Guild Wars 2

in my opinion absulutely not agreed. Armor Skins should be exclusive ingame rewards for playing the game, not in a cashshop. This is not a third rate free to play sceme, this is a A+ Buy to play game. Whats the use of the coming buy to play expansion, if all Skins are locked behind a pay wall, i would feel cheated. And this is not a virtual toy store, like some of the C titles. Convenience items, services, optinal fluf and outfits in the store, normal skins (armor and weapons) as play to earn reward.
One tip, when making a post, dont do it in an entitled demanding way, your post will certainly be trashed which such attitude.

I actually liked it back when we got a new set of gem store armour skins every 3 months or so. Waiting for them to put them in game? We’ll be lucky to get two a year.

I absolutely agree with you 100% Pyriel.

When they offered tormented weapons in the gemstore, it was essentially a slap in the face to vets and it raised a red flag for me.

Furthermore, when they pulled the same kitten with chaos weapons, it was a sign there is no hope for what the players want and all that’s left is what lines Anet’s pockets the best.

The Anet of old would release art in an artistic way, then await the cash.
Now it seems Anet wants that cash, so they throw together something they think will sell.

For example, armor sets are now exclusively designed as in-game rewards while outfits are primarily Gem Store offerings.

https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/hidden-arcana-developer-spotlight-on-crystin-cox/

That explains a lot. Ok, then. As long as we see a lot of armor skins added in HoT I’ll be happy then. Also, bring tribal armor back please.

Odyssey.2613:

I absolutely agree with you 100% Pyriel.

When they offered tormented weapons in the gemstore, it was essentially a slap in the face to vets and it raised a red flag for me.

Furthermore, when they pulled the same kitten with chaos weapons, it was a sign there is no hope for what the players want and all that’s left is what lines Anet’s pockets the best.

The Anet of old would release art in an artistic way, then await the cash.
Now it seems Anet wants that cash, so they throw together something they think will sell.

++++++

If anet would have released an expansion after 1 year of the launch they could implement all in this expansions instead of this dumb gemstore.

Seriously If anet would release every year a new expansion for 50€ I would buy it, but I will NEVER put money in this kittenty gemstore!

They could make so many armors obtainable via quests or whatever but they chose the greedy way.

I just pray to god, that after hot launches anet will stop a few months releasing new trash in gemstore because they could include it in the expansion rather than wait just to milk their customers more….

You know guys, no one is forcing you to buy things in the gem store, right?

Vesuvius.9874:

You know guys, no one is forcing you to buy things in the gem store, right?

I don’t think the bulk of the argument is in being “forced to buy,” though.

Outfits have “pieces” (though they really don’t) that would be really cool to add to the wardrobe, but those bits are unavailable without the entire outfit. Some people want to mix/match outfits, but the pieces aren’t available as a set, just the one item. They say they would buy it if it were a set.

I get the argument, but it’s phrased the wrong way, most of the time. “qq stop outfits” is unproductive, when what the players want/need for this is the option to use those outfit pieces as “pieces,” even though it might not be technically possible. If it is possible, the request should be “Can we have outfits as armor sets as well?” and “Can we earn more armor pieces in game?”

Rauderi.8706:

Vesuvius.9874:

You know guys, no one is forcing you to buy things in the gem store, right?

I don’t think the bulk of the argument is in being “forced to buy,” though.

Outfits have “pieces” (though they really don’t) that would be really cool to add to the wardrobe, but those bits are unavailable without the entire outfit. Some people want to mix/match outfits, but the pieces aren’t available as a set, just the one item. They say they would buy it if it were a set.

I get the argument, but it’s phrased the wrong way, most of the time. “qq stop outfits” is unproductive, when what the players want/need for this is the option to use those outfit pieces as “pieces,” even though it might not be technically possible. If it is possible, the request should be “Can we have outfits as armor sets as well?” and “Can we earn more armor pieces in game?”

Right and the way you’ve put it makes it an entirely different argument from what the topic of this thread is. Sure the game could do with more collectible armour sets that can be won from dungeons or elsewhere in the game.

would you rather they charged for all the living story updates, giving all the skins they have launched in the gem store as rewards for completing the achievements?

Vesuvius.9874:

Rauderi.8706:

Vesuvius.9874:

You know guys, no one is forcing you to buy things in the gem store, right?

I don’t think the bulk of the argument is in being “forced to buy,” though.

Outfits have “pieces” (though they really don’t) that would be really cool to add to the wardrobe, but those bits are unavailable without the entire outfit. Some people want to mix/match outfits, but the pieces aren’t available as a set, just the one item. They say they would buy it if it were a set.

I get the argument, but it’s phrased the wrong way, most of the time. “qq stop outfits” is unproductive, when what the players want/need for this is the option to use those outfit pieces as “pieces,” even though it might not be technically possible. If it is possible, the request should be “Can we have outfits as armor sets as well?” and “Can we earn more armor pieces in game?”

