717 replies to this topic

[Shonie]

I don't understand why so many people feel obligated to tell Anet how to run their business and their game.
Seriously, dyes will be character-bound, deal with it.
Should you feel the desire to purchase dyes packs, go for it... if not, then don't.
Nobody has a gun to your head.
Dyes are just cosmetic colours on the armors of your character which can be found in abundance by playing the game, and by using the mystic forge. It's such a wonderful system that it actually blows my mind how anyone can actually complain about it.

[Wayshuba]

Shonie, on 24 June 2012 - 01:22 PM, said:

I don't understand why so many people feel obligated to tell Anet how to run their business and their game.
Seriously, dyes will be character-bound, deal with it.
Should you feel the desire to purchase dyes packs, go for it... if not, then don't.
Nobody has a gun to your head.
Dyes are just cosmetic colours on the armors of your character which can be found in abundance by playing the game, and by using the mystic forge. It's such a wonderful system that it actually blows my mind how anyone can actually complain about it.

Not telling ArenaNet how to run their business, but as customers many with the same viewpoint as myself are telling them HOW they can get my money. It's up to them whether they want it or not.

[white_migraine]

Shonie, on 24 June 2012 - 01:22 PM, said:

I don't understand why so many people feel obligated to tell Anet how to run their business and their game.
Seriously, dyes will be character-bound, deal with it.
Should you feel the desire to purchase dyes packs, go for it... if not, then don't.
Nobody has a gun to your head.
Dyes are just cosmetic colours on the armors of your character which can be found in abundance by playing the game, and by using the mystic forge. It's such a wonderful system that it actually blows my mind how anyone can actually complain about it.

Sorry we want a good game with no unnecessary flaws.

[Omedon]

Wayshuba, on 24 June 2012 - 01:24 PM, said:

as customers many with the same viewpoint as myself are telling them HOW they can get my money. It's up to them whether they want it or not.

This right here is basically the core of most of the more reasonable complaints.

While some of the complaining on this subject, here and on the official forums does veer off into entitlement land, there are two sides to that coin.

On one hand, no, we as players are not entitled to have ArenaNet cave to our every whim, and even as an altoholic who would VASTLY prefer to have account based dyes (and doesn't really think their *stated* reasons to change that detail hold any water at all), I can appreciate ArenaNet not letting the torch bearing mob alter the course of their game, as a precedent.

However, what needs to be remembered, is that ArenaNet aren't entitled to our money spent on the cash shop either.  Expressing "these are the conditions under which I would buy" isn't entitlement, it's just a statement to put a voice out there, more to inform in case ArenaNet want to take it under advisement... which we can't and shouldn't be able to make them do.

[Arava]

After the first BWE I was fairly unhappy... dyes not accountwide, one per day through the dye-guy and seeds... crappy to be honest (especially after being so excited after reading that blogpost a long while ago).

But after the second BWE I think they really listened to us I am happy that we can get dyes from drops now (I got quite a few in 2 days playing). I like the fact that we can get them instantly (kind of like in GW1) and that we can use them forever on that character.
On top of all of that we now get 7 dyes if we choose to buy from the cash-shop. That's ok for me.
I will buy there, but not too much. I don't need all of the 400 dyes on all of my characters anyway.

I love the fact, that we will have a relatively easy way to get specific dyes through the mystic forge. Good move.

------------------
One thing that really bugs me is that I am not really able to see, which colors are new/ which ones I don't already have.
Maybe an idea would be to have the dye-box blink/ highlight up when you add the dye to your panel.
I would like to have a system kind of like the storage panel for crafting stuff and minipets where you can see the box (grayed out) and then, when you find the dye it fills up. Maybe there could be an option to sort "obtained" from "unobtained" dyes.

That would have some advantages:
1. You can see which color is missing and you don't have to comb through 400 dyes on the wiki.
2. You know when you are "done" collecting.
3. For the collectors among us it is a big goal to fill up all the boxes

Well yes, that is my plea for anet  

[Parvati]

If they were to make dye unlocks account wide I think they would have to decrease the drop rate. But dyes in GW1 were never looked at as "got to get 'em all' anyway. I'm just happy that the dye system is much free-er. Like, no need to re-buy a dye (EX: black dye) if you have it unlocked. It's a much free-er system and fun system compared to its implimentation in GW1.

