lokh.2695 Posted August 2, 2018 Share Posted August 2, 2018 > @"SmirkDog.3160" said: > "Vote with your wallet" does absolutely nothing unless you're spending your money. There's always those people that snatch up the new gem store items as soon as they're available and parade them through LA. Those people tell ANet that selling stuff at high prices and randomizing what you get when you make your purchase is financially beneficial to them. > > Meanwhile, me deciding I'm not going to buy anything from the gem store anymore does _nothing_ to change the state of things. "Vote with your wallet" is a farce, and used to trick people into thinking they're getting something done by doing nothing and not saying anything, when it's just used to do exactly that; get us to do nothing and say nothing. Then vote with your wallet and acompany it with an angry post on reddit. Voting with your wallet doen't exclusively mean that you're doing nothing or that not spending is your only choice of action. Voting with your wallet not just means don't buy what you don't want it also means buy what you agree with, there's action involved, in my oppinion in both decissions, but at least in the latter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sariel.2143 Posted August 2, 2018 Share Posted August 2, 2018 > @"Scar.1793" said: > Wasn’t the backlash from that kind of crap not enough? I thought they learned the lesson. Apparently not. > > Hopefully all of Europe will do as Belgium and Netherlands who banned that greedy and shady practise that are lootboxes. And don’t tell me licenses are not, even though it appears more fair you still pay for something you don’t know and with random chances to get what you want. You clearly didnt read enough about the situation in Netherlands and Belgium. By their definition these licenses arent lootboxes. Only boxes that give an advantage over other players (atm). You dont have to hope for good rng anyway. You can just buy the skin you want. So I dont see the problem of the OP. I guess he just wants the best looking from the licenses but cheaper. Lol... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Algreg.3629 Posted August 2, 2018 Share Posted August 2, 2018 this whole thread is basically about customers enjoying lower prices, while companies would like prices to be as high as possible while still being able to sell their products. The end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blocki.4931 Posted August 2, 2018 Share Posted August 2, 2018 > @"Scar.1793" said: > Wasn’t the backlash from that kind of crap not enough? I thought they learned the lesson. Apparently not. > > Hopefully all of Europe will do as Belgium and Netherlands who banned that greedy and shady practise that are lootboxes. And don’t tell me licenses are not, even though it appears more fair you still pay for something you don’t know and with random chances to get what you want. The second set of adoption licenses had 0 backlash at all and the result from the controversy around the first one was giving people the option to buy a single skin directly for a higher price. There is nothing wrong with their business model like this, this is what people want and this is pretty reasonable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rasta.2371 Posted August 2, 2018 Share Posted August 2, 2018 So I only had one gripe with the mounts, and that is, the first set i bought the 1600 or 1800 for 5 mounts ( i dont remember exactly), and i did not recieve a skimmer OR griffin skin. So when the istani isle set came around i bought another 5 and i got 2 griffins but still no skimmer. I like the direction that anet was going with it but if they ccould make one tweak for future releases on mounts and that is to somehow get a skin for a mount that you don't have a skin for yet. I finally pulled out my wallet and purchased the full 15 of the desert racer mounts because i wanted the beetle, and i liked the other ones. So right now you have the 1 select mount for 1200, and rng for 400/360/340 (if you buy 1.8k and 5.1k) If there was a third option for let's say, 1 random skin of each mount for that set, so let's say 6 skins for 2.5k gem or something along those lines, would it defeat the purpose of the rng? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manasa Devi.7958 Posted August 2, 2018 Share Posted August 2, 2018 > @"Sariel.2143" said: > > @"Scar.1793" said: > > Wasn’t the backlash from that kind of crap not enough? I thought they learned the lesson. Apparently not. > > > > Hopefully all of Europe will do as Belgium and Netherlands who banned that greedy and shady practise that are lootboxes. And don’t tell me licenses are not, even though it appears more fair you still pay for something you don’t know and with random chances to get what you want. > > You clearly didnt read enough about the situation in Netherlands and Belgium. By their definition these licenses arent lootboxes. Only boxes that give an advantage over other players (atm). > > You dont have to hope for good rng anyway. You can just buy the skin you want. > > So I dont see the problem of the OP. > I guess he just wants the best looking from the licenses but cheaper. Lol... I'm not completely sure about the Belgium situation but Dutch law doesn't define "loot boxes" at all. It has only been tested to determine whether or not they qualify under the gambling regulations. Conclusion: some do, some don't. Several criteria need to be met before they're considered "gambling". The one that puts the mount licenses