Gemstore or Subscription
I have played since the betas- I play most days and I like to think I contribute to the community in game.
I have recommended the game to several of my friends who also bought the game.
I buy gems with real money.
I would absolutely not play a game with a subscription
Did that with DDO- and the game still cost me money on top of the stupid sub because you had to pay for content- Artificer class I’m looking at you
Made me feel that Turbine expected me to moo
Now I can buy something if I want it- it is not something I need- there is a huge difference
Gunnar’s Hold
The problem is we should not be forced into feeling sorry for them and paying money. Remember – “buy once, play forever.” But that means they have to have some deviant techniques to get money out of people, in some cases that would not have otherwise spent.
This is the sour taste f2p and b2p games leave in my mouth, which is why I much prefer a subscription model.
As for your subscription proposal…. keep it out of my game. I’ve bought my game. I deserve to enjoy and play it.
You’ve bought the game, fair enough. But what about the service it takes to run it, and the development of new content? That’s what I’d prefer a subscription existed to pay for.
Actually, Arenanet making gw2 b2p is keeping with their believe they have HELD since BEFORE they go purchase by NCsoft. And it is pretty cool of Ncsoft to let ARenanet do what it wanted with that model.
So what? It’s not about what Anet promised, it’s about the fact that new MMOs are still starting with subs and existing MMOs that went f2p still offer subs because it is a viable option.
The idea that B2P is the new standard is complete nonesense.
Blade and soul is subscription only in Korea, in china is going f2p. Wildstar is an unproven title so you really cannot make a statement about it UNTIL after it releases. Even still then, you have to wait until 6 months before anything conclusive.
Again, I go by what companies present. I use factual information of this moment. Of course things can change after release but as I said current MMOs still offer subs even when they have f2p options and you on the other hand are completely making things up. B2P is not the new fashion. It just isn’t. You just made that up because GW2 is all you can see.
It’s a game forum. The truth is not to be found here.
subscription? lol gtfo with that bs.
Actually, Arenanet making gw2 b2p is keeping with their believe they have HELD since BEFORE they go purchase by NCsoft. And it is pretty cool of Ncsoft to let ARenanet do what it wanted with that model.
So what? It’s not about what Anet promised, it’s about the fact that new MMOs are still starting with subs and existing MMOs that went f2p still offer subs because it is a viable option.
Viable in terms of profit, I agree. There is, however, a difference between companies that want to sell entertainment versus a product. Arenanet is trying to sell entertainment, most other games are trying to sell a product.
Blade and soul is subscription only in Korea, in china is going f2p. Wildstar is an unproven title so you really cannot make a statement about it UNTIL after it releases. Even still then, you have to wait until 6 months before anything conclusive.
Again, I go by what companies present. I use factual information of this moment. Of course things can change after release but as I said current MMOs still offer subs even when they have f2p options and you on the other hand are completely making things up. B2P is not the new fashion. It just isn’t. You just made that up because GW2 is all you can see.
If you use factual information of this moment, then where are your sources? All I see is you bashing someone for actually citing factual information without actually having any credentials yourself.
Also…
The idea that B2P is the new standard is complete nonesense.
He never, in the entirety of his post, stated that B2P is the new standard. You brought that up twice in a response to him and then stated that it was his idea and that he’s wrong because he stated it (which, I’ll re-iterate, he didn’t state).
I don’t agree that B2P is the new standard, but I do believe that it’s a fairer method. That’s my opinion. I am entitled to it. If you disagree, you are entitled to that.
Viable in terms of profit, I agree. There is, however, a difference between companies that want to sell entertainment versus a product. Arenanet is trying to sell entertainment, most other games are trying to sell a product.
I wasn’t talking about Anet. He did. What I see happened is that silvermember starting responding to something I said to someone else as if it was him. That confused me.
It was Xae something who said the following:
There’s a reason why games these days don’t do standard subscription models anymore. It just doesn’t work.
When every other game in competition with you does a B2P/microtrans model, you simply can’t sell the game on a subs model.
That’s what this is about.
If you use factual information of this moment, then where are your sources? All I see is you bashing someone for actually citing factual information without actually having any credentials yourself.
Again I blame this on silvermember taking over for someone else. And I did give a link directly to the wildstar site. And it’s factual that other new games like the new FF MMO will be sub based. Those are the facts I am refering to. Also current MMOs like SWTOR, DDO, LotrO etc still have sub options. Again those are the facts I am talking about.
He never, in the entirety of his post, stated that B2P is the new standard. You brought that up twice in a response to him and then stated that it was his idea and that he’s wrong because he stated it (which, I’ll re-iterate, he didn’t state).
I don’t agree that B2P is the new standard, but I do believe that it’s a fairer method. That’s my opinion. I am entitled to it. If you disagree, you are entitled to that.
As I said, originally I was responding to this Xae guy and Silvermember just decided to butt in and confuse matters. This whole discussion was about Xae’s comment. Not what Silver decided to throw into it as if it was him I replied to.
It’s a game forum. The truth is not to be found here.
When I found out that ESO was going to be subscription based it brought a major smile to my face.
Lol they still havent changed their mind?
ESO was questionable from the start (being based on the mediocre SWTOR engine and all) but a subscription fee pretty much seal the deal – its going to fail just like every other game has unless its a really, really, really good game. Which I seriously doubt it is.
Bah! Subscription fees remain the largest money scam in gaming history. You dont pay to get “quality” content. You pay for the possibility to get “quality” content. And people think ingame RNG is bad…
In game RNG is very bad. I wonder how many people, the kind that would get addicted to gambling at a casino, are now addicted to those Black Lion Chests? They release new content and put it behind RNG then put items in the gem store for people to buy that is also RNG but just RNG with better odds.
It’s a lazy way at simulating difficulty. It doesn’t reward the skilled just the lucky. Then after getting lucky, they flaunt it as if to say ‘look how l33t I am’.