Right and the way you’ve put it makes it an entirely different argument from what the topic of this thread is. Sure the game could do with more collectible armour sets that can be won from dungeons or elsewhere in the game.

And I think that’s why I get so fatigued over seeing this exact same topic/thread showing up every time a new outfit gets released. Often twice on the front page, as if the outrage over outfits doesn’t warrant looking at the topic list first.

It’s an old, tired, selfish argument that’s very akin to throwing a tantrum. Instead, there’d be a ton of player support for having more mix-match skins in the store and in game, if the brass could be assured players would actually buy the stuff. But I know exactly why those kinds of decisions are being made. ( Because Extra Credits is very informative. )

Rauderi.8706:

But I know exactly why those kinds of decisions are being made. ( Because Extra Credits is very informative. )

Whos are thoses old hags ? :P

BrooksP.4318:

tramwajarz.2369:

this is not f2p game
kkthxbye

The business models are relatively the same. The difference is the initial cost allow for the devs to avoid doing more gameplay invasive cash shop items in order to generate revenue. So the balance between cash shop items(in this case cosmetics) and cosmetics via content will still always lean towards cash shop similar to F2Ps.

Hannelore.8153:

Also this game is not F2P, it costs $50 to buy it. That is alot of money. To put it into perspective, in some countries that is all you get paid each week.

To put it into another perspective, single player games range from $50-60 and usually yield 30-60 hours worth of gameplay. GW2 being $50 initially with no other costs, means after 30-60 hours the initial cost of the game is irrelevant.

Single player games are not widely played in all countries, generally only the countries to where they are localised. However, MMOs are. This is because of their high return on the investment that makes them suitable for low income populations, particularly since games like GW2 allow you to convert gold to gems, meaning that low income players can still manage to buy gemstore items with just time alone.

Another reason is that MMOs are far easier to understand even if you can’t read any of the text. All you need is someone to tell you what buttons to push, and you can make it through almost any content and eventually memorize all the skill names according to the effect that they have in game. I have had friends that do not read any language supported by the game very good, yet still managed to run dungeons with me without any kind of problem whatsoever, because they learned and adapted by apperance and effect rather than descriptions and words. Its actually quite fascinating.

But if you think that’s cheap just because of those reasons, you are still wrong. Because I’ve invited many players to this game, and out of those, only one has joined. The stated reason is always the steep initial cost, for a game that they do not know if they will enjoy. Indeed, I have quite a few friends on my list that quit forever at 500-1000 achivement points after spending all of that money.

When you buy a single player game, you know exactly what you are getting. Especially since its usually a sequal to a game you’ve already played before.

You say that a certain amount of time makes the cost irrelevant. However, consider that most potential players do not ever get to that amount of time, because they do not ever buy the game to begin with and instead play some F2P MMO or MOBA. Then add that to the count of players lost early on as well.

Now your arguement still holds a bit of water… except for one thing. The most important thing of all: MMOs are a social game. When you do not buy the game, or when you quit early on, it doesn’t just affect you, it screws everyone who wanted to play with you. Therefor the quality of their purchase has been reduced as well. Sure, they can go solo all the content because GW2 is friendly to that. Or they can go make new friends to replace you. But its not you, and their game experience won’t be all that it could’ve been, and they may end up quitting as well.

That’s the secret behind MMOs: Player retention at all costs, even the initial price. Farming, RNG gambling, etc. exist precisely to create addictions.

TL;DR: This is not an F2P game.

Anet, how many more have to wait? Already half a year has passed, and new content is still not. It looks as deception.
I want to play, but i cant, because there is nothing to do in the game.

New content will be available “When It’s Ready”™

Cheers mate!

Vesuvius.9874:

New content will be available “When It’s Ready”™

Cheers mate!

As always.

and in gw1 i bought a lot of expansions…

they are gonna get your money people…that’s how it works!
you should want to support a game you enjoy.
i see gw1 vets saying when chaos and the other gw skins were bl you knew we were doomed….how hard is it to make 100g playing a game your like to get your choice of any of those weapons? it isn’t i farmed gold for 4-5 of those skins…big deal…if you don’t want to farm you could throw real cash and obtain one…even at 250g+ a skin is only a weeks casual grind…i know thats how i got mine…without buying gems…farm is part of most a solid mmo…except here there is no sub, no update costs….just an expansion very much down the road from release…with plenty of dead boring time to farm gold for anything you desire…or just bust out your visa card….it’s always been your choice…both are fair options…why anyone would demand more for cosmetic items is beyond me…more often then not speaks of the people who get everything they just “had to get” then quit…save yourself the time and trouble…lol

meh, I’m new. I like my free cool armour

I advocate them working even more outfits and clothing options into the gemstore. I would rather see the game flourish through gemstore sales then sink and I for one have never had a problem getting enough gems ingame to keep me from getting anything I wanted on the gemstore.

