maddoctor.2738 Posted December 17, 2019 Share Posted December 17, 2019 > @"DesiRe.1348" said: > If you want to protest against their gemstore policy you are not allowed to purchase anything from it - not with money, not with gold. Because in the end, they still get the money. And they don't care whether they get it from Person A buying _and_ spending the gems or from Person B buying the gems, selling them for gold to Person A and then Person A is spending them on the gemstore. This isn't entirely true, they DO care if their items directly sell otherwise MO wouldn't insist on his post regarding gem prices about expensive items have a better impact on them even though they sell less copies. If they only cared about getting gem sales they wouldn't care about expensive vs not-expensive items. Also, they care about their monthly revenue, imagine if nobody bought gems with cash for an entire month, but only used gold to buy gems. Although they did get the money when someone in the past bought those gems, their monthly revenue will plummet. In the end they DO care about selling items for cash instead of gems Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DesiRe.1348 Posted December 17, 2019 Share Posted December 17, 2019 > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > @"DesiRe.1348" said: > > If you want to protest against their gemstore policy you are not allowed to purchase anything from it - not with money, not with gold. Because in the end, they still get the money. And they don't care whether they get it from Person A buying _and_ spending the gems or from Person B buying the gems, selling them for gold to Person A and then Person A is spending them on the gemstore. > > This isn't entirely true, they DO care if their items directly sell otherwise MO wouldn't insist on his post regarding gem prices about expensive items have a better impact on them even though they sell less copies. If they only cared about getting gem sales they wouldn't care about expensive vs not-expensive items. > Also, they care about their monthly revenue, imagine if nobody bought gems with cash for an entire month, but only used gold to buy gems. Although they did get the money when someone in the past bought those gems, their monthly revenue will plummet. In the end they DO care about selling items for cash instead of gems First of all I would like to say that we should disregard whatever Anet says about "what they care about". It's probably only money, but they always say "we care about you, the players", yet fiascos at the cost of their players keep happening. So I wouldn't rate too highly what MO said (though I would like to read that, do you have a link by chance?). Second of all I don't really see how "selling many cheaper items" vs. "selling fewer expensive items" has anything to do with this? There is plenty of factors that change the income Anet makes via gemstore sales, and yes, one of them is the aforementioned "cheap and many" vs. "fewer but more money!". It might be, that for Anet selling less but more expensive gemstore items has a positive effect on their revenue. Items bought with gems from IRL money or items bought with gems from gold, which where previously bought with IRL money does _not_ make a difference to them. It can't, just by pure logic. If you buy 800 gems for 10 bucks and buy directly off the gemstore, they make 10 bucks. If you buy 800 gems for 10 bucks, sell those 800 gems for 250g to me, and I then spent the 800 gems on the gemstore, they still make 10 bucks. It doesn't matter _financially_. Third of all, yes of course you can make up theoretical scenarios where suddenly no one buys gems with IRL money anymore and their revenue falls drastically. But that's not gonna happen. Because for every person that decides to only buy gems with gold instead of IRL money, the gold-price for gems will increase, since the demand goes up. So people get more gold for the same amount of gems. What happens next? Well, more people buy gems, because they can sell them very well. So you still end up with the same amount of gems bought from Anet (roughly). Whatever may be, by buying gems with gold instead of IRL money, you _still_ support Anet. If your mindset is to _not_ support Anet and their gemstore policy anymore, you also cannot buy any more gems with gold, because - well - in the end you _still_ support Anet's gemstore policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddoctor.2738 Posted December 17, 2019 Share Posted December 17, 2019 > @"DesiRe.1348" said: > though I would like to read that, do you have a link by chance? Here is a link: > What our data shows is that higher-priced flashy individual items can work, and lower-average-price-per-item bundles can work, but lower-priced individual items generally don’t generate meaningful revenue to support the game. I don't have the totals of course but I have the feeling that overall, across a year for example, many smaller items would net more income for Arenanet than selling highly priced -rare- skins. They price them higher because they want the money during that specific month that they release them. For example a character slot at 800 gems must've generated way way more revenue than all the expensive mount skins combined over the years. Yet they release expensive items (and say that cheap items don't generate revenue) which leads me to believe that's because cheaper items don't generate revenue **when** they need it, but over time. It's the same with buying gems with gold, it is revenue, but for Arenanet it's from a different month (or even year) depending on when exactly the gems were purchased. A company has monthly bills and require a constant income to work properly, meaning they can't "stop caring" about players buying gems with cash because someone a few months back bought some gems with cash. It's the -now- that matters, all the revenue they got in the previous month is gone when the month changes. Which is why it is very very important for them to get revenue every month, regardless of how well they did previously. My point of argument was with the "they don't care if you buy gems with gold or cash", because I think they do care, a lot, cash is more important to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mbelch.9028 Posted December 17, 2019 Share Posted December 17, 2019 > @"DesiRe.1348" said: > > @"Mbelch.9028" said: > > **Anet is never getting another dime of my money**, not unless they release a PvP expac. That said, the gem store cape was good enough that **I used some of my gold to get 500 gems and purchased it**. > > You _do_ realize how hypocritical that is, right? In the end, they still got their money. Because people like you, who buy gems with gold, exist, there is also people who buy gems from ArenaNet to convert them into gold themselves. So while you yourself didn't spend the money on Anet, someone else did _for_ you. In the end, they still got another dime of your money. > If you want to protest against their gemstore policy you are not allowed to purchase anything from it - not with money, not with gold. Because in the end, they still get the money. And they don't care whether they get it from Person A buying _and_ spending the gems or from Person B buying the gems, selling them for gold to Person A and then Person A is spending them on the gemstore. I understand this -- somewhat. There's already an abundance of gems on the marketplace. My converting gold for a few gems to buy the cape isn't making an impact on it, in my opinion. It does make an impact that I no longer spend $20-40 per month on gems like I used to when I was more happy with the game directionally. A sidenote is I'm not protesting the gemstore policy. I used to appreciate certain things being attainable via the gemstore, and I didn't even really mind RNG lootboxing. I just am not happy with the direction of the game, the support for PvP (none?) or WvW (less than none?), so I choose not to give any more of my money. By my calculation, they've already lost about $300-$500 in what I normally would have spent since I adopted this outlook. Not enough to make an impact, but certainly a statement on my end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pifil.5193 Posted December 17, 2019 Share Posted December 17, 2019 Can anyone tell me if the new cape sits better on asura than the previous one? That is, is it actually at their neck or is it in the middle of their back between their shoulderblades? