Gehenna.3625 Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 > @"Lilyanna.9361" said: > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > @"Lilyanna.9361" said: > > > Legislators do not care about pixels. > > > > > > Stop trying to put the government in every single little thing you people have personal issues with. > > They do not care about pixels but they do care about money that's made with lootboxes especially when it resembles gambling. The EU is already researching this whole business now with all gambling committees together to come with a common approach towards this even though individual countries have already taken action against certain games they looked into. And yes that includes cosmetics. > > > > You can probably thank EA for bringing this nefarious side of the gaming business to light with the big scandal around BF2. But in the end black lion chests are lootboxes. So by the time the legislation comes, GW2 might have to do away with them as well. I think it's a good thing because RNG lootboxes that you can spend real money on are gambling and they're only getting away with it because it's not specifically mentioned in the law. But that's because this is a new variant that the law was unaware of. > > > > As much as I think that ArenaNet have been more reasonable in their approach, these Black Lion Chests are morally broken and it's because companies justify just about anything because it's not expressly or specifically forbidden that people have grown to accept a lot of things that morally are not acceptable. RNG lootboxes are simply gambling and should be forbidden to minors. So they either get rid of them to keep their T rating or make this game for mature audiences. > > > > The only way you can disagree with me is to be just like the companies and justify it because it's not expressly forbidden. Well, cheating on your partner is also not against the law but that doesn't make it ok either. > > > > The government will not take action unless they find out that: there is a moral issue that affects especially minors (which voters might get upset about) or if they are missing out on tax money. I think both might apply here. Companies need to learn to self-regulate but they're too greedy to see it. Frankly it's one of the main blemishes on ArenaNet's business practices. I don't even think that they really thought about it because it's become the norm. But for all their concern about morality and family values, this is one that they are failing hard. They will worry if people use f-bombs but they have no problem offering gambling mechanisms to minors. > > > > Something doesn't add up there. That's my view on it. Agree or disagree as you will. > > Like someone said before. > America doesn't care. > We don't see it as an issue because at the end of the day it is the individual's choice. > > Just seeing people begging for the legislatures to step in tells me the lack of control or discipline. But it doesn't hurt me none. And the little ones I look after don't go on a supposed spending spree like parents and guardians like to default to as an excuse for the government to step in. > > This era is government dependent. All of our problems now are being solved because people simply want to yell and yell and yell and yell until everyone else's enjoyment tanks. They want everything to conform to THEIR moral standards. A lot of innocent things have been faded out because of these mindsets. I honestly could care less about BLCs because they simply don't effect me, but people seem to act like these skins are their lifeblood > > Maybe I simply don't get these attachments to virtual things. > Like I said, it's not about the pixels but the money involved and the business practices. I agree with you that they don't care about pixels especially in the USA...except if it's pixels of nekkid boobs of course, then they're evil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gateless gate.8406 Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > @"gateless gate.8406" said: > > Repeat after me: You are not entitled to cosmetic skins. > > Repeat after me: If a person is willing to spend money on something but just doesn't like RNG, they're not entitled because they are still willing to pay for it. I think you're confusing the two uses of entitled. I'm not calling or insinuating that this person has an "entitled" state of mind (the use of the term that's sprung up in recent years). I'm saying they are literally not entitled to have -- that is, owed -- cosmetic skins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gateless gate.8406 Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 > @"mortrialus.3062" said: > > @"gateless gate.8406" said: > > Repeat after me: You are not entitled to cosmetic skins. > > Cash shop is a whole different ballgame than something like raids or legendaries. Do you mind elaborating? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloodstealer.5978 Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 > @"Zaklex.6308" said: > > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said: > > > @"Zaklex.6308" said: > > > > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said: > > > > There are only two ways that ANet will stop putting desirable items in loot boxes are: legislation stops them from doing so; or people stop buying the keys. It seems unlikely at this point that the latter is ever going to happen. > > > > > > Neither will happen as long as ArenaNet is headquartered in the United States, it's already been defined in the Federal Register what gambling is...and by U.S. definition as long as you win something it's not gambling, so the only solution is for people to stop buying keys(and that won't happen, I'd buy some myself, but since I'm working for free at the moment can't do that[damned Government shutdown]) > > > > Laws, and the definitions that they contain, are written on paper (or digital media these days), not graven in stone. Both the law and the definitions could be changed. Legislators could redefine gambling to include loot box schemes. They could create laws specific to loot boxes, bypassing the issue of a gambling definition. They could even say that virtual goods are worth nothing, and that thus both desired prize and undesired consolation prize are just so much chaff. Or, they could do nothing. > > > > I certainly don't know what lawmakers will eventually do on this issue. Neither do you. > > Legislators can do a lot, but in this case it's not a law but a regulation...which can still be changed, but I highly doubt they'll waste their time on it...not with how much money they'd probably end up getting in donations from companies that profit from them. Besides, I think our definition is the correct one, if you are not guaranteed to win something(which is the case with betting, slot machines, poker, horse races., etc., etc.) then you're gambling, but if you're guaranteed to get something, just not the top prize then you're not gambling, just taking a risk...obviously though it's they affect on peoples brains that is the bigger issue, which just goes to show how little will power most individuals have over their own brain. GW2 is bigger than just muricans… Belgium has done it, UK looking at gambling laws.. other countries will undoubtedly follow. I also recall some movement in the states regarding these issues.. was it Hawaii or something that kicked it all off? BTW sorry to hear your being affected by some silly wall politics, hope it gets resolved soon and paychecks resume. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zaklex.6308 Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 > @"Ayakaru.6583" said: > > @"Voltekka.2375" said: > > Hydra staff was on blc. > > Exalted gloves were on blc. > > Svanir gloves were on blc. > > Dragon longbow was on dlc > > Desert throne was on blc. > > How is this any different, this time? > > They keep doing it, and we’ll complain they keep doing it. > > -anet makes a nice skin > -playerbase wants to buy said skin > -anet puts it in a loot > -playerbase doesn’t want to roll lootboxes, they just want to pay anet the money and receive the item > -anet ignores playerbase and makes more nice skins, and put nice skins into loot boxes > -playerbase create another thread on the topic > -the perpetual cycle continues > > In the end, to me it feels like “anet doesn’t want my money. If anet wanted my money, they would’ve sold it to me. > Instead, they put it somewhere no one wants to go.” Correction, they put somewhere you and some others don't want to go, but plenty of people do otherwise they wouldn't do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lambent.6375 Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 It's not gated around randomness, the guaranteed alternative just requires patience, diligence, and money. Money = Purchasing enough keys to obtain 60 Black Lion Statues, or using gold for a future Black Lion exclusive chest on the tp. Diligence = Being sure to check the Black Lion Statue merchant regularly for when the shoulders appear on there. Patience = Waiting for the item to appear on the Black Lion merchant, or waiting until the next Black Lion exclusive chest is released. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eloc Freidon.5692 Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 You'll just have to wait for it to be available in the Statuette vendor for a ridiculous amount. > @"gateless gate.8406" said: > Repeat after me: You are not entitled to cosmetic skins. Repeat after me: Entitled isn't a negative word and shouldn't be used to shame people who don't agree with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eloc Freidon.5692 Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 > @"Zaklex.6308" said: > > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said: > > There are only two ways that ANet will stop putting desirable items in loot boxes are: legislation stops them from doing so; or people stop buying the keys. It seems unlikely at this point that the latter is ever going to happen. > > Neither will happen as long as ArenaNet is headquartered in the United