I suppose the one real issue I have about dyes is that if you buy a random dye pack from the market you can end up with dyes you already have unlocked. Considering that those people will have paid real cash, I do not think that it is acceptable that they can end up with duplicates that they can neither use nor trade off/away. Random dye packs should not include dyes you have unlocked already.

Edited by Parvati, 24 June 2012 - 03:30 PM.

[Feathermoore]

I am not a person to care about the way dyes work (will likely never use them), but I am curious how this decision got past the "is this fun?" test that Anet claimed they put everything through.

[shamayne]

Feathermoore, on 24 June 2012 - 03:33 PM, said:

I am not a person to care about the way dyes work (will likely never use them), but I am curious how this decision got past the "is this fun?" test that Anet claimed they put everything through.

Before I start, we should all keep in mind that nobody of us knows what was the driving force behind the decision from going account-based to character-based unlocks. I myself can think about atleast 5 different reasons, which all make sense.

If I were a playtester at Anet and I would have to give feedback about my impressions about the difference between BWE1 and BWE2 I'd have said: Well, the system in BWE2 makes more fun than the one in BWE1, but it isn't optimal yet. There are certain things that could be changed to make it more fun. Give me a method to get a specific dye that I have no luck to get by identifying my dyes... you are working on it? Okay, I take another look later. It would also be useful to see the color of the dye and not just the name. How about a preview function before I register (unlock) the dye on my character? Oh, maybe you could add an account-wide achievement for color unlocks, that could please completionists and in the same time remove the pressure of having all the color on every char.

The biggest problem I see in this whole discussion: A lot of people just see the change from account- to character-unlocks. Even in BWE1 it was already charcater-unlock IIRC and it had a timesink mechanic which I think is totally annoying. To remove that, there was this convinient (beware! sarcasm) item in the store. THAT's what i call cash grab. THAT's what greedy shops offer.

Arguing the way like so many others do, that they have to unlock all dyes on 5 characters isn't really an argument. If this is viable I could argue that everything for my character should be account-based. Because, I already collected all the dungeon armor sets with one character, I don't see a reason to do that again just to use the skin on another char it's just pure grind.
To clarify: I am NOT asking for account wide armor unlocks it just was meant as an example. Slowly I seem to understand how it must be for Anet. If I were in their shoes I would be afraid to give any information at all. The way people are twisting and over analyzing each of their words, it must be like walking on hot coals for those guys. I wouldn't wonder if they're in the process of hiring a lawyer to read over every twitter feed, so they are safe it doesn't backfire.

To sum it up and answer your question, Feathermoore: I don't know how it got past their "is this fun?" test, but it definately got past mine when I compare the systems that I was offered so far. I don't think it's fun to search through 400 dyes I have unlocked on my account when I think only 30 or 50 of them fit my Mesmer. I find it more fun to just have the colors I see fit for a certain Profession on that character. How the next iteration excels I'll tell you after BWE3 (or maybe after the stresstest if it's implemented at the time).

Edited by shamayne, 24 June 2012 - 04:24 PM.

[dansamy]

white_migraine, on 24 June 2012 - 12:39 AM, said:

They nerfed the mission before the ring of fire missions in prophecies for the exact same reason you mentioned, I don't plan to see any difficulty toned down in betas, but upon release, they do listen to bitching about difficulty.

Just an FYI, they didn't nerf it because of difficulty. It was possible to do THK, even with PUGs, if you were intelligent about pulls and a monk took King Jalis. They nerfed it because average PUGs, with no sense of organization or leadership literally couldn't complete the game without getting past THK. There was a monk strike where monks refused to play with PUGs and only went through the mission with friends and guildmates. The monk henchmen AI was retarded. You couldn't complete this mission without a human player monk and all the human player monks refused to monk PUGs through it. They had to "repair" it so that it could be completed relying only on the henchmen AI as the party's sole source of healing.

There were players stalled at THK for literally weeks. I know because I played E/Mo healer through it on my first character. I was forced to switch from elemental aoe to ele healer for THK and all of the Ring of Fire missions due to the monk strike. It was also where/how I ended up switching from ele to monk for the majority of my PvP in GW.

