for those players" so this entire paragraph is irrelevant as it's not actually referencing something I said, I was saying this release method is for the players who enjoy this style of release method, not for the players that don't. A skin's aesthetic value or position as art does not have any bearing on that position.

 

But again, the topic at hand is "was the release method of these skins adequately serving GW2's players?" For that to be true, the people who would want those skins would have needed a viable method of acquiring them. A distribution method that fails to achieve that is a failed distribution method. You seemed to assert that in some vague way "RNG lovers" were being served with this method, but there's no evidence that there is any player who actively preferred this method to a reasonable alternative one, merely that there were some players who genuinely didn't care, and were therefore neutral on the topic.

 

>And here you're agreeing with me again while pretending that it refutes my stance. I have already stated and reiterated my belief that it would be better if both methods were available. So this whole paragraph, again, does not address anything I actually said. The point, since it seemed to pass you by, is not that they "had to give something to the poor RNG fans out there", it's that they prioritised a different paying demographic than the one you are a part of. That does not make it a corrupt practice.

 

1. Again, there is no evidence that the demographic you speak of actually exists, whereas there is plenty of evidence that the demographic harmed by this decision does exist, so it was a flawed premise. 2. It is not made a corrupt practice because it "targeted the wrong demographic," it is a corrupt practice because it is a system that only justifies itself in its capacity to get players to buy items that they do not want, in search of items that they do want. This is an inherently exploitative and corrupt mechanism and there's no defending it.

 

>I read it, yes. And my post you chopped up already addressed this point of your's. Interestingly you didn't include the part where I addressed it in your reply though, hmm...

 

Not particularly interesting, the comments you made on that seemed oblivious to what MO actually said.

 

>> And personally I do think that 400 is too high for the most simplistic of the skins, but at this point, for these skins, I wouldn't entirely object to them sticking to that price point for the existing ones, so long as they commit to a lower price on future equivalent skins. It would just mean that I'd be buying less of them than I'd planned.

 

>This is a question of what they are personally "worth" to you, which is an entirely subjective opinion and not at all related to the discussion when it comes to you defending your claim of it being a corrupt practice from being challenged.

 

It is entirely subjective, and I presented it as such. It has nothing to do with gamble boxes being a corrupt practice, which remains true regardless of my opinions about their pricing.

 

>Again, you're just calling it one here. This paragraph has no substance except to reiterate your belief. It is not fact. Saying something is alcohol is a factual statement. What you are saying about it being corrupt, is not.

 

Fair enough, prove me wrong then. In the current system, can you dispute that either 1. at least some players who participate in this scheme will end up with mount skins that they would not have purchased if direct purchasing were an option, OR that 2. ANet had reason to believe that they would profit off of these players not receiving the item they wanted on the first try? If both of those statements are true, then it represents a corrupt system.

 

>Well, since you asked, off the top of my head: It is not a trick if you believe that the people in your target demographic (ie. the ones who enjoy the rng element) are the ones doing the majority of the purchasing.

 

Which would be a preposterously irrational position to hold. If you're going to release a set of mount skins, then obviously the demographic they appeal to is "people who want mount skins." If your target demographic is "people who like RNG", then just make some sort of "RNG thing" that would not appeal to anyone else. Again, you cannot divorce the content of these boxes, the mount skins, from the audience of people who want mount skins.

 

>So if the only way this rng system is designated as not corrupt is through the use of these subjective concepts, then how can you claim that your definition of corrupt is not in turn subjective? And if you now claim that it is subjective after all, how can you claim that my definition is "wrong"?

 

Subjective positions are verified by the wisdom of the crowd. If the general consensus is that a system is less than optimal, then it is less than optimal.

 

> @pah.4931 said:

> PSA: Anet will continue to try to make their game profitable.

>

> What's wrong with choices? Seems like you don't want others to be able to enjoy the game just because they enjoy it differently than you. Some people like loot boxes. It makes lots of money. And they will release non loot box mount skins in the future.

