Guild Wars 2

Zenith.7301:

snip

Well, again, I’m not agreeing/disagreeing with you. What I meant by “metrics” is running standardized tests with your Guardian’s spec and whatever Noss’s BM is, instead of just tossing around numbers. Doing 3k crits consistently is great, but does that actually translate into higher DPS? (My Ranger SB build consistently crits for 1.2k with Crossfire, for example, but fires twice as fast. Raw numbers don’t tell the whole story.)

By providing test results that show your Guardian spec does more damage than his BM build, you can convincingly prove that your point “BM spec does weak damage” is true beyond a doubt.

Is all I’m saying. I’m all for good discussion, but tossing around theory and personal experience is conducive to it.

EDIT: Forgive me if I’m misunderstanding, but re-reading your post I get the impression you are trying to compare Guardian damage to Ranger pet damage by itself? I don’t think that’s what Noss is saying at all, I think he’s saying BM damage overall. Ignore me if I’m wrong though.

Lets see. Gold → Gem ratio.

3/26 patch: 21434 C pre-spike, 24990 C post-spike.
Absolute delta: 3556C
Percentage delta: 16.6 %

Mining Pick: 23629 C pre-spike, 30821 post-spike.
Absolute delta: 7192
Percentage delta: 30.4%

No definitive conclusion of course. The only conclusion which can be drawn is that more people converted Gold → Gems for the mining pick as opposed to Fused Skins.

On top of that, the difference can’t be solely attributed to random vs non random acquisition methods. Mining Pick has a very clear convenience function, while Fused Skins didn’t.

Still, I do want to hope this persuades Anet somewhat on more guaranteed event items in the future.

Actually, I’d like to do some super rough calculations on how big the exchange spikes were, to get a super rough idea on the popularity of the two.

But does anyone remember the day when the Fused skins went on “sale?”

Fiontar.4695:

Why would these have any impact on the price of Orichalcum? Unless, of course, not having to replenish mining picks has just made mining node bots that much more efficient?

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/bltc/Price-of-Ori/first#post1849902

There you go. John Smith basically stating that the assumption “not enough people have bought the pick to cause an Ori mining rampage” is wrong.

Also munkiman makes a very good point. The spike in the Gem/Gold exchange is also a pretty good indicator of the item’s popularity.

Fiontar.4695:

So many businesses fail due to poor pricing it isn’t even funny.

Yes. But…

Fiontar.4695:

IMO, who ever is running the shop is probably costing the company millions in lost revenue and damaging the long term prospects for the game due to the continual generation of ill will.

…It’s just that you’re projecting your opinions onto the general populace and claiming the company is losing “millions” without ANY data to back up your claims.

Which makes you sound really stupid, especially when indicators that we can see (impact on ori prices, Gem/Gold exchange) seem to show that this item is pretty hotly coveted. Will it sell more if it’s cheaper? Of course. But will that increase volume make up for the loss in the reduced price, and what will be the economic impact when you remove an important gold sink (purchase of gathering tools) from a larger portion of players?

Fiontar.4695:

I mean, for crying out loud, what is with the mentality that a cash shop item isn’t worthy of being sold unless it is in some way a rip-off for customers? Why can’t they just sell things people want at prices that are fair and actually entice people to buy who might not otherwise because the value is so apparent?

Just a quick glance at this forums shows at least 5 people who does not think the purchase is a rip-off in any way, shape or form. Can you please stop projecting your idea of “fair prices” to the entire population?

Zenith.7301:

No, it is weak. What you call good pet damage I call half my guardian’s hybrid spec damage.

While I don’t agree or disagree with you, I think it’ll be a useful contribution to this discussion if you provided actual metrics and experimental results to back up your claims.

I can say Rangers do more damage than Guardians. You can say they don’t. Both our statements are pretty worthless because we’re essentially throwing out unproven claims, with the best evidence being “general/individual perception of things” which is shaky evidence, at best.

Again, I don’t agree or disagree, but for the sake of good discussion (which I hope everyone is interested in) more objective analysis is needed.

Xia.3485:

Edit: Either I need my eyes adjusted, but I don’t see the coat she’s wearing anywhere on the site you linked.. nor do I see the pants >_>

That’s interesting. The link I posted doesn’t actually lead to the page for the skin itself.

http://argos-soft.net/GW2ArmorGallery/index.php?weight=1&race=2&color=10&sex=1&armorSet=tudentfi

Try this? Regardless, the top is the PvP student. Try previewing it in the Mists.

