Guild Wars 2

Have it so bag slot upgrades are account wide, but each slot upgrade can only be active on one character at a time.

Basically, you’ll have a number of bag slot expansions available to the entire account, and if you wish to transfer one from one character to another, you will need to remove items and the bag from the slot you wish to reclaim. This would cost nothing to do, because nothing is gained besides having more inventory available on your new ‘main’

I am not fond of account upgrades that are permanently stuck with a character, though I do think that it should only be available to one character at a time due to the lower 400 gem cost.

I WILL buy bag slots if they do this, otherwise, not a chance in hell.

Pretty much. I would buy them no doubt if they were account wide. But per character? Never going to happen.

My “policy” toward bag slot upgrades in GW2 (after buying one on my first character) is to find a way to do without them. Having said, that, I just logged onto CO for the first time in a while, and happened to look at costume slots. It’s possible in that game to buy a slot for a single character at a low cost, and a slot for every character on the account for a larger cost. I might be tempted to buy GW2 bag slots at an increased cost if all my characters would benefit.

Disclaimer: I’m not demanding this, just letting ANet know how to get me to loosen the purse strings. If they’re not interested, my current policy will remain in force.

I was debating extra bag slots … until I found out they were for a character not an account. My ranger may need the space now but it could be my engineer next month.

So far I haven’t found it even necessary to have more bag space, but things fill up quick at times, it would be worth it if it wasn’t soulbound.

A couple of questions.

Do you like the game?
Do you want to continue to play the game?

If you said yes to these then you better realise that nothing in the world is free. It’s definitely not free to run an MMO.

Yes, and…?
I would be willing to pay for slot upgrades if it was transferable.

Obviously I’m not asking for it to be free, I’m asking for it to be movable.

Weylin.6478:

Yes, and…?
I would be willing to pay for slot upgrades if it was transferable.

Obviously I’m not asking for it to be free, I’m asking for it to be movable.

personally I have enough issues shuffling ascended gear much-less an entire inventory. I do agree that anet needs to rein in some of its greed, like making you pay everytime you want to swap looks after you already bought something……

Making them account wide would also mean upping the price.

It’ll be better if there was two to choose from.

The cheap 400 ones, and more expensive account-wide ones.

Abbehemoth.2471:

A couple of questions.

Do you like the game?
Do you want to continue to play the game?

If you said yes to these then you better realise that nothing in the world is free. It’s definitely not free to run an MMO.

A bad investment is still bad. There are other less scummy ways to get money from us. This just feels bad.

Abbehemoth.2471:

A couple of questions.

Do you like the game?
Do you want to continue to play the game?

If you said yes to these then you better realise that nothing in the world is free. It’s definitely not free to run an MMO.

Eh… I have no problem supporting GW2. I payed $60 for 2.5-3 years / 1500+ hours of game time (and counting!) of fun and enjoyment and wouldn’t mind paying for things in the gem store like armor, weapon skins, gems to gold, etc. and I don’t even mind paying $100 for the expansion. But I also want to pay for a good investment, meaning if I buy something I want to get as much enjoyment out of it as possible.

In the case of bag slots, I don’t feel like paying $5.00 for 1 bag slot for 1 character. For another added $5 I can get a character slot with 5 more bag slots. I’d pay a bit more money for a bag slot expansion across all characters than pay $5 for one.

EDIT: Bank slots are account wide, bag slots should be too. It’s mainly about convenience here and whether or not this purchase/price of the product is a wise one.

I only have two characters I use enough to warrant full bag space on (160 slots) so I didn’t mind upgrading them. Upgrading every toon would be a bit excessive though.

Having 3+ armor sets and multiple trinket combinations takes up a bunch of space on my mains. My alts have only 1-2 armor sets (zerk and maybe condi) and I swap my ascended trinkets over when I want to use them. Full weapons assortments on my mains but my alts only use a few. Point being it isn’t necessary for an alt to have so much space.

