Should Arena Net Revisit Gliders with Back Items and make them Dyable?

[kharmin.7683]

> @"Pifil.5193" said:

> > @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > Would you rather have them go back and work on old things, or create new ones?

>

> There's no reason that they'd have to go all one way or the other.

>

> I'd like them to rework the backpacks for gliders that can be dyed and only those ones while producing new ones. Maybe update one old one for every new one they add to the store.

 

I understand your proposed scenario, but that doesn't answer my question. My question was, given limited resources (as we don't know how many people are on the team that works on these), would you like for them to focus on working on the old things or move forward with creating new ones?

[Pifil.5193]

> @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > @"Pifil.5193" said:

> > > @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > > Would you rather have them go back and work on old things, or create new ones?

> >

> > There's no reason that they'd have to go all one way or the other.

> >

> > I'd like them to rework the backpacks for gliders that can be dyed and only those ones while producing new ones. Maybe update one old one for every new one they add to the store.

>

> I understand your proposed scenario, but that doesn't answer my question. My question was, given limited resources (as we don't know how many people are on the team that works on these), would you like for them to focus on working on the old things or move forward with creating new ones?

 

That's a false dilemma. In reality it's not a matter of them only being able to do one or the other, they could do both. Produce fewer new ones while also reworking the limited number of glider backpacks already in the game.

[kharmin.7683]

> @"Pifil.5193" said:

> > @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > > @"Pifil.5193" said:

> > > > @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > > > Would you rather have them go back and work on old things, or create new ones?

> > >

> > > There's no reason that they'd have to go all one way or the other.

> > >

> > > I'd like them to rework the backpacks for gliders that can be dyed and only those ones while producing new ones. Maybe update one old one for every new one they add to the store.

> >

> > I understand your proposed scenario, but that doesn't answer my question. My question was, given limited resources (as we don't know how many people are on the team that works on these), would you like for them to focus on working on the old things or move forward with creating new ones?

>

> That's a false dilemma. In reality it's not a matter of them only being able to do one or the other, they could do both. Produce fewer new ones while also reworking the limited number of glider backpacks already in the game.

 

It's a hypothetical.

[Josiah.2967]

Glider/Backpack combos already have dye patterns, multiple models, and more. There is no reason not to update these.

[AgentMoore.9453]

When the [wings of love](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Wings_of_Love_Backpack_Skin "wings of love") were released as a back item, people who had bought them as full-priced gliders received the back item for free. It was a nice little 'hey, have a nice thing' moment.

 

I'd like to one day see dye-able versions of existing back pieces, particularly those with a dye-able glider counterpart. I imagine the implementation of that would be like the wings of love skin release, an offhand 'hey, we finally had spare time to do this, so thank you for playing' update. Game polishing, if anything.

[Super Hayes.6890]

Given that these items rotate in and out of the gemstore, they will sell more to players that didn't previously purchase due to only being able to dye the glider portion. I skipped a few myself since they wouldn't match after I dyed the glider. Is it enough players to justify the resources to update the old ones? I hope so...

[Ayakaru.6583]

> @"Lottie.5370" said:

> > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > They won;t be reworking old gemshop items - they've already sold them. The same is doubly true of the backpacks obtainable ingame (notice, by the way, how Bjora Marches meta backpack does not have color channels, even though it had to be designed when they already had the tech close to being finished).

>

> It does not make sense to dye the skull.

>

> > @"Eloc Freidon.5692" said:

> > Its so weird that they can't on at least some of them since their glider counterparts can be dyed. Who would design 3-D models and not save backups of the projects? Who would add models to a game but not allow those models to be overwritten?

>

> They absolutely can (read: are able to) make the old backpacks dyeable. The reason they are not going to is because it would take up development time where they are not receiving anything in return - those backpacks have already been sold to most people, any sales they make relative to the cost would be negligible. It does not make sense for them to do that, as much as we all would like it.

 

I disagree on not making anything in return.

They lost a lot on revenue by selling bundles where one of two items could never be used together with the other.

I believe sales would increase by at least 20% if backpacks of combos were dyeable.

It's a stupid guess, i know, but i base it on how often i heard people not buying the combos because the combo wasn't dyeable

[Pifil.5193]

> @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > @"Pifil.5193" said:

> > > @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > > > @"Pifil.5193" said:

> > > > > @"kharmin.7683" said:

> > > > > Would you rather have them go back and work on old things, or create new ones?