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DesiRe.1348 Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > @"DesiRe.1348" said: > > though I would like to read that, do you have a link by chance? > > Here is a link: > > What our data shows is that higher-priced flashy individual items can work, and lower-average-price-per-item bundles can work, but lower-priced individual items generally don’t generate meaningful revenue to support the game. > > I don't have the totals of course but I have the feeling that overall, across a year for example, many smaller items would net more income for Arenanet than selling highly priced -rare- skins. They price them higher because they want the money during that specific month that they release them. For example a character slot at 800 gems must've generated way way more revenue than all the expensive mount skins combined over the years. Yet they release expensive items (and say that cheap items don't generate revenue) which leads me to believe that's because cheaper items don't generate revenue **when** they need it, but over time. > Okay this I feel like is just speculation, we don't know and honestly I don't think so, but it doesn't matter too much. > It's the same with buying gems with gold, it is revenue, but for Arenanet it's from a different month (or even year) depending on when exactly the gems were purchased. A company has monthly bills and require a constant income to work properly, meaning they can't "stop caring" about players buying gems with cash because someone a few months back bought some gems with cash. It's the -now- that matters, all the revenue they got in the previous month is gone when the month changes. Which is why it is very very important for them to get revenue every month, regardless of how well they did previously. > But you're operating under the assumption that there's huge fluctuations in gem purchases. I don't think that's the case at all, the playerbase is so big that - on average - you will have the same amount of gems bought to be converted into gold every month. A lot of players I would argue even buy the gems to _immediately_ turn them into gold, not months later. And besides, even if that weren't the case, at the same time you would have a very similar amount of people buying gems _now_ to spent them later just as there were people some time ago buying gems to spent them now. It's still stable solid income, it doesn't matter when the gems get bought/spent. Also, they care about quarterly numbers, not months. So even less fluctuation. They don't care about it, trust me.. everything you're doing is just trying to find a fitting hypothesis to make a meaningful difference between buying gems with gold or cash. And there's not. > My point of argument was with the "they don't care if you buy gems with gold or cash", because I think they do care, a lot, cash is more important to them. BUT THEY DO GET THE SAME AMOUNT CASH, WHETHER PEOPLE BUY THE GEMS WITH CASH OR FROM SOMEONE ELSE WITH GOLD :D:D. Come on man. It is also explained quite precisely and often in the thread you linked. It's really not hard to understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashantara.8731 Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 > @"killfil.3472" said: > I hope older backpacks will be revisited. They wrote that they won't, only new back items will contain the coloring feature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DesiRe.1348 Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 > @"Mbelch.9028" said: > > @"DesiRe.1348" said: > > > @"Mbelch.9028" said: > > > **Anet is never getting another dime of my money**, not unless they release a PvP expac. That said, the gem store cape was good enough that **I used some of my gold to get 500 gems and purchased it**. > > > > You _do_ realize how hypocritical that is, right? In the end, they still got their money. Because people like you, who buy gems with gold, exist, there is also people who buy gems from ArenaNet to convert them into gold themselves. So while you yourself didn't spend the money on Anet, someone else did _for_ you. In the end, they still got another dime of your money. > > If you want to protest against their gemstore policy you are not allowed to purchase anything from it - not with money, not with gold. Because in the end, they still get the money. And they don't care whether they get it from Person A buying _and_ spending the gems or from Person B buying the gems, selling them for gold to Person A and then Person A is spending them on the gemstore. > > I understand this -- somewhat. There's already an abundance of gems on the marketplace. My converting gold for a few gems to buy the cape isn't making an impact on it, in my opinion. > To be honest if anything there's an abundance of gold on the marketplace. With the introduction of build templates the gem price has heavily gone up and you get a lot more gold per gem (or rather less gems you need to spent per gold) than you used to. And it's not about your impact on the market, it's about hypocrisy. Same thing if a person decided to protest against mass animal farming and they still keep on eating meat 7 times a week, since they alone have "no impact on the market". > It does make an impact that I no longer spend $20-40 per month on gems like I used to when I was more happy with the game directionally. > > A sidenote is I'm not protesting the gemstore policy. I used to appreciate certain things being attainable via the gemstore, and I didn't even really mind RNG lootboxing. I just am not happy with the direction of the game, the support for PvP (none?) or WvW (less than none?), so I choose not to give any more of my money. > Okay good to know! But tbh the reason why is very arbitrary. > By my calculation, they've already lost about $300-$500 in what I normally would have spent since I adopted this outlook. Not enough to make an impact, but certainly a statement on my end. Yes, and thats good! But my point is, it doesn't matter if you - instead of the usual 20-40 bucks a month - now trade lets say gold for 400 gems each month, you could just as well still buy the 400 gems each month with money. There's no difference between buying them with money or with cash. What does make a difference is, if you generally tone down the amount of gems you buy each month; what method you do it with, doesn't matter at all. $20-40 a month for gems is like what, 3.2k gems? If you bought 3.2k gems with gold now instead each month, it's still the same thing