@Dygz Excellent post, Dygz, regarding this subject! Doubt it could have been stated any better, than the way you put it. Agree wholeheartedly!
Hopefully, Steven further addresses any misunderstandings in the upcoming podcast. His response in this thread shows the devs attention to the community, which is a great sign going forward. And, his mea culpa post was well done, on his part. Thank you, Steven.
I'll keep this short. It's all about misleading promises. Thanks to @dygz for his other post, challenging another forum participate to find a definition on the KS webpage that defines mount. I took up that challenge.
FAQ from KS, near the bottom:
Q: What’s the difference between a mule and a normal character mount? They both serve different purposes.<strong> A mount is a ridable animal used mostly for speed</strong>, while a mule is an animal used to haul goods.
There’s your definition. Just be honest and admit that a mistake had happen, and stop doubling down on false and twisted logic like words with multiple meanings.
Yep. Which tells us the clear difference between a mule and a normal character mount. Rather than the differences between a normal character mount and a KS mount and a KS mount skin.
The logical question still remains - if KS rewards are cosmetic and the company is anti-P2W, how can the KS mounts provide speed greater than player character run speed? The logical answer is that the KS mounts must be cosmetic.
Yeah. See what you are doing with this kind of language is both a twisting of logic and denying of common sense. Intrepid’s KS page is poorly worded in the case of this mount vs skin thing. They admit this. The more that you try to convince some people that they are in the wrong for reading things the way that they did, the more that they will get angry because they know that you are being obtuse and defensive of Intrepid. Intrepid has already admitted that it is a problem and tried to clarify. You are arguing that someone else’s reading comprehension is wrong when Intrepid has already admitted that it isn’t.
Anyone that is still just pushing the issue and acting irate and mad, either has not seen the apology and clarifications, or they are pushing to get the thing actually changed from “skins” to actual mounts. Help the former find any Intrepid clarifications so they can be satisfied and DO NOT FEED the later.
Problem goes away! Hurrah!
Anything else that you do might just be damaging and interfering in Intrepid's damage control and customer service policies.
I don't see how they can feel logical, when the packages and Backer Rewards SPECIFICALLY seperate Armor skins and Costumes, Notably the Angel and Demon Skins also specifically mentioned as skins not costumes.
Saying you receive a Skin and you receive a costume are TWO SEPARATE things, And that is Per KS packages and Per Intrepid Studios. It's the exact same thing with the difference between a Mount and a skin! They are two entirely separate definitions and arguing otherwise is frankly just childish. It's very clear what the distinction is and differences between the two. And in NO uncertain terms.
That being said As you said, Steven already came down and clarified and admitted it was a mistake.
Which is fine mistakes happen, people aren't infallible. And I also increased my KS to Leader Of Men in the aftermath after everything was cleared up. I ???? appreciate @steven and @IntrepidStudios Transparency :) and will support their vision for a great game to come
But for others don't insult our intelligence when the wrong was clearly identified, and acknowledged already. You just look silly now @dygz
It's not about wrong. It's not about blame. It's not just mounts vs skins.
There is a break down in communication because the definitions of terms for previous MMORPGs are different than what they will be for Ashes. Both the devs and the fans will have to work together to make the definitions and terminology for Ashes more clear... all across the board.
For all you know all mounts are exactly the same and mount speeds could be tied to a characters stats not the specific mount. You have no grounds to call it p2w elements when it offers no advantage other than to look cool.
Now if something came down and said "hey yo, these mounts are Wayyyy faster than base game mounts" then yes that would be p2w. But that obviously isn't the case. I don't know where or what reasoning you were taught but that is clearly not a p2w element.
That also being said, I like the skins idea, but would have preferred mounts that we could "revive" if they died or have mounts all at base game have zero stats and only having mounts stats change per character upgrades.
@Nelson_Rebel I believe the whole point of this forum thread, a reddit post, and a you tube video, all centered on this topic of mounts vs. skins, sprang from just that. A miscommunication, and the misinterpretation by some of the player base, because of it.
What I took from Dygz post was that, misunderstanding aside, IS is trying to "redefine" what mmorpg's are, and how they are made. In doing so, terminologies and practices that we would normally associate with your more common mmo's, would not operate the same in relation to AoC. So, while it is definitely incumbent on the devs of such a game to remain transparent in what they're trying to implement, it would also help if the player base thought outside the box, to keep an open mind.
