1300 Gems for 3 Pieces of an Armor Set

[Hyper Cutter.9376]

> @Oglaf.1074 said:

> It is overpriced as all kitten and I've no idea what Anet were thinking. The cynic in me fears that they are testing the waters for how a later pricehike of skins in general would go over with their playerbase... Like if 1300 Gems for an incomplete armour set is happily gobbled down by the players, we'll see it being phased in as the new standard eventually.

>

> I hope I'm wrong.

There is literally nothing new about this. Standalone skins have always been in this price range and they've released partial sets before.

[Fenom.9457]

I don't mind the prices or them making a full set and selling it individually. But I wish they would realize adding standalone or sold separately leg or chest armors wouldn't end the fucking world! We have almost double the helmets, shoulders, and gloves as chest and legs. At least theyre doing boots more often

[Fenom.9457]

> @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> * ANet gave us a choice: armor sets via in-game achievement or via gem shop; we chose in-game.

> * 1300 gems actually gets us 9 skins, which is less than 150 gems/skin. 500 gems gets us 3 skins, which is 167 gems/skin. Those are well within precedent costs of older skins.

>

> I'm not saying the OP has to like the way ANet is doling out new skins; I only ask that the OP take the time to understand the context first.

 

 

I didn't recall the original situation. If anet really only gave us the two choices, it IS their fault because I (and many more) would have opted for both gladly, and instead of outfits drop the armor weight concept, or don't stick to it with every single set

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

> @Fenom.9457 said:

> > @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> > * ANet gave us a choice: armor sets via in-game achievement or via gem shop; we chose in-game.

> > * 1300 gems actually gets us 9 skins, which is less than 150 gems/skin. 500 gems gets us 3 skins, which is 167 gems/skin. Those are well within precedent costs of older skins.

> >

> > I'm not saying the OP has to like the way ANet is doling out new skins; I only ask that the OP take the time to understand the context first.

>

>

> I didn't recall the original situation. If anet really only gave us the two choices, it IS their fault because I (and many more) would have opted for both gladly, and instead of outfits drop the armor weight concept, or don't stick to it with every single set

 

We were never going to get the choice of "no outfits" or "both in-game and gem shop full armor sets." We also aren't going to get to choose "no armor weights." ANet made a choice long before launch that seemed like a good idea at the time (to make feature-rich armor, with variable colors, lots of moving parts affected by combat, ambient conditions, ...) that ends up requiring ~9 months to fully implement a new armor set.

 

They sound as if they have been kicking themselves in the proverbial backside for ages about this, but even if they completely redesigned armor, we wouldn't see the results for ages & ages.

 

Again, none of us have to like the fact that we'll almost certainly never get as many new armor skins as we'd reasonably expect from a 5-year old game. But given as ANet is making the best of a bad situation, we can choose to accept it (and make suggestions that take these limitations into account) or not accept it and keep criticizing ANet for the symptoms of the root issue, and get grump as nothing changes in the direction we'd hope.

[Nikal.4921]

I think these items are a bit too pricey as well. I think the least Anet could do is knock down the price of the 3-pack for those who previously purchased the gloves and/or shoulders, before the 3-pack was available.

[Ashen.2907]

> @Atonement.8021 said:

> > @Ashen.2907 said:

> > ANet pulled back from putting armor sets in the gemstore in response to player request. Sure not everyone agreed with the requests, but they were there. Partial sets in the gemstore are a compromise between those desiring armor sets in the gemstore and those preferring otherwise.

> >

> > Not a perfect solution, but compromises are rarely perfect.

>

> Sorry but that doesn't match up with what I remember them saying. In fact I specifically remember them saying outfits were easier to implement than individual armour skins, or at least that was the key reason stated.

>

> As for the wider discussion I do agree with the OP it is steep, but people will pay for it so Anet won't care. It will be the same for mount skins whatever they decide to charge for them.

>

> I do lament the fact so many of the best skins go into the gem store, but I guess this is just a side effect of their financial model and the fact they know they can get away with it.

 

I never said that outfits were not easier to implement than individual armor skins. But Crystin Cox, during LS2, took leadership of a team specifically created to improve in-game rewards after years of player requests for armor sets to be earned in game rather than purchased in the gemstore. Among her first actions was to move armor sets to being earned in game leaving outfits for the gemstore.

[Drecien.4508]

They released several new sets of armor with POF and you don't have to pony up gems! Spearmarshal, Bounty hunter, Warbeast, Funerary. But I guess y'all want more outfits.

[Iason Evan.3806]

> @Drecien.4508 said:

> They released several new sets of armor with POF and you don't have to pony up gems! Spearmarshal, Bounty hunter, Warbeast, Funerary. But I guess y'all want more outfits.

 

Did you even read the title? I'm talking about how three pieces of an incomplete set for 1300 gems is overpriced in my opinion and I'd like to see that change.

But to your off topic point you missed that they added Elonian as well and Spearmarshal is just fancy Elonian even though the versions of those sets in GW1 were totally different.