Centurion.7296:

Jahroots.6791:

there’s little to do besides grind gold.

I dont know about you, but if you really think that grinding gold is the only thing that you can do in the game then you might not be playing the right game :I

Well, what else is there to do? Dungeons dont give any decent rewards to play, once u have all fractal skins, there is no point in doing those either. WvW is boring on a dead server. And 2 years after launch, we still have the same legendary’s, nothing new added to grind for.

The only things worth playing for are some skins, but most get sold in the gem store, so no point in grinding for those.
I stopped playing when they were releasing season 2, and i had 6/8 story’s. I came back only to see that they asked money if i wanted to play the rest of the story oO.

It’s a shame, since gw2 could have become such a good mmorpg, but instead they are milking the cow, while they should have added some kind of endgame..

Pyriel.4370:

Gemstore skins are basically getting extremely annoying, all I see is “Here is some armor that we could have put in game for you to earn via achievements and/or new content but no, we are being lazy and just wanna milk the cash cow a little more each week.”

Outfits themselves are a strange option in a game where prestige is ‘cosmetic’ as there is no real customisation to outfits and there are plenty of sets being wasted. Imagine if the Chaos weapons could be earned by a new dungeon-esque Fissure of Woe?

I get some might be saved for HoT but there have been the following in the gem store;

- 22 Gemstore outfits
– 21 Weapon sets (multiple weapons in each set, average 11)
– 21 Full armor skins
– 55 Standalone helmet/weapon/armor skins

If that isn’t a drain on creative resources, I don’t know what is.

In comparison via typical updates since launch we have got;

– 1 Outfit (Hexed)
– 5 Full Armor Skins – 6 more are simply variants, not unique sets (Luminescent and Glorious Hero’s)
– 4 full weapon set (one for each wep and colour/particle variants not included e.g. SAB and ascended)
– 34 Individual weapon skins as random Champion Bag drops.
– 13 Standalone armor pieces (colour/particle variants are not included)

This is one of the reasons the game is getting stagnant. Would it be so terrible to spend less time on the gemstore and more time on new content that might keep the player base around?

Here’s the thing:

1) I’m still a relative newbie to GW2
2) I spent the last eight to nine years playing a sub based game

Now that’s out of the way, I’d like to chime in here. The game in which I’ve come from just recently is going down hill and rapidly. This is a SUB based game, mind you. In fact the current developers have, in the most recent expansion, given players less overworld content to participate in than ever before in this game’s history. Yet we pay a monthly sub for a lot less. In fact, they’ve also gone so far as to say their future focus will be on ‘targeted exploration’ by which I take to mean a lot less emphasis on exploration and fun and more focus on instanced content.

The reason I brought this up is because I cannot help but feel this is what a subscription based game eventually gets you: Less for more.

But with GW2 being B2P and needing income, I feel it’s entirely appropriate for the inclusion of a game store. Sure, it’s frustrating at times when you want more bag space, more bank space, that awesome outfit, etc. but consider the alternatives.

When you have developer ego creating less content for more money, it stands to reason that you’d WANT a game such as GW2 where the developers/designers are encouraged to put more cosmetics in a game store for purchase where the player can buy them at their leisure. This puts pressure on the developers/designers to put aside their ego (for the most part) and create content suited for the player. Thus, we get MORE for less.

Frankly, I’m perfectly okay with that.

Edit: I’d also like to add that the genius of the GW2 store is you’re not FORCED to go out and spend real money on a gem card (though it may seem the most expedient option). Instead, you can farm gold (which so far, I’ve found to be reasonably easy when I’m participating in as many things as I can) and convert those to gems so you have OPTIONS which, in any game and in my humble opinion, is ALWAYS a wonderful thing.

BrooksP.4318:

Jahroots.6791:

It’s been a couple of years for some of us, there are a lot of things to do but we’ve already done them. Most of the new stuff goes straight to the gem store or TP, hence the grinding.

Because they can generate outfits much quicker and cheaper than they can content. They are already developing new content via HoT, however they still need to sustain income while they develop it.

Well, they could do something crazy like Kickstarter. They say: “Hey guys, we’ve created this fancy new armor for you and if we reach this goal until this date, we’re gonna put it in the game as quest. If we don’t, we’ll push it out as gemstore update.” I’d certainly spend some bucks on that system, which is already more than I spend currently, which is none.

Wuselknusel.4082:

BrooksP.4318:

Jahroots.6791:

It’s been a couple of years for some of us, there are a lot of things to do but we’ve already done them. Most of the new stuff goes straight to the gem store or TP, hence the grinding.

Because they can generate outfits much quicker and cheaper than they can content. They are already developing new content via HoT, however they still need to sustain income while they develop it.