Edited by dansamy, 24 June 2012 - 04:38 PM.

[white_migraine]

dansamy, on 24 June 2012 - 04:33 PM, said:

Just an FYI, they didn't nerf it because of difficulty. It was possible to do THK, even with PUGs, if you were intelligent about pulls and a monk took King Jalis. They nerfed it because average PUGs, with no sense of organization or leadership literally couldn't complete the game without getting past THK. There was a monk strike where monks refused to play with PUGs and only went through the mission with friends and guildmates. The monk henchmen AI was retarded. You couldn't complete this mission without a human player monk and all the human player monks refused to monk PUGs through it. They had to "repair" it so that it could be completed relying only on the henchmen AI as the party's sole source of healing.

There were players stalled at THK for literally weeks. I know because I played E/Mo healer through it on my first character. I was forced to switch from elemental aoe to ele healer for THK and all of the Ring of Fire missions due to the monk strike. It was also where/how I ended up switching from ele to monk for the majority of my PvP in GW.

I never played monk and never noticed any trouble with finding monks in pugs, so I still feel that was blown out of proportion so I don't know. but then there was still shadowform, ursan blessing was easy mode everything. it really seems like they stopped trying to balance things once eotn was out honestly. I kind of forgot how this got onto this topic...

[MisterB]

dansamy, on 24 June 2012 - 04:33 PM, said:

Just an FYI, they didn't nerf it because of difficulty. It was possible to do THK, even with PUGs, if you were intelligent about pulls and a monk took King Jalis. They nerfed it because average PUGs, with no sense of organization or leadership literally couldn't complete the game without getting past THK. There was a monk strike where monks refused to play with PUGs and only went through the mission with friends and guildmates. The monk henchmen AI was retarded. You couldn't complete this mission without a human player monk and all the human player monks refused to monk PUGs through it. They had to "repair" it so that it could be completed relying only on the henchmen AI as the party's sole source of healing.

There were players stalled at THK for literally weeks. I know because I played E/Mo healer through it on my first character. I was forced to switch from elemental aoe to ele healer for THK and all of the Ring of Fire missions due to the monk strike. It was also where/how I ended up switching from ele to monk for the majority of my PvP in GW.

THK was possible with henchmen; it's how I succeeded (eventually). The monk strike was meaningless if you were able to play with henchmen. Not all players could do that, nor all PuGs, as you noted. See this thread or here, for other accounts of playing THK with henchmen.

ANet updated the henchmen to have 3 pieces of infused armor on June 1, 2005, and I'm positive I wasn't at THK then. I imagine it was more difficult with Spectral Agony having its full effect on henchies before that.

Edited by MisterB, 24 June 2012 - 05:45 PM.

[Jijimuge]

MisterB, on 24 June 2012 - 05:41 PM, said:

THK was possible with henchmen; it's how I succeeded (eventually). The monk strike was meaningless if you were able to play with henchmen. Not all players could do that, nor all PuGs, as you noted. See this thread or here, for other accounts of playing THK with henchmen.

Offtopic I guess, but same here - did it fine with henchies (no heroes) on mesmer after the infusion buff but before the monk strike.

Wayshuba, on 24 June 2012 - 01:24 PM, said:

Not telling ArenaNet how to run their business, but as customers many with the same viewpoint as myself are telling them HOW they can get my money. It's up to them whether they want it or not.

From that perspective, it becomes a question of the elasticity of demand for dyes - perhaps ANet believe that demand is inelastic and that having dyes character bound would be more profitable....

For myself, I'm not fussed whether dyes are account or character bound...and yes, I do want dyes on characters.  What is appealing for me about the forge system is that it allows me to get the colour I want via a crafting process, which I believe I'll find more interesting than dyes being reduced to an auction house system.  That said, it all depends on how the system for getting desired colours works.

[dansamy]

Oh, I'm getting old and my memory is failing me! Yes, I did it with a PUG as an e/mo healer in May-ish of 2005 before the infusion upgrade to henchies. It was suicide to do it with hench before they got infused armors. They just died repeatedly. That part was broken and had to be repaired. (Who at Anet thought it was a good idea that they weren't infused to start with?)

