Abakk.9176 Posted February 20, 2018 Author Share Posted February 20, 2018 > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said: > > @"Abakk.9176" said: > > > > The point is that It's a stupid business model to chase away potential customers from your store by hiding stuff behind forced RNG. > > There's an assumption in this statement that you cannot back up with anything factual. I suppose it's natural for people to assume that a lot of other people think the way they do. That is what you are doing, though. They managed to make 20 euro off me because i was weak and really wanted 4 dye channels on my raptor. I bought 3 skins and got 1 that i was somewhat content with, the other two are useless to me. That's 1200 gems spent and the last i'll ever spend on mount skins in this game. Had there been another way of seeing and buying what i want, like how it is with all the other skins in the shop, i would have bought more than the uselessly spent 800 gems on the other two skins. I spend 700 gems per armor skin when i see a nice one so they can even up the price for all i care. So there is proof of loss of revenue AND proof it's a stupid system for not giving me an option to spend more money besides gambling. > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said: > I don't like the random-item-from-a-purchase model, either. However, ANet has decided that they need sufficient revenue from mount skins to continue supporting the production of GW2. They have therefore decided that mount skins are not for everyone. The _only_ reason I can see for them to make such a decision is that they believe they will get more revenue selling both "expensive" mount skins, mount skin bundles and the random licenses to fewer customers than they would by selling lower-priced skins to more people. Sure, ANet could be wrong, but they have data and we don't. All fine with me. They can consider this thread as 'unsatisfied customer data' then. If anything it explains to them why one of their customers refuses to buy any more mount skins through this weird system. I think it's just a test to see if they can make more by turning things into lootboxes. That is why its important to speak out on such matters in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IndigoSundown.5419 Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 > @"Abakk.9176" said: > > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said: > > > @"Abakk.9176" said: > > > > > > The point is that It's a stupid business model to chase away potential customers from your store by hiding stuff behind forced RNG. > > > > There's an assumption in this statement that you cannot back up with anything factual. I suppose it's natural for people to assume that a lot of other people think the way they do. That is what you are doing, though. > > They managed to make 20 euro off me because i was weak and really wanted 4 dye channels on my raptor. I bought 3 skins and got 1 that i was somewhat content with, the other two are useless to me. That's 1200 gems spent and the last i'll ever spend on mount skins in this game. > > Had there been another way of seeing and buying what i want, like how it is with all the other skins in the shop, i would have bought more than the uselessly spent 800 gems on the other two skins. I spend 700 gems per armor skin when i see a nice one so they can even up the price for all i care. > > So there is proof of loss of revenue AND proof it's a stupid system for not giving me an option to spend more money besides gambling. Loss of revenue? Correct. Stupid? Still not proven. It would only be stupid if the current approach is not producing more revenue from those who buy bundles, licenses and individual skins than it loses from people like you and I. > > > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said: > > I don't like the random-item-from-a-purchase model, either. However, ANet has decided that they need sufficient revenue from mount skins to continue supporting the production of GW2. They have therefore decided that mount skins are not for everyone. The _only_ reason I can see for them to make such a decision is that they believe they will get more revenue selling both "expensive" mount skins, mount skin bundles and the random licenses to fewer customers than they would by selling lower-priced skins to more people. Sure, ANet could be wrong, but they have data and we don't. > > All fine with me. They can consider this thread as 'unsatisfied customer data' then. If anything it explains to them why one of their customers refuses to buy any more mount skins through this weird system. > > I think it's just a test to see if they can make more by turning things into lootboxes. That is why its important to speak out on such matters in my opinion. > Unfortunately, speaking one's mind is only part of the equation. Consumer advocacy of this sort only works if there is a significant consumer response in _both_ not spending and speaking out about why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abakk.9176 Posted February 21, 2018 Author Share Posted February 21, 2018 > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said: > > @"Abakk.9176" said: > > > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said: > > > > @"Abakk.9176" said: > > > > > > > > The point is that It's a stupid business model to chase away potential customers from your store by hiding stuff behind forced RNG. > > > > > > There's an assumption in this statement that you cannot back up with anything factual. I suppose it's natural for people to assume that a lot of other people think the way they do. That is what you are doing, though. > > > > They managed to make 20 euro off me because i was weak and really wanted 4 dye channels on my raptor. I bought 3 skins and got 1 that i was somewhat content with, the other two are useless to me. That's 1200 gems spent and the last i'll ever spend on mount skins in this game. > > > > Had there been another way of seeing and buying what i want, like how it is with all the other skins in the shop, i would have bought more than the uselessly spent 800 gems on the other two skins. I spend 700 gems per armor skin when i see a nice one so they can even up the price for all i care. > > > > So there is proof of loss of revenue AND proof it's a stupid system for not giving me an option to spend more money besides gambling. > > Loss of revenue? Correct. Stupid? Still not proven. It would only be stupid if the current approach is not producing more revenue from those who buy bundles, licenses and individual skins than it loses from people like you and I. Proven stupid because they don't give me the option i want **besides** the gambling route. That's my cash on top of that of the gamblers'. > > > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said: > > > I don't like the random-item-from-a-purchase model, either. However, ANet has decided that they need sufficient revenue from mount skins to continue supporting the production of GW2. They have therefore decided that mount skins are not for everyone. The _only_ reason I can see for them to make such a decision is that they believe they will get more revenue selling both "expensive" mount skins, mount skin bundles and the random licenses to fewer customers than they would by selling lower-priced skins to more people. Sure, ANet could be wrong, but they have data and we don't. > > > > All fine with me. They can consider this thread as 'unsatisfied customer data' then. If anything it explains to them why one of their customers refuses to buy any more mount skins through this weird system. > > > > I think it's just a test to see if they can make more by turning things into lootboxes. That is why its important to speak out on such matters in my opinion. > > > > Unfortunately, speaking one's mind is only part of the equation. Consumer advocacy of this sort only works if there is a significant consumer response in _both_ not spending and speaking out about why. Well, you gotta start somewhere. And this is as good a start as any. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevieboy.4192 Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 Lol...a gamble on a random mount skin, you don't get the one you want.. it's a slap in the face... The RNG in this game is awful... not sure what you were expecting.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stand The Wall.6987 Posted February 22, 2018 Share Posted February 22, 2018 t r o l o ppl actually expect anet to abandon rng-ebus cash cow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now