Well, they could do something crazy like Kickstarter. They say: “Hey guys, we’ve created this fancy new armor for you and if we reach this goal until this date, we’re gonna put it in the game as quest. If we don’t, we’ll push it out as gemstore update.” I’d certainly spend some bucks on that system, which is already more than I spend currently, which is none.

I actually like that idea.

But than you may run into an overabundance of gear on the Gem Store and not enough in game, thereby rendering the game (for all intents and purposes) P2W which is NEVER a good thing.

I’ve spent way too much on outfits. I love them. I’ve bought skins too but skins are only really viable at level 80 since you upgrade your armor way too much while leveling. I would love for them to bring back some of the other stuff. I’d spend more. My necro needs those wings.

Also, there should be no gear in the gem store. There should only be skins. GW is doing it right.

Huggywuggles.2814:

Wuselknusel.4082:

BrooksP.4318:

Jahroots.6791:

It’s been a couple of years for some of us, there are a lot of things to do but we’ve already done them. Most of the new stuff goes straight to the gem store or TP, hence the grinding.

Because they can generate outfits much quicker and cheaper than they can content. They are already developing new content via HoT, however they still need to sustain income while they develop it.

Well, they could do something crazy like Kickstarter. They say: “Hey guys, we’ve created this fancy new armor for you and if we reach this goal until this date, we’re gonna put it in the game as quest. If we don’t, we’ll push it out as gemstore update.” I’d certainly spend some bucks on that system, which is already more than I spend currently, which is none.

I actually like that idea.

But than you may run into an overabundance of gear on the Gem Store and not enough in game, thereby rendering the game (for all intents and purposes) P2W which is NEVER a good thing.

I don’t speak about gear or anything like that. I speak about the things that get added regularely into the gemstore. ANet starts a “Kickstarter campaign” for that item one week before release, detailing what item it is and what event it could be implemented in and waits if enough money gets raised during that week to implement it. If not, it goes into the gemstore, if yes, the item will be held back (or still be released in the gemstore) and the event will be implemented with the item as reward.

Money gets raised from whom? The players? If it’s money to make it ingame or money but it can fail and ends up in the gemstore for more money, then no thanks. I’ll keep my money in my wallet and I bet a lot of other people will too.,

Just a flesh wound.3589:

Money gets raised from whom? The players? If it’s money to make it ingame or money but it can fail and ends up in the gemstore for more money, then no thanks. I’ll keep my money in my wallet and I bet a lot of other people will too.,

It’s not like you could easily work around that…
As example: You pay real money for points on ANet’s personal “Kickstarter” website.
You can then use these points to pledge for one specific project, like getting an event for Faren’s Rapier. If that event gets enough pledges it will be implemented and the points you have spent will get deleted. If the event doesn’t get enough pledges, the points will simply return into your wallet and you can spend them on other projects.

Wuselknusel.4082:

Just a flesh wound.3589:

Money gets raised from whom? The players? If it’s money to make it ingame or money but it can fail and ends up in the gemstore for more money, then no thanks. I’ll keep my money in my wallet and I bet a lot of other people will too.,

It’s not like you could easily work around that…
As example: You pay real money for points on ANet’s personal “Kickstarter” website.
You can then use these points to pledge for one specific project, like getting an event for Faren’s Rapier. If that event gets enough pledges it will be implemented and the points you have spent will get deleted. If the event doesn’t get enough pledges, the points will simply return into your wallet and you can spend them on other projects.

In other words, I have to pay them to make events and put skins in game? If I don’t pay, but others do, can I still do those events and benefit for free or will it be gated events that only people who put $X in it can play, or at least get the drop. Can it be retroactive payment for those that start the game later but want that drop? Will there be a cutoff minimum payment? Let’s say I put $1 down. Other people put in an average of $10 and the event is put in the game. Will they say I need to put $9 more down to get that drop? Or can I get by with my $1?

I’d be better off with a sub every month than the gemstore.

Based on the amount I have spent, so far (in 3.5 months), I could have played WoW for almost 3 years.

That is, partly, why I feel I have a right to say what I do and don’t like about the game, as much as I like, whether some people on here like it, or not.

Just a flesh wound.3589:

Wuselknusel.4082:

Just a flesh wound.3589:

Money gets raised from whom? The players? If it’s money to make it ingame or money but it can fail and ends up in the gemstore for more money, then no thanks. I’ll keep my money in my wallet and I bet a lot of other people will too.,

It’s not like you could easily work around that…
As example: You pay real money for points on ANet’s personal “Kickstarter” website.
You can then use these points to pledge for one specific project, like getting an event for Faren’s Rapier. If that event gets enough pledges it will be implemented and the points you have spent will get deleted. If the event doesn’t get enough pledges, the points will simply return into your wallet and you can spend them on other projects.