Monk strike was long after I was through with the PvE portion on multiple toons.

Edited by dansamy, 24 June 2012 - 06:28 PM.

[Havoc]

Wayshuba, on 24 June 2012 - 12:38 PM, said:

A business making money is one thing, a business making money by engineering exploitative techniques is another. Business is not about making all the money you can at all costs, including crippling products to do it. In fact, this business model is so questionable that there are many countries now debating legislation around it. Guess it must be really good business for this to be on the table. Yes, profit is important, but American companies in particular have clearly lost sight when it has become about profit at all costs - to employees, morals, ethics and customers. At the end of a year, if you can manage to provide for your customers and pull a 20% net profit - is 30% any better? Your in the black.. period. I'd rather see a business do the former and please their customers than do the latter and piss a whole bunch of them off.

Lastly, I own a business, and have for many years. Though it isn't a game company, I've managed to provide for my family and a couple of hundreds of others as well. I've built this business successfully from listening to our customers and providing them with a superior flat-rate pricing model versus the competition (which in the OSR market has traditionally been about nickel-and-diming businesses which they are all tired of - sound familiar?).

Business 101: When customers are willing to pay for a product or service in a certain manner and you can provide this in that manner without incurring extra costs for your business you do it. Otherwise you are being foolish, and YES they are being greedy. For ArenaNet, for example, to go full account unlock non-RNG would please more customers - those that don't like the way it is now and those that don't care either way. Yet they continue to push forward with a controversial method, which is not smart business.

Case in point: It costs maybe $0.05 actual to program RGB setting for a dye. They can sell each of these for $0.30 and make a heck of a profit (500% markup). Instead, we go RNG and make them character locked so we can sell this same item multiple times over even though the cost hasn't changed. It's plain greed and it's plain BS. After all why have 500% margin when you can have 5000%. Please, please enlighten me as to how this is even considered sane business? Five-hundred percent isn't enough? We have to resort to crippled game mechanics and RNG lotteries because we want a 5000% return instead? Secondly, we have costumes at $7.00 in GW1. If you have seven characters, that is roughly $1.00 a character. In GW2 they are now $8.00 PER CHARACTER! Yes, you can swap the item with another character but you still only get one. Please tell me how this massive price increase from one game to the next makes any sense at all.

Sorry you don't like my viewpoint, but being that I am both a customer and do own a successful business I will stick with my opinions. ArenaNet is completely ignoring the negativity around this issue and there is no reason for them to do so. It simply tarnishes many customers view of the company overall. Lastly, I have not attacked anyone who supports the current viewpoint - that's anyone's right as a customer and I will not begrudge anyone that.

You're a successful business man with several hundred employees? Right. Well I'm the king of the world.

If you were a successful businessman, you would understand what ANet is doing. You would even understand that there is no single successful business model. You would understand that ANet has responsiblities above and beyond their own pockets, and even their customers pockets. You would understand that they have a responsibility to NCSoft, and to corporate stockholders. You would understand that R&D costs money. You would understand that the money you paid for the game reimbursed ANet for development of that game, and not for any development on future content.

If you were a successful businessman, you would understand that coming onto this forum and calling them insane, greedy, and fools is not likely to swing their position or even cause them to regard what you are writing in a favorable light. Lastly, if you were a successful businessman with hundreds of employees, you would have neither the time or the inclination to hang out on this forum ranting in this rediculous fashion about something that may save you a couple dozen dollars down the road.

...and just for your info, you can't even get a programmer to turn on his computer for five cents, let alone program RGB settings.

[Wayshuba]

Havoc, on 24 June 2012 - 06:24 PM, said:

You're a successful business man with several hundred employees? Right. Well I'm the king of the world.

If you were a successful businessman, you would understand what ANet is doing. You would even understand that there is no single successful business model. You would understand that ANet has responsiblities above and beyond their own pockets, and even their customers pockets. You would understand that they have a responsibility to NCSoft, and to corporate stockholders. You would understand that R&D costs money. You would understand that the money you paid for the game reimbursed ANet for development of that game, and not for any development on future content.