to ArenaNet. Literally. If you only buy lets say 800 gems a month for X gold anymore? Good! If you buy only 800 gems a month for 10 bucks? Good, same thing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddoctor.2738 Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 > @"DesiRe.1348" said: > They don't care about it, trust me.. everything you're doing is just trying to find a fitting hypothesis to make a meaningful difference between buying gems with gold or cash. And there's not. But there is an actual difference between the two. When the game launched they created a massive pool of gems for the exchange to work, that pool had be rather large. They used to have gem rewards in high end PVP matches, you get gems from achievement rewards and of course the all extra gems when you buy collectors editions of the expansions. Gems are created from thin air, not only by buying them using the exchange (of course you have to sell those to the exchange for this to work), meaning those using gold to buy gems are occasionally buying gems that nobody paid actual money for (collector edition gems were part of a different deal). Saying that every time you buy gems with gold it's the same as buying them with money is false, you can't be sure where the gems you bought came from. How big is that number is anyone's guess but it's not zero that's for sure > $20-40 a month for gems is like what, 3.2k gems? If you bought 3.2k gems with gold now instead each month, it's still the same thing to ArenaNet. Literally. If that was the case then the exchange would have a flat conversion rate, just like when you buy gems with cash. Instead, how much gold you get from the exchange depends heavily on how many gems are available in the pool, the higher the amount of gems in the pool, the less gold you get from the exchange. If gold and cash were the same for the developers we wouldn't need that. I guess we'd have to disagree about getting gems with gold and cash being the same. In my ideal world we wouldn't need an exchange at all, just fairer gem prices, and maybe more in-game opportunities to get gems, but the exchange can't be removed or altered at this point. Not to mention all those that hate expansions, they'd also hate the disappearance of the exchange. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DesiRe.1348 Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > @"DesiRe.1348" said: > > They don't care about it, trust me.. everything you're doing is just trying to find a fitting hypothesis to make a meaningful difference between buying gems with gold or cash. And there's not. > > But there is an actual difference between the two. When the game launched they created a massive pool of gems for the exchange to work, that pool had be rather large. They **used** to have gem rewards in high end PVP matches, you get gems from achievement rewards and of course the all extra gems when you buy collectors editions of the expansions. Gems are created from thin air, not only by buying them using the exchange (of course you have to sell those to the exchange for this to work), meaning those using gold to buy gems are occasionally buying gems that nobody paid actual money for (collector edition gems were part of a different deal). Saying that every time you buy gems with gold it's the same as buying them with money is false, you can't be sure where the gems you bought came from. How big is that number is anyone's guess but it's not zero that's for sure > Used to yea, those days are gone and its not relevant anymore. The gems from collectors edition are also paid for in cash, and the gems from achievement are nothing compared to how many gems people buy, so you can leave that out of the equation. While I do have to admit I did not think of those gems, I strongly believe they are close to irrelevant. 400 gems for 5k achievement points, while the top AP hunters have just above 40k AP is very neglectable I suppose. Edit: Where did you get that they created a massive gem pool at launch? I find that hard to believe. > > $20-40 a month for gems is like what, 3.2k gems? If you bought 3.2k gems with gold now instead each month, it's still the same thing to ArenaNet. Literally. > > If that was the case then the exchange would have a flat conversion rate, just like when you buy gems with cash. Instead, how much gold you get from the exchange depends heavily on how many gems are available in the pool, the higher the amount of gems in the pool, the less gold you get from the exchange. If gold and cash were the same for the developers we wouldn't need that. > What? No why would it have a flat conversion rate? The conversion rate is decided by the market, by us players. It does depend on the amount of gems available, but not **only**. That's the supply. It _also_ depends _very heavily_ on how many people want gems, e.g. what I mentioned with the release of build templates. That's the demand. Even _if_ the gem pool _would_ be constant (which it, of course, is not), we would still have a changing conversion rate based on the players demands. If Anet releases something cool on the gemstore that a lot of people want, more people will convert their gold to buy gems from the (in this thought experiment constant) gem pool and the conversion rate will change (in making gems more expensive to buy with gold). As an approximation you can assume this: Buying 800 gems with cash -> 10 bucks for Anet's pocket Buying 800 gems for 300 gold -> 10 bucks for Anet's pocket Buying 800 gems for 10000 gold -> 10 bucks for Anet's pocket Buying 800 gems for 2 gold -> still 10 bucks for Anet's pocket Now, I'll be fair and admit you have a point about the gems that no money was ever paid for, so lets say instead of 10 bucks for Anet's pocket it's only 9.95 bucks, because a couple of gems will not be cash-bought-gems. But honestly? That's very neglectable. > I guess we'd have to disagree about getting gems with gold and cash being the same. In my ideal world we wouldn't need an exchange at all, just fairer gem prices, and maybe more in-game opportunities to get gems, but the exchange can't be removed or altered at this point. Not to mention all those that hate expansions, they'd also hate the disappearance of the exchange. What would removing the exchange be any good for though? Again, to Arenanet it won't make a difference. They will still have the same amount of gems bought. There will be more people buying gems (read: more bought gems), since they can't buy them for gold anymore, but there will be _just as many_ people not buying gems anymore (read: equally less bought gems), since they can't sell them for gold. And that's an inherent fact with the self regulatory exchange market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddoctor.2738 Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 > @"DesiRe.1348" said: > The gems from collectors edition are also paid for in cash Not really the same. Ultimate edition comes with 4000 gems (A €50 Value) while the full package costs €79.99, the Deluxe Edition, that has everything in the Ultimate edition with the exception of the gems, is at €54.99, meaning you get those gems at half price, compared to getting them from the in-game store. More gems for less money, meaning a lot are created out of thin air. > Buying 800 gems with cash -> 10 bucks for Anet's pocket > Buying 800 gems for 300 gold -> 10 bucks for Anet's pocket > Buying 800 gems for 10000 gold -> 10 bucks for Anet's pocket > Buying 800 gems for 2 gold -> still 10 bucks for Anet's pocket Anet gets money (for the same gems) twice now? Buying gems with gold doesn't bring any money to Anet's pocket, the money is already there. Converting those gems, or using them to buy something from the gem store, makes no difference. Every time you buy gems with gold, Anet doesn't get any kind of money > What would removing the exchange be any good for though? Better gem store prices and probably gem prices too. Right now the gem prices for items have to account for the gold conversion, without that in the equation then gem prices could change. Furthermore, in a lot of games companies make discounts for their currency, in Guild Wars 2 they really can't because that would upset the balance of the exchange. For example, if they gave gift vouchers that provided 25% discount for you next gem purchase (something other games do) then it would be helpful to players supporting the game with their money. But it would cause trouble with the gem exchange as the price of gems wouldn't be constant and, depending on how easy those vouchers would be to get, cause a lot of trouble in the exchange. That's a topic for another discussion though, or none, since the gem exchange can't be removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kharmin.7683 Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > Anet gets money (for the same gems) twice now? Buying gems with gold doesn't bring any money to Anet's pocket, the money is already there. Converting those gems, or using them to buy something from the gem store, makes no difference. Every time you buy gems with gold, Anet doesn't get any kind of money Thank you! I have been arguing this forever but many don't seem to comprehend this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DesiRe.1348 Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > @"DesiRe.1348" said: > > The gems from collectors edition are also paid for in cash > > Not really the same. Ultimate edition comes with 4000 gems (A €50 Value) while the full package costs €79.99, the Deluxe Edition, that has everything in the Ultimate edition with the exception of the gems, is at €54.99, meaning you get those gems at half price, compared to getting them from the in-game store. More gems for less money, meaning a lot are created out of thin air. > No, they aren't. The prices they set up for the different editions are completely arbitrary. I could argue and say they don't get the gems at half price, but the rest of the game's edition cheaper and the gems at the same price. I can just turn your argument the other way around. And then you would have the gems for the same amount of money, meaning nothing is created out of thin air. Moot argument. > > Buying 800 gems with cash -> 10 bucks for Anet's pocket > > Buying 800 gems for 300 gold -> 10 bucks for Anet's pocket > > Buying 800 gems for 10000 gold -> 10 bucks for Anet's pocket > > Buying 800 gems for 2 gold -> still 10 bucks for Anet's pocket > > Anet gets money (for the same gems) twice now? Buying gems with gold doesn't bring any money to Anet's pocket, the money is already there. Converting those gems, or using them to buy something from the gem store, makes no difference. Every time you buy gems with gold, Anet doesn't get any kind of money > What? Are you serious? Of course they don't get the money twice. I never said that, and it would contradict me to my point, since then Anet would rather have everyone only convert gems to gold so they could score some bucks twice. No, of course not. But the 800 gems were still bought nonetheless at an earlier point. So they still got 10 bucks for it at some point. So for all of these scenarios above, for the 800 gems used for whatever purpose, they STILL GOT TEN BUCKS EACH TIME. That's my whole point. It doesn't matter whether people go through a middle-man. For every 800 gems spent on the gemstore they got 10 bucks (excluding ofc the gems you get from achievements) at one point in history. Whether you got the gems 5 minutes prior to your purchase with cash, or whether you got the gems with your gold. The gems were still purchased at some point for 10 bucks. > > What would removing the exchange be any good for though? > > Better gem store prices and probably gem prices too. Right now the gem prices for items have to account for the gold conversion, without that in the equation then gem prices could change. Furthermore, in a lot of games companies make discounts for their currency, in Guild Wars 2 they really can't because that would upset the balance of the exchange. For example, if they gave gift vouchers that provided 25% discount for you next gem purchase (something other games do) then it would be helpful to players supporting the game with their money. But it would cause trouble with the gem exchange as the price of gems wouldn't be constant and, depending on how easy those vouchers would be to get, cause a lot of trouble in the exchange. > If you think the gem prices would be better if there was no gold exchange you have not been paying attention to Anet's latest policies. And no, the gem prices for items do not have to account for the gold conversion, the gold conversion happens and changes according to the gem prices for items.. since it is player driven, not Anet driven. But they can make discounts for the products, which they do, which is essentially the same thing for the customer. What is it to you if the gems you buy for an item are 20% off and you buy the item for the same price, or if they just give you 20% off the item directly instead? Same outcome for the customer. Again, moot argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DesiRe.1348 Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 > @"kharmin.7683" said: > > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > > Anet gets money (for the same gems) twice now? Buying gems with gold doesn't bring any money to Anet's pocket, the money is already there. Converting those gems, or using them to buy something from the gem store, makes no difference. Every time you buy gems with gold, Anet doesn't get any kind of money > Thank you! I have been arguing this forever but many don't seem to comprehend this point. No one ever believes Anet gets money twice. _You_ don't seem to comprehend that the gems you buy with gold don't just appear. They were still bought, by someone else, at some other time. But nonetheless, the gems you recieve were paid for in cash, to Anet. So when someone buys 800 gems with his ingame gold, Anet still - at some point before - got 10 bucks for it. Just like they do when you buy the 800 gems with 10 bucks yourself.