In other words, I have to pay them to make events and put skins in game? If I don’t pay, but others do, can I still do those events and benefit for free or will it be gated events that only people who put $X in it can play, or at least get the drop. Can it be retroactive payment for those that start the game later but want that drop? Will there be a cutoff minimum payment? Let’s say I put $1 down. Other people put in an average of $10 and the event is put in the game. Will they say I need to put $9 more down to get that drop? Or can I get by with my $1?

I don’t know any specifics and I can’t name you any specifics since I don’t work for ANet. But the way this would function would work, is that everyone can play the event once it is in the game, but do keep in mind that the goal, the money that has to be raised, has to be enough to cover the expenses of implementing the event and the loss they have when people don’t buy this on the gemstore but get it through playing.
None the less, I’d rather pay them for making content than paying them for their ugly gemstore.

I see problems with this.

One: To me this is an abuse of Kickstarter. Kickstarter should be used to get community funding of projects that otherwise could not exist, not to be a “voting” system where the project starter rakes in money for stuff they’re doing anyway.

Two: I don’t think money is the limiting factor for ANet. Manpower is. Certainly over time they can expand (and have done so), but hiring, training, and integrating qualified people into the design team isn’t just a matter of tossing money at things. They have to allocate their man-hours to the development most needed for the game and can’t just divert them to one week projects on a whim.

Three: Creating an event takes more than a week. You’re asking them to develop content, have people money-vote on whether to use it, then toss it in the wastebasket if “not enough” money comes in to “earn” the in-game event.

Four: What Just a flesh wound said. Why should we pay money as an incentive to do work that may or may not be completed? I don’t get in bidding wars to get a plumber to agree that I’m the winner so he or she will come to my house to fix my toilet, and then pay the additional parts and labor costs, with the understanding that if I lose the bid I’m still out the money I paid.

Just a flesh wound.3589:

Money gets raised from whom? The players? If it’s money to make it ingame or money but it can fail and ends up in the gemstore for more money, then no thanks. I’ll keep my money in my wallet and I bet a lot of other people will too.,

You wouldn’t be able to play this game if everyone felt the same. But I don’t agree with a kick starter. I do think they should keep stocking the gem store.

1) We’re not talking about Kickstarter but about a Kickstarterish website owned and controlled by ANet.
2) That is ANet’s job to figure out.
3) I’ve never said that creating an event would only take one week.
4) Just as said before, you don’t lose money, or atleast not much, if the goal isn’t reached.

I don’t think flesh wound was saying s/he won’t spend money on the gem store.

It’s more that s/he (and I) won’t spend money for game play that won’t exist unless enough people pony up, but if too few pay the money, ANet still gets all that money as pure profit and then tosses in the game-play items for yet more money.

I am certainly a whale. Not to the extent of opening my wallet to get Legendaries, and some items I’ve never bought (boxing gloves, Toxic, Lawbreaker, other things with no aesthetic appeal to me), but I’ve bought most every cosmetic item the gem store has provided. Always because I liked them enough to want them.

And yet I would not sink one penny into this pie-in-the-sky-scam-feeling concept.

Wuselknusel.4082:

3) I’ve never said that creating an event would only take one week.

Actually, that’s how I interpreted your paragraph above:

“I don’t speak about gear or anything like that. I speak about the things that get added regularely into the gemstore. ANet starts a “Kickstarter campaign” for that item one week before release, detailing what item it is and what event it could be implemented in and waits if enough money gets raised during that week to implement it. If not, it goes into the gemstore, if yes, the item will be held back (or still be released in the gemstore) and the event will be implemented with the item as reward.”

I see now that you’re saying release gets delayed if people pay enough money to get it as an event rather than as a straight up gem store purchase. I’m not sure that’s any better.

Ok, first, pay very close attention to this paragraph:

[..]
If the event doesn’t get enough pledges, the points will simply return into your wallet and you can spend them on other projects.

Second, I imagine them to put up that campaign one week before gemstore release. If the campaign is successful, the event will be created and the gemstore release will be stopped, halted until the event is implemented or the item will be just added to the gemstore, so that people who can’t wait for the event to be implemented still can buy the item.

Tigaseye.2047:

I’d be better off with a sub every month than the gemstore.

Based on the amount I have spent, so far (in 3.5 months), I could have played WoW for almost 3 years.

That is, partly, why I feel I have a right to say what I do and don’t like about the game, as much as I like, whether some people on here like it, or not.

Just as with everyone else, your purchase of the box bought you the right to say what you want (within the ToS) on the forums. Spending in the gem store does not give one’s opinion any extra weight — though some might try to paint it that way. Why is that? Because the business owner set it up that way. If believing that frees you up in any way to state your opinion, though, then more power to you.

Those who prefer a store and those who prefer a sub are never going to see eye to eye. Both groups have their reasons, and all the explanations in the world about why are unlikely to shake that conviction. That said, I share Huggy’s perception, that sub games are increasingly providing less for the sub, to the point where — for my tastes — the only difference I see between sub and store games is whether the developer has his hand on my credit card every month or not. Still, I can see why someone else would think differently because they value different things about games than I do.