If you were a successful businessman, you would understand that coming onto this forum and calling them insane, greedy, and fools is not likely to swing their position or even cause them to regard what you are writing in a favorable light. Lastly, if you were a successful businessman with hundreds of employees, you would have neither the time or the inclination to hang out on this forum ranting in this rediculous fashion about something that may save you a couple dozen dollars down the road.

...and just for your info, you can't even get a programmer to turn on his computer for five cents, let alone program RGB settings.

Whether you believe my information or not is of no import. Even business owners do not work around the clock and yes, we also can enjoy MMOs too. You do realize that there are business owners, celebrities and sports stars that also play MMOs - did you not?

Secondly, as a business owner I do understand the importance of customer feedback - even when it is harsh but true. I understand all too well what ArenaNet is doing, the OSR industry (as well as the older Video Rental industry) was doing this to customers long before the MMO industry and everytime it has proven to be a business model that eventually fails. Customers don't like feeling taken advantage of - period. NetFlix destroyed the video rental industry by upending a model where customers felt abused. My business has been successful in the OSR (Online search and recruitment) space for the exact same reasons. In the OSR industry for example, companies are typically charged for every little thing they want to do - want to post a job you pay, want to do a search, you pay yet again, want to save potential candidates for future reference, you pay yet again. Businesses are tired of it and our company (along with a few of the newer startups in this space) are bucking that trend, going for a flat rate, and all are doing well (since it's a rather booming industry at the time). Seems the MMO space should look beyond the smoke and mirrors of the industry to see that this business models are not that great in the long term.

As far as R&D you are incorrect in your assessments. A company usually doesn't collect money from current customers for future development, it doesn't work that way at all. A company invests money in R&D to be recuperated at a future point (which is why the IRS allows R&D investment to be written down over multiple years) when it is sold. So, any work done currently should be recuperated on box sales alone. Any future work should be recuperated at a later date for developments made. This is the essence of the cash shop model, invest in producing something and, if customers find value in it, they buy it AFTER the investment is made. Right now, there are quite a few customers (it was the longest thread from last beta) that are saying character locked and RNG packages do not have value to them, but account bound and specific dye purchases do. To ignore it is being foolish period. People are telling ArenaNet outright how they would like to spend money with them and they are choosing to let it fall on deaf ears - that is the very definition of foolish in business. Harsh words, yes, but also true. I like the game as next as the next person, but it doesn't mean I walk around with blinders on to a company's businesses practices either.

Also, like most rapid growth businesses, I have outside investors, so I am quite aware of what they are looking for. In the end, they want growth and profit - but not at the expense of pissing customers off - it is not good for a company's reputation and therefore, in financial terms, usually has an impact on valuation multipliers. The better your revenue and brand image, the higher the multiplier. Even higher revenue but a mediocre brand image usually results in lower multiplier thresholds. At the end of the day, it is not the revenue or profit that is the main driver for investors (otherwise 80% of internet companies today that have no revenue wouldn't exist) it is total company valuation - nothing else matters beyond that. Their stock is based on company value - little to do with overall revenue and profit. Honestly, they could care less if you were turning a 1% net margin but your company valuation was high and climbing, they would love you. Profit only means the capability of a company to continue normal operations, shareholders rarely see any of the profit so why do they care if it is 10%, 20% or 30% - as long as it is in the black it is good. Shareholders only care about one thing - the rising share price. So you see, I quite in fact do understand how this works and ArenaNet would do well to heed the same - reputation is just as important as profit as both contribute to overall company value.

Edited by Wayshuba, 24 June 2012 - 08:55 PM.

[Syncline]

dansamy, on 24 June 2012 - 04:33 PM, said:

There were players stalled at THK for literally weeks. I know because I played E/Mo healer through it on my first character. I was forced to switch from elemental aoe to ele healer for THK and all of the Ring of Fire missions due to the monk strike. It was also where/how I ended up switching from ele to monk for the majority of my PvP in GW.

My roomie stopped monking for pugs because it was such a pain. I stopped healing for pugs because no one took an ele healer seriously at the time; I'd switched because I preferred the ele look and didn't like how they were weak in hard mode because of the elemental resistances that everything used to have.