You may be able to just buy the game and then play it without spending a single cent more but someone else somewhere else in the world could be throwing $60 or more each month. ANet could very well be making more per month with the cash shop then they would if they went with a 15/month sub and no cash shop.
I’m willing to bet they are.
Oh and as for the argument of wanting to pay a sub if it means quality content. Of course there is no guarantee. Of course there are exceptions. That should go without saying but regardless you will get that one person that will hang on what’s said word for word and take it as if the person is saying that it does guarantee.
However, I have played GW1, GW2, and NWO, amongst others. I’ve also played WoW, Aion, and EVE, amonst others. I know P2P and B2P. I also know that P2P, in general, has more enjoyable and higher quality content. I’m also beginning to see that in game cash shops in addition to the B2P model makes the content released even worse since, not only does the cash shop have to be managed, the content designed and released is done so with the shop in mind.
There’s a reason why games these days don’t do standard subscription models anymore. It just doesn’t work.
When every other game in competition with you does a B2P/microtrans model, you simply can’t sell the game on a subs model.
Except they do standard subs still. The new titles coming out in the next year do often have subs, and the MMOs that have added f2p still have subs as an option because obviously there is still an interest in it.
Even NcSoft, you know the company that Anet belongs to, is using a sub model for their current blade and soul and their next game Wildstar again.
I would suggest doing a bit of research before making any outrageous comments like this. What you say is simply not true.
Question for you:
Are those upcoming titles going to be, “standard,” sub models in the traditional sense ?
1) monthly sub fee without any free to play option ?
2) all content and features included with no cash shop ?
I am honestly curious about this because the evolution of the MMO business model has added elements such as these to the perceived monetary value of the genre. I am somewhat surprised by the idea that the companies funding MMOs have decided to reduce their ability to recoup development costs and reduce potential revenue by going back to what was once the standard sub model instead of the current trend of hybrid models.
(edited by Ashen.2907)
When I found out that ESO was going to be subscription based it brought a major smile to my face.
As the OP said, ANet is a company interested in making a profit. When your on going source of income, after initial sale of the game, is ‘macro’ (the RL cash value on the virtual items is too big to be considered micro) transactions in the gem store, then you want to try and convince people to spend their money on what’s available there.
I believe the quality of the content takes a huge hit as new content is designed with getting people to spend real money in mind.
Quality becomes even more important when you are trying to successfully run a P2P model along side F2P models like GW2. If the quality of the content of the P2P model game is on par with the F2P model game, then why bother going with the P2P model game?
A sub model also gives the company a more reliable and stable source of income to work with. The company can better plan future content because the future income is more easily predicted.
Also, having a monthly sub in a free to play market helps act as a player base filter. Ensuring that those who don’t think it’s worth it don’t make up too large of a % of the in game player population. Seriously it works out to be 50 cents a day. If you don’t think the game is worth playing at 50 cents a day, then don’t play. You’ll be better off by not playing and those that do think it’s worth it will be better off by not having you play.
However, there is this….
Sounds like they might be double dipping. I certainly hope not. I hope they abandon the online shop before release. They’ve said by having the sub that people won’t have content gated behind a cash shop, so what could they possibly put in the cash shop besides Account Services (Name changes, sex changes, faction changes, etc.)?
Vanity items? How is that any different than what GW2’s cash shop then?
Part of why I left Aion, aside from cheap combat mechanics, was how the game was basically Dress-up Doll Online. With the plush back packs, little minis, and some other items, it’ll be one of the reasons I’ll leave GW2. I fear, however, that ESO will have the same crap which doesn’t stay true to the TES titles at all.
In DH there is a player in LA. They’re often found dancing in their underwear with boxing gloves on, bunny ears, and a plush quaggan backpack.
I’m sorry but if I’m entering into an Ayleid ruin, I don’t want to come across another player wearing a plush mudcrab backpack followed by a mini flame atronach I’ll uninstall the game right there.
I’m not a role player but I like games that enforce a certain atmosphere and crap like that would absolutely kill the Elderscroll’s atmosphere.
As a fan of TES, I’ll buy the game to both check it out and support the title but if they have a cash shop filled with the kind of crap that my 5 year old daughter would find most appealing (much of what’s found in GW2’s cash shop), then I won’t play beyond the 30 days that come with purchase.
This is interesting as i’m also a big fan of TES but i won’t be getting ESO. I like the lore and everything (the amount of books i read in oblivion and skyrim was insane!) but it’s already going to be a huge break from the previous TES games that i think it’s going to be TES in name only. And so i wait for TESVI.
I’m also beginning to see that in game cash shops in addition to the B2P model makes the content released even worse since, not only does the cash shop have to be managed, the content designed and released is done so with the shop in mind.
What about content released with subs in mind? As in, arbitrary time-gating and artificial extension of whatever you are trying to do? I think that’s as bad as content released with the shop in mind (which generally means less shinies for people).
“We have no first-person view because stupid people would lock into it”
“You can’t have more than 10 HS decks because that would confuse people”
“30 fps is more cinematic”
“You can’t have more than 10 HS decks because that would confuse people”
“30 fps is more cinematic”
I’m also beginning to see that in game cash shops in addition to the B2P model makes the content released even worse since, not only does the cash shop have to be managed, the content designed and released is done so with the shop in mind.
What about content released with subs in mind? As in, arbitrary time-gating and artificial extension of whatever you are trying to do? I think that’s as bad as content released with the shop in mind (which generally means less shinies for people).
Well, I believe that the best route to take for P2P is to make the content worth paying a sub for since the “well it’s free to play anyway” mentality doesn’t apply. As for time gating, we’re seeing that in GW2 now anyway.
There’s a bit more to it. In multiplayer games, the players themselves are part of the content of the game. It is important to have a strong, vibrant community in game, both to play with and to play against. The player that sticks around for the game and isn’t mean spirited is adding to the quality of game, making it more appealing to the public at large and making buying the game a more attractive investment. Players who don’t buy a thing from the gem shop are contributing to the profits of the game indirectly in this manner, both with new sales and with making the game enjoyable enough for players to want to spend gems in it.