IndigoSundown.5419:

Tigaseye.2047:

I’d be better off with a sub every month than the gemstore.

Based on the amount I have spent, so far (in 3.5 months), I could have played WoW for almost 3 years.

That is, partly, why I feel I have a right to say what I do and don’t like about the game, as much as I like, whether some people on here like it, or not.

Just as with everyone else, your purchase of the box bought you the right to say what you want (within the ToS) on the forums. Spending in the gem store does not give one’s opinion any extra weight — though some might try to paint it that way. Why is that? Because the business owner set it up that way. If believing that frees you up in any way to state your opinion, though, then more power to you.

Those who prefer a store and those who prefer a sub are never going to see eye to eye. Both groups have their reasons, and all the explanations in the world about why are unlikely to shake that conviction. That said, I share Huggy’s perception, that sub games are increasingly providing less for the sub, to the point where — for my tastes — the only difference I see between sub and store games is whether the developer has his hand on my credit card every month or not. Still, I can see why someone else would think differently because they value different things about games than I do.

Well, given that I’m a fairly left wing type – in one way, I don’t particularly feel it should give me more right to have an opinion than some other people who have spent less (or even nothing, beyond the initial payment).

I certainly don’t think it should give me more right to an opinion than nice, considerate, polite, generous, helpful people, for example.

Even if they don’t contribute much financially, they are contributing to a nice atmosphere and that’s fine.

On the other hand, some of the people, who haven’t spent much real life money on this game, but who play it a heck of a lot, seem to think they have more right to their opinions, than the people who have spent more; simply on the basis that they have used the product far more, for free, than them.

That is not the way the world works.

That is not capitalism.

If I ran the financial side of a game, that basically (at this stage) relied on people supporting it through extra purchases, of course I would be more inclined to encourage the developers to listen to the people who spent more.

Rather than the people who were trying to get a permanent free ride, at other people’s expense.

Especially if some of the second group were, quite possibly, ruining the first group’s experience, with their elitist attitudes and in-game currency-hungry playstyles.

Playstyles that often favour efficiency, in terms of maximising loot, rather than ensuring the first group can have fun; or even, sometimes, join in at all…

It would be foolish to expect one type of player to, permanently, financially subsidise the other type, while that other type often openly criticise, try to scare-off and ruin the fun of the first type.

That is kind of why I’m pro-sub.

Because it removes these kind of moral dilemmas and awkward clashes of interests.

Because then, at least, everyone pays the same, no one is subsidising anyone, most people are slightly less desperate for in-game loot and (at least, in theory) everyone really does have an equal say.

Would I want to pay a sub, at this point, having spent this much in the gemstore already and having certain ongoing issues with the game?

Not really.

But, I would certainly have preferred that model from the start, given the choice.

Wuselknusel.4082:

Ok, first, pay very close attention to this paragraph:

[..]
If the event doesn’t get enough pledges, the points will simply return into your wallet and you can spend them on other projects.

Second, I imagine them to put up that campaign one week before gemstore release. If the campaign is successful, the event will be created and the gemstore release will be stopped, halted until the event is implemented or the item will be just added to the gemstore, so that people who can’t wait for the event to be implemented still can buy the item.

The problem with some people paying to get content that all then can play is that human nature means many won’t pay since they know they can get it for free. If the kick starter fails and the item goes in the gem store, then they aren’t any worse off as they can buy it with gold. Your plan would have to keep them from leeching off the system, but then the game is filled with events you have to pay real money for or not get the reward. That would definitely cause a sour feeling among the players, constantly encountering events that require money to get the rewards.

Just a flesh wound.3589:

Wuselknusel.4082:

Ok, first, pay very close attention to this paragraph:

[..]
If the event doesn’t get enough pledges, the points will simply return into your wallet and you can spend them on other projects.

Second, I imagine them to put up that campaign one week before gemstore release. If the campaign is successful, the event will be created and the gemstore release will be stopped, halted until the event is implemented or the item will be just added to the gemstore, so that people who can’t wait for the event to be implemented still can buy the item.

The problem with some people paying to get content that all then can play is that human nature means many won’t pay since they know they can get it for free. If the kick starter fails and the item goes in the gem store, then they aren’t any worse off as they can buy it with gold. Your plan would have to keep them from leeching off the system, but then the game is filled with events you have to pay real money for or not get the reward. That would definitely cause a sour feeling among the players, constantly encountering events that require money to get the rewards.

If others want more content then they get a tool to get more content. If others want to pay ANet for their game they have made, but not for the gemstore, then that is also a valid option for them. I don’t know about you, but I certainly had fun playing this game and I’m willing to show my gratitude through money. But I’m not willing to support a system that is in my eyes completely flawed. ANet wont gain a single penny from me through the gemshop. If they want to have my money, then they have to deliver content. If there are enough other out there who are thinking the same, then my idea will work.