States, it's already been defined in the Federal Register what gambling is...and by U.S. definition as long as you win something it's not gambling, so the only solution is for people to stop buying keys(and that won't happen, I'd buy some myself, but since I'm working for free at the moment can't do that[damned Government shutdown]) I guess the games at casinos aren't considered gambling anymore because they can just make it that they reward at least a penny per spin. Great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gehenna.3625 Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 > @"gateless gate.8406" said: > > @"Gehenna.3625" said: > > > @"gateless gate.8406" said: > > > Repeat after me: You are not entitled to cosmetic skins. > > > > Repeat after me: If a person is willing to spend money on something but just doesn't like RNG, they're not entitled because they are still willing to pay for it. > > I think you're confusing the two uses of entitled. I'm not calling or insinuating that this person has an "entitled" state of mind (the use of the term that's sprung up in recent years). I'm saying they are literally not entitled to have -- that is, owed -- cosmetic skins. Except the OP doesn't say anything that would indicate that they feel they're owed this. So your comment just makes no sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashantara.8731 Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 Do we have to have the same discussion over and over again with each new BLC skin release? Just wait until it becomes available via Black Lion Statuettes, which you should have enough of when you have unsuccessfully opened chests to get the skin. It's just a matter of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zealex.9410 Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 > @"Ashantara.8731" said: > Do we have to have the same discussion over and over again with each new BLC skin release? > > Just wait until it becomes available via Black Lion Statuettes, which you should have enough of when you have unsuccessfully opened chests to get the skin. It's just a matter of time. I think its beneficial to the players and the studio to give feedback on possible issues that exist with the game. If some feedback keeps repeating it simply means the problem hasnt been adressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danikat.8537 Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 > @"asterix.9614" said: > They have definitely decreased the drop rate by a lot for the newer stuff, spent over 5000 gems trying to get the shoulder skin, got 2 super rares (the cheap weapon skins), I am going to stop. maybe they will go to statuette for a reasonable amount (heck anet might increase from the 60 for the rare stuff)..... I got the new greatsword skin from the previous chest with my 3rd key. It wasn't the account bound drop I wanted and it's useless to me, but it's as rare as the others and according to my 'data' quite easy to get. Of course even with my attempts and yours combined we don't have enough data to make any kind of reliable conclusion, especially since most the data (what we did get) is currently missing. If you really want to see what the drop rates are there are people who track this stuff, using large enough sample sizes to get reliable results (meaning hundreds or thousands of chests opened). > @"Zaklex.6308" said: > > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said: > > There are only two ways that ANet will stop putting desirable items in loot boxes are: legislation stops them from doing so; or people stop buying the keys. It seems unlikely at this point that the latter is ever going to happen. > > Neither will happen as long as ArenaNet is headquartered in the United States, it's already been defined in the Federal Register what gambling is...and by U.S. definition as long as you win something it's not gambling, so the only solution is for people to stop buying keys(and that won't happen, I'd buy some myself, but since I'm working for free at the moment can't do that[damned Government shutdown]) Arenanet does not operate only in the USA and is therefore not only subject to US law. This is why they have additional legal documentation for residents of other countries (including an entirely different refund policy for Germany). It's also why they've blocked residents of Belgium from buying Black Lion Keys - it's not some kind of cute little protest on Anet's part - it's actually a legal requirement which they have to comply with because they sell their game in Belgium. Also if US law cannot ever be changed once it's written you guys have far bigger problems than RNG boxes in games. Sooner or later most laws need to be updated because they no longer reflect the reality of the situation (and I say this as a citizen of a county with some current laws so old they're technically not written in the same language and some whose origins actually pre-date anyone writing down the law at all). Of course it's usually not a quick or easy process (and probably shouldn't be) but it