Guild Wars 2

Hey all

I don’t have a ticket for fused weapons, mainly because I used up my supply of keys last month because I thought after all the Halloween complaining that this wouldn’t happen again… However, even though I am 99% certain that I will never get a fused ticket, I kind of like that. The fact is, the cool skins in the game become extremely popular (see flaming armour, T3 medium female human armour, winged light armour, the legendary greatswords… etc.) and they start to get a little boring.

Admittedly, I don’t like the fused stuff that much (apart from the longbow), but I really liked the halloween stuff, and its still kind of unique to see a Greatsaw or a Grinning Shield/Gourd etc. (which I never got either) running around. It adds a bit of variety to the game.

I do think that the skins should have been tradeable, not to allow people to cash in, but rather to allow people who desperately wanted a specific skin to actually get one without being forced into the RNG. However, whilst I understand that a lot of people feel differently, I thought it would be good to actually express some positivity towards the system

I think it’s fine for Arenanet. They need to generate money somehow. This is the way to do it.

The only thing I’d do differently would be to remove the account bound requirement

I like it when it’s an extra, but not really when it’s the only option. Let’s say for example the backpacks (charr/quaggan) – you can buy them and you can “win” one with a different colour.

Other than that it’s a great gold sink. Wonder at what point the gem price (-range) will hold somewhat stable.

I have ranted my dislike of BLC several times already, so I leave the answer to the topic to just: No. Its bad for consumer.

I could tolerate it if they weren’t account bound and dropped fairly enough. The only way to get the skins shouldn’t be gambling insane amounts of real money or time (in-game money).

I think Black Lion Keys would be a fantastic deal if the contents came unbound and could be sold on the TP.

60 keys, got my shortbow. My quest for my legendary skin is over ^^ will never need/want another skin. lol

I’ve been thinking about this more and more with all the threads complaining about it.

I really do think it’s a good thing. I don’t think they’re going to change it this time around, but for the future, perhaps a combination of ideas could work.

Right now, they’ve got a token you can turn in for the skin of your choice at a vendor contained in a chest guarded by RNG. I like this idea because you don’t continually have to fight RNG to get the skin you want. If you get a token, you get the skin you want. Perfect!!!

This is the ONLY way to get the item though….by fighting the RNG guard. I think this is where the biggest heartburn throughout the community is.

If they were to add the skins to the Gem Store for purchase, that would appease many of the players….depending on the price of course. If it’s too low, no one will fight the RNG guard for their skin because it’s “cheaper” to just buy the skin. If the price is too high, people will complain that they’re forcing us to fight the RNG guard for our skin. There has to be a balance. The community wants their pretty new shiny and Anet wants to make money.

What should the price in the Gem Store be though? Personally, I think it should be a value in Gems corresponding to the value in Gems of the keys (125 Gems per key) used to open the chest and the % chance of getting the item FROM the chest. Where would that put the price though?

If the % chance of getting a skin token is 1%, then it “should” take about 100 chest openings to get the skin you want. That would make the price 12,500 Gems per skin.

If the % chance is 0.5%, it should cost about 25,000 Gems per skin.

25,000 Gems seems totally unreasonable though. In USD, that’s $312.50.

Even at 12,500 Gems it’s bordering on ridiculous…..$156.25

How much should a skin cost? I would say around $25. That puts it around 2,000 Gems. Total reasonable. Totally understandable. It’s a rare skin. It should have a high price. If you don’t like the high price, then gamble for it, but it’s not likely you’ll get one unless I’m totally underestimating the drop rate of the skin from the chest.

Charismatic Harm.9683:

I’ve been thinking about this more and more with all the threads complaining about it.

I really do think it’s a good thing. I don’t think they’re going to change it this time around, but for the future, perhaps a combination of ideas could work.

Right now, they’ve got a token you can turn in for the skin of your choice at a vendor contained in a chest guarded by RNG. I like this idea because you don’t continually have to fight RNG to get the skin you want. If you get a token, you get the skin you want. Perfect!!!

This is the ONLY way to get the item though….by fighting the RNG guard. I think this is where the biggest heartburn throughout the community is.

If they were to add the skins to the Gem Store for purchase, that would appease many of the players….depending on the price of course. If it’s too low, no one will fight the RNG guard for their skin because it’s “cheaper” to just buy the skin. If the price is too high, people will complain that they’re forcing us to fight the RNG guard for our skin. There has to be a balance. The community wants their pretty new shiny and Anet wants to make money.