Wuselknusel.4082:

Just a flesh wound.3589:

Wuselknusel.4082:

Ok, first, pay very close attention to this paragraph:

[..]
If the event doesn’t get enough pledges, the points will simply return into your wallet and you can spend them on other projects.

Second, I imagine them to put up that campaign one week before gemstore release. If the campaign is successful, the event will be created and the gemstore release will be stopped, halted until the event is implemented or the item will be just added to the gemstore, so that people who can’t wait for the event to be implemented still can buy the item.

The problem with some people paying to get content that all then can play is that human nature means many won’t pay since they know they can get it for free. If the kick starter fails and the item goes in the gem store, then they aren’t any worse off as they can buy it with gold. Your plan would have to keep them from leeching off the system, but then the game is filled with events you have to pay real money for or not get the reward. That would definitely cause a sour feeling among the players, constantly encountering events that require money to get the rewards.

If others want more content then they get a tool to get more content. If others want to pay ANet for their game they have made, but not for the gemstore, then that is also a valid option for them. I don’t know about you, but I certainly had fun playing this game and I’m willing to show my gratitude through money. But I’m not willing to support a system that is in my eyes completely flawed. ANet wont gain a single penny from me through the gemshop. If they want to have my money, then they have to deliver content. If there are enough other out there who are thinking the same, then my idea will work.

One problem with your idea is that it will generate strife. If everyone can do it, then many of the people who paid good money to get an event with a reward put into the game are going to resent having people who didn’t pay a penny getting to do the event and get the same desired reward, for free. The game and forums will be filled with accusations of freeloading and leaching.

If the event needs to be paid for in order to access the reward then people are going to resent being nicked and dimed for content and ingame rewards. It’s going to provoke accusations of pay to win and ANet is greedy/money grabbing while people who paid will be accusing the others of trying to get things for free, etc. No matter how it’s set up, there are going to be large numbers of unhappy people accusing each other and ANet of greed, money grabbing, freeloading, pay to win.

Just a flesh wound.3589:

Wuselknusel.4082:

Just a flesh wound.3589:

Wuselknusel.4082:

Ok, first, pay very close attention to this paragraph:

[..]
If the event doesn’t get enough pledges, the points will simply return into your wallet and you can spend them on other projects.

Second, I imagine them to put up that campaign one week before gemstore release. If the campaign is successful, the event will be created and the gemstore release will be stopped, halted until the event is implemented or the item will be just added to the gemstore, so that people who can’t wait for the event to be implemented still can buy the item.

The problem with some people paying to get content that all then can play is that human nature means many won’t pay since they know they can get it for free. If the kick starter fails and the item goes in the gem store, then they aren’t any worse off as they can buy it with gold. Your plan would have to keep them from leeching off the system, but then the game is filled with events you have to pay real money for or not get the reward. That would definitely cause a sour feeling among the players, constantly encountering events that require money to get the rewards.

If others want more content then they get a tool to get more content. If others want to pay ANet for their game they have made, but not for the gemstore, then that is also a valid option for them. I don’t know about you, but I certainly had fun playing this game and I’m willing to show my gratitude through money. But I’m not willing to support a system that is in my eyes completely flawed. ANet wont gain a single penny from me through the gemshop. If they want to have my money, then they have to deliver content. If there are enough other out there who are thinking the same, then my idea will work.

One problem with your idea is that it will generate strife. If everyone can do it, then many of the people who paid good money to get an event with a reward put into the game are going to resent having people who didn’t pay a penny getting to do the event and get the same desired reward, for free. The game and forums will be filled with accusations of freeloading and leaching.

If the event needs to be paid for in order to access the reward then people are going to resent being nicked and dimed for content and ingame rewards. It’s going to provoke accusations of pay to win and ANet is greedy/money grabbing while people who paid will be accusing the others of trying to get things for free, etc. No matter how it’s set up, there are going to be large numbers of unhappy people accusing each other and ANet of greed, money grabbing, freeloading, pay to win.

Why should people feel that way? When something gets “kickstarted”, everyone can buy it, no matter if they have pledged or how much they have pledged. Kung Fury for example is now free to watch for everyone. I, who has pledged for Kung Fury, am not thinking that others have to pay too to see the film. I actually hope that people who haven’t pledged for Kung Fury but like it are now willing to pledge too if they find something they like.

ProtoGunner.4953:

I partially agree, especially with the Zodiac, Chaos and Tormented sets. Those should have been added with the implementation of an instanced hard party oriented content like it was in GW1: UW, FoW, DoA etc.

After years we veterans still ask for it and they still didn’t do anything.

And they most likely never will. I honestly still feel hurt about them throwing the Zodiac, Chaos, and Tormented sets behind RNG (BLTC) and money (TP).

They should’ve been something that you had to earn.