> > > >

> > > > There's no reason that they'd have to go all one way or the other.

> > > >

> > > > I'd like them to rework the backpacks for gliders that can be dyed and only those ones while producing new ones. Maybe update one old one for every new one they add to the store.

> > >

> > > I understand your proposed scenario, but that doesn't answer my question. My question was, given limited resources (as we don't know how many people are on the team that works on these), would you like for them to focus on working on the old things or move forward with creating new ones?

> >

> > That's a false dilemma. In reality it's not a matter of them only being able to do one or the other, they could do both. Produce fewer new ones while also reworking the limited number of glider backpacks already in the game.

>

> It's a hypothetical.

 

In that case, definitely new things.

[Khisanth.2948]

If they do then the dyeable version should be a separate skin that autounlocks if you have the original. Don't need a repeat of what happened in GW1 when they made a similar change for armor.

[borgs.6103]

Nah.

Though I would change my mind if they revisit them in a way that the dyeable versions can be obtained in-game through very challenging content.

[starhunter.6015]

Its mixed really, only certain glider/Back combo's would need the over haul. They could even charge to unlock the new dyeable skins via a Black lion vendor for shards or mystic coin and only if you had purchased earned the original .

We saw with release of HoT, those who had bought the white or black feather wing backpack got to upgrade them to glider for free.

[Terter.4125]

Here is some interesting spreadsheet with more info about the gliders, which are with back item combo, and which can be dyed.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1mNvBvvn-KyWw49B3-uS-1WAMxiHFNQCu2E08Yc-lNS8/edit?usp=sharing

[FrizzFreston.5290]

All the backitems! Why stop at gliders...

[Lottie.5370]

> @"Ayakaru.6583" said:

> > @"Lottie.5370" said:

> > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > They won;t be reworking old gemshop items - they've already sold them. The same is doubly true of the backpacks obtainable ingame (notice, by the way, how Bjora Marches meta backpack does not have color channels, even though it had to be designed when they already had the tech close to being finished).

> >

> > It does not make sense to dye the skull.

> >

> > > @"Eloc Freidon.5692" said:

> > > Its so weird that they can't on at least some of them since their glider counterparts can be dyed. Who would design 3-D models and not save backups of the projects? Who would add models to a game but not allow those models to be overwritten?

> >

> > They absolutely can (read: are able to) make the old backpacks dyeable. The reason they are not going to is because it would take up development time where they are not receiving anything in return - those backpacks have already been sold to most people, any sales they make relative to the cost would be negligible. It does not make sense for them to do that, as much as we all would like it.

>

> I disagree on not making anything in return.

> They lost a lot on revenue by selling bundles where one of two items could never be used together with the other.

> I believe sales would increase by at least 20% if backpacks of combos were dyeable.

> It's a stupid guess, i know, but i base it on how often i heard people not buying the combos because the combo wasn't dyeable

 

You can't really extrapolate based on what _you_ have heard. Anet has the figures on how many of an item they have sold, and how single gliders/backbacks sell compared to selling them as a combo, so I'm pretty sure they know what would be worth their time to develop and how they should sell it.

 

Yes, they would make _something_ but I'd argue they've already made the majority of potential sales already.

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"Khisanth.2948" said:

> If they do then the dyeable version should be a separate skin that autounlocks if you have the original. Don't need a repeat of what happened in GW1 when they made a similar change for armor.

 

Different coloring system. In gw1, the color was a result of mixing up to 4 added dyes, with the base item color. The base color was important, because if it wasn't the "uncolored gray", it could impact what end color you could and could not obtain. In gw2 the selected dye _replaces_ the base color. Thus, if you add color channels, you don't need to think how that base color might impact the end result and, thus, devs can simply leave it as it was before.

 

There's no reason to think adding color channels for backpacks in gw2 would change the way the base, uncolored item would look like

[Ayakaru.6583]

> @"Lottie.5370" said:

> > @"Ayakaru.6583" said:

> > > @"Lottie.5370" said:

> > > > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > > They won;t be reworking old gemshop items - they've already sold them. The same is doubly true of the backpacks obtainable ingame (notice, by the way, how Bjora Marches meta backpack does not have color channels, even though it had to be designed when they already had the tech close to being finished).

> > >

> > > It does not make sense to dye the skull.