Fiontar.4695:

Yet another potentially huge seller squashed by insanely high pricing. They would probably have sold 100X as many at a third the price. Yep, they sure know what they are doing here at the Gem Store…

What is with people projecting their own opinions on the entire playerbase, then concluding “Yup terrible sale, Anet would’ve made more money if they only catered to me.”

Seriously? Judging from the fact that Orichalcum had a pretty significant drop in price and all the anecdotal evidence on the forums, I imagine a ton of people bought it.

They have actual sales data. You don’t. You just end up sounding stupid and self-centered when you make conclusions like that without any evidence at all.

The “new” armor skins/styles already exist in game.

For example, the human ele in that thread:

Original: http://i.imgur.com/dMZZxez.jpg
Wearing Human T3 skin

Chinese: http://i.imgur.com/HXbTIxY.jpg
Same boots/shoulders, but wearing this coat:
http://argos-soft.net/GW2ArmorGallery/index.php?weight=1&race=2&color=10&sex=1&armorSet=tudentfi

Hey all,

Was wondering if anyone can identify this remix of the Norn Theme that Matt Visual uses at the end of his videos.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=f_1CmHphkkI&list=UUYb66dD0Cz_R38FtzapueWg#t=490s

Thanks!

Pandemoniac.4739:

John Smith.4610:

Time Price Quantity
4/14/2013 389g 1
4/14/2013 250g 1
4/15/2013 130g 1
4/15/2013 220g 1
4/15/2013 185g 1
4/15/2013 225g 1
4/15/2013 225g 1
4/16/2013 200g 1
4/16/2013 300g 1
4/16/2013 195g 1
4/17/2013 224g 1

Wow someone got a steal at 130G. Thanks for the information.

HAHA I wonder if that’s Malediktus.

Nike.2631:

Pirlipat.2479:

Uhm, in a way it does. For example when your inventory is full and you need room to pick up new items and there is no vendor near the place you are.

It is possible to, you know, discard things. Without taking any loss whatsoever .

But when you list it on a TP, at least you get some copper back. If you just discard it, you’re not getting anything back.

John Smith.4610:

You’ve made two false assumptions, fix them both and you have your answer.

JOHN SMITH! It’s good to see you back.

But I was about to say, I imagine it’s because people going ori-crazy with the new picks to try to justify their purchase. I guess John’s post is a pretty good confirmation.

Geotherma.2395:

kokiman.2364:

Geotherma.2395:

You could simply wait for the huge influx of cool items to die down and the gem ratio to re-stabalize.

Never going to happen.

Revisit my comment in May :P

Well, the huge influx of cool items may or may not die down.

But the ratio will stabilize. The system has to, since going one direction encourages movement the opposite direction. The way the system is constructed, it has to reach an equilibrium as opposed to infinitely increasing.

When we’ll hit it though, we’ll never know.

Calae.1738:

You’re comparing a gingerbread sword to a sword with molten lava on it.

Arenanet thinks we’re going to spend hundreds of dollars to look cool and only a few dollars to look stupid. I’d like to meet these designers and have a chat with them.

I don’t understand what your point is. My point is that the Fused Skins are so far the only weapon skins obtained solely through random chance. Every other event-themed weapon skins have been obtainable straight from the Gem Store (Wintersday) or can be purchased from the TP (Halloween, Lost Shores, Wintersday).

What does your personal opinion of the aesthetics of the Wintersday/Fused skins have to do with my point?

1. You can’t list buy orders lower than the vendor prices any more.
2. They have chosen not to remove the buy orders lower than vendor prices that exist because it was deemed an insignificant problem.

Ephedrine.4521:

Please link me to the John Smith explanation for the graph plotting bug.

But please know that a graph visual representation hardly explains for the actual numbers it represents.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/bltc/Playing-for-the-inflationary-compensation/page/2#post1391811

By the way, the servers were down for 2 hours recently with maintenance. Can very well explain a period of no activity.

dimurea.7810:

Love the game to death, but the fact that so many event themed skins (which is always the thing I want) you have to gamble to get…….

I don’t understand. Fused skins are so far the only event-themed skins that you have to gamble to get. Halloween, Lost Shores, and Wintersday themed skins all gave you the option of purchasing these skins off the TP. Wintersday even had a separate set which you could purchase directly from the gem store.

Swagger.1459:

what purpose does the entire game economy serve?

why are professions limited in terms of weapons, buttons, skills and customization (ouside of gear)?

