Owlett.1604 Posted June 7, 2018 Share Posted June 7, 2018 _I don't know if this has been suggested yet - if it has, I'm sorry for double posting and will delete :)_ I was thinking about how the mount skins could become a bit more special than skins you buy off the trading post and I thought of how anet made legendary weapons into these kinds of treasure hunts, where you have to take certain steps to acquire items and stuff to get your legendary. What if we did that with mount skins, though? If we had a "legendary" skin for each mount form that had some small piece of lore to it and you had to follow some tracks from the animal and complete some "tests" in order to earn the special mount-skin? Idk, it's just an idea, since I would like Guild Wars to make a mount skin you could flash that wasn't just bought with gems ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ProverbsofHell.2307 Posted June 7, 2018 Share Posted June 7, 2018 > @"Owlett.1604" said: > Idk, it's just an idea, since I would like Guild Wars to make a mount skin you could flash that wasn't just bought with gems ;) You would like that, I would like that... ArenaNet? Not so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owlett.1604 Posted June 7, 2018 Author Share Posted June 7, 2018 > @"ProverbsofHell.2307" said: > You would like that, I would like that... ArenaNet? Not so much. I can't see why they wouldn't like it. I mean: they would still design skins for the gem store and people (including me) would still buy them. How would one design for each mount hurt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pifil.5193 Posted June 7, 2018 Share Posted June 7, 2018 > @"Owlett.1604" said: > > @"ProverbsofHell.2307" said: > > You would like that, I would like that... ArenaNet? Not so much. > > I can't see why they wouldn't like it. I mean: they would still design skins for the gem store and people (including me) would still buy them. How would one design for each mount hurt? > Well, it would hurt financiall, as that would be one design for each mount that isn't in the gemstore. Therefore that'd be one design where they didn't get €20 or more for each set sold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owlett.1604 Posted June 7, 2018 Author Share Posted June 7, 2018 > @"Pifil.5193" said: > > @"Owlett.1604" said: > > > @"ProverbsofHell.2307" said: > > > You would like that, I would like that... ArenaNet? Not so much. > > > > I can't see why they wouldn't like it. I mean: they would still design skins for the gem store and people (including me) would still buy them. How would one design for each mount hurt? > > > > Well, it would hurt financiall, as that would be one design for each mount that isn't in the gemstore. Therefore that'd be one design where they didn't get €20 or more for each set sold. That's true..but they still add so much new content, stories, new armor with expansions, new legendaries and elite specs because we all payed for the game. I think it would be wonderful if it was possible to look at these 5 designs as part of the game and for the players. It would satisfy a lot of players as well, I think - and add some more excitement about the mounts. I think it could be worth it, somehow - even though it is a lot of money they're potentially "missing" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jediwolf.8724 Posted June 7, 2018 Share Posted June 7, 2018 Something like a scavenger hunt or something like the steps of getting the griffon. Minus the 250 gold sink of course. It would be interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlippyCheeze.5483 Posted June 7, 2018 Share Posted June 7, 2018 > @"jediwolf.8724" said: > Something like a scavenger hunt or something like the steps of getting the griffon. Minus the 250 gold sink of course. > It would be interesting. All other legendaries contain some gold sink, as well as items that require significant investments of either time or gold (eg: crafting a bazillion wood), so I don't see why this would be any different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
starlinvf.1358 Posted June 7, 2018 Share Posted June 7, 2018 > @"Owlett.1604" said: > > @"ProverbsofHell.2307" said: > > You would like that, I would like that... ArenaNet? Not so much. > > I can't see why they wouldn't like it. I mean: they would still design skins for the gem store and people (including me) would still buy them. How would one design for each mount hurt? > I think of 4 off the top of my head, all of which are in common with Legendary weapons. - They are a "Final" ultimate Investment for a Cosmetic. This is a catch 22 thats existed for a while, but hadn't become a real problem until Wardrobes and Outfits became a thing. Because.... - Legendary collections have to be a massive gold sink to communicate to the player that this things has enough value to be worth investing effort into, and not just another throw away skin. But.... - Because players are super invested on effort, and have no practical reason not to use it once obtained, they're more willing to use it over other skins, including gem store ones. Legendary armor was an outlier because people weren't sold on the skin, they were sold on the Stat swapping. With Legendary weapons, it was actually the other way around... with stat swapping created to resolve a basic usability conflict of the new Wardrobe system, but otherwise