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddoctor.2738 Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 > @"DesiRe.1348" said: > I can just turn your argument the other way around. Which means nothing as my argument still stands. Anet expects the 4k gems to be acquired with 25 because there is no other point in getting the ultimate edition. But even so, do you know how the editions were priced? > But the 800 gems were still bought nonetheless at an earlier point. Which means buying gems with gold doesn't earn them any money, at all. The money was already there to begin with, meaning no matter how many times you buy gems with gold, Anet will never make any money. Buying gems with gold doesn't result in Anet making any money, in any way or form. You telling others to stop paying gold for gems as well as cash for gems is pointless, the only part that counts for Anet is not paying cash for gems, gold for gems is irrelevant to them. As they get no money from it. > But they can make discounts for the products, which they do, which is essentially the same thing for the customer. It's the same if you actually want to buy those products that are on discount and you are available at the point they have the discounts available. A gem discount means you can buy the gems and then buy anything you wish at any future point with that discount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DesiRe.1348 Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > @"DesiRe.1348" said: > > I can just turn your argument the other way around. > > Which means nothing as my argument still stands. Anet expects the 4k gems to be acquired with 25 because there is no other point in getting the ultimate edition. But even so, do you know how the editions were priced? > Which means my argument also still stands. > > But the 800 gems were still bought nonetheless at an earlier point. > > Which means buying gems with gold doesn't earn them any money, at all. The money was already there to begin with, meaning no matter how many times you buy gems with gold, Anet will never make any money. Buying gems with gold doesn't result in Anet making any money, in any way or form. You telling others to stop paying gold for gems as well as cash for gems is pointless, the only part that counts for Anet is not paying cash for gems, gold for gems is irrelevant to them. As they get no money from it. > Of course they don't get the money of _that particular_ transaction. But they still got the same money for the same amount of gems.... I'll make it very simple now: If **everyone** stopped purchasing gems to spent them on the gemstore, and **everyone** who buys gems **only** exchanges these gems for gold, and **everyone** bought things from the gemstore **only** from gems they bought with **ingame gold**, do you think Anets revenue on gem purchases would go down? >! No, of course it would not!!!!! Since at the end of the day, they still make the same amount of gem sales, the same amount of cash, the same amount of items sold on the gemstore..>! > > But they can make discounts for the products, which they do, which is essentially the same thing for the customer. > > It's the same if you actually want to buy those products that are on discount and you are available at the point they have the discounts available. A gem discount means you can buy the gems and then buy anything you wish at any future point with that discount. True. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DesiRe.1348 Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 Once you buy gems with cash from ArenaNet they don't care what you do with them. They got their cash. They don't care if you buy something from the gemstore with it, they don't care if you sell the gems for gold to person B, and they don't care what person B does with those gems. Whether he spends it on the gemstore or trades them into gold once more. _They. Don't. Care._ They got their money for the gems, whatever happens after that does **not** matter, at all. Period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddoctor.2738 Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 > @"DesiRe.1348" said: > Of course they don't get the money of that particular transaction. But they still got the same money for the same amount of gems.... You didn't give the correct example. If everyone stops buying gems to use them in the exchange and instead only to buy items directly, would buying gems with gold give money to Anet? For a time yes, out of all the old gem exchanges, until those run out and the exchange itself explodes and becomes useless. I'm willing to bet that the initial pool of gems hasn't been exhausted yet, due to how gems enter it and exit all the time. > Once you buy gems with cash from ArenaNet they don't care what you do with them. Actually they do care what you do with them, a lot, that's how a cash shop works. They care about what you do with your gems once you buy them, in order to make informed decisions on what to do in the future and how to move the store forward. Armor skins weren't profitable, mount skins are very profitable. Mail carriers used to be a thing, now they are not. Chairs were added, gliders were added and a lot of other things. Saying that they do not care what you do with your gems and that it doesn't matter invalidates the entire idea of an online cash shop. Which was I posted MO's link where he specifically discusses which items are good for revenue and which are not. If all they cared was the number of gems sold then we would still see Armor sets and mail carriers and no expensive mount skins. Notice: that's what I said in my initial post: > This isn't entirely true, they DO care if their items directly sell otherwise MO wouldn't insist on his post regarding gem prices about expensive items have a better impact on them even though they sell less copies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kharmin.7683 Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 > @"DesiRe.1348" said: > > @"kharmin.7683" said: > > > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > > > > Anet gets money (for the same gems) twice now? Buying gems with gold doesn't bring any money to Anet's pocket, the money is already there. Converting those gems, or using them to buy something from the gem store, makes no difference. Every time you buy gems with gold, Anet doesn't get any kind of money > > Thank you! I have been arguing this forever but many don't seem to comprehend this point. > > No one ever believes Anet gets money twice. _You_ don't seem to comprehend that the gems you buy with gold don't just appear. They were still bought, by someone else, at some other time. But nonetheless, the gems you recieve were paid for in cash, to Anet. So when someone buys 800 gems with his ingame gold, Anet still - at some point before - got 10 bucks for it. Just like they do when you buy the 800 gems with 10 bucks yourself.. Yeah, nice job assuming what I comprehend. I KNOW that they were bought by someone else. When I convert gold -> gems, my account receives gems that someone else purchased. Some argue that by me doing so, Anet is still getting money from MY transaction when the initial gem purchase by a third person has already been completed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DesiRe.1348 Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > @"DesiRe.1348" said: > > Of course they don't get the money of that particular transaction. But they still got the same money for the same amount of gems.... > > You didn't give the correct example. If everyone stops buying gems to use them in the exchange and instead only to buy items directly, would buying gems with gold give money to Anet? For a time yes, out of all the old gem exchanges, until those run out and the exchange itself explodes and becomes useless. I'm willing to bet that the initial pool of gems hasn't been exhausted yet, due to how gems enter it and exit all the time. > I still want a source on that, you keep saying that. I don't believe there was a "huge gem pool" Anet brought into the game "for free". And in your example, if no one buys gems to convert them into gold, you also _can't_ buy gems with your gold anymore, since there is no supply left anymore.. they don't just magically appear for you to buy with gold! > > Once you buy gems with cash from ArenaNet they