I don’t get what you mean by “Profession.” Do you actually mean classes like War/Ranger, etc? If so, what does that have anything to do with the economy? (They have unique weapons/skills because they are unique professions, btw)

If you mean the crafting professions, then what do you mean weapons/buttons/skills?

Gestankfaust.4216:

The fact might be established that this is why the economy sucks.

Opinion.

Gestankfaust.4216:

If it is a true economy, the “people/players” do not control it entirely.

I have no idea what you’re trying to say. What’s a true economy and what’s a false economy? The playerbase as a whole controls the Exchange Rate through an algorithm Anet created. This is pretty well established already. Unless, of course, you don’t believe in John Smith. Then eh.

Gestankfaust.4216:

So that the minority, but most active, cannot destroy said economy. Right?

How are you defining “destroying” an economy. A price increase in luxury goods? (Luxury goods that aren’t available to purchase with in-game gold in most other games with microtransactions.) Seems like a very narrow definition. By that definition, I imagine most game economies have been “destroyed.”

How were you able to determine that only a minority of the playerbase is purchasing Gems with Gold? Where did you get this data from?

Gestankfaust.4216:

But nothing is governing anything here. So now the rate exchange has declined more than half?

Awesome…but keep spouting how it’s the norm.

Player transactions govern the exchange. I think this fact has been well-established already.

Sunflowers.1729:

That is true until you can no longer farm fast enough to keep up with inflation, or are a new player who doesn’t have any upgrades at all.

Personally I just don’t like mechanics which exclude newer players so much.

No one likes run away inflation, which is why gold sinks which scale with inflation (TP tax, gem exchange) exist.

Sunflowers.1729:

Pretty sure she will keep buying transmutation stones, if anything.

Well he said “account upgrades.”

But the reason why I bring it up because these account upgrades, while expensive, stay with your account for the rest of your lifetime. So while yes, assuming inflation keeps on occurring, on the flipside you also need to buy way fewer upgrades.

Lane.3410:

Needless to say, my in game income remains fixed while prices continue to rise. It’s eventually going to mean I won’t be able to afford anything because I’ll be too poor both in and out of game to buy anything.

This is a curious statement. By your own words, you’ve already purchased your account upgrades. Will you foresee yourself continuing to buy account upgrades (I’m assuming bank slots/char slots) in the future? Because once you purchase enough of those, you don’t need to purchase more, no?

dronzer.8392:

So you’re considering it unethical based on your personal “value” of the rewards? okay lets change the reward then, a chance to win $1 million real world money (or equiv in your own currency). Anet makes a lot of money from the sales of these items and win rate is quite low, this in turn is actually accessible by people for all ages.

Would your stance then change?

No.

dronzer.8392:

At which point does it become unethical ? at which point is it ethical? just because it’s value is pixels vs real world currency does not negate the fact that this is gambling, pure and simple.

It matters quite a bit. People hold different ethical views, and their thresholds vary. Depending on what the reward is different amounts of people will be outraged.

If the right to continue playing this game was only obtainable through gambling, then I will assure you the rage will be vast.

Pretty pixels? Sure there will be a few people who’d consider it unethical, but to the majority of players it will be but a blip on their radar.

Gambling is gambling yes, but I’d postulate that only a minor portion of the player base sees pure gambling as “unethical,” while a majority of the player base could care less, especially on items which have no direct affect on their gameplay.

dronzer.8392:

Remove the "only obtained via this method (which this method actually has mechanics of gambling) " and this thread wouldn’t have even been made.

You missed Halloween and the Lost Shores. Random items which can be sold on the TP. People still complained.

Again, these are fully consenting customers here, and relating to purely luxury/cosmetic items. The “unethical” accusations are incredibly hard to take seriously.

Kaiza.4618:

Why would anyone transfer Gems -> Gold when its half the value?

I don’t understand. What do you mean half the value. The values of Gems/Gold are tied together by the Exchange rate.

Kaiza.4618:

this game is going to die a quick death Imo.

Ah. The “I don’t like this specific aspect of the game, so I predict this specific aspect of the game will kill the game” argument.

Very silly when you consider this aspect of the game is quite benign. Quitting the game because you can’t purchase additional bank-slots with in-game gold, when most (all?) other games don’t have the option of using in-game gold to purchase microtransaction items in the first place? I mean, go ahead I guess. But eh. Very silly.

Geotherma.2395:

Go google twinkies price..

Hahahahahahahahahahaha.

Amazing!