into the clear is that to be considered gambling, specifically online gambling, players need to be able to "cash out", i.e. you need to be able to turn your "winnings" back into real world coin. This did put some Steam/Valve games in hot water, and they've made changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkeyspit.3965 Posted August 2, 2018 Share Posted August 2, 2018 > @"Rasta.2371" said: > So I only had one gripe with the mounts, and that is, the first set i bought the 1600 or 1800 for 5 mounts ( i dont remember exactly), and i did not recieve a skimmer OR griffin skin. So when the istani isle set came around i bought another 5 and i got 2 griffins but still no skimmer. I like the direction that anet was going with it but if they ccould make one tweak for future releases on mounts and that is to somehow get a skin for a mount that you don't have a skin for yet. I finally pulled out my wallet and purchased the full 15 of the desert racer mounts because i wanted the beetle, and i liked the other ones. > > So right now you have the 1 select mount for 1200, and rng for 400/360/340 (if you buy 1.8k and 5.1k) > > If there was a third option for let's say, 1 random skin of each mount for that set, so let's say 6 skins for 2.5k gem or something along those lines, would it defeat the purpose of the rng? Personally I wish they offered licenses bundled by mount type. If I already have the skin I want for my Skimmer, I'd rather not get another by chance that will never be used, and instead can buy Griffon pack after Griffon pack until I get the one I want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danikat.8537 Posted August 2, 2018 Share Posted August 2, 2018 > @"Blocki.4931" said: > > @"Scar.1793" said: > > Wasn’t the backlash from that kind of crap not enough? I thought they learned the lesson. Apparently not. > > > > Hopefully all of Europe will do as Belgium and Netherlands who banned that greedy and shady practise that are lootboxes. And don’t tell me licenses are not, even though it appears more fair you still pay for something you don’t know and with random chances to get what you want. > > The second set of adoption licenses hat 0 backlash at all and the result from the controversy around the first one was giving people the option to buy a single skin directly for a higher price. There is nothing wrong with their business model like this, this is what people want and this is pretty reasonable. I think some people didn't realise the original (currently unavailable) mount adoption licences and the Istani Isles ones are different. They way some people have described the situation it seems like they heard Anet released 1 set of mount adoption licences, got a huge backlash and promised to make the next set better, they saw 1 set on the store and assumed that's what it was about and now a 2nd one has appeared they're complaining because both of those are identical - they don't realise the first set they saw _is_ the new improved version. That's definitely the case for one guy in-game yesterday who kept insisting they renamed the first adoption licences to Istani Isles licences ready for the release of the second one. It is confusing if you've not kept track of events and which mounts are available from which licences. I did do that because it's something I care about (I like mounts and themed characters - so I want to get mounts to suit all my characters) so I keep checking exactly what each pack/licence set includes. But I know a lot of people find it very confusing because they just look at the list of mount skins in the Hero Panel and the items available in the gem store and don't see any obvious way to match them up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReaverKane.7598 Posted August 2, 2018 Share Posted August 2, 2018 > @"Trise.2865" said: > "Dear ArenaNet: > You're charging more than I want to pay for a thing that I want. Plz nerf." That's usually how a market works. Sure in game's there's the whales and the fanboys who will justify any price within their mind cannon, but usually that's a minority. I wonder how much money did they make with Branded pack vs with any of the 2000 gem single mounts. I'm guessing way more since Branded mounts have had a return already, while they're still figuring out how to better market any of the other types. > @"lokh.2695" said: > > @"SmirkDog.3160" said: > > "Vote with your wallet" does absolutely nothing unless you're spending your money. There's always those people that snatch up the new gem store items as soon as they're available and parade them through LA. Those people tell ANet that selling stuff at high prices and randomizing what you get when you make your purchase is financially beneficial to them. > > > > Meanwhile, me deciding I'm not going to buy anything from the gem store anymore does _nothing_ to change the state of things. "Vote with your wallet" is a farce, and used to trick people into thinking they're getting something done by doing nothing and not saying anything, when it's just used to do exactly that; get us to do nothing and say nothing. > > Then vote with your wallet and acompany it with an angry post on reddit. > > Voting with your wallet doen't exclusively mean that you're doing nothing or that not spending is your only choice of action. Voting with your wallet not just means don't buy what you don't want it also means buy what you agree with, there's action involved, in my oppinion in both decissions, but at least in the latter. That's why i bought the Branded pack. I