You don’t pay for gems, do you?
Sure, everyone contributes in some manner. But, you lurking about isn’t going to pay for Anet’s employees unless you actively recruit friends to join.
I have played this game since BW3, and frankly I find large parts of the community antisocial and alienating – especially the elite community – who just happens to be the one’s complaining about having to pay for things.
I buy gems every month. Yes I contribute real cash to the game. Why in the hell would I recruit friends to this game. I did it one time, and I’ve felt guilty about it ever since. I play right now because I genuinely hope that things change. What kind of horrible friend would I be to recommend this game though? That’s like telling my friend to buy a car, if it doesn’t run well. Sure I might hope it starts working well, but that would just be really bad of me to do.
I wanted to give GW2 a year to see if it could pull even with GW1. I think anyone who played then remembers how things with GW1 were at first (aside from gwen burning us all to death =P ) The year has come, and sadly gone,
If you want proof of my purchases I have no problem showing what I can, though I don’t know how to show my gem purchase history.
Anet should have taken lessons from Riot. They produced a game that in 3 years has surpassed everything else, they’ve beaten SC, WoW, and everything else. They’ve done it on a completely free to play system also. You can get everything except the absolute cosmetics just by playing. Not getting lucky, just play. There you don’t unlock a skin for a single game, you unlock it for your account. There are differences, but there is so much Anet could have learned from Riot.
Oh, and yes LoL is an mmo. It’s not an mmorpg though. In some ways you could argue neither is GW2.
(edited by GSSBlunaspike.4153)
There’s a bit more to it. In multiplayer games, the players themselves are part of the content of the game. It is important to have a strong, vibrant community in game, both to play with and to play against. The player that sticks around for the game and isn’t mean spirited is adding to the quality of game, making it more appealing to the public at large and making buying the game a more attractive investment. Players who don’t buy a thing from the gem shop are contributing to the profits of the game indirectly in this manner, both with new sales and with making the game enjoyable enough for players to want to spend gems in it.
You don’t pay for gems, do you?
Sure, everyone contributes in some manner. But, you lurking about isn’t going to pay for Anet’s employees unless you actively recruit friends to join.
I have played this game since BW3, and frankly I find large parts of the community antisocial and alienating – especially the elite community – who just happens to be the one’s complaining about having to pay for things.
I buy gems every month. Yes I contribute real cash to the game. Why in the hell would I recruit friends to this game. I did it one time, and I’ve felt guilty about it ever since. I play right now because I genuinely hope that things change. What kind of horrible friend would I be to recommend this game though? That’s like telling my friend to buy a car, if it doesn’t run well. Sure I might hope it starts working well, but that would just be really bad of me to do.
I wanted to give GW2 a year to see if it could pull even with GW1. I think anyone who played then remembers how things with GW1 were at first (aside from gwen burning us all to death =P ) The year has come, and sadly gone,
If you want proof of my purchases I have no problem showing what I can, though I don’t know how to show my gem purchase history.
Anet should have taken lessons from Riot. They produced a game that in 3 years has surpassed everything else, they’ve beaten SC, WoW, and everything else. They’ve done it on a completely free to play system also. You can get everything except the absolute cosmetics just by playing. Not getting lucky, just play. There you don’t unlock a skin for a single game, you unlock it for your account. There are differences, but there is so much Anet could have learned from Riot.
Oh, and yes LoL is an mmo. It’s not an mmorpg though. In some ways you could argue neither is GW2.
I’m sorry, but I must say that you haven’t even played League of Legends if you think League’s business model is at all more reasonable than Guild Wars 2’s.
Just comparing cash shops – everything Guild Wars 2 has is aesthetics, convenience, or services (slot space, name changes, etc.) League of Legends sells champions – which in a game based largely around team composition equates to power selling, albeit not in the traditional sense (especially when one factors in that buying champions with real money makes obtaining runes faster and easier.)
Nothing in the Guild Wars 2 cash shop is required to get the most out of the game. With the ever-increasing supply of max-price League champs, a new League of Legends player will find it more and more difficult to get the most out of their game with each release.
The worst complaints that can be derived of the Guild Wars 2 cash shop is an overuse of RNG for OPTIONAL SKINS (most of which can be bought from other players via the tp anyway). Riot games, on the other hand, legitimately broke their promise during beta and Season 1 to release new champions at all price levels.
Even comparing currency gain rates, Guild Wars 2 wins out. The average 800 gem item translates to roughly 40g, which can be gained in a day or two of proper farming. Obtaining the average 6300 champion varies based on play habits, but tends to take the average player 1-2 weeks or more per character – now multiply this by over half the cast of 100 characters and the essential competitive requirement of multiple rune pages.
Guild Wars 2 (structured/tournament) PvP allows players to bypass all grind for competitive purposes. League of Legends is pure PvP and still contains massive IP grind along with arguable power selling.
The $60 box price of Guild Wars 2 is quite reasonable when you compare it to the hundreds of dollars it would take to own the ever-expanding LoL roster (or even a significant number of champions).
There’s a bit more to it. In multiplayer games, the players themselves are part of the content of the game. It is important to have a strong, vibrant community in game, both to play with and to play against. The player that sticks around for the game and isn’t mean spirited is adding to the quality of game, making it more appealing to the public at large and making buying the game a more attractive investment. Players who don’t buy a thing from the gem shop are contributing to the profits of the game indirectly in this manner, both with new sales and with making the game enjoyable enough for players to want to spend gems in it.
You don’t pay for gems, do you?
Sure, everyone contributes in some manner. But, you lurking about isn’t going to pay for Anet’s employees unless you actively recruit friends to join.
I have played this game since BW3, and frankly I find large parts of the community antisocial and alienating – especially the elite community – who just happens to be the one’s complaining about having to pay for things.