Kaiza.4618:

And being player regulated has led to where we are now with the current prices climbing still. Its not going to stop.

Well, the majority of the playerbase still thinks its worth more to convert Gold → Gems than it is to convert Gems → Gold. Hence the increase. You’re looking at it solely from the perspective of people who don’t want to spend IRL money on the game. While you have a right to complain, Anet also has to look out for themselves. And the fact that you can purchase Gems with in-game gold is an admirable compromise.

It is regulated by the players though. More people converting gold → gems means a higher exchange rate.

SnowHawk.3615:

Yea I am, bc that’s the only perspective I can view it on since I dont use real money.
Great for all the real money users- I get that they are the ones bascially driving the market up and up at their leisure and Anet is happy about that.
The only activity I see for #1 is grinding.. now wasn’t Gw2 not supposed to be about that? Oh wait, it is just another MMO. Who am I kidding.

Well, you asked what the intent was. That is the intent.

Customers are selfish. They want things cheaper. They want things free. Which is okay. I’m a customer, I’ll love it if gems became cheaper. But then the company must be selfish too, and the two motivations must strike a balance. And all things considered, this is a pretty good compromise.

By the way, they are not driving the exchange rate up “at their leisure.” The exchange is player-driven.

SnowHawk.3615:

So drive up the prices and make ppl who dont use real money grind much more? yea that plan makes so much sense.
And wheres proof of this intention? I dont mean the gem store prices are high I think they are super- but gold to gem rate is.. just I mean 4g wont even get me 140gems.
I imagine you use your money – Arena net only caters to those ppl any more though.

The ability of the Gem exchange rate to adapt to in-game inflation is an incredibly elegant system.

1. People who don’t like to spend real life money:
Benefits them, because you can use in-game gold to purchase things in the Gem Store. All other games with microtransactions off the top of my head does not have this ability.

2. People who want to convert real-life money to in-game gold
Because it adjusts to in-game inflation, the gems you buy today will be worth the same a year from now, when adjusted for inflation. When the game first came out, 100 gems got you like 20s. If that rate was flat, no one in their right minds would convert Gems to Gold. But because it adjusts to inflation, it keeps people who like to convert money into gold happy.

3. Anet
By allowing it to adjust for inflation, Anet encourages the activity of people #2 over #1, which is important since #2 spends real-money, and #1 doesn’t. If the Gem exchange rate stayed flat, no one in their right mind would purchase gems today, since Gold is so easy to get.

The Gem Exchange Rate which adjusts for in-game inflation is an elegant compromise of the 3 parties above. You’re looking at it from just #1’s perspective.

Nope. Not ridiculous at all. Everything is working as intended.

Aurelian Omenkind.2470:

But GW1 was all about purchasing an item or upgrade. GW2 doesn’t guarantee that, which is entirely my point.

Seriously, take off your nostalgia goggles. I’m wondering if you actually looked at GW2’s Gem Shop at all.

In GW2, you can purchase everything you can purchase in GW1. GUARANTEED. Except content (content gated by money? No thanks), mercenary heroes, and skill unlocks (doesn’t apply to combat system).

Costumes (Both town cloths and actual armor skins. Guaranteed purchases)
More bank space (Guaranteed purchase.)
More inventory space (Guaranteed purchase.)
Makeover pack (Guaranteed purchase.)
Name Change (Guaranteed purchase.)

On top of all that, GW2 adds boosters and convenience items .

Infinite mining pick (Guaranteed purchase.)
Boosters of all kinds. EXP/karma/MF/Crafting (Guaranteed purchases.)
Convenience items such as Merchant/Trader/Banker summons (Guaranteed purchases.)

Aaaaaaaand three random boxes.

Minis
Dyes
Black Lion Box/Keys.

Which all contain items which can be purchased with in-game gold or Gems, with the exception Fused Weapon Skins.

So tell me why the GW1 shop is better than the GW2 shop again? Because re-reading your quote, I’m under the impression that you haven’t actually looked at GW2’s Gem Shop. GW2 has PLENTY of guaranteed purchases. I have no idea what you mean when you say “GW2 doesn’t guarentee an item or upgrade.” It does, for the majority of the purchases.

Please inform us if it ever sells. Also, do you mind telling us what the exact price you listed for is? It’ll be interesting to get a feel for at what speed the Legendary market moves at.

Best of luck!