don't care what you do with them. > > Actually they do care what you do with them, a lot, that's how a cash shop works. They care about what you do with your gems once you buy them, in order to make informed decisions on what to do in the future and how to move the store forward. Armor skins weren't profitable, mount skins are very profitable. Mail carriers used to be a thing, now they are not. Chairs were added, gliders were added and a lot of other things. > What you are talking about is a completely different aspect and has nothing to do with anything I'm discussing. That's marketing and fixing your product line in needs of the customer, but has nothing to do with the model of "you pay us for gems". What you are talking about is how Anet wants to adress future sells, so they can - well - sell more things. However, it does not change the fact that once they got the money from you for the gems, they don't care about _that and following transactions_ anymore. They got the money. To make it simple: imagine the game does not exist anymore in 2 weeks, the servers get shut down. Then they don't care about what you do with the gems you have left, or the gems you might buy with gold. They are already paid for, Anet got the money. The only reason they care _now_ is, because they want people to buy more things in the future. That is independent of what I'm talking about.. > Saying that they do not care what you do with your gems and that it doesn't matter invalidates the entire idea of an online cash shop. Which was I posted MO's link where he specifically discusses which items are good for revenue and which are not. If all they cared was the number of gems sold then we would still see Armor sets and mail carriers and no expensive mount skins. Again, this has nothing to do with the initial topic. It's a completely different aspect of marketing and selling. The conflicted nature of selling many things cheaper vs. more expensive things in lesser quantities is not a new take on marketing, and - again - has nothing to do with this discussion. > Notice: that's what I said in my initial post: > > This isn't entirely true, they DO care if their items directly sell otherwise MO wouldn't insist on his post regarding gem prices about expensive items have a better impact on them even though they sell less copies. As I can see you fail to understand anything I say here, your way of thinking limits how I can explain things to you. I've traid, on a very simple level, but to no avail. That's why I will stop this discussion from my side. If you really believe there is a big difference between buying stuff from the gemstore with gems from cash, or with gems from gold, and you really believe that Anet does not or has not at any point generated money if you buy things from the gemstore with gems you got by exchanging them for your gold, go ahead. You're wrong nevertheless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DesiRe.1348 Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 > @"kharmin.7683" said: > > @"DesiRe.1348" said: > > > @"kharmin.7683" said: > > > > @"maddoctor.2738" said: > > > > > > > Anet gets money (for the same gems) twice now? Buying gems with gold doesn't bring any money to Anet's pocket, the money is already there. Converting those gems, or using them to buy something from the gem store, makes no difference. Every time you buy gems with gold, Anet doesn't get any kind of money > > > Thank you! I have been arguing this forever but many don't seem to comprehend this point. > > > > No one ever believes Anet gets money twice. _You_ don't seem to comprehend that the gems you buy with gold don't just appear. They were still bought, by someone else, at some other time. But nonetheless, the gems you recieve were paid for in cash, to Anet. So when someone buys 800 gems with his ingame gold, Anet still - at some point before - got 10 bucks for it. Just like they do when you buy the 800 gems with 10 bucks yourself.. > > Yeah, nice job assuming what I comprehend. I KNOW that they were bought by someone else. When I convert gold -> gems, my account receives gems that someone else purchased. Some argue that by me doing so, Anet is still getting money from MY transaction when the initial gem purchase by a third person has already been completed. To be fair, you also assumed "many" (in this case including me) don't comprehend this, sooo.. No one is saying Anet earns money directly from _your_ transaction. I was just arguing that, even if you pay for gemstore stuff with gems you bought with your gold, you still support Anet's gemstore policy, you still support them. Because as long as you keep buying gems with gold, other people keep buying gems with IRL money to sell them for gold, and therefore Anet makes profit. So, by extension, you still support Anet financially by buying gems with gold. Since, if you and everyone else stopped buying gems with ingame gold, no one would be buying gems with cash anymore to sell said gems for ingame gold. And thus, Anet would earn less money. It's the same as arguing "I don't support animal abuse anymore, thats why I don't buy meat at the grocery store anymore" and instead you have someone else go to the grocery store, buy meat, and you buy the meat off them for let's say chocolate. You're still supporting the meat industry, even though you don't buy the meat from the grocery store anymore... (I don't want a discussion about veganism or anything, I eat meat on my own, it's just an example) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mbelch.9028 Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 > @"DesiRe.1348" said: > > @"Mbelch.9028" said: > > > @"DesiRe.1348" said: > > > > @"Mbelch.9028" said: > > > > **Anet is never getting another dime of my money**, not unless they release a PvP expac. That said, the gem store cape was good enough that **I used some of my gold to get 500 gems and purchased it**. > > > > > > You _do_ realize how hypocritical that is, right? In the end, they still got their money. Because people like you, who buy gems with gold, exist, there is also people who buy gems from ArenaNet to convert them into gold themselves. So while you yourself didn't spend the money on Anet, someone else did _for_ you. In the end, they still got another dime of your money. > > > If you want to protest against their gemstore policy you are not allowed to purchase anything from it - not with money, not with gold. Because in the end, they still get the money. And they don't care whether they get it from Person A buying _and_ spending the gems or from Person B buying the gems, selling them for gold to Person A and then Person A is spending them on the gemstore. > > > > I understand this -- somewhat. There's already an abundance of gems on the marketplace. My converting gold for a few gems to buy the cape isn't making an impact on it, in my opinion. > > > To be honest if anything there's an abundance of gold on the marketplace. With the introduction of build templates the gem price has heavily gone up and you get a lot more gold per gem (or rather less gems you need to spent per gold) than you used to. And it's not about your impact on the market, it's about hypocrisy. Same thing if a person decided to protest against mass animal farming and they still keep on eating meat 7 times a week, since they alone have "no impact on the market". > > It does make an impact that I no longer spend $20-40 per month on gems like I used to when I was more happy with the game