I buy gems every month. Yes I contribute real cash to the game. Why in the hell would I recruit friends to this game. I did it one time, and I’ve felt guilty about it ever since. I play right now because I genuinely hope that things change. What kind of horrible friend would I be to recommend this game though? That’s like telling my friend to buy a car, if it doesn’t run well. Sure I might hope it starts working well, but that would just be really bad of me to do.
I wanted to give GW2 a year to see if it could pull even with GW1. I think anyone who played then remembers how things with GW1 were at first (aside from gwen burning us all to death =P ) The year has come, and sadly gone,
If you want proof of my purchases I have no problem showing what I can, though I don’t know how to show my gem purchase history.
Anet should have taken lessons from Riot. They produced a game that in 3 years has surpassed everything else, they’ve beaten SC, WoW, and everything else. They’ve done it on a completely free to play system also. You can get everything except the absolute cosmetics just by playing. Not getting lucky, just play. There you don’t unlock a skin for a single game, you unlock it for your account. There are differences, but there is so much Anet could have learned from Riot.
Oh, and yes LoL is an mmo. It’s not an mmorpg though. In some ways you could argue neither is GW2.
I’m sorry, but I must say that you haven’t even played League of Legends if you think League’s business model is at all more reasonable than Guild Wars 2’s.
Just comparing cash shops – everything Guild Wars 2 has is aesthetics, convenience, or services (slot space, name changes, etc.) League of Legends sells champions – which in a game based largely around team composition equates to power selling, albeit not in the traditional sense (especially when one factors in that buying champions with real money makes obtaining runes faster and easier.)
Nothing in the Guild Wars 2 cash shop is required to get the most out of the game. With the ever-increasing supply of max-price League champs, a new League of Legends player will find it more and more difficult to get the most out of their game with each release.
The worst complaints that can be derived of the Guild Wars 2 cash shop is an overuse of RNG for OPTIONAL SKINS (most of which can be bought from other players via the tp anyway). Riot games, on the other hand, legitimately broke their promise during beta and Season 1 to release new champions at all price levels.
Even comparing currency gain rates, Guild Wars 2 wins out. The average 800 gem item translates to roughly 40g, which can be gained in a day or two of proper farming. Obtaining the average 6300 champion varies based on play habits, but tends to take the average player 1-2 weeks or more per character – now multiply this by over half the cast of 100 characters and the essential competitive requirement of multiple rune pages.
Guild Wars 2 (structured/tournament) PvP allows players to bypass all grind for competitive purposes. League of Legends is pure PvP and still contains massive IP grind along with arguable power selling.
The $60 box price of Guild Wars 2 is quite reasonable when you compare it to the hundreds of dollars it would take to own the ever-expanding LoL roster (or even a significant number of champions).
I will play you right now. You can pick any 6300 champ, I will pick a champ that costs 450 or less. Show me how much more powerful 6300 champs are. I will even use my smurf, who has almost no runes and I’ve not played for awhile.
http://www.lolking.net/summoner/na/32179239#history
lolking for smurf, I will log in now.
edit: changed to 450 or less
(edited by GSSBlunaspike.4153)
I will play you right now. You can pick any 6300 champ, I will pick a champ that costs less than 450. Show me how much more powerful 6300 champs are. I will even use my smurf, who has almost no runes and I’ve not played for awhile.
http://www.lolking.net/summoner/na/32179239#history
lolking for smurf, I will log in now.
Oh, I’m sure you would beat me, considering I stopped playing League at least 6 bloody months ago. After playing since Season 1 the game got boring.
For what it is worth variety in tactical options is a form of power even if none of the individual options is superior to any of the others.
I will play you right now. You can pick any 6300 champ, I will pick a champ that costs less than 450. Show me how much more powerful 6300 champs are. I will even use my smurf, who has almost no runes and I’ve not played for awhile.
http://www.lolking.net/summoner/na/32179239#history
lolking for smurf, I will log in now.
Oh, I’m sure you would beat me, considering I stopped playing League at least 6 bloody months ago. After playing since Season 1 the game got boring.
Look this is getting off topic. So I’m going to post this last part about it, and you can get angry or just accept it. In a team setting at higher elos there are still low cost champions that play out much better than any of the 6300 champions. Look at the pick/ban ratio for ash/twitch in tournaments. Neither of them are 6300 champions, and ash is pretty much free. Individual skill makes a huge difference when it comes to champion selection versus the price of champions. I hit 1800 in s2 playing only Gangplank pretty much.
Riot’s model is to sell only cosmetics, EVERYTHING else you can get from just playing. They also make entry level stuff really cheap. You can buy a good t1 rune set for really cheap. There isn’t any rng in it. If Anet made it so that instead of opening the kitten chests you could spend say 400 gems and just unlock a skin for your account they would end up selling plenty of skins. Of course that’s just my opinion.
Quite a few years back, a few MMO lovers left Blizzard to make a game. They also made a business case for a subscription free service, which another company assessed as a reasonable risk and put their own money into the project.
Guild Wars 2 exists because of the successful outcome of that risk taking venture. ArenaNET has, now, 8 years of financial records with which to make their decisions.
As the new game follows the same structure as the old, I conclude that something must be right with the subscription-free model, otherwise it wouldn’t be so prevalent in today’s games.
If you think Guild Wars 2 needs a subscription, to me, it sounds like you are coming from other games where you did pay a subscription, and this is what you are used to. Do you think that how we are charged for the game will affect the quality of it?
I paid only one subscription, in 32 years, for a game: Lego Universe… and guess what, it didn’t even last the year I paid in advance for.
Nothing in the gem store is necessary for you to enjoy the game, though the consumer mentality driven into each of us makes us yearn for much of it.
Making it expensive is part of the allure. (Think about cars as a comparison.) If everything was dirt cheap, everyone would have it, no one would look different..and ArenaNET would have to work harder to produce more content to fulfill the ongoing desire to stand out — something which is impossible if it’s cheap enough for everyone to buy.