Edit: note that, last I read, dyes don't work like a lot of games do it, where it just changed the numerical value of the channel. Each dyed part of a costume is hand-colored (even if some may just have been color-shifted in whatever paint program they used), because they didn't like how changing RBG values without changing the actual texture made a lot of stuff look. They had this issue in GW1 and decided to change it for GW2.

Edited by Syncline, 24 June 2012 - 08:44 PM.

[Havoc]

Wayshuba, on 24 June 2012 - 08:37 PM, said:

Whether you believe my information or not is of no import.

-snip-

It is certainly true that whether I believe you or not is of no import. Also of no import is everything you say in this post and your previous posts.
Anet has decided upon this model, and have reaffirmed that they are commited to it. You are most certainly not going to change that by insulting them, which you have done repeatedly. Throwing around numbers based upon conjecture will also fail to change their mind.

Edited by Chalky, 24 June 2012 - 09:52 PM.

[Wayshuba]

Havoc, on 24 June 2012 - 08:49 PM, said:

I was baiting him a bit, it's true, but just because my BS meter was off the scale. Fact of the matter is that he is trolling (hence, you're spot-on calling it troll bait - as I was baiting a troll). His entire discussion has absolutely nothing to do with the topic of this thread.



It is certainly true that whether I believe you or not is of no import. Also of no import is everything you say in this post and your previous posts.
Anet has decided upon this model, and have reaffirmed that they are commited to it. You are most certainly not going to change that by insulting them, which you have done repeatedly. Throwing around numbers based upon conjecture will also fail to change their mind.

Or perhaps, if they happen to read this, and similar posts by others on their official threads, they may just reconsider their position and take it to heart. It's not like I have just used a tough stance on them without giving a good bit of feedback on why. If they ignore it, fine, it is their right to do so. But if they launch with the current model and it performs below expectations, they will remember this type of feedback at a future point and may finally understand and correct for it. Like the old saying, "hindsight is sometimes 20/20".

Would it be better that I, and customers feeling the same way as I do, just keep quiet so we don't hurt their feelings (which honestly I could care less about as they are a business) and then ArenaNet releases with this model, it tanks in meeting revenue expectations and instead of having feedback they sit in a conference room wondering WHY it tanked. No, feedback, both good and bad, should be considered.

I call them foolish because it is exactly what they are being when customers tell you how to get their money and you completely ignore it, or worse do the one thing they tell you will keep them from parting with their money. What would you call that? Good business?

Let me give another small example: Your a business that sells plastic cups. Customers tell you they want to by just the red ones for $1 each. Instead, you package three random color cups in a container, that may or may not contain red, and price it at $3. You thoughts are customers will spend a ton of money trying to get the red cup, but instead no customer buys the package at all because they only want the red cups and don't like spending money to see if they will get a red cup or not. So instead of the business getting $1 for a red cup, they get nothing at all because customers don't like the value in the package you presented. So now, both the customer and the business has lost here. See the point?

Edited by Wayshuba, 24 June 2012 - 09:10 PM.

[Metaditon Orions]

woah coming in here a lot of off-topic in my opinion

anyway I prefer the dyes being PER character, gives me something to do on every character I can spend MORE time in game, waste more of my real life.

If I could I would thank them for doing this, yes account-based is nice and all that but I would get them really quickly due to my obsessive play style I would just get them really and waste hours getting colors nicely.

[Havoc]

Wayshuba, on 24 June 2012 - 09:03 PM, said:

-snip-

Feedback is a wonderful thing for any project in development, as are suggestions. I fully support both. It's your tone that is wrong. Insulting them will really get you nowhere. Suggesting high-handedly that you know so much more than they do will just cause them to cease taking you seriously.

You should seriously reconsider how you are delivering your message.

As far as them not listening to your feedback; your feedback is not everybodies. Maybe they're listening to my feedback? After all, I'm also a customer, and one who wants to support them....

[Shonie]

Wayshuba, on 24 June 2012 - 09:03 PM, said:

Or perhaps, if they happen to read this, and similar posts by others on their official threads, they may just reconsider their position and take it to heart. It's not like I have just used a tough stance on them without giving a good bit of feedback on why. If they ignore it, fine, it is their right to do so. But if they launch with the current model and it performs below expectations, they will remember this type of feedback at a future point and may finally understand and correct for it. Like the old saying, "hindsight is sometimes 20/20".