directionally. > > > > A sidenote is I'm not protesting the gemstore policy. I used to appreciate certain things being attainable via the gemstore, and I didn't even really mind RNG lootboxing. I just am not happy with the direction of the game, the support for PvP (none?) or WvW (less than none?), so I choose not to give any more of my money. > > > Okay good to know! But tbh the reason why is very arbitrary. > > > By my calculation, they've already lost about $300-$500 in what I normally would have spent since I adopted this outlook. Not enough to make an impact, but certainly a statement on my end. > > Yes, and thats good! But my point is, it doesn't matter if you - instead of the usual 20-40 bucks a month - now trade lets say gold for 400 gems each month, you could just as well still buy the 400 gems each month with money. There's no difference between buying them with money or with cash. What does make a difference is, if you generally tone down the amount of gems you buy each month; what method you do it with, doesn't matter at all. > $20-40 a month for gems is like what, 3.2k gems? If you bought 3.2k gems with gold now instead each month, it's still the same thing to ArenaNet. Literally. > If you only buy lets say 800 gems a month for X gold anymore? Good! If you buy only 800 gems a month for 10 bucks? Good, same thing! > It does make a difference, though. I'm not giving them further dollars. It doesn't matter to me if somebody else does — I am not, and neither is anybody in my circle of former PvPers. I can't control other people, I can only control myself. Gems already on the marketplace are dollars already in Anet's pocket, so it very clearly isn't the same as creating new never-before-in-existence gems, putting new dollars in their pocket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DesiRe.1348 Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 > @"Mbelch.9028" said: > > @"DesiRe.1348" said: > > > @"Mbelch.9028" said: > > > > @"DesiRe.1348" said: > > > > > @"Mbelch.9028" said: > > > > > **Anet is never getting another dime of my money**, not unless they release a PvP expac. That said, the gem store cape was good enough that **I used some of my gold to get 500 gems and purchased it**. > > > > > > > > You _do_ realize how hypocritical that is, right? In the end, they still got their money. Because people like you, who buy gems with gold, exist, there is also people who buy gems from ArenaNet to convert them into gold themselves. So while you yourself didn't spend the money on Anet, someone else did _for_ you. In the end, they still got another dime of your money. > > > > If you want to protest against their gemstore policy you are not allowed to purchase anything from it - not with money, not with gold. Because in the end, they still get the money. And they don't care whether they get it from Person A buying _and_ spending the gems or from Person B buying the gems, selling them for gold to Person A and then Person A is spending them on the gemstore. > > > > > > I understand this -- somewhat. There's already an abundance of gems on the marketplace. My converting gold for a few gems to buy the cape isn't making an impact on it, in my opinion. > > > > > To be honest if anything there's an abundance of gold on the marketplace. With the introduction of build templates the gem price has heavily gone up and you get a lot more gold per gem (or rather less gems you need to spent per gold) than you used to. And it's not about your impact on the market, it's about hypocrisy. Same thing if a person decided to protest against mass animal farming and they still keep on eating meat 7 times a week, since they alone have "no impact on the market". > > > It does make an impact that I no longer spend $20-40 per month on gems like I used to when I was more happy with the game directionally. > > > > > > A sidenote is I'm not protesting the gemstore policy. I used to appreciate certain things being attainable via the gemstore, and I didn't even really mind RNG lootboxing. I just am not happy with the direction of the game, the support for PvP (none?) or WvW (less than none?), so I choose not to give any more of my money. > > > > > Okay good to know! But tbh the reason why is very arbitrary. > > > > > By my calculation, they've already lost about $300-$500 in what I normally would have spent since I adopted this outlook. Not enough to make an impact, but certainly a statement on my end. > > > > Yes, and thats good! But my point is, it doesn't matter if you - instead of the usual 20-40 bucks a month - now trade lets say gold for 400 gems each month, you could just as well still buy the 400 gems each month with money. There's no difference between buying them with money or with cash. What does make a difference is, if you generally tone down the amount of gems you buy each month; what method you do it with, doesn't matter at all. > > $20-40 a month for gems is like what, 3.2k gems? If you bought 3.2k gems with gold now instead each month, it's still the same thing to ArenaNet. Literally. > > If you only buy lets say 800 gems a month for X gold anymore? Good! If you buy only 800 gems a month for 10 bucks? Good, same thing! > > > > It does make a difference, though. I'm not giving them further dollars. It doesn't matter to me if somebody else does — I am not, and neither is anybody in my circle of former PvPers. **I can't control other people**, I can only control myself. Gems already on the marketplace are dollars already in Anet's pocket, so it very clearly isn't the same as creating new never-before-in-existence gems, putting new dollars in their pocket. But by buying the gems with gold you give other players incentive to buy more gems so they can sell them for your gold.... So you still support Anet's gem sales, and support them financially. It's like arguing it's okay for the environment to buy a new car every month through a middleman. You know, they are already built, and you don't pay the manufacturing company, so you don't support the environmental pollution.. Come on, can you think one step further than that please? If more people decide to not spent cash on gems, but buy them with gold, more _other_ people will buy more gems with cash because they can sell them well. So it does create "new never-before-in-existance gems", because the demand for gems via gold exchange goes up, so the supply goes up, so more people buy more gems and voila, there you go. New dollars in their pocket. So if that's what you want, not give Anet more money, you shouldn't buy gems with gold either, thats all I'm saying. Because over a corner or two, you still increase their gem sales. Edit: You _can_ control people though, that is the point. By buying gems with gold you incentivize other people to buy more gems, because they can convert them to gold. If everyone stops buying gems with gold, people with stop buying gems, because they can't convert them to gold anymore. _That's_ how you control people, because that's how basic money economics work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddoctor.2738 Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 > @"DesiRe.1348" said: > If you really believe there is a big difference between buying stuff from the gemstore with gems from cash, or with gems from gold, and you really believe that Anet does not or has not at any point generated money if you buy things from the gemstore with gems you got by exchanging them for your gold, go ahead. You're wrong nevertheless. What