What should the price in the Gem Store be though? Personally, I think it should be a value in Gems corresponding to the value in Gems of the keys (125 Gems per key) used to open the chest and the % chance of getting the item FROM the chest. Where would that put the price though?

If the % chance of getting a skin token is 1%, then it “should” take about 100 chest openings to get the skin you want. That would make the price 12,500 Gems per skin.

If the % chance is 0.5%, it should cost about 25,000 Gems per skin.

25,000 Gems seems totally unreasonable though. In USD, that’s $312.50.

Even at 12,500 Gems it’s bordering on ridiculous…..$156.25

How much should a skin cost? I would say around $25. That puts it around 2,000 Gems. Total reasonable. Totally understandable. It’s a rare skin. It should have a high price. If you don’t like the high price, then gamble for it, but it’s not likely you’ll get one unless I’m totally underestimating the drop rate of the skin from the chest.

I thought 800-1200 ($10-$15) was fine for the skin price with gems. $25 is almost half the price of the game itself, more than half if you bought it discounted. ^^ The reason for my price would be, take a look at Dagger(s)/Sword(s). That gets pricey.

I don’t think anything will change on this round either. And that’s going to be an issue IMO. These are the best flaming weapons in the game except for Volcanus and the HoM sword. And they’re permanently out of reach of a bunch of people in a couple months and there is no sure way for people to get one before then. If you wanted a flaming whatever for your character and you don’t get lucky, you’re going to be stuck with scrub flaming weapons from COF while you get to occasionally see a weapon much nicer that you can never have.

At least with the legendaries, there is always the chance you’ll get a precursor drop or come into the money to get the one you want.

Geotherma.2395:

I thought 800-1200 ($10-$15) was fine for the skin price with gems. $25 is almost half the price of the game itself, more than half if you bought it discounted. ^^ The reason for my price would be, take a look at Dagger(s)/Sword(s). That gets pricey.

I think price SHOULD be a limiting factor. Remember, this is a skin we’re talking about. Nothing more. If it’s meant to be rare (and given the abysmal drop rate from the chest, it is), then it should be rare in the game too.

Allow people to support ArenaNet by paying a high price for it. If you don’t want to pay the high up-front price, then gamble for it. If you want TWO…..well…..decide how badly you really want two of them.

I agree that it probably shouldn’t ONLY be available through the chests, but having one should also come at a price. For a rare item, that price should be high.

The short answer is no. I will buy a powerball ticket, because if RNG is gonna happen there I retire. In game, I already know what the odds and my chances are…I’m saving my money for powerball tickets.

For the people with dual weapons, it does seem like they should count as half a ticket in the same way the faction weapons cost half for the one-handers.

Making the tickets or weapons not account-bound wouldn’t really make people much happier, overall. Given their rarity, it would just put them in the same situation as precursors are in currently, and cause the same amount of discontent. Instead of people unhappy due to bad luck or risk-aversion, it would just make people start talking about “market manipulation” or “price-gouging.”

The fundamental issue as I see it is that these threads all make the basic assumption that the chest has no value in itself. A lot of people see the chests as a lottery ticket, you either hit the jackpot or you have a worthless piece of paper. Buying keys for the sole purpose of trying to get a voucher, then, is like actively trying to win PowerBall. Your chances of winning are low, and failure leaves you with nothing of value.

But a much better way for this to work is to make it more like a Golden Ticket scenario (since somebody else brought up Charlie and the Chocolate Factory in another thread). You’re Charlie. You buy a bar of chocolate, hoping for a golden ticket, but when you don’t find one in your bar, you still have that bar of tasty chocolate.

The thing that is preventing this scenario from occurring is that people assign no value to the majority of the chest’s drops. Right now, people look at what comes out of the chests and they don’t see tasty chocolate, they see trash cluttering up their inventory. It’s true that people might just be too caught up in the frenzy of vouchers to think rationally about the actual value of what comes out of the chests, but since we had a thread just before the patch discussing why people spend money on keys, I think this reaction was already prevalent before the drama of the vouchers was introduced.