>

> Everybody wins and you're still upset. :/

 

Nobody minds that they offered the choice of a loot box. People mind that they **didn't** offer the choice of **not a loot box.** Everybody didn't win here.

 

> @"Endless Soul.5178" said:

> > Some people like loot boxes.

>

> Out of all my gaming friends, I can't think of a single one that actually likes RNG lootboxes. Obviously this is anecdotal, so if there really are people who like lootboxes, who are they?

 

I too would like to hear tales of these strange creatures that "like loot boxes."

 

> @Deihnyx.6318 said:

> > @witcher.3197 said:

> > https://imgur.com/gallery/peMyH

> >

> > Just substitute EA with Anet and it's the same thing.

>

> It's really, really not at the level of EA. EA's Battlefront has PAY TO WIN elements.

 

Some, but what was the primary cause for people's anger? That certain popular characters like Vader were locked behind grind that could be short-cut with cash. These were supposedly equivalent in power to the free options, so it was primarily a cosmetic issue. People were mildly upset that Battlefront was P2W. People were *furious* about *cosmetics.*

 

> @Cynn.1659 said:

> Loot boxes are here to provide players with a sense of pride and accomplishment for acquiring different mount skins.

 

Lol, Poe's Law man, Poe's Law. You've got to use /s or something when you say stuff like that or people will think you're serious.

 

 

[Ohoni.6057]

> @Swagger.1459 said:

> > @Djinn.9245 said:

> > > @Swagger.1459 said:

> > > This is the super EASY guide to obtaining all 30 mount skins for FREE! Guaranteed!!!

> > >

> > > 1. Gather crafting materials daily and sell them on the BLTC!

> > >

> > > 2. Exchange the gold earned from selling mats into 400 FREE gems at the end of each week!

> > >

> > > 3. Buy your 1 FREE mount license, you earned with FREE gold and FREE gems, and enjoy it!

> > >

> > > 4. Repeat steps 1-3 weekly, and you will get all 30 mount skins for FREE!

> > >

> > > 5. Don’t rush yourself, just gather casually and savor the journey to collect all 30 FREE mount skins!

> > >

> > > You are very welcome!!!

> >

> > My time isn't free.

>

> Nor is the time for the nearly 400 employees at Anet headquarters! But thankfully Anet is so super generous by allowing players to get these mount skins, and anything from the gemstore, for FREE!!!

 

Nothing purchased from the gem store is free. If you buy gems with gold, that's only because someone else bought even more god using gems. ANet gets their money either way, that is not them being generous. I am fine with them getting money, just not off of gamble boxes.

[Serophous.9085]

"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"

 

Here's my breakdown of your "benefits and how they aren't.

 

1. Let's do math. let's say each skin costs 2000 gems in the store. In this grab bag is 500 gems. I decide to....risk...my gems and buy a bag. Didn't get the skin I wanted. 3 more times still no skin. My...risking...for a better deal now will cost me MORE than paying for the skin outright. The discount is mute.

 

And before someone goes "but you got something!" I DIDNT get What I wanted. I can have 30 bags each with a game and charge 5 bucks a pop to pick one. One has PoF in it. Who wants to risk $5 for a $30 game, hm?

 

The problem here is, the skins ARENT straight up buyable. So you have a decent chance of shelling out more dough than the skin might've been worth if put on the store.

 

2. This is a tactic to encourage more buying. "Oh not this time! But your odds went up! Try again!"

 

3.this contradicts how you are proud of the work put into these skins. You are basically mixing the less flashy skins with flashy skins. If you WERE proud of them, there would be no need for mixing, just put them in the store. You said it yourself you want to suite tastes, the grab bag works against that. Someone with one taste is going to get mount skins they hate, and so on. This is COUNTERPRODUCTIVE.

 

You could've released the skins separately without a discount beside the grab bag, but you didn't. want us to...risk...our gems for a chance at what we want.

 

There's a word for that, but I can quite place my finger on it...