MithranArkanere.8957:

Making them account wide would also mean upping the price.

It’ll be better if there was two to choose from.

The cheap 400 ones, and more expensive account-wide ones.

The sales volume increase would more than compensate imo.

If you could move it between characters, I could see that but universal unlock for every character existing or future, no, I don’t see that happening. ANet needs to make money somehow.

You all realise that you can convert gold into gems, right? If you really do not feel like this game should survive then just farm and convert, yay!

Weylin.6478:

Yes, and…?
I would be willing to pay for slot upgrades if it was transferable.

Obviously I’m not asking for it to be free, I’m asking for it to be movable.

So a math question for you. 1×400 gems > (1+X)x400 gems =?
Which one gives Anet more money to run the game with?
Permanent one time buy costumes? Permanent one time buy infinite mining/logging/hervesting tool?

Nah, they make money from BLC keys, dyes, etc. Things you buy repeatedly.

Ralanost.8913:

A bad investment is still bad. There are other less scummy ways to get money from us. This just feels bad.

What is bad about it? You get more bag space, Anet can keep running the game.
Less scummy way? like a Subscription that people would be making 2739847289 thread about every day demanding “more content nao!” since they pay such an exorbitant fee (12-15/month) for the game..?

piano man.1672:

Eh… I have no problem supporting GW2. I payed $60 for 2.5-3 years / 1500+ hours of game time (and counting!) of fun and enjoyment and wouldn’t mind paying for things in the gem store like armor, weapon skins, gems to gold, etc. and I don’t even mind paying $100 for the expansion. But I also want to pay for a good investment, meaning if I buy something I want to get as much enjoyment out of it as possible.

In the case of bag slots, I don’t feel like paying $5.00 for 1 bag slot for 1 character. For another added $5 I can get a character slot with 5 more bag slots. I’d pay a bit more money for a bag slot expansion across all characters than pay $5 for one.

EDIT: Bank slots are account wide, bag slots should be too. It’s mainly about convenience here and whether or not this purchase/price of the product is a wise one.

So are you supporting the game at all? Or are you just leeching off of other people keeping it running? You do realise that you 60$ hasn’t kept the game runnig for the last 2½-3 years, right? It might have payed for some of the development costs.

It’s about ‘convenience’ for you and you wallet. Anet need a way to make a constant stream of money how do they do that by changing the inventory space pricing and model?

Crossflip.4390:

The sales volume increase would more than compensate imo.

Yes, short time! What happens long term then?
Is 18x Inventory slot upgrades giving them more money then 2x account wide slot upgrades?

Uhm no, i can see storage (Bank) being account wide, but why on earth should bag slot be? What i have in my bag slot on one char, i don’t have on another. Bank on the other hand is shared among all my characters.

So no, i just don’t see it.

Abbehemoth.2471:

piano man.1672:

Eh… I have no problem supporting GW2. I payed $60 for 2.5-3 years / 1500+ hours of game time (and counting!)….blah blah my quote shortened because I can’t have more than 5001 characters.
In the case of bag slots, I don’t feel like paying $5.00 for 1 bag slot for 1 character. For another added $5 I can get a character slot with 5 more bag slots. I’d pay a bit more money for a bag slot expansion across all characters than pay $5 for one.

So are you supporting the game at all? Or are you just leeching off of other people keeping it running? You do realise that you 60$ hasn’t kept the game runnig for the last 2½-3 years, right? It might have payed for some of the development costs.

Yes and no. Yeah, in a sense I’m leeching off of everyone else. I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t. And I’m sure lots of other GW2 players are as well. To be honest, I’ve spent maybe $150-$200 on things within the gemstore, and that price includes my $60 preorder purchase. With the current GW2 model (Box-2-Play), GW2 allows you and everyone else to do the same. Many have paid just $60 to play the game for 2/3 years. I’ve paid a bit more to play the game for 2/3 years. And I know of people who have spent over $1000 on the game. Players have the freedom to choose whether or not they want to invest into the game and in return, receive benefits/items/stuff/ability from the gemstore, and every player using cash to buy things through the gemstore KNOWS they are investing and allowing the game to run for players who only paid the box price, or only paid $10 for the 2 weekends they had that sale on for.