Wuselknusel.4082:

Just a flesh wound.3589:

Wuselknusel.4082:

Just a flesh wound.3589:

Wuselknusel.4082:

Ok, first, pay very close attention to this paragraph:

[..]
If the event doesn’t get enough pledges, the points will simply return into your wallet and you can spend them on other projects.

Second, I imagine them to put up that campaign one week before gemstore release. If the campaign is successful, the event will be created and the gemstore release will be stopped, halted until the event is implemented or the item will be just added to the gemstore, so that people who can’t wait for the event to be implemented still can buy the item.

The problem with some people paying to get content that all then can play is that human nature means many won’t pay since they know they can get it for free. If the kick starter fails and the item goes in the gem store, then they aren’t any worse off as they can buy it with gold. Your plan would have to keep them from leeching off the system, but then the game is filled with events you have to pay real money for or not get the reward. That would definitely cause a sour feeling among the players, constantly encountering events that require money to get the rewards.

If others want more content then they get a tool to get more content. If others want to pay ANet for their game they have made, but not for the gemstore, then that is also a valid option for them. I don’t know about you, but I certainly had fun playing this game and I’m willing to show my gratitude through money. But I’m not willing to support a system that is in my eyes completely flawed. ANet wont gain a single penny from me through the gemshop. If they want to have my money, then they have to deliver content. If there are enough other out there who are thinking the same, then my idea will work.

One problem with your idea is that it will generate strife. If everyone can do it, then many of the people who paid good money to get an event with a reward put into the game are going to resent having people who didn’t pay a penny getting to do the event and get the same desired reward, for free. The game and forums will be filled with accusations of freeloading and leaching.

If the event needs to be paid for in order to access the reward then people are going to resent being nicked and dimed for content and ingame rewards. It’s going to provoke accusations of pay to win and ANet is greedy/money grabbing while people who paid will be accusing the others of trying to get things for free, etc. No matter how it’s set up, there are going to be large numbers of unhappy people accusing each other and ANet of greed, money grabbing, freeloading, pay to win.

Why should people feel that way? When something gets “kickstarted”, everyone can buy it, no matter if they have pledged or how much they have pledged. Kung Fury for example is now free to watch for everyone. I, who has pledged for Kung Fury, am not thinking that others have to pay too to see the film. I actually hope that people who haven’t pledged for Kung Fury but like it are now willing to pledge too if they find something they like.

Why should people feel that way? Because it’s human nature. Many who have paid will feel like they “own” it and will resent “freeloaders” who come in and get the same thing they got, but without paying. If everyone has to pay to access, then they’ll complain about that. Just look at the threads complaining about having to pay $2 to access each part of season 2. They call ANet money grabbing and greedy just for that. People call ANet greedy/pay to win when they put fluff in the gem store. If it’s actual content with a reward and must be paid for, then again, greedy and pay to win will be all over the forums.

Your idea will have two groups, people who paid and freeloaders, or have (who paid) and have nots (who didn’t). It’s guaranteed to cause strife.

Like I said, I don’t feel that way and I would denote myself as human being.

Wuselknusel.4082:

Like I said, I don’t feel that way and I would denote myself as human being.

From what ive seen, most people who play this game do however.

I personally wouldnt, dont, wont ever use kickstarter, sorry, but i wont, i have my reasons and i dont need to list them. By your idea though, id get it for free, because it would be added to the game through content, and i imagine that people who payed for it wouldnt like it. Hell people dont like the fact that there are people wanting to be able to earn the tribal armor skin.

The idea I have given was not intended to limit the amount of people who can get the item but to add more content to the game, rather than just dropping everything new into the gemstore.

At last, if people then still complain about the gemstore, we can all redirect them to that new method of adding content to the game that is not gemstore related.
People have to realize that ANet needs to make money. If they risk their current model and try the kickstarter-ish idea I will happily support them.

Wuselknusel.4082:

The idea I have given was not intended to limit the amount of people who can get the item but to add more content to the game, rather than just dropping everything new into the gemstore.

And my point was that those who payed for it would think that others, who did not, should not have access to it, because they didnt pay for it. As for new content, HOT is coming, honestly dont expect much new content outside the gemstore for now. The rebuilding of LA was a huge surprise to me with HOT in the works, and a rather neat one.

That’s their problem, not mine. I don’t think that all players are self-centered people who aren’t able to understand that ANet can’t give them goodies for free.

Wuselknusel.4082:

That’s their problem, not mine. I don’t think that all players are self-centered people who aren’t able to understand that ANet can’t give them goodies for free.

Read the threads about afk people in the Silverwastes getting rewards without effort. Even those that aren’t upscaling the event with their presence are controversial. Those people, the leeches, are resented by a number of people posting on the forums, and they are getting rewards from events that are free to all. Just imagine what people would be saying if real money was involved.

Forum bug. They’re on it.