liked the look (as opposed to the ones before, and after) and i think that method has a fair pricing. I'm probably not going to buy any more though, because they're now introducing new mounts which won't be introduced in those bundles, and i would rather have a full set. Since i can't i doubt i'll ever buy any mount skins ever again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rasta.2371 Posted August 2, 2018 Share Posted August 2, 2018 so the original set of mount adoptions did not have the select mount that the istani, desert and moving forward will. Anet screwed up on 1 set of mount skins, they apologized due to the backlash and now we have the current system. The question about that original set if there is a skin someone really likes; would A-net even want to open that can of worms if they adopt a path to acquire it somehow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zaraki.5784 Posted August 2, 2018 Share Posted August 2, 2018 > @"Trise.2865" said: > "Dear ArenaNet: > You're charging more than I want to pay for a thing that I want. Plz nerf." Despite you said it in a sarcastic way, it's exactly what many people want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tekoneiric.6817 Posted August 2, 2018 Author Share Posted August 2, 2018 > @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said: > > @"Tekoneiric.6817" said: > > > @"Biff.5312" said: > > > But they do. They release sets for 1600 gems every now and then, which come with similarly themed skins for all available pets. > > > > I know about the existing sets however they have good skins locked up in that RNG license. The only way to get them is either RNG which I do not like at all or pay 3x the amount to be able to choose the skin you want. > > The only skins locked are the original ones. And ANet said that they didn't want to change the mechanic out of fairness for those who have already acquired skins that way. And, as it turns out, they aren't available right now through any means. > > What other system would you propose that is both close to the current system and remains fair to current owners of the original set's skins? I did so in my original post. Pair like skins up into packs and sell them like the existing packs. All they need to do is add some for mounts missing skins that match the theme. Here's an example of the some packs they could put together if they added some skins to match. --- Fires of Primordus Mount Skins Pack Raptor: Flamelander Springer: Primal Hare Jackal: Pyroclast Griffon: Fire Pinion Missing: Skimmer and Beetle --- Shiverpeak Winds Mount Skins Pack Raptor: Dzalana Ice Scale Springer: Artic Jerboa Jackal: Iceflow Missing: Griffon, Skimmer and Beetle --- Cosmic Eternity Mount Skins Pack Skimmer: Stardrift Jackal: Stardust Griffon: Starbound Missing: Raptor, Springer and Beetle --- Lightning Aspect Mount Skin Pack (This would be a good Festival of the Four Winds set) Jackal: Storm Ridge Springer: Sargol Thunderer Missing: Skimmer, Jackal, Griffon, Beetle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sorudo.9054 Posted August 2, 2018 Share Posted August 2, 2018 > @"SmirkDog.3160" said: > "Vote with your wallet" does absolutely nothing unless you're spending your money. There's always those people that snatch up the new gem store items as soon as they're available and parade them through LA. Those people tell ANet that selling stuff at high prices and randomizing what you get when you make your purchase is financially beneficial to them. > > Meanwhile, me deciding I'm not going to buy anything from the gem store anymore does _nothing_ to change the state of things. "Vote with your wallet" is a farce, and used to trick people into thinking they're getting something done by doing nothing and not saying anything, when it's just used to do exactly that; get us to do nothing and say nothing. you do know there are ppl who farm every single day for gems right, and that they are able to easily buy all mount skins with gold right.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Illconceived Was Na.9781 Posted August 2, 2018 Share Posted August 2, 2018 > @"Tekoneiric.6817" said: > > @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said: > > > @"Tekoneiric.6817" said: > > > > @"Biff.5312" said: > > > > But they do. They release sets for 1600 gems every now and then, which come with similarly themed skins for all available pets. > > > > > > I know about the existing sets however they have good skins locked up in that RNG license. The only way to get them is either RNG which I do not like at all or pay 3x the amount to be able to choose the skin you want. > > > > The only skins locked are the original ones. And ANet said that they didn't want to change the mechanic out of fairness for those who have already acquired skins that way. And, as it turns out, they aren't available right now through any means. > > > > What other system would you propose that is both close to the current system and remains fair to current owners of the original set's skins? > > I did so in my original post. Pair like skins up into packs and sell them like the existing packs. All they need to do is add some for mounts missing skins that match the theme. Here's an example of the some packs they could put together if they added some skins to match. That changes the nature of how those original skins are made available. If I spent 2-4k on 5-10 RNG licenses originally and that system were implemented, I'd be livid. I can't see ANet deciding to go that route, especially not after the current feedback. I think ANet did a terrible job of setting our expectations for how much MountFits cost. I think they made a fundamental mistake in first offering skins by RNG, instead of starting with a fixed price and only later bringing in a discount lotto method. But they can't change the fact that this is how they rolled out MountFits originally. Pretending that system doesn't exist isn't going to help make things right. They have since dropped that flawed approach. And, as time goes by, the original license pack will become a smaller and smaller fraction of available skins. Eventually, nearly all of us who want MountFits are going to find skins we like as much or more as the ones we covet from the original. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danikat.8537 Posted August 2, 2018 Share Posted August 2, 2018 > @"Tekoneiric.6817" said: > I did so in my original post. Pair like skins up into packs and sell them like the existing packs. All they need to do is add some for mounts missing skins that match the theme. Here's an example of the some packs they could put together if they added some skins to match. > > --- Fires of Primordus Mount Skins Pack > Raptor: Flamelander > Springer: Primal Hare > Jackal: Pyroclast > Griffon: Fire Pinion > Missing: Skimmer and Beetle > > --- Shiverpeak Winds Mount Skins Pack > Raptor: Dzalana Ice Scale > Springer: Artic Jerboa > Jackal: Iceflow > Missing: Griffon, Skimmer and Beetle > > --- Cosmic Eternity Mount Skins Pack > Skimmer: Stardrift > Jackal: Stardust > Griffon: Starbound > Missing: Raptor, Springer and Beetle > > --- Lightning Aspect Mount Skin Pack (This would be a good Festival of the Four Winds set) > Jackal: Storm Ridge > Springer: Sargol Thunderer > Missing: Skimmer, Jackal, Griffon, Beetle There is a fire beetle, ice skimmer, space raptor and lightning griffon in the Desert Racer pack, so we're even closer to having full sets of these. There's also ghost mounts - we have a ghost bunny, jackal and beetle and hopefully we'll get a ghost raptor, griffon and skimmer at some point too. I realise it's unlikely to happen, but I really like this idea. But with the condition that the packs work like Living World seasons and automatically discount for skins you already have. So for example the full price for a pack of 6 mounts would be 2400/1920 gems (based on current prices - 2000 or 1600 gems for a pack of 5) but if you already have 2 mounts it would deduct 2/6th from the price and you'd pay 1,280. That could also be a solution for adding the beetle into existing. So people who are buying it for the first time pay for all 6, but people who already have 5 only pay for the beetle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inculpatus cedo.9234 Posted August 2, 2018 Share Posted August 2, 2018 But, would that work for skins that are only available, now, from the original random Mount License? Would that enable players to get those particular skins at a lower (possibly) price by circumventing the RNG? I mean, would ArenaNet find this a viable change to their marketing? They might not have an issue with the subsequent Mount Skins...I'm not sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tekoneiric.6817 Posted August 2, 2018 Author Share Posted August 2, 2018 > @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said: > That changes the nature of how those original skins are made available. If I spent 2-4k on 5-10 RNG licenses originally and that system were implemented, I'd be livid. I can't see ANet deciding to go that route, especially not after the current feedback. I'm livid that they locked these skins up in RNG or offer them for ridiculous prices. There is nothing micro about these transactions with their pricing. The difference with me is I was livid about the RNG locked up skins when it first dropped and I still am. The only think I can do is vote with my wallet and make suggestions. I'm not going to spend money to support a system I don't agree with. People who were livid about it when it first dropped have gotten used to it which is what ANet wanted so they can keep doing what they started out doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danikat.8537 Posted August 3, 2018 Share Posted August 3, 2018 > @"Inculpatus cedo.9234" said: > But, would that work for skins that are only available, now, from the original random Mount License? Would that enable players to get those particular skins at a lower (possibly) price by circumventing the RNG? I mean, would ArenaNet find this a viable change to their marketing? They might not have an issue with the subsequent Mount Skins...I'm not sure. Well at the moment the original licences are not available at all, so Anet are making nothing from them. I know what they said in Mike O'Brien's response to that controversy but I'll be extremely surprised if they bring them back without offering an alternative way to get them. It might be something totally different like adding them to the Black Lion Statuette offerings, but bringing them back with just the original RNG licence will do nothing but kick the whole controversy off all over again. But ignoring that for the moment I can't see how it would let players get them for a lower price. The original licences were 400 gems each, or 3,400 gems for 10 (340 gems each) or 9,600 for all 30 (320 gems each). 