> > >

> > > > @"Eloc Freidon.5692" said:

> > > > Its so weird that they can't on at least some of them since their glider counterparts can be dyed. Who would design 3-D models and not save backups of the projects? Who would add models to a game but not allow those models to be overwritten?

> > >

> > > They absolutely can (read: are able to) make the old backpacks dyeable. The reason they are not going to is because it would take up development time where they are not receiving anything in return - those backpacks have already been sold to most people, any sales they make relative to the cost would be negligible. It does not make sense for them to do that, as much as we all would like it.

> >

> > I disagree on not making anything in return.

> > They lost a lot on revenue by selling bundles where one of two items could never be used together with the other.

> > I believe sales would increase by at least 20% if backpacks of combos were dyeable.

> > It's a stupid guess, i know, but i base it on how often i heard people not buying the combos because the combo wasn't dyeable

>

> You can't really extrapolate based on what _you_ have heard. Anet has the figures on how many of an item they have sold, and how single gliders/backbacks sell compared to selling them as a combo, so I'm pretty sure they know what would be worth their time to develop and how they should sell it.

>

> Yes, they would make _something_ but I'd argue they've already made the majority of potential sales already.

 

Fair point.

 

Another rebuke from my end would be playerbase satisfaction.

It's not a strong argument, but nonetheless.

(Save that playerbase satisfaction could also be achieved by texture updates or a new engine)

 

A satisfied playerbase is more likely to want to support the game in a broader field. Sales on the gem store would increase with more than just glider combo sales. I'm not saying it'd be much, but it's something to take in account as well.

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"Ayakaru.6583" said:

> A satisfied playerbase is more likely to want to support the game in a broader field. Sales on the gem store would increase with more than just glider combo sales. I'm not saying it'd be much, but it's something to take in account as well.

Their approach to monetizing build templates seems to suggest they aren't thinking in those categories, though.

 

[AllNightPlayer.1286]

How about making **all** gliders dyeable, too?

[Yargesh.4965]

Since they posted that only new back items will be dyable it is kind of meaningless poll. Make it a suggestion but a poll is not going to get anywhere.

[Ayakaru.6583]

> @"Yargesh.4965" said:

> Since they posted that only new back items will be dyable it is kind of meaningless poll. Make it a suggestion but a poll is not going to get anywhere.

 

I have no intention to stop crying like a baby until i can dye my destroyer wings into normal fire colours.

 

[Khisanth.2948]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"Khisanth.2948" said:

> > If they do then the dyeable version should be a separate skin that autounlocks if you have the original. Don't need a repeat of what happened in GW1 when they made a similar change for armor.

>

> Different coloring system. In gw1, the color was a result of mixing up to 4 added dyes, with the base item color. The base color was important, because if it wasn't the "uncolored gray", it could impact what end color you could and could not obtain. In gw2 the selected dye _replaces_ the base color. Thus, if you add color channels, you don't need to think how that base color might impact the end result and, thus, devs can simply leave it as it was before.

>

> There's no reason to think adding color channels for backpacks in gw2 would change the way the base, uncolored item would look like

 

Except the problem was that the masking left some area uncovered resulting in some locations having bits that just can't be dyed. There is also the potential of an item having a color that is simply not available in the dye system.

[ROMANG.1903]

> @"Zaraki.5784" said:

> They "should" but they won't, they wouldn't get any money from that action and we all know that's enough of a reason for them to not moving a finger.

 

Excuse me my good monsieur but they would totally get my money. The only thing that kept me from buying the Watchwork Wings Glider is the fact that the tandem backpeice couldn't be dyed, and that's definitely not the only glider in that case (looking at you Dragon Wings and Vine-Touched). Fix this and I'm buying them as soon as they reappear in the gemstore.

[Mork.9532]

I'll simplify the request with: "Make backpacks dyable".

[Dante.1508]

I'd buy more gliders if the back items could be dyed.. And seeing the new capes they could be dyed easily.

[Zaraki.5784]

> @"ROMANG.1903" said:

> > @"Zaraki.5784" said:

> > They "should" but they won't, they wouldn't get any money from that action and we all know that's enough of a reason for them to not moving a finger.

>

> Excuse me my good monsieur but they would totally get my money. The only thing that kept me from buying the Watchwork Wings Glider is the fact that the tandem backpeice couldn't be dyed, and that's definitely not the only glider in that case (looking at you Dragon Wings and Vine-Touched). Fix this and I'm buying them as soon as they reappear in the gemstore.

 

How could you pay them if you already own those items?