needs to be possible or eventually the law will become impractical, useless or even oppressive. > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said: > > @"Zaklex.6308" said: > > > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said: > > > There are only two ways that ANet will stop putting desirable items in loot boxes are: legislation stops them from doing so; or people stop buying the keys. It seems unlikely at this point that the latter is ever going to happen. > > > > Neither will happen as long as ArenaNet is headquartered in the United States, it's already been defined in the Federal Register what gambling is...and by U.S. definition as long as you win something it's not gambling, so the only solution is for people to stop buying keys(and that won't happen, I'd buy some myself, but since I'm working for free at the moment can't do that[damned Government shutdown]) > > Laws, and the definitions that they contain, are written on paper (or digital media these days), not graven in stone. Both the law and the definitions could be changed. Legislators could redefine gambling to include loot box schemes. They could create laws specific to loot boxes, bypassing the issue of a gambling definition. They could even say that virtual goods are worth nothing, and that thus both desired prize and undesired consolation prize are just so much chaff. Or, they could do nothing. > > I certainly don't know what lawmakers will eventually do on this issue. Neither do you. Even if the law is carved in stone that doesn't make it permanent. [The Rosetta Stone](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosetta_Stone "The Rosetta Stone") is a record of a new law carved in stone in 3 different languages. It still exists, and (after extensive study) we know what it says, but that doesn't mean the people of Egypt still recognise the divinity of King Ptolemy V. Even at the time it's doubtful it actually achieved much given there was an on-going rebellion underway. Laws are essentially memes (under the original definition of the word) - ideas which perpetuate by being shared between people. All it really takes for them to come into existence is for enough people to accept that the law exists, and all it takes for them to effectively cease to exist is for enough people to ignore it. Writing them down is an effective way of recording exactly what the law is to ensure more people know about it (and that it stays consistent) but that's all. > @"Ayakaru.6583" said: > > @"Voltekka.2375" said: > > Hydra staff was on blc. > > Exalted gloves were on blc. > > Svanir gloves were on blc. > > Dragon longbow was on dlc > > Desert throne was on blc. > > How is this any different, this time? > > They keep doing it, and we’ll complain they keep doing it. > > -anet makes a nice skin > -playerbase wants to buy said skin > -anet puts it in a loot > -playerbase doesn’t want to roll lootboxes, they just want to pay anet the money and receive the item > -anet ignores playerbase and makes more nice skins, and put nice skins into loot boxes > -playerbase create another thread on the topic > -the perpetual cycle continues > > In the end, to me it feels like “anet doesn’t want my money. If anet wanted my money, they would’ve sold it to me. > Instead, they put it somewhere no one wants to go.” You missed the part where some people will spend significant amount of money buying keys before deciding they don't want to try their luck with loot boxes, and may well do the same again when a new set of items is added to the boxes, and that some people will buy keys regardless because they enjoy the gambling aspect. So you're half right - Anet don't want your money. They want other people's money, often because those people will spend far more on keys chasing that 1 item than they would if it was in the gem store. The cycle will only stop when that behaviour stops (or is stopped by someone else, like legislators). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zaklex.6308 Posted January 25, 2019 Share Posted January 25, 2019 > @"Eloc Freidon.5692" said: > > @"Zaklex.6308" said: > > > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said: > > > There are only two ways that ANet will stop putting desirable items in loot boxes are: legislation stops them from doing so; or people stop buying the keys. It seems unlikely at this point that the latter is ever going to happen. > > > > Neither will happen as long as ArenaNet is headquartered in the United States, it's already been defined in the Federal Register what gambling is...and by U.S. definition as long as you win something it's not gambling, so the only solution is for people to stop buying keys(and that won't happen, I'd buy some myself, but since I'm working for free at the moment can't do that[damned Government shutdown]) > > I guess the games at casinos aren't considered gambling anymore because they can just make it that they reward at least a penny per spin. Great. Technically they could do that...I'm not sure how corporate would like it, but you'd have to readjust the odds all across