That being said, as consumers, we should always be aware of what we're getting ourselves into, ask questions, and expect accountability from people we invest in. IS did word their KS wrongly, though they did say no P2W. That left players to draw their own conclusions, which is a bad thing. But, it's been addressed.
Sure you can create a whole new lexicon and set of words that mean slightly different things than straight dictionary definitions if you like for your sub culture. You can't expect that everyone will know how to speak or understand perfectly how to speak or interpret you, though. Nor do I believe that Intrepid was trying or is trying to redefine vocabulary. "We are going to redefine the MMORPG fantasy marketplace" or "I want to make a game myself, that overturns all of the old ways of doing things and makes them better" or "Absolutely no pay to win" Still needs constant defining and explaining, just because it is too complex a bit of meaning to get across without lots of words exactly as they are defined in the dictionary. Each of those phrases is too broad.
I think everyone who believes this is a P2W issue needs to look at themselves.
Let me point out that one of the rewards is a 1-2 day headstart. Exclusive to people who put real life money into the game. You can gain level and items while playing. Please tell me, how the 1-2 day headstart is not P2W if you're so adamant that having a mount at lvl 1 vs lvl 5 is P2W.
My point is, if your gonna defend your stance that mounts need to be skins because of P2W issues, go to the devs and advocate for no 1-2 day head start. Otherwise you're all hypocrites for defending your argument with P2W.
How absolutely technical do you want to get about P2W? My KS reward dress is different than any other dress and when I wear it, it is so impressive that I get better deals trading with sex starved MMO players than I do wearing regular apparel?
But yeah, there is an inarguable advantage in character growth with headstart days. There also is with alpha and beta testing. You know most likely where critters will be, where dungeons might be. You know some tricks that may not make it into youtube videos, etc...
The more nitpicky you get on the P2W thing, the less and less you leave KS users to offer as rewards... So what can you do, raise a stink about everything?
Since we know that some people misunderstood what the devs intended to communicate, there was a miscommunication. The devs didn't word their page "wrongly" - rather they weren't as clear as they thought they were. They know what they meant by "mount" - they didn't anticipate that some people would be confused that the KS mounts would be a skin.
The devs didn't use the "wrong" word. They could have used a word that would have been more clear. But, that is 20/20 hindsight thing - and part of communication. Different people might have different concepts of the same word. Again, especially when talking about a revolutionary, new design.
One reward is a one-two day headstart with nodes turned off. Which is significant because it's the node changes which change the world. Affecting things like the levels of mobs that are available. So... the next question you should be asking yourselves is how significant the headstart will be in terms of gaining power. And people should figure out what that actually means rather than assuming that they know what it means based on experiencing headstarts in previous MMORPGs.
@Shirikuryu Steven has addressed the issue if the "1-2 day headstart" as well. He clearly stated that all nodes would be deactivated, during the headstart phase. Meaning that, players will just be exploring, and getting more familiar with the game mechanics, as opposed to getting the jump on building up nodes.
And, if the idea of a player getting a couple days headstart, over others is P2W, then I guess every player who start playing before another is also guilty of P2W. If my friend can't play the game when it launches, while I can (and do), by that logic, because I could afford to play before he could, I'm guilty of P2W.
But, this is why we have forums, to discuss this stuff. Everyone interprets things differently, and while we try to find commonality, sometimes we just have to agree to disagree.
Well, Dygz, they were using the English language for their descriptions and wording. They used the wrong word for skins. That is pretty simple. They see that and say that. 99% or more of the internet would agree that skin and mount mean different things. It's ok to admit to yourself that the drivers of the hypetrain made a mistake here and there. They seem to have no problem acknowledging it.
You are saying: I meant for you to turn left but I wrote down "turn right" and you should have done the research to know that means "turn left" in my secret language.... Naw. Not buying that today. ;)
@Dygz lol worded "wrongly", "inaccurately", "vaguely", "unclearly"...for the most part, convey the same message, imho. But, I'll digress from engaging in semantics. It is what it is.
Not quite. I'll tell you why head starts are P2W (remember, I don't actually care but it's about principle here)
1st I know nodes are deactivated.
2nd, we can agree that you do gain some benefits, ie, distance, level advantage, and items (including a mount in those lvl 5 quest).