Full disclosure: I pay more, in gems, every month, than I would ever pay on a subscription to this game. I -try- to find something to buy to show my ongoing support. I’ve bought gold a few times, but don’t really find it as fulfilling as grinding the game.
I have a son, and have a software company of my own. I understand the value of my time, and the pleasure this game gives me far outweighs the “dollars per gold” equation that gem buyers use as an argument against those who complain about grinding for their gold.
Really – if it’s such a problem, why are you even playing? Guilt? In my not so humble opinion, that is INSANE.
I love this game, and I will continue to recommend to everyone I know.
For what it is worth variety in tactical options is a form of power even if none of the individual options is superior to any of the others.
This was the point. A team with a larger variety of champions to pick from has a tactical advantage over the other, even if the “balance” of characters is within reasonable parameters. There’s synergy between picks, counter-picking, and other factors to consider.
I’m also beginning to see that in game cash shops in addition to the B2P model makes the content released even worse since, not only does the cash shop have to be managed, the content designed and released is done so with the shop in mind.
What about content released with subs in mind? As in, arbitrary time-gating and artificial extension of whatever you are trying to do? I think that’s as bad as content released with the shop in mind (which generally means less shinies for people).
Well, I believe that the best route to take for P2P is to make the content worth paying a sub for since the “well it’s free to play anyway” mentality doesn’t apply. As for time gating, we’re seeing that in GW2 now anyway.
wolfheart did say arbitrary time-gating. The time-gating of ascended, imo, is needed for its successful implimentation. If it weren’t time-gated you’d end up in situations where those with higher ingame wealth or far more free time will drastically overpower other players. Imagine when ascended weapons and armour are released what would happen if not time-gated? You’d have the farmers decked out in full ascended on the first day of its release and stomp everyone in wvw through the power of numerical values. Time-gating is a necessary tool in the fight against power creep.
For what it is worth variety in tactical options is a form of power even if none of the individual options is superior to any of the others.
This was the point. A team with a larger variety of champions to pick from has a tactical advantage over the other, even if the “balance” of characters is within reasonable parameters. There’s synergy between picks, counter-picking, and other factors to consider.
Yeah, my post was meant to be directed to GSSBlunaspike. He seemed to be trying to make a point that one champion being a match for another was an indication that buying more options was not a form of buying power.
Disclosure: I do not play LoL. For all I know they have managed, somehow, to come up with something that no one in the history of wargaming has…a means of introducing new combat options without having more options be better than fewer options.
I bought GW2 on the promise of what ANet’s advertising painted it to be. The fan base preferred it to be a different game, or at least ANet believes that to be the case. I got my money’s worth on my original, and on my gem purchases. However, what the game has become, and is on its way to becoming, is not what I want, therefore it is not deserving of my further monetary support. That’s how business works.
I’m also beginning to see that in game cash shops in addition to the B2P model makes the content released even worse since, not only does the cash shop have to be managed, the content designed and released is done so with the shop in mind.
What about content released with subs in mind? As in, arbitrary time-gating and artificial extension of whatever you are trying to do? I think that’s as bad as content released with the shop in mind (which generally means less shinies for people).
Well, I believe that the best route to take for P2P is to make the content worth paying a sub for since the “well it’s free to play anyway” mentality doesn’t apply. As for time gating, we’re seeing that in GW2 now anyway.
wolfheart did say arbitrary time-gating. The time-gating of ascended, imo, is needed for its successful implimentation. If it weren’t time-gated you’d end up in situations where those with higher ingame wealth or far more free time will drastically overpower other players. Imagine when ascended weapons and armour are released what would happen if not time-gated? You’d have the farmers decked out in full ascended on the first day of its release and stomp everyone in wvw through the power of numerical values. Time-gating is a necessary tool in the fight against power creep.
No it’s not.
The developers would have to develop and release the next Tier gear at a rate that is faster for half or more of the player base to obtain. I’ve yet to play a game that does that.
The idea behind the concept of ‘power creep’ is if the developers release the next tier too quickly. People who can only put in an hour or two can’t completely obtain that next tier before the developers move on and release the Tier after. Meanwhile those that can poor in 4 or more hours a day get that next Tier shortly after release. So the people who can only play an hour or two fall behind.
Putting sufficient time between such content releases for everyone to not only obtain the gear but to also play with it for a little while is all that’s needed.
This really has nothing to do with time gating in GW2. The devs determine how much time is between releases by choosing when to release it. Period. This time gating in GW2 is nothing more than play on the psyche of players who otherwise probably wouldn’t log in feel compelled to in order to ensure they don’t miss out or fall behind by missing days. It’s a ploy to keep people logging each day since the more that log in each day, the greater the chance one of them will make a purchase in the gem shop.
It’s straight up pure BS marketing and it is such nonsense that causes the quality of the content to suffer.
“Time-gating is a necessary tool in the fight against power creep”
This is the OP from the thread titled “Left behind?”.
Come back after a break and I loved WvW, but sadly reading the forums it seems everyone is fully decked out in Ascended items.. putting me at a severe disadvantage unless I suck it up and roll with the zerg…
I thought by now ascended would have been made easier to get rather than a time-sink (laurels) or fractals, maybe log in do daily and in a few months time i’ll be able to play and actually compete :-)
Looks to me time gating is doing the opposite of what you believe it does. Those that miss time can’t catch up as quickly as they could without it.
(edited by Deamhan.9538)
Here is what we all MUST make a stand on:
1 Gemstore
2 SubscriptionYou can’t have neither.
GW1 did, and it was rather successful.
I main Ele and Necro, though I have an alt of each profession at level 80.
How to Condi Reaper on a budget
Everything I say is only in reference to PvE and WvW.
How to Condi Reaper on a budget
Everything I say is only in reference to PvE and WvW.
(edited by Blaine Tog.8304)
Here is what we all MUST make a stand on:
1 Gemstore
2 SubscriptionYou can’t have neither.
GW1 did, and it was rather successful.