GW1 cash shop? Seriously? GW2 cash shop has everything the GW1 cash shop had and more. GW2 shop also has guaranteed purchases of costumes, bank slots, makeover kits and name changes, which is pretty much what the GW1 shop had. (In addition to content gated by money. Zzzzz)

GW2 cash shop offers a TON more options than GW1 shop. In addition to costumes (both town clothes and actual armor) it offers you boosters, dyes, weapon skins, back item skins, convenience items (perma mining pick, insta-access to merchants) AND on top of it all you can use in-game gold to purchase it all.

GW2 cash sho kitten o far superior to the GW1 cash shop, it’s not even funny. Try taking your nostalgia goggles off sometimes.

Though I do hope Anet continues their gambling boxes (hopefully not account-bound. More Halloween-style RNG boxes, not Molten weapon account-bound crap). More money for Anet is always good, since the gambling doesn’t affect me since I don’t buy it, and more money for the developer is always more content for me down the line!

Oh wow. I can’t believe I missed this gem of a thread yesterday.

Definitely fair. I think being punished for attempting something this risky without fully researching everything is completely and fair. Gotta punish impulsiveness and stupidity somehow, eh?

By the way, even if assuming you were able to “buy out” all the supply for this Sigil, I highly doubt your investment would’ve paid off considering the high volume of transactions for these Sigils. There’s also the possibility that as the server is carrying out your purchases, more of those commodities is listed. Again, high volume market. Won’t be surprised.

Hm.

Quick back-of-the-envelope calculations for Knights vs Soldiers in terms of damage.

Assume full soldiers: 1003 power.
Assume full knights: 697 power, 697 precision.

Assume 916 base stat (no traits)

We then calculate the expected value of damage, crit and non-crit.

With full soldiers, you achieve 209% increase in damage
With full knights, you achieve 204% increase in damage.

This interesting! In the absolute absence of critical damage, Soldiers does more damage than Knights.

However, as soon as you reach 10% critical damage, Knights will edge out Soldiers in terms of damage.

I’ll argue that Crit damage shouldn’t be looked at as “burst” damage at all, especially when talking about timescales of ~30s-1 minutes which is really the minimum amount of time most non-trivial fights in this game take. Burst or no burst, under most conditions (How many Rangers have less than 10% crit damage?) Knights will end up doing more damage.

Calae.1738:

I have found that The Anomaly provides the best return per skill point. Assuming you have 250 skill points lying around and assuming you purchase the 100 mystic coins and 250 globs of ectoplasm; each skill point will net you about 20 silver.

How are you calculating your purchases of ecto/mystic coins? With sell orders on spidy or buy orders?

How desperate are you for money?

If not, the put a sell listing. It may not sell immediately, but it will most likely sell, because the precursor market has low, but still significant amount of transactions. Fluctuations in prices still do occur, and is reflected on spidy.

If you’re desperate for money however, sell it to the highest buy order.

Pandemoniac.4739:

The problem is that I could spend millions of gold and not get that skin or anything that even comes close to being that skin. That’s why folks are upset.

Is it evil/unethical/unfair? I don’t think so. It’s just not a happy situation and I don’t think it’s irrational for folks to be disappointed or upset about it.

Basically this. This method was an incredibly stupid move by Anet. Unethical/evil? Not in the least. My only hope is that this method did terrible overall sales so that they do not do it again.

KorbanDallas.7389:

I’m on nobody’s side here, because I hate RNG so I haven’t bought any keys for these skins despite their coolness of design and particles, but I just felt the need to point this out:

You can sell unwanted cards from MTG for various prices depending on rarity and the buyers desire to own it. Heck, I know people that actually turn a pretty darn good profit off of it. Really, you could even trade a card for another card(s). You cannot sell/trade most items you get from a BLC (as most of them are account bound).

No need to attack the guy for stating his opinion.

So.

I have stated many, many, many, many times how the current system is stupid because you don’t have any other option of obtaining it.

That’s not a problem. We’re in complete and utter agreement if that is the case.

The problem, however, is not the randomness of the process but the fact that Anet offers only one method of obtaining this item.

if a grocery store sold “Mystery Bags Of Meat” that usually held a hamburger patty and very rarely a prime steak, and people were spending fifty to a hundred dollars for that steak sold nowhere but the mystery bag, I would question that grocery store’s ethics. Whose fault is it? Primarily the customer for being so stupid. But also the store for taking advantage of the people they knew would pay for the bags. I would not frequent that grocery store because I would find it distasteful and irritating.