[Ohoni.6057]

> @Deihnyx.6318 said:

> Well, lots, lots of people grind for stuff that doesn't have to do with RNG stuff sold with gems (or sold with golds, since it's exact same thing). Legendary backpacks, armors or gen 2 weapons are heavily gated behind grinding.

>

> You don't want to grind, fine, I don't like it too, but that's not an argument against RNG as a whole.

>

> 3 ways to make valuable items:

> - Grinding

> - RNG

> - Difficulty

>

> My favorite is difficulty, my least favorite is grinding.

>

> Guess what people tend to prefer? Grinding. People whine about difficulty (see clock tower thread, see anti dps meters/anti raid threads, see eater of soul threads) and now whine about RNG (this whole pseudo drama).

> So what's left? Just grinding easy stuff.

>

> Not exactly what I want for this game either.

 

I prefer all three. Not "some of one, some of another," I mean "all three in all cases." Make a path to earn everything that is difficult. For players that can't handle that level fo difficulty, also make a path to that same item that is grindy. For people who like their odds and don't want to do either of those things, have a path that's RNG. That way, everyone can get the item in a way that best suits their tastes. Obviously "difficulty" and "grind" are tricky concepts to have in a store, but basically in this case, sure, have the RNG gamble boxes, nobody said they should be entirely off the table, but *also* offer those *same* items as direct purchases at a reasonable price, so that players who hate RNG have a reasonable alternative.

 

> @pah.4931 said:

> But what if... making more money through legal ways (even if you don't like it), could either get more artists and developers hired? Or, keep the lights on and the servers running??

 

If it means more gamble boxes and less direct purchases, then I'm not sure what difference them hiring more people who do for me. They don't need the gamble boxes, they can just sell the skins and let people buy them.

 

Again, people need to **stop arguing that ANet needs to get paid.** Nobody is disputing that point. Nobody thinks that ANet should not get paid. That is not an argument on the table. The question is, **when** ANet gets paid, should it be in the form of direct "what you see is what you get" purchases, or in the form of blind box gambling? That's it, that is the discussion, participate or not, but stop throwing more strawmen at the situation than Rani in Wayfarer Foothills.

 

 

[FrizzFreston.5290]

> @ProtoGunner.4953 said:

> > @FrizzFreston.5290 said:

> > > @ProtoGunner.4953 said:

> > > The whole griffon mount collection takes 4-5 hours and 250g is really not that much to get.

> >

> > In your opinion. I know lots of people who think 250 gold is a large sum of gold. Hell I think it is alot of money.

>

> At this point I had only about 500g left, so I went down to 250 and on day later I was up to 300 again. Sorry, but no, it's not much. You get money faster than you think. Of course not if you play 1h per week. But that's a question of relativity. There are people who have 100'000g and btw the highest I had was around 2k gold, but then again I have about 7 legendaries, so everyone it's own.

>

> Besides that 250g is 15€/$ which is about the same price I pay for two beers. It's the other way around if you really want it.

 

Well, I can totally agree that its not much from your position. It's just not true for everyone. You can disagree all you want, but in no way does it reflect everyones reality just your own.

[Djinn.9245]

> @pah.4931 said:

> > @Turial.1293 said:

> > > @pah.4931 said:

> > > Sinking gems into this also encourages Anet to continue developing the game GW2.

> > As a player since GW1 beta.... if the games future direction is RNG loot boxes like mobile games then I hope it goes under today, nobody should be supporting greed from a company that was founded on supporting players best interests. The RNG aspect does not support the players, loot boxes are a corrupt practice and they know it. They have screwed up big time but don't seem to care, if that is how it is, then they deserve the irreparable damage to their good name and with it a large loss in business. I wonder how their stocks are looking...

>

> My argument is that it's not greed. It's an attempt to keep the lights on.

 

People keep saying this as though the game isn't making money and is going to shut down any day. This is simply not true - you can look at their numbers yourself. And even if it was true, that doesn't excuse the use of sleazy business practices. If the game is really going to close down any day then it would be even worse to encourage players to spend more and more money on something they won't be able to use much longer. That's like a MMO selling an expansion and then closing down before anyone can even play the expansion they purchased.