And with you questioning me whether I am leeching on the game, are YOU leeching by having others pay your way? Or are you leeching off of other people keeping it running? Have you paid your fair share of server/data space? Have you earned your keep? That’s a really, really stupid question in my honest opinion. Unless you can answer for these questions with evidence and proof, you really don’t have a place to ask me those questions without saying, “I’m doing the same thing you are.”.

I could care less if you supported the game more than I have. I’ve supported the game with what I can provide every so often without going overboard. You know, with going to college and paying for a car and insurance and all. GW2 has graciously created their game with a model that involves players supporting the game so other players can play it, and I give my respect and thanks to ArenaNet and the players who invest a lot of money into the game.

Abbehemoth.2471:

It’s about ‘convenience’ for you and you wallet. Anet need a way to make a constant stream of money how do they do that by changing the inventory space pricing and model?

I’m simply voicing my opinion that I WOULD DEFINITELY 100% WITHOUT A DOUBT BUY extra inventory slots if they were account wide and cost the same or slightly higher than buying another character slot (currently $10 I believe). I understand it makes sense for GW2 to have people purchase inventory slots per character, as that’s one option to make money. But personally, I believe more people would buy the item (and they would make more money in return) by increasing the price on inventory expansion slots and selling them as an account-wide package. I know for a fact that many of my guild mates and friends would buy inventory expansion slots if they were an account wide upgrade. Currently, they are not buying and have not bought inventory expansion slots because they’re for one character only.

I prefer the current price.
Making them account-wide would increase the price quite a bit, in order to compensate for the loss of income due to less being sold.

And yes, people can claim all they want that more will be sold and thus that would compensate. But do we actually know that?
And what happens when people have bought it and few new players are coming into the game? That would mean that the income from them would basically become zero, due to people creating new characters would no longer need to buy another unlock.

lordkrall.7241:

I prefer the current price.
Making them account-wide would increase the price quite a bit, in order to compensate for the loss of income due to less being sold.

And yes, people can claim all they want that more will be sold and thus that would compensate. But do we actually know that?
And what happens when people have bought it and few new players are coming into the game? That would mean that the income from them would basically become zero, due to people creating new characters would no longer need to buy another unlock.

Plus, if they made them account bound then I’d make out like a bandit, many other players as well. I’ve already got a character with all slots unlocked so all my other 54 characters would fill up for free.

Tirien.1326:

Uhm no, i can see storage (Bank) being account wide, but why on earth should bag slot be? What i have in my bag slot on one char, i don’t have on another. Bank on the other hand is shared among all my characters.

So no, i just don’t see it.

I just don’t get this, I don’t get it at all. The “what i have in my bag slot on one char, i don’t have on another” part. It kills me.

Your Bank is a place to store items across characters. All good fine and dandy, I understand it, support it, I’ve paid for more bank tabs because it’s account wide and benefits me as a person. My whole account. Every character. It’s great and convenient and it works.

Inventory Slots are slots that you fill loot with for a character. All good fine and dandy. Got it. The ONLY DIFFERENCE between additional Inventory Slots and Bank Tabs is that your Inventory isn’t a place to store items for different characters. Although it has the ability to do so for non-character-bound items, it’s main purpose is to increase how much potential loot your characters can hold, all depending on what bag you fill that slot with.

So let me re-state your question again.

Uhm no, i can see storage (Bank) being account wide, but why on earth should bag slot be?

Are you saying it would be a stupid idea to allow players to buy an account upgrade that increases the inventory slot of all characters on your account by one? If that’s the case, then it would be a stupid idea to allow players to buy an account upgrade that increases the bank slots of all characters on your account by one tab.