The original quote. Here, you are railing against randomness, not the limitation of choices that Anet has given us. If your opinion is that randomness is predatory, I’ll call your opinion silly. Especially when when we’re looking at a case where we have consenting customers purchasing a chance at a purely cosmetic/luxury items.

LowestTruth.2635:

Ursan.7846:

So are you mad at arbitrarily inflating prices? Or the fact that the product is random?

Why are you projecting anger into my posts?

EDIT: The whole arbitrary worth thing wasn’t even part of my main point, so other than it being a great nitpicker’s target, I’m not sure why you two are fixated upon it. I’m guessing because the rest of my post was chock full of subjective common sense and there wasn’t much to rage about. Carry on, bro.

I guess I’ll repeat myself. Do you think a company providing an item which contains randomized rewards is predatory?

What do you think of Magic: The Gathering then?

munkiman.3068:

This isn’t the point at all, everyone of those items are purchasable by other means. If i want a booster pack i’ll buy one, if i want a backpack i’ll buy one, if i want dyes i’ll buy them.

So your entire point is that it’s not good to have something obtained purely through random chance, as opposed to a choice between random chance and a guarenteed purchase through the TP or by other means.

Then we’re in agreement that it’s stupid

However.

munkiman.3068:

Does it make it a fair ethical practice? Not even remotely.

No, it’s not unethical at all. And I’m glad that you realized how stupid that notion was.

munkiman.3068:

I won’t comment on the comprehension/communication thing, it adds nothing.

Then don’t bring it up.

munkiman.3068:

You can’t use gambling here as a valid argument, if i buy in, i know what my odds are and the possible return on my bid.

Do you know what are the odds of a Booster Pack in Yugioh containing a rare card?

Man, those vendors were sure unethical.

LowestTruth.2635:

The Blizzard one would only be accurate in this context if they sold a game card for fifteen bucks that could contain anything from an hour’s subscription to a free lifetime of the game.

So what do you think about Magic: The Gathering?

EDIT: I guess you missed the context of his Blizzard example, which is directly in response to your post:

Yeah, I can. I think the fact that folks are enticed into paying a few hundred dollars for something of arbitrary value, an electronic item with an artificial inflation of worth, is pretty questionable.

Which, taken literally. Yea, that Blizzard analogy applies aptly.

So are you mad at arbitrarily inflating prices? Or the fact that the product is random?

FourthVariety.5463:

Does the BLC constitute gambling as defined by German law: YES.

Does Magic: The Gathering constitute gambling as defined by German law too?

munkiman.3068:

@Syeria

I feel it only fair to respond with, i’m done with trying to give you any feedback for your arguments. Your comprehension of my statements are faulty at best.

Lol.

He broke down your posts and answered them point by point. He’s definitely reading it pretty thoroughly. If his comprehension and what you’re actually trying to say is so different that you want to make a point of it, perhaps you should work on your communication?

You sure have a right to your opinion. But it won’t change the fact that your opinion is quite silly.

Why are BLT chests unethical? Because their rewards are randomized? Do you think lotteries are unethical? Coin slot machines? Games of poker? Most card games, like Magic/Yugioh/Pokemon? Are they all unethical too for having randomized rewards?

Are they unethical for attempting to artificially inflate prices? What about Gucci, or every brand-name goods out there? Sodas companies, and their ridiculous mark-ups?

When you paint a transaction in which a consenting customer purchases a chance at a purely cosmetic/luxury product and are fully aware that the product is random as “unethical….” you end up sounding quite silly.

So Anet is selling a box with random cosmetic/luxury items. They clearly stated that this was random. A consenting customer purchased this box with random goodies.

If you think this is unethical, by gods I hope you don’t play Magic the Gathering.

Geikamir.6329:

Josh Foreman.8250:

Nothing is certain, but I’m pretty sure these ones will only be around for this month.

Hm! Mind posting the thread for the context? I’m stupid and seem to be failing at finding that post…

If we want to talk about the DLC topic, I’d like to say for the record that I’m almost drowning in the free content that Anet has bestowed on us and has been promised to continue being provided to us in the future.

Syeria.4812:

Let’s not get off on the (giant, but off-topic) topic of DLC. But one thing worth mentioning there is that the backlash against and distaste for DLC is generally grossly misplaced and simply a result of the average gamer’s ignorance of basic economics.

Mind PMing your views on this? I am not a fan for “pay for more content” model they have for Mass Effect, for example.

Don’t mind “pay for more skins/weapons” like in GW2, but “pay to do Arah dungeon?” Nope.