3rd, Remember, this 1-2day headstart is exclusive to pledgers. The difference between not having the time to log on vs not being able to log on is what's separates my argument from yours. What makes everything <strong>not </strong>P2W is that everyone has a fair opportunity to achieve the same things as long as they put the same effort and time to it. No amount of effort or time can gain the same privileged as a 1-2 day headstart. That in itself is different than you and your friends logging in at different times, because both you and your friend had the same opportunity to log in when the game launchs, just one of you choose not to.
Look, I'm just pointing out that if you can construe mounts as P2W, then you have to use the same logic and say that 1-2 day headstart is P2W. It's not fair to change the logic to fit your argument.
Finally, yes I want to have healthy discussions with fellow players on a game we all love. But my issue is people being hypocrites and using illogical arguments to defend their point. I've made some blunders, and when I'm wrong, I simple apologize and move on. But some people just refuse to admit they are wrong when the devs themselves came on to apologize. And yes, we can agree to disagree. (I don't disagree with you that much, you have a fair and kind approach and I do appreciate that).
No. They didn't use the wrong word for skins since the skins are skins of mounts. In this case mount is synonymous with skin mounts. It's like when people in the south use the word coke to refer to soda aka pop. It's OK to admit to yourself that you misunderstood what the devs meant. And it's important to understand that you will likely misunderstand what the devs mean if you continue to hold on to the concepts that have been used in previous MMORPGs. Because many of the terms we've been using for the 20 years have different meanings in Ashes.
Again, we all have to work together -fans and devs- to make sure that we're using terms as they apply to Ashes specifically. So, no, I am saying that when you move to a new place, you need to make sure that all the words used there have the same meanings as where-ever you're from...because some of them may not have the same meaning.
I feel like the issue is that; #1. Everyone has a different take on what P2W really is and some people will go further and further shaving that stick(issue) down until there is no stick left. Some stop at a certain point. It's what different takes are all about.
#2. Intrepid Studios(so far) has set their P2W definition to include that "Free Mounts at the Start are P2W" and "a cpl days early access without node progress" is not P2W.
#3. This access will only be on one or a cpl servers. Other servers will not have early access players in them getting all the virgin NPCs. If EA bothers you, go to the virgin servers....
IF they meant to say skins are synonymous with actual physical mounts (which they already admitted they did not, and said they needed to reword it to Skins FOR mounts) then they wouldn't have DELIBERATELY addressed Armor Skins as SKINS and Weapon Skins as SKINS if they knew there was a distinction.
Clearly english is not your Native language if you interpret this otherwise. Mounts mean MOUNT.
If I purchased a horse that says "Purchase exclusive Horse" And they instead give me a picture of an exclusive horse THAT IS NOT WHAT I PURCHASED. That is called a misled wording to purchase a product.
I'm not saying it was an intentional misleading(as Steven already said) But this is a cut and dry MISTAKE. No question. And not a misinterpretation.
@Shirikuryu lol I hear you, Shirikuryu. Like other posters have stated, I guess it all comes to down to what we (Intrepid included) look at as P2W.
But, I think most everybody here can agree that they want this game to be a success, and that quality fun can be had by all....no matter when you get to play! lol Great discourse with all of you. Thanks!
How much level advantage do we get from the headstart? Is it possible to reach level 5 during the headstart without leveling a node or is that just your assumption?
Pay2Win means that people are able to pay for things that provide avatars with a quicker power advantage over those who don't pay. If a mount is faster than a player character can run - that is a power advantage. And if you can pay real world cash for that. it is inherently P2W. Especially so if the mount is faster than other mounts that can be acquired in the game. If I can pay real world cash to make the mount I acquire we acquire at Level 5 faster than your mount because you didn't pay real world cash - that is P2W.
The devs came on to apologize for their part in a misunderstanding. If someone misunderstands what you say, it's easy enough to apologize since the message you sent wasn't as clear as you hoped it would be - that doesn't mean you're apologizing for misleading someone. And that doesn't mean that the audience doesn't also bear responsibility for assuming they understood the meanings of the words used - especially when their definitions clash with the context of the speakers overall commentary. "You mislead me because you said coke instead of soda...!" No. You just didn't understand that coke is also a synonym for soda. And the people for whom coke is a synonym for soda may not expect that you might be confused until you tell them that, for you, "coke" specifically refers to Coca Cola. There was a learning curve back in the day, when restaurants had to start specifying that the coke they sell is Pepsi.
I speak various dialects of English as my native language. And I also speak Spanish, Japanese and Russian. Perhaps understanding definitions in context is difficult for people who only speak one dialect of English.