Oh wait! Bank tabs work that way! And it’s awesome and great and people love it because it makes sense!

Guys, for the people arguing that they make more money. I get what your saying and the angle you’re approaching this debate from. But I want you to stop yourself and think! Have you considered that sales for inventory tabs MAY INCREASE if they were account-wide?

Think about it this way. I wouldn’t have ever bought any bank tabs if they only increased the bank tab for one character. Why? Because I have 5 Maxed 80s and 2 other additional alts. I don’t play on only ONE character.

Currently, I know myself, many of my RL friends, and many of my guild mates refuse to buy inventory slots because they are not account wide. The benefit they bring to your account is very little. For me personally, I am not going to pay $5 to get an extra inventory slot for one character. If I’m not going to do that, then I’m DEFINITELY not going to pay $25 to get an additional inventory slot for 5 characters. I might as well pay for 2 character slots at that price and with that system, each granting me 5 additional inventory slots.

But I WILL 100% WITHOUT A DOUBT pay $10-15 for an inventory expansion slot upgrade that applies to your whole account, and I know many of my RL friends and guild mates would do the same. That means more money coming in! This may not apply to the majority, and if it doesn’t then it’s better to go with the 1-slot 1-character system. But it doesn’t hurt at all to provide players with this option.

Yes, the sales might increase (for a while, which is rather important to take into consideration), but will they increase enough?

I’d love them to be account wide but bumped up to say 800 gems each. The main reason I don’t have additional bag slots is my alt addiction, it would just be too expensive

piano man.1672:

Yes and no. Yeah, in a sense I’m leeching off of everyone else. I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t. And I’m sure lots of other GW2 players are as well. To be honest, I’ve spent maybe $150-$200 on things within the gemstore, and that price includes my $60 preorder purchase. With the current GW2 model (Box-2-Play), GW2 allows you and everyone else to do the same. Many have paid just $60 to play the game for 2/3 years. I’ve paid a bit more to play the game for 2/3 years. And I know of people who have spent over $1000 on the game. Players have the freedom to choose whether or not they want to invest into the game and in return, receive benefits/items/stuff/ability from the gemstore, and every player using cash to buy things through the gemstore KNOWS they are investing and allowing the game to run for players who only paid the box price, or only paid $10 for the 2 weekends they had that sale on for.

Thank you for reiterating my point..?

piano man.1672:

And with you questioning me whether I am leeching on the game, are YOU leeching by having others pay your way? Or are you leeching off of other people keeping it running? Have you paid your fair share of server/data space? Have you earned your keep? That’s a really, really stupid question in my honest opinion. Unless you can answer for these questions with evidence and proof, you really don’t have a place to ask me those questions without saying, “I’m doing the same thing you are.”.

Well there is this thing called ‘stupid’ that is what I would be if I tried to make others realise the need to pay if I wasn’t doing that myself..
Is your argument here that I need to prove that I am paying or the argument “Anet needs money to run the game” isn’t true..?

piano man.1672:

I could care less if you supported the game more than I have. I’ve supported the game with what I can provide every so often without going overboard. You know, with going to college and paying for a car and insurance and all. GW2 has graciously created their game with a model that involves players supporting the game so other players can play it, and I give my respect and thanks to ArenaNet and the players who invest a lot of money into the game.

Alright so why are you complaining about 5$ then? Skip buying two coffes and just like that you have more inventory space!
I have a hard time understand your point here. Are you comlaining about Anet needing money or about you not wanting to part with yours because you are the only person in the world with real life expenses?
Anet did not create a game in which one player is supposed to pay for another if that is what you are implying they utilise the “Free” to play model (The BUY2play thing is to reduce the risk of lost revenue from people that take F2P to it’s limit) which means you give the illusion of the game not costing anything to play after buying it. 5$ here, 10$ there, suddenly a player has gone way over the horrible 12$ a month sub model..

piano man.1672:

Abbehemoth.2471:

It’s about ‘convenience’ for you and you wallet. Anet need a way to make a constant stream of money how do they do that by changing the inventory space pricing and model?