Now, obviously not everyone is going to find every item equally useful (e.g. someone who doesn’t pvp won’t find a Glory booster nearly as useful as someone who does), but I think we can achieve a much higher level of general utility from the chest drops, to the point where people who don’t get a voucher might still be disappointed, but they might go “well hey at least I got something I can use.” This could be achieved either by tightening up the drop table to a sort of “Greatest Hits” collection, or by tweaking some of the items to have greater utility. I don’t think I’ve ever talked to a person who thought mobile bankers were useful.

Elentari.9156:

The fundamental issue as I see it is that these threads all make the basic assumption that the chest has no value in itself.

[clipped]

The thing that is preventing this scenario from occurring is that people assign no value to the majority of the chest’s drops.

[clipped]

Now, obviously not everyone is going to find every item equally useful….

I picked out a few points that you made that I think are great. I agree that is seems most people apply no value to the items that come from the chest that aren’t the ones they’re looking for.

Maybe Anet should institute an in-game survey. They did it for quests and events during the beta. It was triggered for the player on completion of the event.

What if they could trigger a survey when a player opened a chest and asked them to rate the “value” of the items in the chest. They could collect this data and make adjustments if necessary.

So as not to overwhelm a player with a survey every time they opened a chest, it could pop up each time they do until the user does one of two things. They either complete the survey, or they click the button that declines taking the survey.

These chests seem to have a lot of player negativity associated with them. It would be kind of cool if they did a survey to see what players really think. Doing it on the forums won’t work, but doing it from within the game would.

A-net failed to listen to the Wintersday feedback, which either means they are not reading these forums or they don’t care what their customer base is saying, which is a worry.

I won’t be buying anything from them.

Avigrus.2871:

A-net failed to listen to the Wintersday feedback, which either means they are not reading these forums or they don’t care what their customer base is saying, which is a worry.

I’m thinking tens of thousands of dollars walking in the door via the gem store has to be included in the “feedback”. As is a flood of gold being eliminated from the bloated economy so fast it pegged the gem/gold rate.

Or not comming in, as their response to the Wintersday “feedback” suggests.

If that had worked to their satisfaction, I think we’d see a model more like it.

I won’t be buying anything from them.

Then there is even LESS reason to try and curry your favor.

There are better ways to make money, while keeping majority of the player base happy, than having a RNG based system, and attempting to abuse the gambling addicts for money.

I don’t bother with BLCs at all. Im a little surprised though. There so many BLC being sold for 1copper, like thousands. In a couple of days they were all purchased and its up to 4c for a BLC. There must be alot of people buying them.

BLCs have always been RNG based. So when they added the skins to them what did you all think it would be like? A skin every other time on average?

Charismatic Harm.9683:

Elentari.9156:

The fundamental issue as I see it is that these threads all make the basic assumption that the chest has no value in itself.

[clipped]

The thing that is preventing this scenario from occurring is that people assign no value to the majority of the chest’s drops.

[clipped]

Now, obviously not everyone is going to find every item equally useful….

I picked out a few points that you made that I think are great. I agree that is seems most people apply no value to the items that come from the chest that aren’t the ones they’re looking for.

Maybe Anet should institute an in-game survey. They did it for quests and events during the beta. It was triggered for the player on completion of the event.

What if they could trigger a survey when a player opened a chest and asked them to rate the “value” of the items in the chest. They could collect this data and make adjustments if necessary.

I didn’t expand on this because my last post was already a wall of text, but ArenaNet already has player input on how generally useful various items are, in the form of gem store sales data. People would only choose to directly pay for stuff they actively want, so I think how much people tend to buy a certain item is a good indicator of how generally useful people find it. I have to admit though, the caveat is that some items may not sell as well as they naturally would, due to pricing. For example, the current gold→gem conversion rate makes directly buying BL Salvage Kits a net profit loss over using Master’s Kits, so the usefulness of the Salvage Kits may not be fully reflected in their sales volume. In contrast, boosters have no reliably-obtainable counterpart that’s cheaper, so the demand for boosters is more likely to be fully-represented by sales volume.

I left the game over this. Here’s my argument from another thread: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/bltc/Gem-store-gambling/page/3#post1734039

Let’s overwhelm the forums with talk of this and make this game everything it can be. Guild Wars 2 is too good to be degraded by such nonsense.

Desirable items cost $$$. That’s fine, but not my bag.

Only thing I call into question is why they are account bound this time around.

Let people sell the skins like they did for the other stuff