Fixed that for ya. Since GW2 has the gem store.
Between all the various models I’ve seen….
1 Game Store
2 Subscription
3 Initial purchase
You have to have at least one of these. Two is more likely but all three is just greedy.
If Anet really needs money, while they’re on a free to play model, they should put more effort into designing higher quality items for the gem store. In my view, the gem store lacks variety, and what does exist there is somewhat lacking in quality and therefore, appeal.
People want quality, and they’ll pay for it.
If Anet really needs money, while they’re on a free to play model, they should put more effort into designing higher quality items for the gem store. In my view, the gem store lacks variety, and what does exist there is somewhat lacking in quality and therefore, appeal.
People want quality, and they’ll pay for it.
The gem store has been relying mainly on RNG items and limited time offers to bring in the money. It would be nice to have more variety of permanent stuff to buy other than cheesy town clothes.
Be careful what you wish for, Anet might just give it to you “HoT”
“…let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we shall die;.”
“…let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we shall die;.”
If GW2 had a sub fee I’d pay it in a heartbeat. I think it’s a fantastic game, and what ArenaNet delivers in patches is well beyond anything I’ve seen from any game I’ve subbed to in the past.
However they chose an alternative route, deciding they’d rather sell boxes and then run a virtual casino. Well, they sold me a box, and I’m very happy with it. But the casino profits they’ll have to earn from people stupid enough to gamble on the scamboxes. They won’t be getting that money from me.
it is just you.
a lot of people play guild wars 1 and guild wars 2 because it has no monthly subscription fees.
and they will never go back to monthly subscription fees billing method because they earn so much more with the gem store.
Would rather pay a sub. That way I know quality is assured (snip)
Are you implying that every game with a sub releases only quality content? Because I keep hearing this argument really often and I wonder how paying monthly assures anything.
Every P2P game I’ve played in reality was a crap skinner box in the end that just copypastas every other MMO’s mechanics so P2P doesn’t equal Quality to me. It feels more like a trap. That’s why I stuck with GW1 in the end and then onto GW2. It was very story driven with lots of things to do and didn’t force you to grind like crazy. Better quality than any P2P imo.
Some P2P games add cash shops on top of it anyways too. -.- ew
| Fort Aspenwood (NA): Sylvari Daredevil Thief Main: All Classes 80. |
Please Remove/Fix Thief Trait: “Last Refuge.”
“Hard to Catch” is a Horrible and Useless Trait. Fixed 6/23/15. Praise Dwayna.
Fixed that for ya.
ACK thanks!
I main Ele and Necro, though I have an alt of each profession at level 80.
How to Condi Reaper on a budget
Everything I say is only in reference to PvE and WvW.
How to Condi Reaper on a budget
Everything I say is only in reference to PvE and WvW.
First, a subscription game doesn’t automatically guarantee quality, but what it DOES do is make sure the developer’s are focused on the right thing — they have to capture us with content. In order to get paid next month, they have to do something awesome this month.
In the f2p/b2p zone that ArenaNet is in, “monetization” has to be involved in every step of the design process. The events every two weeks? Think of them as sales vehicles to sell cash shop items, not unlike Hallmark has created holidays to sell cards.
Like it or not, that is the business model of a b2p/f2p game. Now, give ArenaNet credit for trying to wrap it up in the Living Story, but it ends up pretty shallow and I’m not even sure that’s worth it. I’d almost rather see that development and design time simply go into amazing and constant flow of cash shop items. They’d probably do better.
It’s easy to estimate that a subscription game of say, 500,000 players (estimating that’s the number of active GW2 players) can make more — and perhaps more importantly — forecast more accurately.
500k subscribers paying $15 a month is ~$7.5m revenue. However, using even generous mtx conversion rates of 10%, that same number of active players in GW2 gets only $750,000 in that same month. And that assumes they are spending at least $15 each.
Of course those numbers are speculation, but they are based on industry data and the best assumptions we can make about active GW2 players until ArenaNet releases actual numbers.
Summary: A subscription model doesn’t guarantee quality, but it guarantees focus on gameplay, not monetization.
First, a subscription game doesn’t automatically guarantee quality, but what it DOES do is make sure the developer’s are focused on the right thing — they have to capture us with content. In order to get paid next month, they have to do something awesome this month.
In the f2p/b2p zone that ArenaNet is in, “monetization” has to be involved in every step of the design process. The events every two weeks? Think of them as sales vehicles to sell cash shop items, not unlike Hallmark has created holidays to sell cards.
Like it or not, that is the business model of a b2p/f2p game. Now, give ArenaNet credit for trying to wrap it up in the Living Story, but it ends up pretty shallow and I’m not even sure that’s worth it. I’d almost rather see that development and design time simply go into amazing and constant flow of cash shop items. They’d probably do better.
It’s easy to estimate that a subscription game of say, 500,000 players (estimating that’s the number of active GW2 players) can make more — and perhaps more importantly — forecast more accurately.
500k subscribers paying $15 a month is ~$7.5m revenue. However, using even generous mtx conversion rates of 10%, that same number of active players in GW2 gets only $750,000 in that same month. And that assumes they are spending at least $15 each.
Of course those numbers are speculation, but they are based on industry data and the best assumptions we can make about active GW2 players until ArenaNet releases actual numbers.
Summary: A subscription model doesn’t guarantee quality, but it guarantees focus on gameplay, not monetization.
My experience of the subscription model is different. In a subscription game, the company has to keep you playing, because they don’t want you unsubscribing. There are different ways to do this and it’s not always with content. Often it’s with grind. The slower you progress people, the longer they have to play to get stuff…or get to the good stuff.
I’ve played subscription games and didn’t particularly like any of them. Nor do I like free to play games that pretty much require you to spend money in the cash shop.
But I don’t think I’ve seen better or more content in subscription games than I have here. It’s content with a different focus. If you like that focus it’s obviously better. But I never liked raids and I’m not particularly fond of dungeons. And that’s the content most supported by most subscription games.