I believe is that they do care if someone buys things with cash over with gold and they track their gem store sales and their revenue during a quarter to understand which items affected it the most. It does make a difference in their decision making for the future of the game and the items they will bring on the gem store. I'm also certain they can deduce if a new item is popular by seeing how many bought gems with cash to buy it directly, compared to those using the exchange and buying it with gold. And that's it. > I don't believe there was a "huge gem pool" Anet brought into the game "for free". When the gem->gold exchange gets higher, it means more players are buying gems with gold, than players sell gems for gold, that's how the exchange works. For example let's say there are 1000 gems in the pool and each gem goes for 10 gold, if someone buys 200 of those gems, then the next 1800 gems will be valued at 12 gold each. You probably know this but I had to reiterate as an example. Now, if you check the gem price over the years: https://www.gw2spidy.com/gem You'll notice that, with some fluctuations, it is going up every quarter, if there was no initial, very very large, pool of gems and all the gems in the exchange were bought by players and then sold on it, then we'd run out of gems after so many years of going constantly upwards. As Arenanet economist John Smith said there is a finite number of gems on the exchange, which is obvious otherwise the whole thing wouldn't work. But if it constantly goes up it means more gems are being bought with gold rather than sold to the exchange, so the gem pool will dry up eventually Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mbelch.9028 Posted December 18, 2019 Share Posted December 18, 2019 > @"DesiRe.1348" said: > > @"Mbelch.9028" said: > > > @"DesiRe.1348" said: > > > > @"Mbelch.9028" said: > > > > > @"DesiRe.1348" said: > > > > > > @"Mbelch.9028" said: > > > > > > **Anet is never getting another dime of my money**, not unless they release a PvP expac. That said, the gem store cape was good enough that **I used some of my gold to get 500 gems and purchased it**. > > > > > > > > > > You _do_ realize how hypocritical that is, right? In the end, they still got their money. Because people like you, who buy gems with gold, exist, there is also people who buy gems from ArenaNet to convert them into gold themselves. So while you yourself didn't spend the money on Anet, someone else did _for_ you. In the end, they still got another dime of your money. > > > > > If you want to protest against their gemstore policy you are not allowed to purchase anything from it - not with money, not with gold. Because in the end, they still get the money. And they don't care whether they get it from Person A buying _and_ spending the gems or from Person B buying the gems, selling them for gold to Person A and then Person A is spending them on the gemstore. > > > > > > > > I understand this -- somewhat. There's already an abundance of gems on the marketplace. My converting gold for a few gems to buy the cape isn't making an impact on it, in my opinion. > > > > > > > To be honest if anything there's an abundance of gold on the marketplace. With the introduction of build templates the gem price has heavily gone up and you get a lot more gold per gem (or rather less gems you need to spent per gold) than you used to. And it's not about your impact on the market, it's about hypocrisy. Same thing if a person decided to protest against mass animal farming and they still keep on eating meat 7 times a week, since they alone have "no impact on the market". > > > > It does make an impact that I no longer spend $20-40 per month on gems like I used to when I was more happy with the game directionally. > > > > > > > > A sidenote is I'm not protesting the gemstore policy. I used to appreciate certain things being attainable via the gemstore, and I didn't even really mind RNG lootboxing. I just am not happy with the direction of the game, the support for PvP (none?) or WvW (less than none?), so I choose not to give any more of my money. > > > > > > > Okay good to know! But tbh the reason why is very arbitrary. > > > > > > > By my calculation, they've already lost about $300-$500 in what I normally would have spent since I adopted this outlook. Not enough to make an impact, but certainly a statement on my end. > > > > > > Yes, and thats good! But my point is, it doesn't matter if you - instead of the usual 20-40 bucks a month - now trade lets say gold for 400 gems each month, you could just as well still buy the 400 gems each month with money. There's no difference between buying them with money or with cash. What does make a difference is, if you generally tone down the amount of gems you buy each month; what method you do it with, doesn't matter at all. > > > $20-40 a month for gems is like what, 3.2k gems? If you bought 3.2k gems with gold now instead each month, it's still the same thing to ArenaNet. Literally. > > > If you only buy lets say 800 gems a month for X gold anymore? Good! If you buy only 800 gems a month for 10 bucks? Good, same thing! > > > > > > > It does make a difference, though. I'm not giving them further dollars. It doesn't matter to me if somebody else does — I am not, and neither is anybody in my circle of former PvPers. **I can't control other people**, I can only control myself. Gems already on the marketplace are dollars already in Anet's pocket, so it very clearly isn't the same as creating new never-before-in-existence gems, putting new dollars in their pocket. > > But by buying the gems with gold you give other players incentive to buy more gems so they can sell them for your gold.... So you still support Anet's gem sales, and support them financially. It's like arguing it's okay for the environment to buy a new car every month through a middleman. You know, they are already built, and you don't pay the manufacturing company, so you don't support the environmental pollution.. Come on, can you think one step further than that please? > If more people decide to not spent cash on gems, but buy them with gold, more _other_ people will buy more gems with cash because they can sell them well. So it does create "new never-before-in-existance gems", because the demand for gems via gold exchange goes up, so the supply goes up, so more people buy more gems and voila, there you go. New dollars in their pocket. So if that's what you want, not give Anet more money, you shouldn't buy gems with gold either, thats all I'm saying. Because over a corner or two, you still increase their gem sales. > > Edit: You _can_ control people though, that is the point. By buying gems with gold you incentivize other people to buy more gems, because they can convert them to gold. If everyone stops buying gems with gold, people with stop buying gems, because they can't convert them to gold anymore. _That's_ how you control people, because that's how basic money economics work. What would you prefer in this totally unrelated scenario? A customer buying a hamburger from you right now. OR A customer buying half of an old hamburger that you sold days/months/years ago from somebody who took it out in a doggie bag? My point is... $10 new dollars is more attractive than no new dollars. But also, get off it — I have a stance. I keep my stance. I'm not giving them any more of my dollars, and I'm fine with that even if you aren't lol. Good day! 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