the board. All I was doing is pointing out the definition of gambling in the United States Federal Register, anyone with a browser and search bar can look it up...that's how I know what it is, didn't take rocket science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UfoCoffee.2084 Posted January 25, 2019 Share Posted January 25, 2019 > @"Rewan.8490" said: > Hi there, > as a fashion-wars aficionado i find it quite sad that the cool new Exalted shoulder skin is gated behind a random BLC drop AND is account bound. I don't mind spending a couple of gems for a cool skin, but this? Just to get people to buy black lion keys a bunch and not even getting the shoulders? Not very nice in my opinion. Love the skin though. Would be nice having it. So what if it is? They have to make money you know or else you won't have a game to play fashion wars in at all. Support the game instead of complaining. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UfoCoffee.2084 Posted January 25, 2019 Share Posted January 25, 2019 > @"NecroSummonsMors.7816" said: > DOnt worry you wont get the skins even if open black lion chests...4k gems in the toilet Got mine on second key. Rng is rng. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashantara.8731 Posted January 25, 2019 Share Posted January 25, 2019 > @"zealex.9410" said: > I think its beneficial to the players and the studio to give feedback on possible issues that exist with the game. While I agree, it is not benefitial to have the exact same discussion over and over again with each new BLC release. P.S. I admit committing this "crime" myself on occasions, but I hope I have been doing better since. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkeyspit.3965 Posted January 25, 2019 Share Posted January 25, 2019 It's pretty simple for me: I will never, ever, ever purchase a BL key. I'm happy to support ANET and the gemstore with other purchases, but I will not gamble resources because the very model for gambling insists that more players have to lose than those that win. I have no problem spending 15mins a week getting a free key, and I'm always happy to get a key from doing a map complete vs. receiving another crummy transmute charge, but I will not waste my gems, no matter how many players tell me "I got my 'x' after my 2nd or 3rd key". Well, that's good news for that player, but doesn't apply to anyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Illconceived Was Na.9781 Posted January 25, 2019 Share Posted January 25, 2019 > @"Bloodstealer.5978" said: > Belgium has done it, UK looking at gambling laws.. other countries will undoubtedly follow. That's not clear. There's some momentum based on the Belgian example, but it's apparently lost steam, compared to last year. A 'declaration' was made by a group of regulators in September 2018; it's not clear if it's had any specific impact other than generate publicity. (Side note: I don't mean to suggest that's nothing. Clearly, publicity is going to be a necessary component of any evolution of views on the topic. I meant that no one has chosen to act with the same speed as Brussels did.) > I also recall some movement in the states regarding these issues.. was it Hawaii or something that kicked it all off? A single state legislator from Hawaii (Chris Lee) promised to introduce legislation. I thought that was going nowhere (politicians say a lot of things). The bill was presented, along with three other pieces of legislation that included loot box regulation components; none of these proposals made it "out of committee." Only one US regulator signed the 2018/September declaration, from Washington state (although small, it's notable because of the presence of Amazon & Microsoft). Notably, no one at the US Federal level signed on, and likely they would have to, since this would fall under "online gaming," not "gaming taking place within a state's borders." A bill was introduced in Washington state (SB 6266) & one in Minnesota (HF 4460) in April. Neither seems to have gone anywhere. tl;dr I don't think it's fair to say that "other countries will undoubtedly follow." I think it's more accurate to say that in a year's time, the landscape for loot boxes will look different; it's far too soon to predict in what ways. ##### Various Articles Regarding Lootboxes * [Legal Status of Lootboxes Around the World (PC World)](https://www.pcgamer.com/the-legal-status-of-loot-boxes-around-the-world-and-whats-next/) (tl;dr jury still out) * [Federal Trade Commission (US) (Polygon): What's Next?](https://www.polygon.com/2018/11/29/18118164/ftc-loot-box-investigation-legal-analysis) (tl;dr FTC said it will investigate, but they haven't taken even the first step. More importantly: the current administration is reluctant to add any regulations at all) * [15 Countries & One US State Team Up (Ars Technica)](https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2018/09/multinational-regulators-join-together-to-fight-gambling-in-video-games/) (tl;dr this was the September 2018 'declaration' -- spot checking, I personally didn't find any