Would it be better that I, and customers feeling the same way as I do, just keep quiet so we don't hurt their feelings (which honestly I could care less about as they are a business) and then ArenaNet releases with this model, it tanks in meeting revenue expectations and instead of having feedback they sit in a conference room wondering WHY it tanked. No, feedback, both good and bad, should be considered.

I call them foolish because it is exactly what they are being when customers tell you how to get their money and you completely ignore it, or worse do the one thing they tell you will keep them from parting with their money. What would you call that? Good business?

I think perhaps you overestimate the value of your own opinion.
It's pretty easy to sitback and armchair quarterback and throw out multitudes of opinions and suggestions just waiting for perhaps one of them to come to fruition so you can sitback and say "told you so".
You're never going to know how much ANet makes, or doesn't make from the cashshop, with dyes only being one of a hundred or more things that are purchasable within it.
So actually think about what you're complaining about and how minor it is in the grand scheme of things within the game. It's probably about as important as telling McDonalds their small ketchup packets are less awesome as white with red lettering instead of red with white lettering. It's not important enough to make a big fuss about, and if armour dye within the game being character-bound or account-bound is of some major importance to you that you resort to this sort of adament complaining and hassle, you need to rethink the things that are actually important.

[Wayshuba]

Havoc, on 24 June 2012 - 09:14 PM, said:

As far as them not listening to your feedback; your feedback is not everybodies. Maybe they're listening to my feedback? After all, I'm also a customer, and one who wants to support them....

Okay, my last post on this subject.

I want to support them also. If they were, for example, to make the dyes a fixed batch of 10 colors for say $5 and account wide I can guarantee I would be buying all 40 batches on day one - or dropping another $200. The way they are now, I will just take what drops in game and live with it.

The whole point is if they made the dyes account wide and fixed in colors in the store they would capture the most customers. The game now, however, is the customers like myself (of which there were a whole lot in the beta) that won't spend money on this now, they hope that those that will support them will spend even more money to make up for the customers who won't purchase the current setup.

[eviator]

I'm jumping into this conversation on page 24. Hard to believe this topic is still getting posts. I know we're still in beta/development phase, but the character-bound dyes seem pretty much set in stone at this point. Not so good for completionists, and potentially frustrating for folks looking for a very specific look. It also makes people who are anti-"cash shop" (such a misnomer, but I'll play) angry.

I think it will improve character diversity, and it will make that Black Zaitan-scale armor that much more rare and treasured. I got a handful of "dye seeds" (?) in a few hours of PvE play, and who knows what kind of other ways we'll be able to get them (e.g. special events, karma, and so on).

I guess what I'm hoping is that people will give up begging for account-bound dyes because it's not likely, and this thread can finally be buried. If you feel like this is a troll post, please don't respond because I don't care to bump this topic any further.

[Wayshuba]

Shonie, on 24 June 2012 - 09:16 PM, said:

I think perhaps you overestimate the value of your own opinion.

Except my opinion wasn't unique in the beta - in fact, my opinion aligned with the vast majority of the feedback in the beta. So it just isn't me.

Now I'm done permanently with this subject.

Edited by Wayshuba, 24 June 2012 - 09:23 PM.

[anzenketh]

Wayshuba, on 24 June 2012 - 09:03 PM, said:

Or perhaps, if they happen to read this, and similar posts by others on their official threads, they may just reconsider their position and take it to heart. It's not like I have just used a tough stance on them without giving a good bit of feedback on why. If they ignore it, fine, it is their right to do so. But if they launch with the current model and it performs below expectations, they will remember this type of feedback at a future point and may finally understand and correct for it. Like the old saying, "hindsight is sometimes 20/20".

Would it be better that I, and customers feeling the same way as I do, just keep quiet so we don't hurt their feelings (which honestly I could care less about as they are a business) and then ArenaNet releases with this model, it tanks in meeting revenue expectations and instead of having feedback they sit in a conference room wondering WHY it tanked. No, feedback, both good and bad, should be considered.

I call them foolish because it is exactly what they are being when customers tell you how to get their money and you completely ignore it, or worse do the one thing they tell you will keep them from parting with their money. What would you call that? Good business?