When I found out that ESO was going to be subscription based it brought a major smile to my face…
I was tickled about that, too. I note that Wildstar (a game I’m not interested in because it’s NCSoft and they ruined GW2, so no more money from me) has also chosen that model. Maybe we’re starting to get away from monetization.
Prior to GW2, I played a few other sub-based games, but I always kept coming back to Guild Wars 1. At the time, I figured that if ArenaNet could make a profit from Guild Wars by making a great game and having some nice cosmetic stuff for sale, then I wasn’t really interested in sub-based games.
Now, after having seen what happened to Aion, SWTOR, and RIFT when they moved from sub-based to a cash shop, and now GW2 with its gem store, I think I preferred the old sub-based system. The quality of the game content declines in these cash-shop models, and the “spend money here” voice of the cash-shop salesman gets shriller and shriller. And then I realize: I’m annoyed at my hobby, and I am not enjoying it.
I don’t want to have to buy things to make my gameplay experience better. Like Deamhan, I don’t want to see cute dress-me-up crap wandering around my gamescape. I’m not opposed to vanity items, but keep them visually consistent with the atmosphere of the game. Bunny-ears and quaggan backpacks make the game start to look like a preschooler’s Romper Room. I bought an adventure game, not Hello Kitty.
How about some really cool, classy, in-character, weapons, armor, and clothing? I mean good-looking, and realistic, not over-sized, over-blinged, I-have-no-taste tacky stuff.
So for me, simple answer is: I want a good game where the quality of the content doesn’t revolve around a cash shop and monetization. I will cheerfully pay a subscription for this. I’m never, ever buying another gem again. Ever.
I’d consider buying nice vanity items from a sub-based game, if they weren’t tacky, and had no effect on gameplay. Heck, I’d even buy character makeovers, and the occasional name-change (and I have, in several different games). It’s nice to change things up a little…when it’s not tacky, that is, and when the quality of the content isn’t taking a backseat to the tacky crap in the store.
TL:DR
I guess I’m looking for a studio, and a game, with class. I’ll pay good money for a fun, imaginitive, classy experience.
I won’t pay for items that improve gameplay, or cutesy things that belong in a child’s game.
Edit. Had to change “ankitten ot” to “and I am not” due to the overzealous kitten filter. :/
(edited by Chuo.4238)
Question for you:
Are those upcoming titles going to be, “standard,” sub models in the traditional sense ?
1) monthly sub fee without any free to play option ?
2) all content and features included with no cash shop ?
I am honestly curious about this because the evolution of the MMO business model has added elements such as these to the perceived monetary value of the genre. I am somewhat surprised by the idea that the companies funding MMOs have decided to reduce their ability to recoup development costs and reduce potential revenue by going back to what was once the standard sub model instead of the current trend of hybrid models.
Well, it depends a bit on the company I think. If you look at the new FF MMO, they are definitely sticking to the sub only.
Wildstar has mainly a sub but an option to work for your sub in game. They do indicate on their website this is made for people who have a lot of time. So this would mean that most people probably won’t be able to get away with not having a sub.
My guess is though that companies have discovered something new. Rather than going B2P or F2P they start with a sub with perhaps a second option that is not for most people (to attract box sales I guess) and are already prepared to add f2p options into the mix at a later stage IF needed.
I think part of the problem is that because most MMO players have played MMOs before, the expectations of a new game are higher. Perhaps they are ready to meet those standards.
The cash shops are here to stay. Especially with subs they create a good basis. The combination of subs and microtransactions has proven to be lucrative. I see it in SWTOR. Bioware made a lot of mistakes in the first year of the game. But since they’ve added F2P options and a cash shop that is rather more interesting than the one here if I may add, the game’s demise has been turned around and new content is being added etc.
I suspect that a developer might look at it and say: Ok, we will get x amount from box sales. We use subs as long as we can and add F2P after 6 months to a year if needed or desired. At that stage we’ve made alot by the initial sales and subs and a large % of players still prefer subs.
So I don’t see them wanting to step away from subs, but I do think that aside from a couple of exceptions most MMOs will add F2P options at some point but AAA titles are not likely to go B2P or F2P from the start like GW2.
Subs create stability for an MMO. That is what people forget sometimes, but they do need to have more ready at the start of a game because people expect certain things in there from the start now and not after a year or something.
The biggest problem lies there I think and is why MMOs lose half their player base in a matter of months.
It’s a game forum. The truth is not to be found here.
No, just no.
’nough said
Elona is Love, Elona is life.
No, just no.
’nough said
I guess you don’t read very well. Subs are no good for GW2. They work for other games to varying degrees but the point is not here to bring subs to GW2…seems like you thought that’s what people are saying here.
It’s a game forum. The truth is not to be found here.
No thank you the current system is perfectly fine. Don’t even THINK about asking me if I have spent any cash on gems because the answer is YES. $200+ easy over the price of the game. Don’t think you are BETTER than anyone else because you buy gems or are ready to pay a subs. IMO that would be to the detriment of this game.
Think about companies in business who have a monopoly on their product. They can get lazy and greedy because they feel they don’t have to work their best or hardest to entice their customers to their product. Anet has gone the opposite here and provide the current system because believe it or not they PREFER to show that they are working HARD for our dollars and they do this buy offering us quality products to buy with real cash.
Since when did this business of being a hero become being a business?
(edited by Paulytnz.7619)
No thank you. If I were a fan of subscription-based gaming, there are plenty of other options still out there.
Name 3 fantasy based MMO’s with subs.
WoW
LotRo
DDO
Aion
Rift
TeraMost of them can be played f2p as well but still have sub options that give you more in game.
From whole that list only ONE game have subs. Others are micro transaction based.
No thank you. If I were a fan of subscription-based gaming, there are plenty of other options still out there.
Name 3 fantasy based MMO’s with subs.
WoW
LotRo
DDO
Aion
Rift
TeraMost of them can be played f2p as well but still have sub options that give you more in game.