5 packs of mount skins have been sold for 2,000 gems 'normal' price, or discounted to 1,600. Which is 400 or 320 gems each. So if they sold a 6-pack of themed mounts for 2,400 or 1,920 gems it would be exactly the same price for each mount skin as the original licences. And you'd have to buy 6 at a time. The only difference is that instead of buying 6 licences and accepting whatever mounts you get you're buying a specific set of 6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inculpatus cedo.9234 Posted August 3, 2018 Share Posted August 3, 2018 Well, maybe...if they believe most players get the skin they desired within 6 purchases, or stop buying at or before 6 purchases. They may add those skins, separately, 1 or 2 at a time to the BL Statuette vendors. Who knows what the future may offer us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goettel.4389 Posted August 3, 2018 Share Posted August 3, 2018 "RNG mess" OP? Seeing armies of bought skins in game it looks like it's been a giant success, both for ANet and for players. Choice is great, and we're talking cosmetics here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoid.2568 Posted August 3, 2018 Share Posted August 3, 2018 Did they not already let us choose a skin for 1200 gems. Or what are you on about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zaklex.6308 Posted August 3, 2018 Share Posted August 3, 2018 > @"Cyninja.2954" said: > > @"SmirkDog.3160" said: > > "Vote with your wallet" does absolutely nothing unless you're spending your money. There's always those people that snatch up the new gem store items as soon as they're available and parade them through LA. Those people tell ANet that selling stuff at high prices and randomizing what you get when you make your purchase is financially beneficial to them. > > > > Meanwhile, me deciding I'm not going to buy anything from the gem store anymore does _nothing_ to change the state of things. "Vote with your wallet" is a farce, and used to trick people into thinking they're getting something done by doing nothing and not saying anything, when it's just used to do exactly that; get us to do nothing and say nothing. > > If enough consumers/customers purchase a product or service, then obviously the price point selected by the company was good. > > The fact that you might not be among the group which is okay with a price is insignificant to everyone else but you. Especially the company who should see no reason to drop their price only to accommodate customers who are less financially **WILLING** (unless you're unemployed it's whether you're willing to spend the money or not). > > Now if the price is to high and a vast majority of customers decides they are not going to purchase content/service, then the price will be lowered. Obviously that seems not to be the case for mount skins (which are purely cosmetic and optional). The only thing you can complain about is that you are not on par with the average money spending customers (aka you spend less money on aspects of the game others are willing to spend more on). Corrected this for you, people that are less financially capable would be unemployed and not the target audience anyways...if you'r employed then it's a matter of whether or not you're willing to spend your money on a game...doesn't mean you're incapable of doing so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tekoneiric.6817 Posted August 3, 2018 Author Share Posted August 3, 2018 There are ways ANet can make money and drop the RNG or at least offering a reasonable alternative. There are so many possible gem store offerings they haven't explored that people would jump on. Like that Dragon T-Shirt skin that isn't available anywhere. I'd pay gems for a T-Shirt, shorts and sneaker armor skin set. They could offer a waypoint license that after purchase makes all waypoints free jumps. If they improved the travel toy system they would find more of a market for them. They would be much more fun and useful if they converted it to a hero panel selected travel toy and added a keybind to enable/disable it manually. Have seamless transition from gliding to ground skimming with ones that have matching glider skins and travel toys. I'd like to see a Forged Glider travel toy that I could make the transition from gliding to skimming seamlessly. They could boost the travel speed to fast running pace and give the ability to go from travel toy to mount. They'd sell a lot more of them if they were more convenient to use. My point is that there is a lot more ways for them to make money without having to resort to RNG or price gouging on single items. The micro in micro-transations is about lots of smaller offerings rather than high priced ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drecien.4508 Posted August 4, 2018 Share Posted August 4, 2018 I have no problem supporting the game through gemstore purchases. The time and effort given on some things is well worth it and I show my appreciation with money. Some people will never like it. That's fine too. The latest moutfits license had 5 I really liked, but do I buy just a 5pack? Or spend more than the 15 pack price to ensure I get the ones I like? I went with a full 15 pack because why not? It's the best price for the options available. I ended up getting all five I wanted in the first 6 license. I'm still satisfied. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaiser.9873 Posted August 4, 2018 Share Posted August 4, 2018 > @"Trise.2865" said: > "Dear ArenaNet: > You're charging more than I want to pay for a thing that I want. Plz nerf." Hmmm....something something killed the goose of gold or something? 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