Let me give another small example: Your a business that sells plastic cups. Customers tell you they want to by just the red ones for $1 each. Instead, you package three random color cups in a container, that may or may not contain red, and price it at $3. You thoughts are customers will spend a ton of money trying to get the red cup, but instead no customer buys the package at all because they only want the red cups and don't like spending money to see if they will get a red cup or not. So instead of the business getting $1 for a red cup, they get nothing at all because customers don't like the value in the package you presented. So now, both the customer and the business has lost here. See the point?

There is a difference between feedback and criticism. What you are doing is pure criticism. If you truly want to give feedback you can keep the AreaNet is fools, liers, thiefs, Money grabber not caring about the customer comments to yourself. This includes any comment against any ArenaNet employee.

Feedback is: I don't like XYZ due to XYZ. With a possiblity of saying. I think XYZ will solve ABC problem. Then leaving it at that.

I honestly think that after all the information that has come out on this someone who is informed is accepting of the change pending review of the way they finish implementing the new dye system.

Wayshuba, on 24 June 2012 - 09:22 PM, said:

Except my opinion wasn't unique in the beta - in fact, my opinion aligned with the vast majority of the feedback in the beta. So it just isn't me.

Now I'm done permanently with this subject.

Yes your opinion is not unique. But now I feel a lot of the community is holding back pending further judgment becosue now almost everyone in the community is aware that they are working on a way for us to get the specific color we want. Possibly solving most if not all the problems that everyone has with the dye system.

This is what I recommended oh how many pages back. That the community withold judgment until they complete the system. Then lets see what the community thinks.

Can pepole who have not expressed there dislike with the account bound system still express their opinion on the mattter. Yes By all means do so. But please do so in a construtive polite manner. Say why you don't like the change. No more of this ArenaNet are liers talk.

If pepole are to do this. I will only post to correct incorrect information, and pepole who offer critisism not feedback. If no new individual has feedback on this matter. We can let this thread die until the system is complete.

Edited by anzenketh, 24 June 2012 - 09:37 PM.

[Protoavis]

Wayshuba, on 24 June 2012 - 01:24 PM, said:

Not telling ArenaNet how to run their business, but as customers many with the same viewpoint as myself are telling them HOW they can get my money. It's up to them whether they want it or not.

That's cool, that's fine, but why you feel the need to "suggest" this every 4 posts? I'm sure reading it once is more than enough, rather than having it be every other post.

eviator, on 24 June 2012 - 09:21 PM, said:

I'm jumping into this conversation on page 24. Hard to believe this topic is still getting posts.

It's because the same three people keep posting the same three "suggestions" rather than just accepting they said their piece and moving on to let AN deal with it, if they keep going on and on about it they might change AN mind seems to be their mentality.

Edited by Protoavis, 24 June 2012 - 09:46 PM.

[Shonie]

Wayshuba, on 24 June 2012 - 09:22 PM, said:

Except my opinion wasn't unique in the beta - in fact, my opinion aligned with the vast majority of the feedback in the beta. So it just isn't me.

Now I'm done permanently with this subject.

How do you figure your feedback/opinion is the majority? 5-10 people make up the majority of complaining posts. If 5-10 people make up the majority in this game, it is doomed! Out of 24 or 25 pages of this thread, it's the same few people constantly whining that they want an account-based system with no good reason other than personal preference, and their somehow superior knowledge of how Anet will make money within the financial systems in their game. The only thing I constantly see is people saying that if it is account-based, they'll spend "200 dollars on dyes!!!!!, if it's character-based I won't spend anything!!!! /rage"
Ya ok, whatever...
If they leave it character-based, I'll spend 37 bazillion on dyes! Pretty awesome isn't it.
I'm sure Anet is really concerned about the 200 dollars you and a few others will spend within the first few weeks of the games existance to entirely ruin the dye system in the longrun, rendering it completely useless.

[Chalky]

I think we all need to take a break 'cause it's getting rather heated.  People should perhaps be less quick to scream about "evil intentions" the second a game design decision doesn't live up to their precise preconception of how it would work.

Edited by Chalky, 24 June 2012 - 09:57 PM.