I’m simply voicing my opinion that I WOULD DEFINITELY 100% WITHOUT A DOUBT BUY extra inventory slots if they were account wide and cost the same or slightly higher than buying another character slot (currently $10 I believe). I understand it makes sense for GW2 to have people purchase inventory slots per character, as that’s one option to make money. But personally, I believe more people would buy the item (and they would make more money in return) by increasing the price on inventory expansion slots and selling them as an account-wide package. I know for a fact that many of my guild mates and friends would buy inventory expansion slots if they were an account wide upgrade. Currently, they are not buying and have not bought inventory expansion slots because they’re for one character only.

You are simply voicing that you what more for less.
Me and my friends we did buy inventory space. I guess that proves people does, yay! So I know FOR A FACT that they are selling inventory space. The game is still running so I guess it’s working.

Abbehemoth.2471:

Ralanost.8913:

A bad investment is still bad. There are other less scummy ways to get money from us. This just feels bad.

What is bad about it? You get more bag space, Anet can keep running the game.
Less scummy way? like a Subscription that people would be making 2739847289 thread about every day demanding “more content nao!” since they pay such an exorbitant fee (12-15/month) for the game..?

I’m sorry you don’t understand what a bad investment is, nor do you understand the value of your own money. And people are still begging for more content now. Living Story wasn’t the best content delivery method and now they are trying expansions. In the meantime, the current game is at a standstill with no new content for months.

On the other hand, I would easily pay 1200 gems for account bag unlocks. But I would feel bad buying it per character as sometimes I get tired of a character and ‘switch mains’ per se. I would feel I wasted money if I spent things on only one character. That to me is a bad investment, especially for the money involved for just a single bag unlock.

Some of you seems to know what is profitable for net and what is not, perhaps could you share your numbers ?
The fact is the economic model seems to no longer be the same. The gemstore was supposed to pump enough money to give us Living Story updates for free. Why have they switched to the expansion model ? Is it because Gemstore was not efficient ? Is it because players were asking (begging ?) Anet to take their money for an expansion ? What was the main reason for megserver ? The lack of players and necessity to avoid the empty maps feelings, or a cost reduction because the game was losing money ?
When the game started, John Smith was hired to give us statistics about number of players/professions and economy. Why don’t we have numbers about the game anymore ? Is it because the game is bleeding too much and that would make a bad advertising or because John Smith is too busy watching players flipping on the TP ?
Unless you can answer all these questions, I’m not sure you can tell if Anet should or should not make the slot bags account wide. The fact is many people won’t buy them until it’s done, and these people should suggest what they have in mind. That’s the forum purpose as far as I know.
Some of you are so prompt to take Anet defense that you don’t want to hear other people opinions. What’s the point ? Are you trying to get some moderator status or something ?

Ralanost.8913:

Abbehemoth.2471:

Ralanost.8913:

A bad investment is still bad. There are other less scummy ways to get money from us. This just feels bad.

What is bad about it? You get more bag space, Anet can keep running the game.
Less scummy way? like a Subscription that people would be making 2739847289 thread about every day demanding “more content nao!” since they pay such an exorbitant fee (12-15/month) for the game..?

I’m sorry you don’t understand what a bad investment is, nor do you understand the value of your own money. And people are still begging for more content now. Living Story wasn’t the best content delivery method and now they are trying expansions. In the meantime, the current game is at a standstill with no new content for months.

On the other hand, I would easily pay 1200 gems for account bag unlocks. But I would feel bad buying it per character as sometimes I get tired of a character and ‘switch mains’ per se. I would feel I wasted money if I spent things on only one character. That to me is a bad investment, especially for the money involved for just a single bag unlock.