But, the lesson remains, the terms that we're accustomed to using ofr previous MMORPGs have significantly different meanings in Ashes. It behooves you to pay attention and help the devs be more diligent about term usage all across the board. Because this is an issue that is broader than just "mounts" v "skins".
Comments
Plus we might want to breed them.
It's just a skin - so, removing the skin shouldn't be an issue. (but, ew)
Excellent post, Dygz, regarding this subject! Doubt it could have been stated any better, than the way you put it. Agree wholeheartedly!
Hopefully, Steven further addresses any misunderstandings in the upcoming podcast. His response in this thread shows the devs attention to the community, which is a great sign going forward. And, his mea culpa post was well done, on his part. Thank you, Steven.
I'll keep this short. It's all about misleading promises. Thanks to @dygz for his other post, challenging another forum participate to find a definition on the KS webpage that defines mount. I took up that challenge.
FAQ from KS, near the bottom:
Q: What’s the difference between a mule and a normal character mount?
They both serve different purposes.<strong> A mount is a ridable animal used mostly for speed</strong>, while a mule is an animal used to haul goods.
There’s your definition. Just be honest and admit that a mistake had happen, and stop doubling down on false and twisted logic like words with multiple meanings.
Rather than the differences between a normal character mount and a KS mount and a KS mount skin.
The logical question still remains - if KS rewards are cosmetic and the company is anti-P2W, how can the KS mounts provide speed greater than player character run speed?
The logical answer is that the KS mounts must be cosmetic.
Ok! I give up. Have a great day sir. No hard feelings.
Intrepid has already admitted that it is a problem and tried to clarify. You are arguing that someone else’s reading comprehension is wrong when Intrepid has already admitted that it isn’t.
Anyone that is still just pushing the issue and acting irate and mad, either has not seen the apology and clarifications, or they are pushing to get the thing actually changed from “skins” to actual mounts. Help the former find any Intrepid clarifications so they can be satisfied and DO NOT FEED the later.
Problem goes away! Hurrah!
Anything else that you do might just be damaging and interfering in Intrepid's damage control and customer service policies.
I don't see how they can feel logical, when the packages and Backer Rewards SPECIFICALLY seperate Armor skins and Costumes, Notably the Angel and Demon Skins also specifically mentioned as skins not costumes.
Saying you receive a Skin and you receive a costume are TWO SEPARATE things, And that is Per KS packages and Per Intrepid Studios. It's the exact same thing with the difference between a Mount and a skin! They are two entirely separate definitions and arguing otherwise is frankly just childish. It's very clear what the distinction is and differences between the two. And in NO uncertain terms.
That being said As you said, Steven already came down and clarified and admitted it was a mistake.
Which is fine mistakes happen, people aren't infallible. And I also increased my KS to Leader Of Men in the aftermath after everything was cleared up. I ???? appreciate @steven and @IntrepidStudios Transparency :) and will support their vision for a great game to come
But for others don't insult our intelligence when the wrong was clearly identified, and acknowledged already. You just look silly now
@dygz
There is a break down in communication because the definitions of terms for previous MMORPGs are different than what they will be for Ashes. Both the devs and the fans will have to work together to make the definitions and terminology for Ashes more clear... all across the board.
For all you know all mounts are exactly the same and mount speeds could be tied to a characters stats not the specific mount. You have no grounds to call it p2w elements when it offers no advantage other than to look cool.
Now if something came down and said "hey yo, these mounts are Wayyyy faster than base game
mounts" then yes that would be p2w. But that obviously isn't the case. I don't know where or what reasoning you were taught but that is clearly not a p2w element.
That also being said, I like the skins idea, but would have preferred mounts that we could "revive" if they died or have mounts all at base game have zero stats and only having mounts stats change per character upgrades.
No p2w elements and it satisfies all parties
No, there was no miscommunication nor was the terminology misinterpreted
It was a simple Mistake of them promoting something that was actually something else.
Very clearly, even Steven already said it was their mistake. There is no fighting that.
But as I said it's completely fine, mistakes happen and steven admitted it and was promptly addressed and apologized
I believe the whole point of this forum thread, a reddit post, and a you tube video, all centered on this topic of mounts vs. skins, sprang from just that. A miscommunication, and the misinterpretation by some of the player base, because of it.