[Swagger.1459]

> @Ohoni.6057 said:

> > @Swagger.1459 said:

> > > @Djinn.9245 said:

> > > > @Swagger.1459 said:

> > > > This is the super EASY guide to obtaining all 30 mount skins for FREE! Guaranteed!!!

> > > >

> > > > 1. Gather crafting materials daily and sell them on the BLTC!

> > > >

> > > > 2. Exchange the gold earned from selling mats into 400 FREE gems at the end of each week!

> > > >

> > > > 3. Buy your 1 FREE mount license, you earned with FREE gold and FREE gems, and enjoy it!

> > > >

> > > > 4. Repeat steps 1-3 weekly, and you will get all 30 mount skins for FREE!

> > > >

> > > > 5. Don’t rush yourself, just gather casually and savor the journey to collect all 30 FREE mount skins!

> > > >

> > > > You are very welcome!!!

> > >

> > > My time isn't free.

> >

> > Nor is the time for the nearly 400 employees at Anet headquarters! But thankfully Anet is so super generous by allowing players to get these mount skins, and anything from the gemstore, for FREE!!!

>

> Nothing purchased from the gem store is free. If you buy gems with gold, that's only because someone else bought even more god using gems. ANet gets their money either way, that is not them being generous. I am fine with them getting money, just not off of gamble boxes.

 

Really? Please explain in detail how... me converting gold earned in-game to gems not free for me? And exactly how does Anet get their money from my gold to gems to item purchase? Hmmm?

[Deihnyx.6318]

> @Ohoni.6057 said:

> I prefer all three. Not "some of one, some of another," I mean "all three in all cases." Make a path to earn everything that is difficult. For players that can't handle that level fo difficulty, also make a path to that same item that is grindy. For people who like their odds and don't want to do either of those things, have a path that's RNG. That way, everyone can get the item in a way that best suits their tastes. Obviously "difficulty" and "grind" are tricky concepts to have in a store, but basically in this case, sure, have the RNG gamble boxes, nobody said they should be entirely off the table, but *also* offer those *same* items as direct purchases at a reasonable price, so that players who hate RNG have a reasonable alternative.

This opinion is not the one of many, I'm pretty sure you're a minority in your majority. Aka people just want to hate rng methods and want to get rid of them.

I totally support alternative methods, but not strictly bashing "lootboxes" and putting them all in the same box, or even remotely comparing what we have here to EA.

 

> @Djinn.9245 said:

> > @pah.4931 said:

> > > @Turial.1293 said:

> > > > @pah.4931 said:

> > > > Sinking gems into this also encourages Anet to continue developing the game GW2.

> > > As a player since GW1 beta.... if the games future direction is RNG loot boxes like mobile games then I hope it goes under today, nobody should be supporting greed from a company that was founded on supporting players best interests. The RNG aspect does not support the players, loot boxes are a corrupt practice and they know it. They have screwed up big time but don't seem to care, if that is how it is, then they deserve the irreparable damage to their good name and with it a large loss in business. I wonder how their stocks are looking...

> >

> > My argument is that it's not greed. It's an attempt to keep the lights on.

>

> People keep saying this as though the game isn't making money and is going to shut down any day. This is simply not true - you can look at their numbers yourself. And even if it was true, that doesn't excuse the use of sleazy business practices. If the game is really going to close down any day then it would be even worse to encourage players to spend more and more money on something they won't be able to use much longer. That's like a MMO selling an expansion and then closing down before anyone can even play the expansion they purchased.

 

What are your numbers? Because those I saw about Q3 seemed to indicate that on the contrary, they weren't making that much.

Sure, PoF release at the end of Q3, but PoF could be preordered a month before that, and still the income was slightly higher than the rest of the year.

 

So if you'd like to say it's not true, please tell me how the numbers contradict it.

[actarus.8319]

I guess we need loot-boxes, it's the solution. Oh wait ...