follow ups, but I confess to stopping after 3 searches; I didn't check all 18 names) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mewcifer.5198 Posted January 25, 2019 Share Posted January 25, 2019 I like when anet makes blc items also available for straight up purchase. They should do it more often. It's nice to have a chance at something from keys as I enjoy opening blcs, but if there is something I *really* want I like the option to just straight up buy it if I am not getting lucky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloodstealer.5978 Posted January 26, 2019 Share Posted January 26, 2019 > @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said: > > @"Bloodstealer.5978" said: > > Belgium has done it, UK looking at gambling laws.. other countries will undoubtedly follow. > That's not clear. There's some momentum based on the Belgian example, but it's apparently lost steam, compared to last year. A 'declaration' was made by a group of regulators in September 2018; it's not clear if it's had any specific impact other than generate publicity. > > > I also recall some movement in the states regarding these issues.. was it Hawaii or something that kicked it all off? > A single state legislator from Hawaii (Chris Lee) promised to introduce legislation. I thought that was going nowhere (politicians say a lot of things). The bill was presented, along with three other pieces of legislation that included loot box regulation components; none of these proposals made it "out of committee." He did not, however, originally sign up with the so-called declaration (although a regulator from a different state, Washington, did so). > > A bill was introduced in Washington state (SB 6266) & one in Minnesota (HF 4460) in April. Neither seems to have gone anywhere. > > > > I don't think it's fair to say that "other countries will undoubtedly follow." I think it's more accurate to say that in a year's time, the landscape for loot boxes will look different; it's far too soon to predict in what ways. > > ##### Various Articles Regarding Lootboxes > > * [Legal Status of Lootboxes Around the World (PC World)](https://www.pcgamer.com/the-legal-status-of-loot-boxes-around-the-world-and-whats-next/) (tl;dr jury still out) > * [Federal Trade Commission (US) (Polygon): What's Next?](https://www.polygon.com/2018/11/29/18118164/ftc-loot-box-investigation-legal-analysis) (tl;dr FTC said it will investigate, but they haven't taken even the first step. More importantly: the current administration is reluctant to add any regulations at all) > * [15 Countries & One US State Team Up (Ars Technica)](https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2018/09/multinational-regulators-join-together-to-fight-gambling-in-video-games/) (tl;dr this was the September 2018 'declaration' -- spot checking, I personally didn't find any follow ups, but I confess to stopping after 3 searches; I didn't check all 18 names) > > UK is already talking with Gambling / addiction institutions. Last month in event gambling advertising was taken offscreen.. a small gesture from those businesses as they are all to aware the government is now looking seriously into the issues. There have been some pretty distasteful stats released concerning underage gambling in the UK.. and something does need to change imo. Laws are one thing, getting business to step up and take greater responsibility is another, especially in this day an age when there are so many youngsters with a mobile, tablet etc at their every minute disposal - and yes parents need to shoulder some of that responsibility to help safeguard their kids, I know I do. That said, I never said change would happen overnight but no smoke without fire and other EU countries are equally as concerned. Hats off to Belgium for stepping up I say. Don't get me wrong I believe ANET are much better than most when it comes to loot boxes and they have already shown us they are prepared to listen and offer specific purchase options for those not liken to things like the mount box gambles. If I am honest I have never been totally convinced GW2 loot boxes are a gamble.. I always get something back and sometimes more than I expected... but yeah I guess if you go full throttle into loot boxes expecting to get the one thing, then your setting yourself up for disappointment, at least now we have vendors that offer many of those items for a price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arheundel.6451 Posted January 26, 2019 Share Posted January 26, 2019 Players are so entitled these days.....just spent 1600 gems and got nothing..I buy gems in bulk regularly and I do that to get gold as I don't have time to farm for it in game, the shoulder is simply an enticing item drop from BLC and nobody forces you to buy it; be glad that you pay no money to remain competitive in this game and there are plenty of shoulder armour going around for "free"....