obtained for purely cosmetic reasons. - Unlike Weapons, which have large number of permutations in builds...... Mounts are universal, and very limited in number. So in practice, anyone who is willing to invest effort into a mount skin like that, will very likely ignore the majority of future gem store skins because of that attachment. So the paradox here is the Legendary skin has be better then Gem store skins to justify the effort, but in doing so hampers a revenue stream given people who buy things from the gem store will also see the Legendary (collection only skin) to be just as desirable, if not more so. And point 5...... people got really mad about Collections with legendary gear. Which is why all but the first 3 of the Gen 2 weapons are made through bulk material processing, and PvP and WvW Legendary armor just ported the mechanic to the existing skin set, and time gated it with mode specific currency. I started collecting legendary weapons about 3 years ago, and now use them on the majority of builds that use that weapon. I also try to avoiding doubling up on legendary weapons due to the amount of investment made into the first ones...... which for me meant waiting out LS3 for each weapon announcement, before deciding if a Gen2 was work working on over the cheaper Gen1s. I buy a lot of skins from the Gem store (particularly gliders), but are more picky about Outfits since they cost more, and are more integral to any kind of character theme I want to run at a given time. I'm very compelled to not over invest in skins I won't or will rarely use; and is a sentiment I'm sure most people have when evaluating gem store offers. I'm also not force limiting myself by financial strain or self-imposed budgeting..... its that my value system for cosmetics is weighted heavily toward usage, and want to get at least a few solid months of enjoyment out of wearing them (before I eventually get bored, or get a idea for a theme). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkeyspit.3965 Posted June 7, 2018 Share Posted June 7, 2018 > @"ProverbsofHell.2307" said: > > @"Owlett.1604" said: > > Idk, it's just an idea, since I would like Guild Wars to make a mount skin you could flash that wasn't just bought with gems ;) > > You would like that, I would like that... ArenaNet? Not so much. > > Pretty much this. Subscription games like WoW put like 85% of their skins, etc, in game, and then they offer extra stuff for same on their online store. Non sub games like GW2 need to generate similar revenue, for development of future content, server maintenance, etc, so they put it on the gem store. GW2 doesn't, in any way, support a Pay to Win system, for which they deserve applause. Everything for sale on the Gem store is purely optional, so you can play this game just fine without spending any $$$ there. (but you should, cuz ANET needs your support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owlett.1604 Posted June 8, 2018 Author Share Posted June 8, 2018 > @"starlinvf.1358" said: > So in practice, anyone who is willing to invest effort into a mount skin like that, will very likely ignore the majority of future gem store skins because of that attachment. So the paradox here is the Legendary skin has be better then Gem store skins to justify the effort, but in doing so hampers a revenue stream given people who buy things from the gem store will also see the Legendary (collection only skin) to be just as desirable, if not more so. Ah, yeah - I see how players would avoid buying off the gem store after obtaining the legendary skins. I hadn't thought about that option - personally I just love all the different skins they made for the mounts so I have - and I'm not proud of it - been buying a lot of them. But I do see that the majority of players probably wouldn't continue buying other designs off of the gem store, since they would only want to flash their obtained skins. Makes sense. It's a shame though. I would have loved some more lore revolving the different mounts. Like getting a new zone unlocked through story and finding out there's a new kind of griffon there. Would please the explorer in me lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owlett.1604 Posted June 8, 2018 Author Share Posted June 8, 2018 > @"Turkeyspit.3965" said: > > @"ProverbsofHell.2307" said: > > > @"Owlett.1604" said: > > > Idk, it's just an idea, since I would like Guild Wars to make a mount skin you could flash that wasn't just bought with gems ;) > > > > You would like that, I would like that... ArenaNet? Not so much. > > > > > > Pretty much this. Subscription games like WoW put like 85% of their skins, etc, in game, and then they offer extra stuff for same on their online store. Non sub games like GW2 need to generate similar revenue, for development of future content, server maintenance, etc, so they put it on the gem store. > > GW2 doesn't, in any way, support a Pay to Win system, for which they deserve applause. Everything for sale on the Gem store is purely optional, so you can play this game just fine without spending any $$$ there. (but you should, cuz ANET needs your support. Yeah I can see how it could complicate their income - I have no idea how much money they earn through their gem store. I mean, I would imagine they make quite a lot? But it might not be enough to implement legendary mounts and losing money on future skins over time.