 

There's a quality issue I have with PoF. Also a quantity issue. Doesn't matter if anyone agrees or not. I left this for ArenaNet to read.

[Zenith.7301]

> @Rhanoa.3960 said:

> > @Malediktus.9250 said:

> > yes, 1300 gems = 16,25€. PoF costed 30€, so these 3 armor pieces cost as much as half an expansion

> >

> > The gemshop prices are outrageously expensive for what you get in this game. And this is for stuff you can outright buy. Black lion chest exclusives can easily cost you 50€ a pop with average luck.

>

> How is even an arguement?

> This is almost like a monthly subscription an optional feature to make any purchases in the Gem Store rather than being forced to.

> If I wanted to be a cheap skate I wouldn't purchase anything aside from the core game & Xpacs.

 

Not almost, MORE than a monthly subcription. And the difference between a sub game and a F2P one like this one is that the prestige items in GW2 are all gold/RNG gated unlike subscription games which give you the item from participating in relevant raid content like FFXIV or WoW providing legendaries with no massive gold costs that take many, many months to grind.

 

In this game barring legendary armor from raids, there's not a single barrier other than whipping out your credit card to getting a legendary weapon. The credit card ot playing trading post baron is the most effective way to get prestige items in this game.

 

No amount on a credit card will buy you a legendary in WoW or FFXIV. You have to do the high end combat content and challenges to get the prestige item.

[Ardid.7203]

I would love to buy the new pieces, but sadly they don't match any of my characters.

[hellsqueen.3045]

> @"Iason Evan.3806" said:

> > @RoseofGilead.8907 said:

> > > @Wintermute.5408 said:

> > > For all the skimpy female armor, they still don't do female boots with high heels...

> >

> > We have the Phalanx heavy boots, which are ridiculous, thigh-high "boots" with heels.

>

> They can have all the skimpy boots they want in the gem shop or earnable. Doesn't mean we should pay 1300 gems for them in 3 piece sets. Does no one else think the 1300 gem 3 piece set is over-priced or am I a lone crazed Asura raving wildly alone in the wilderness? Are those two things mutually exclusive?

 

I bought it because of the special effects on it. The armor sets in the past are just skins, no special day and night effects.

Sure it could be a little cheaper but I was paying for unique effects.

[Rhanoa.3960]

> @Zenith.7301 said:

> > @Rhanoa.3960 said:

> > > @Malediktus.9250 said:

> > > yes, 1300 gems = 16,25€. PoF costed 30€, so these 3 armor pieces cost as much as half an expansion

> > >

> > > The gemshop prices are outrageously expensive for what you get in this game. And this is for stuff you can outright buy. Black lion chest exclusives can easily cost you 50€ a pop with average luck.

> >

> > How is even an arguement?

> > This is almost like a monthly subscription an optional feature to make any purchases in the Gem Store rather than being forced to.

> > If I wanted to be a cheap skate I wouldn't purchase anything aside from the core game & Xpacs.

>

> Not almost, MORE than a monthly subcription. And the difference between a sub game and a F2P one like this one is that the prestige items in GW2 are all gold/RNG gated unlike subscription games which give you the item from participating in relevant raid content like FFXIV or WoW providing legendaries with no massive gold costs that take many, many months to grind.

>

> In this game barring legendary armor from raids, there's not a single barrier other than whipping out your credit card to getting a legendary weapon. The credit card ot playing trading post baron is the most effective way to get prestige items in this game.

>

> No amount on a credit card will buy you a legendary in WoW or FFXIV. You have to do the high end combat content and challenges to get the prestige item.

 

Every games has their strengths and weakness.

 

**RNG** is very strong in WOW, unless they recently changed in the last 4 months, they were pretty much handing out Legendaries like candy, if you were one of the luck ones you had more than what you needed. If you were unlucky you maybe had one or none at all.

 

FFXIV is very HEAVILY **GATED**! Unless you whip out your credit card to skip content and max a class. In order for you to advance you were forced to unlock certain features with the game that is actually available in most MMOS. This was painful for me as I really hate crafting.

 

Using your Credit Card in GW2 doesn't give you an edge or makes anyone a better player.

This game is only F2P if YOU choose to be. Last time I checked I purchased all three releases which makes it B2P for me.

[Behellagh.1468]

Well, yes and no. Since the three pieces can be used for any weight and a standard one weight armor set of 6 pieces is 800 gems, that would be 800 x 3 / 2 or 1200 gems for 3 universal weight pieces. 1300 gems for armor pieces with dynamic effects isn't bad.

[hellsqueen.3045]

> @Behellagh.1468 said:

> Well, yes and no. Since the three pieces can be used for any weight and a standard one weight armor set of 6 pieces is 800 gems, that would be 800 x 3 / 2 or 1200 gems for 3 universal weight pieces. 1300 gems for armor pieces with dynamic effects isn't bad.

 

This is a good point. It is three armor pieces that work on all 3 weight classes which makes it 9 pieces with special day/night effects.