What I took from Dygz post was that, misunderstanding aside, IS is trying to "redefine" what mmorpg's are, and how they are made. In doing so, terminologies and practices that we would normally associate with your more common mmo's, would not operate the same in relation to AoC. So, while it is definitely incumbent on the devs of such a game to remain transparent in what they're trying to implement, it would also help if the player base thought outside the box, to keep an open mind.
That being said, as consumers, we should always be aware of what we're getting ourselves into, ask questions, and expect accountability from people we invest in. IS did word their KS wrongly, though they did say no P2W. That left players to draw their own conclusions, which is a bad thing. But, it's been addressed.
Nor do I believe that Intrepid was trying or is trying to redefine vocabulary. "We are going to redefine the MMORPG fantasy marketplace" or "I want to make a game myself, that overturns all of the old ways of doing things and makes them better" or "Absolutely no pay to win" Still needs constant defining and explaining, just because it is too complex a bit of meaning to get across without lots of words exactly as they are defined in the dictionary. Each of those phrases is too broad.
Let me point out that one of the rewards is a 1-2 day headstart. Exclusive to people who put real life money into the game. You can gain level and items while playing. Please tell me, how the 1-2 day headstart is not P2W if you're so adamant that having a mount at lvl 1 vs lvl 5 is P2W.
My point is, if your gonna defend your stance that mounts need to be skins because of P2W issues, go to the devs and advocate for no 1-2 day head start. Otherwise you're all hypocrites for defending your argument with P2W.
But yeah, there is an inarguable advantage in character growth with headstart days. There also is with alpha and beta testing. You know most likely where critters will be, where dungeons might be. You know some tricks that may not make it into youtube videos, etc...
The more nitpicky you get on the P2W thing, the less and less you leave KS users to offer as rewards... So what can you do, raise a stink about everything?
For sure bro. I also want them to be skin. It just a better option for most people IMO.
The devs didn't word their page "wrongly" - rather they weren't as clear as they thought they were.
They know what they meant by "mount" - they didn't anticipate that some people would be confused that the KS mounts would be a skin.
The devs didn't use the "wrong" word. They could have used a word that would have been more clear.
But, that is 20/20 hindsight thing - and part of communication. Different people might have different concepts of the same word.
Again, especially when talking about a revolutionary, new design.
One reward is a one-two day headstart with nodes turned off. Which is significant because it's the node changes which change the world. Affecting things like the levels of mobs that are available.
So... the next question you should be asking yourselves is how significant the headstart will be in terms of gaining power.
And people should figure out what that actually means rather than assuming that they know what it means based on experiencing headstarts in previous MMORPGs.
Steven has addressed the issue if the "1-2 day headstart" as well. He clearly stated that all nodes would be deactivated, during the headstart phase. Meaning that, players will just be exploring, and getting more familiar with the game mechanics, as opposed to getting the jump on building up nodes.
And, if the idea of a player getting a couple days headstart, over others is P2W, then I guess every player who start playing before another is also guilty of P2W. If my friend can't play the game when it launches, while I can (and do), by that logic, because I could afford to play before he could, I'm guilty of P2W.
But, this is why we have forums, to discuss this stuff. Everyone interprets things differently, and while we try to find commonality, sometimes we just have to agree to disagree.
99% or more of the internet would agree that skin and mount mean different things. It's ok to admit to yourself that the drivers of the hypetrain made a mistake here and there. They seem to have no problem acknowledging it.
You are saying:
I meant for you to turn left but I wrote down "turn right" and you should have done the research to know that means "turn left" in my secret language.... Naw. Not buying that today. ;)
lol worded "wrongly", "inaccurately", "vaguely", "unclearly"...for the most part, convey the same message, imho. But, I'll digress from engaging in semantics. It is what it is.
Not quite. I'll tell you why head starts are P2W (remember, I don't actually care but it's about principle here)
1st I know nodes are deactivated.
2nd, we can agree that you do gain some benefits, ie, distance, level advantage, and items (including a mount in those lvl 5 quest).
3rd, Remember, this 1-2day headstart is exclusive to pledgers. The difference between not having the time to log on vs not being able to log on is what's separates my argument from yours.
What makes everything <strong>not </strong>P2W is that everyone has a fair opportunity to achieve the same things as long as they put the same effort and time to it. No amount of effort or time can gain the same privileged as a 1-2 day headstart. That in itself is different than you and your friends logging in at different times, because both you and your friend had the same opportunity to log in when the game launchs, just one of you choose not to.
