Why did you remove the original mount license?

[Icethorn.6570]

When you added the Istani Mount Adoption License you removed the option to obtain the original mounts.

Starbound Griphon for example. Are you ever going to bring these back? There are so many good mounts I wanted to buy. I hate the Istani set.

[Randulf.7614]

They didnt remove it at the same time, they did so last week as advertised in the run up to doing so. I assume as part of the usual rotation to appear later in order to gain “panic sales”

 

There have been a few threads on this, but no official response. Ill be very surprised not to see their return. Id expect them to have said “never returning” when they advertised them coming off the gemstore

[Pifil.5193]

Yes, as Randulf says they'll most likely be back again in a few months on order to drum up demand and improve sales. It's just how the gem store works.

[Danikat.8537]

I'm hoping when they come back it includes the option to buy specific individual mounts as well as the random licence. Luckily I'd decided I want the Istani mounts instead of the originals just before the countdown started for the removal of the originals (and that plan might shift again before I've finished getting enough gold) but I'd still like to get a few of the originals, if it was possible to buy only the ones I want. (Yes I know it would be at the higher price, 1,600 gems each I think, I'm ok with that.)

 

But even if it's still just random licences I'm sure they'll be back at some point.

[Menadena.7482]

> @"Danikat.8537" said:

> I'm hoping when they come back it includes the option to buy specific individual mounts as well as the random licence. Luckily I'd decided I want the Istani mounts instead of the originals just before the countdown started for the removal of the originals (and that plan might shift again before I've finished getting enough gold) but I'd still like to get a few of the originals, if it was possible to buy only the ones I want. (Yes I know it would be at the higher price, 1,600 gems each I think, I'm ok with that.)

>

> But even if it's still just random licences I'm sure they'll be back at some point.

 

Most likely when they return they will be in whatever is the current sale format. So right now it would be like the second group of skins.

 

[crashburntoo.7431]

"Limited Time Only" and "Seasonal" does increase task tension and creates a sense of urgency to buy before it's "too late". The sheer number of items that they could offer would make the gem store difficult to navigate, which is another reason why they rotate items regularly.

 

They may bring the original set back with a price for chosen skins. It would fit the current sales model, and the position can be defended based on the time that's gone by (if anyone was upset by the move). I fully expect that we'll see the original set again, likely with the 6th anniversary. It'll be interesting to see if they do make chosen skins an option.

[DarthFurby.3970]

> @"crashburntoo.7431" said:

> "Limited Time Only" and "Seasonal" does increase task tension and creates a sense of urgency to buy before it's "too late".

 

Yep, sadly (for me) this is very true. When I found out they were removing the original (even knowing more than likely they would return) I bought licenses till I got the starbound griffin; only took a few (though I now have all but 1 or 2 of the original qq).

 

I would be very surprised if they don't bring them back on some sort of limited sale. Many people would buy them and would be a big source of revenue for them.

[Danikat.8537]

It works on me too (annoyingly). I'm one of those people who can easily sit on the fence thinking that maybe I'll buy something one day, and just keep doing that forever. Which is not good for the people selling it because that's not a sale. Whereas if it's going away soon I need to get on and make a decision.

 

Of course the downside is that sometimes that decision is not to buy it. For the first time **ever** I didn't buy a mini pack from the gem store (the SAB Season 4 pack) because I literally did not have the money during the time it was available, and now it's gone so I can't buy it. (Although it was good for me, I had sometimes worried I was addicted to collecting mini pets, but when I couldn't afford it I found it easy to skip one.) It can also impact impulse sales, which are a big part of 'micro'transactions. At one point I wanted to buy the Striders Armour set, but it wasn't available. By the time it came back around I couldn't remember why I'd wanted it, so I didn't buy it and again Anet lost an opportunity to get my money. (I'm currently waiting for the Chaos Gloves to come back, but that's another one I'm not completely sure of so it depends how I feel, and how much money I have, when they appear.)

 

Honestly my assumption would be that artificial scarcity loses more sales than it gains because of problems like that, but I've seen the data (not for the gem store obviously, but for other systems which use the exact same sales tactic) and it does work. In general people are far more likely to buy things they aren't completely sure they want if it's only available temporarily. Combine that with the fact that customers can get put off by too much choice (particularly men for some reason - which is why men's clothing stores are often emptier and more likely to be organised by type of item - all the jeans together - whereas women's are organised by theme) and it does make sense for even digital stores with infinite storage space and no shortage of products to remove things periodically.

 

But just because I understand it doesn't mean I, as a customer, have to like it.

[Biff.5312]

Skin availability is rotated. They'll be available again at some point, and probably as individual sale options as well.

[Pifil.5193]

> @"Biff.5312" said:

> Skin availability is rotated. They'll be available again at some point, and probably as individual sale options as well.

 

Probably not, as Mike O'Brien said "We won’t change the existing license in a way that would invalidate the investment players have made".