From whole that list only ONE game have subs. Others are micro transaction based.
They all had subs at first and many have optional subs still.
Of course, WoW also has a cash shop that sells stuff for too much money, but everyone seems to forget that.
I’d love an optional gem subscription. I pass for a sub that gives a mere right to play the game. That simply doesn’t cut it.
If I can’t play Guild Wars 2 at work, I won’t work in Guild Wars 2 either.
Delayed content is eventually good. Rushed content is eternally bad. ~ Shigeru Miyamoto
Delayed content is eventually good. Rushed content is eternally bad. ~ Shigeru Miyamoto
Topics like these are incredibly annoying.
The developers have said multiple times that this game is staying B2P with the gemshop.
Let’s get one thing straight. If a game is good, then the last thing the company needs to worry about is money.
Apparently I’m not a loyal customer according to the OP. I thought my $60 was good indicator of my loyalty. I could have just found a way to steal a key. I must be a bad customer since I haven’t spent a dime in the Gem Shop but I have probably bought over 50k gems using in-game gold. I am very offended by the loyalty comment OP , screw you. Having said that, I would be glad to purchase an expansion pack for a reasonable price if Anet would ever do that.
$180,000,000+ (digital purchases+ gem shop purchases) should be more than enough to keep a small company like Anet to stay afloat for more than a year. Now that they are selling in China the profit will get much higher. AFAIK GW2 is on budget since that is what I heard in a developer interview about their API tracking systems.
A subscription model is only for the greedy companies or companies that have way too many employees and too much overhead. (WoW lots of commercials , also has to pay lots of royalties to use certain voices or media parodies).
If Truly F2P games like Aion, League of Legends, or Everquest 2 can keep their servers running then a sub fee is completely ridiculous.
Its time to close this thread and let it die.
For GW2? Neither.
Nothing in the gemstore is worth it, and I wouldn’t pay a sub to play this game.
My preferences in general, however, lean towards subscriptions. I just want to play a good game, and if that gives developers the breathing room to make one, and quit shoving ridiculous cash-shop stuff in my face, then that’s what I want.
I’d cheerfully pay a sub for a good, classy game.
Would rather pay a sub. That way I know quality is assured (snip)
Are you implying that every game with a sub releases only quality content? Because I keep hearing this argument really often and I wonder how paying monthly assures anything.
Because when quality isn’t assured. People stopped subbing. Then said bad quality game fails and goes free to play.
Would rather pay a sub. That way I know quality is assured (snip)
Are you implying that every game with a sub releases only quality content? Because I keep hearing this argument really often and I wonder how paying monthly assures anything.
Because when quality isn’t assured. People stopped subbing. Then said bad quality game fails and goes free to play.
Actually TSW and Rift were both good quality games that went free to play. Lotro was a good quality game that went free to play. I don’t think going free to play has anything to do with quality.
And WoW has had some really bad products. But they also have the money to advertise a lot. That helps with sales. Which gives them more money to advertise more.
There are probably more people that have left WoW over the years than are currently playing it. That doesn’t make it a bad game or a good game, but other games that have gone free to play were certainly good games.
Whether people will pay for something is not always a sign of it’s quality.
Pet rocks were very very popular.
Would rather pay a sub. That way I know quality is assured (snip)
Are you implying that every game with a sub releases only quality content? Because I keep hearing this argument really often and I wonder how paying monthly assures anything.
Because when quality isn’t assured. People stopped subbing. Then said bad quality game fails and goes free to play.
sorry, but this is nonsense. As the world changes, so do customer habits and business models. I doubt any new “sub” game will achieve a big business success in our age of microtransaction/f2p/b2p climate. Even the mysterious WoW successor, if it ever sees the light of day, would have a hard time trying to pull that off. Not to mention your argument is flawed: Do people happily pay for bad microtransaction model games while denying that for bad sub based games?
Would rather pay a sub. That way I know quality is assured (snip)
Are you implying that every game with a sub releases only quality content? Because I keep hearing this argument really often and I wonder how paying monthly assures anything.
Because when quality isn’t assured. People stopped subbing. Then said bad quality game fails and goes free to play.
Actually TSW and Rift were both good quality games that went free to play. Lotro was a good quality game that went free to play. I don’t think going free to play has anything to do with quality.
And WoW has had some really bad products. But they also have the money to advertise a lot. That helps with sales. Which gives them more money to advertise more.
There are probably more people that have left WoW over the years than are currently playing it. That doesn’t make it a bad game or a good game, but other games that have gone free to play were certainly good games.
Whether people will pay for something is not always a sign of it’s quality.
Pet rocks were very very popular.
There are a lot more bad F2P games out then than sub games.
Would rather pay a sub. That way I know quality is assured (snip)
Are you implying that every game with a sub releases only quality content? Because I keep hearing this argument really often and I wonder how paying monthly assures anything.
Because when quality isn’t assured. People stopped subbing. Then said bad quality game fails and goes free to play.
Actually TSW and Rift were both good quality games that went free to play. Lotro was a good quality game that went free to play. I don’t think going free to play has anything to do with quality.
And WoW has had some really bad products. But they also have the money to advertise a lot. That helps with sales. Which gives them more money to advertise more.
There are probably more people that have left WoW over the years than are currently playing it. That doesn’t make it a bad game or a good game, but other games that have gone free to play were certainly good games.
Whether people will pay for something is not always a sign of it’s quality.
Pet rocks were very very popular.
There are a lot more bad F2P games out then than sub games.
There are also a lot more F2P games than there are sub games. Remember a ton of games started with subs and are now F2P. Some of them weren’t very good, some were better. But since the number of free to play games is much much greater than the number of sub games, it stands to reason that many would be bad.
The question is how different is the good bad percentage. If there were 10 pay games and 3 of them were good, then 66% of them were bad. It’s hard to say that free to play games are worse by percentage.
Particularly because better and worse are matters of opinion in the first place.