Look, I'm just pointing out that if you can construe mounts as P2W, then you have to use the same logic and say that 1-2 day headstart is P2W. It's not fair to change the logic to fit your argument.
Finally, yes I want to have healthy discussions with fellow players on a game we all love. But my issue is people being hypocrites and using illogical arguments to defend their point. I've made some blunders, and when I'm wrong, I simple apologize and move on. But some people just refuse to admit they are wrong when the devs themselves came on to apologize. And yes, we can agree to disagree. (I don't disagree with you that much, you have a fair and kind approach and I do appreciate that).
In this case mount is synonymous with skin mounts.
It's like when people in the south use the word coke to refer to soda aka pop.
It's OK to admit to yourself that you misunderstood what the devs meant.
And it's important to understand that you will likely misunderstand what the devs mean if you continue to hold on to the concepts that have been used in previous MMORPGs. Because many of the terms we've been using for the 20 years have different meanings in Ashes.
Again, we all have to work together -fans and devs- to make sure that we're using terms as they apply to Ashes specifically.
So, no, I am saying that when you move to a new place, you need to make sure that all the words used there have the same meanings as where-ever you're from...because some of them may not have the same meaning.
#1. Everyone has a different take on what P2W really is and some people will go further and further shaving that stick(issue) down until there is no stick left. Some stop at a certain point. It's what different takes are all about.
#2. Intrepid Studios(so far) has set their P2W definition to include that "Free Mounts at the Start are P2W" and "a cpl days early access without node progress" is not P2W.
#3. This access will only be on one or a cpl servers. Other servers will not have early access players in them getting all the virgin NPCs. If EA bothers you, go to the virgin servers....
IF they meant to say skins are synonymous with actual physical mounts (which they already admitted they did not, and said they needed to reword it to Skins FOR mounts) then they wouldn't have DELIBERATELY addressed Armor Skins as SKINS and Weapon Skins as SKINS if they knew there was a distinction.
Clearly english is not your Native language if you interpret this otherwise. Mounts mean MOUNT.
If I purchased a horse that says "Purchase exclusive Horse" And they instead give me a picture of an exclusive horse THAT IS NOT WHAT I PURCHASED. That is called a misled wording to purchase a product.
I'm not saying it was an intentional misleading(as Steven already said) But this is a cut and dry MISTAKE. No question. And not a misinterpretation.
It doesn't work that way
lol I hear you, Shirikuryu. Like other posters have stated, I guess it all comes to down to what we (Intrepid included) look at as P2W.
But, I think most everybody here can agree that they want this game to be a success, and that quality fun can be had by all....no matter when you get to play! lol Great discourse with all of you. Thanks!
Oh most definitely I have high expectations and Faith in this project. The team and Steven himself have thoroughly impressed me
Is it possible to reach level 5 during the headstart without leveling a node or is that just your assumption?
Pay2Win means that people are able to pay for things that provide avatars with a quicker power advantage over those who don't pay.
If a mount is faster than a player character can run - that is a power advantage. And if you can pay real world cash for that. it is inherently P2W. Especially so if the mount is faster than other mounts that can be acquired in the game. If I can pay real world cash to make the mount I acquire we acquire at Level 5 faster than your mount because you didn't pay real world cash - that is P2W.
The devs came on to apologize for their part in a misunderstanding.
If someone misunderstands what you say, it's easy enough to apologize since the message you sent wasn't as clear as you hoped it would be - that doesn't mean you're apologizing for misleading someone. And that doesn't mean that the audience doesn't also bear responsibility for assuming they understood the meanings of the words used - especially when their definitions clash with the context of the speakers overall commentary.
"You mislead me because you said coke instead of soda...!"
No. You just didn't understand that coke is also a synonym for soda. And the people for whom coke is a synonym for soda may not expect that you might be confused until you tell them that, for you, "coke" specifically refers to Coca Cola.
There was a learning curve back in the day, when restaurants had to start specifying that the coke they sell is Pepsi.
I speak various dialects of English as my native language. And I also speak Spanish, Japanese and Russian.
Perhaps understanding definitions in context is difficult for people who only speak one dialect of English.
But, the lesson remains, the terms that we're accustomed to using ofr previous MMORPGs have significantly different meanings in Ashes. It behooves you to pay attention and help the devs be more diligent about term usage all across the board.
Because this is an issue that is broader than just "mounts" v "skins".
And - I'm done.
Have a great weekend everyone!