**Buy gems if you want to support the game** but remember nobody here owns you anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celsith.2753 Posted January 26, 2019 Share Posted January 26, 2019 > @"gateless gate.8406" said: > Repeat after me: You are not entitled to cosmetic skins. But he is entitled to point out he's not willing to spend in this particular way but would be willing to do so if they were available through straight purchase. This is the type of feedback that is absolutely useful for a business when deciding their practices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rasimir.6239 Posted January 26, 2019 Share Posted January 26, 2019 > @"zealex.9410" said: > If some feedback keeps repeating it simply means the problem hasnt been adressed. Or it could mean ANet has decided that it's not a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syrus.2174 Posted January 26, 2019 Share Posted January 26, 2019 I always get the feeling of Anet not wanting my money due to how long it takes (or took) for some items to reappear in the shop. Why not just make them always available? I'm willing to spend that money, but I can't because the item(s) I can't be bought for another x weeks ... or months even. At some point I pretty much give up on it, or just get, for example, armor that I like better anyway. With the Black Lion Chests it's even worse. I once bought keys, and I have to say, it is more than not worth it. The chance to get something decent is so low, the amount of gems for a few keys makes it a gamble not worth the cost. Only once, the first time I opened a chest after returning to the game, funnily enough, I got a nice item - the Feathers of the Zephyr. Today I will have 27 keys, mostly from map exploration and story runs, none of them bought. But every time I look into the chest I feel like, I would only use them, if there was an item, or better yet two, that I REALLY wanted. And then I'm still quite certain, I'd not get it. I'm really not much into RL money gambling, wouldn't mind if the EU finally went ahead and stomped down on this in games. On the other hand, there are items - like the shoulders - that I would buy, if it wasn't a gamble. Pay 400 gems (that's 5 €, mind you!) for a nice pair of shoulders? Expensive, but I'd still do it, when I want them. It's in the chest you say? No, thank you. So the question is, does it make more money to Anet, to have people gamble on keys (fewer people spending more), or would having things available for buy with more people spending money (probably?, less per person) the more profitable choice? Knowing our dear business people, they have calculated through that thoroughly, which means, the problem lies with the people who spend a lot of money on keys, on gambling essentially. In other words, I would welcome a ban on "lootboxes" and the rampant reallife money gambling that's taken a hold of gaming nowadays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linken.6345 Posted January 26, 2019 Share Posted January 26, 2019 > @"Syrus.2174" said: > I always get the feeling of Anet not wanting my money due to how long it takes (or took) for some items to reappear in the shop. Why not just make them always available? I'm willing to spend that money, but I can't because the item(s) I can't be bought for another x weeks ... or months even. At some point I pretty much give up on it, or just get, for example, armor that I like better anyway. > > With the Black Lion Chests it's even worse. I once bought keys, and I have to say, it is more than not worth it. The chance to get something decent is so low, the amount of gems for a few keys makes it a gamble not worth the cost. Only once, the first time I opened a chest after returning to the game, funnily enough, I got a nice item - the Feathers of the Zephyr. > > Today I will have 27 keys, mostly from map exploration and story runs, none of them bought. But every time I look into the chest I feel like, I would only use them, if there was an item, or better yet two, that I REALLY wanted. And then I'm still quite certain, I'd not get it. I'm really not much into RL money gambling, wouldn't mind if the EU finally went ahead and stomped down on this in games. On the other hand, there are items - like the shoulders - that I would buy, if it wasn't a gamble. Pay 400 gems (that's 5 €, mind you!) for a nice pair of shoulders? Expensive, but I'd still do it, when I want them. It's in the chest you say? No, thank you. > > So the question is, does it make more money to Anet, to have people gamble on keys (fewer people spending more), or would having things available for buy with more people spending money (probably?, less per person) the more profitable choice? > Knowing our dear business people, they have calculated through that thoroughly, which means, the problem lies with the people who spend a lot of money on keys, on gambling essentially. > > In other words, I would welcome a ban on "lootboxes" and the rampant reallife money gambling that's taken a hold of gaming nowadays. Yea lets ban lootboxes and start paying 100 dollars for a standard edition expansion code and 25 bucks for each living story episode instead. 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