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derd.6413 Posted June 8, 2018 Share Posted June 8, 2018 > @"starlinvf.1358" said: > > @"Owlett.1604" said: > > > @"ProverbsofHell.2307" said: > > > You would like that, I would like that... ArenaNet? Not so much. > > > > I can't see why they wouldn't like it. I mean: they would still design skins for the gem store and people (including me) would still buy them. How would one design for each mount hurt? > > > And point 5...... people got really mad about Collections with legendary gear. Which is why all but the first 3 of the Gen 2 weapons are made through bulk material processing. Pretty sure they stopped with the collections because they were to much work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ProtoGunner.4953 Posted June 8, 2018 Share Posted June 8, 2018 > @"Pifil.5193" said: > > @"Owlett.1604" said: > > > @"ProverbsofHell.2307" said: > > > You would like that, I would like that... ArenaNet? Not so much. > > > > I can't see why they wouldn't like it. I mean: they would still design skins for the gem store and people (including me) would still buy them. How would one design for each mount hurt? > > > > Well, it would hurt financiall, as that would be one design for each mount that isn't in the gemstore. Therefore that'd be one design where they didn't get €20 or more for each set sold. I think they can afford to give us a small amount of additional mount skins via gameplay compared to the galore of skins they sell via store. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pifil.5193 Posted June 8, 2018 Share Posted June 8, 2018 > @"ProtoGunner.4953" said: > > @"Pifil.5193" said: > > > @"Owlett.1604" said: > > > > @"ProverbsofHell.2307" said: > > > > You would like that, I would like that... ArenaNet? Not so much. > > > > > > I can't see why they wouldn't like it. I mean: they would still design skins for the gem store and people (including me) would still buy them. How would one design for each mount hurt? > > > > > > > Well, it would hurt financiall, as that would be one design for each mount that isn't in the gemstore. Therefore that'd be one design where they didn't get €20 or more for each set sold. > > I think they can afford to give us a small amount of additional mount skins via gameplay compared to the galore of skins they sell via store. I'd be all for that, even a version of the standard mounts with 4 dye channels as it's pretty apparent to me that the default mounts only have a single dye channel in order to make gemstore mounts more attractive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDub.1530 Posted June 8, 2018 Share Posted June 8, 2018 > @"derd.6413" said: > > @"starlinvf.1358" said: > > > @"Owlett.1604" said: > > > > @"ProverbsofHell.2307" said: > > > > You would like that, I would like that... ArenaNet? Not so much. > > > > > > I can't see why they wouldn't like it. I mean: they would still design skins for the gem store and people (including me) would still buy them. How would one design for each mount hurt? > > > > > > And point 5...... people got really mad about Collections with legendary gear. Which is why all but the first 3 of the Gen 2 weapons are made through bulk material processing. > > > Pretty sure they stopped with the collections because they were to much work > > This is correct. And also why it was so long after HoT until we started getting more Legendaries we were promised. And the breaking of that promise is what had some people (not me) so mad with the "incompleteness" of the HoT release. I, for one, would be all for having more access to mounts in game (the mount currently in the BL chest is a step in the right direction, since I can key farm in game). I'm not sure it would hurt their gem store income. They sell weapon skins there now that get bought despite the existence of Legendaries. And I will never buy a gemstore mount skin. I just disagree with the pricing model. Either a decent price, but for a totally random skin, or a really high price for a specific skin. The 5 skin packs, IMO, are priced fine, I just have yet to find a set I like enough to buy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeanBB.4268 Posted June 8, 2018 Share Posted June 8, 2018 Isn't that what the griffon is already? A legendary quest to get a legendary mount? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redfeather.6401 Posted June 8, 2018 Share Posted June 8, 2018 I wonder why wow and riders of icarus have tons of mount content that incentivizes players to play the game, but when it's suggested for gw2 some players think anet can't afford too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zalavaaris.5329 Posted June 8, 2018 Share Posted June 8, 2018 How would they lose money? 20 dollars for s mount skin vs 40-80 dollars worth to gems to gold for s legendary mount skin. They would stand to make more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimator.3589 Posted June 8, 2018 Share Posted June 8, 2018 > @"DeanBB.4268" said: > Isn't that what the griffon is already? A legendary quest to get a legendary mount? That was more or less what I thought. Maybe an even more legendary quest for an even more legendary mount? JATO rockets for our griffons? Charr cars out in the PvE world? I know I'd work my tail off for that. :grin: 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