Can you please explain how it is a bad investment then? I am not just going to take your word for it without an arguemnt as to why that is.
Yes, people are begging for more content but if the game woudl have the subscription model then people pay a full 12-15$ dollars a month (That is such a vast amount of money..) then they would feel even more entitled to demanding that they get things.
They never should have left the expansion model from GW1.
Good thing you don’t have the pay a subscription or buy any of the ingame store items to play then, right..? You are not losing any of that subscription fee money on not gettign a new patch.

I have 255 hours on my warrior, it used to be my main. Now I play it from time to time. I have some slot unlocked on him. Was it a bad investment? 255 hours for 15$of inventory slots? That is as much as I put into Skyrim. The inventory space is a replacement for the Sub model and you do understand this, how is it a bad investment?
If you like to play the game alot then just convert gold if it’s that bad of an investment to pay 5$xAmount of Inventory Slots for every character you decide to play on..

Acinonyx Rex.8609:

Some of you are so prompt to take Anet defense that you don’t want to hear other people opinions. What’s the point ? Are you trying to get some moderator status or something ?

Personally I am tryign ti explain to people how a company needs money to stay up and that what for you as the consumer seems like a very fair and nice deal isn’t do good for the company.

If anyone has heard of Smite, a MOBA that was goign under they decided to switch their monetary model to a one time buy. That game got a huge boost after that but now the money has more or less stopped coming in which is risking the future of the game.

Abbehemoth.2471:

If anyone has heard of Smite, a MOBA that was goign under they decided to switch their monetary model to a one time buy. That game got a huge boost after that but now the money has more or less stopped coming in which is risking the future of the game.

Source please?
Last i checked SMITE is free and always have been… the only one time buy you can do would be to buy the ultimate god pack to unlock all the gods(but is not in any way necessary to play), a thing i gladly did when i played the game, cause guess what… that was an account wide unlock… but you cant really compare that as a MOBA is on a very fundamentals level different to a MMO in how it works.

So yeah an account wide bag upgrade for a bit more than the current upgrade cost i would gladly buy in gw2, this character wide one i wont, like many others it seem.

An NOONE can know in this thread whether they would get more or less money in the long run by giving us an account wide option, no matter what side of the argument you are on, so that why we give a suggestion for it letting them know there are some people at least that would buy the account wide that dont buy the current one, then it is up to ANet to decide if it would earn them enough to allow it

Honestly I could see an account-wide system working in their favor if they made it more attractive. People would be more inclined to purchase the bag slots rather than avoiding them if this were the case, but in the long run (in my opinion) they would lose out on some gem purchases because of it.

I’ve just learned to manage my inventory and live with what I’ve got. 20 slot bags are easy to come by via Trick or Treat bags/Candy Corn nodes, and the account-wide bank slots work wonders as well. Not to mention creating a personal banking guild with a storage helps with everything that’s not account bound (food items, runes, sigils, etc.).

Abbehemoth.2471:

A couple of questions.

Do you like the game?
Do you want to continue to play the game?

If you said yes to these then you better realise that nothing in the world is free. It’s definitely not free to run an MMO.

Yes i like this game
Yes i continue playing this.
Yes i will buy additional bag space when its needed and all i do is converting gold > gems. Also using the free gems coming with achievements chests.

And yep, it is not free to run an MMO and this is far better then paying a monthly subscription.

lordkrall.7241:

I prefer the current price.
Making them account-wide would increase the price quite a bit, in order to compensate for the loss of income due to less being sold.

And yes, people can claim all they want that more will be sold and thus that would compensate. But do we actually know that?
And what happens when people have bought it and few new players are coming into the game? That would mean that the income from them would basically become zero, due to people creating new characters would no longer need to buy another unlock.

$10 for the account, $20 for a bag slot. I am sure this will generate a lot of cheers.

Eh as much as i despise myself for slowly outfitting my 3 main characters out in them, i dont want them to be changed either.

Just my pennies: I think a good solution would be to change the extra slot to an account bound bag that could be placed in the locked slots. So like the harvesting tools, it would still be enough of an inconvenience for some people to buy several, but still allow others to share the upgrade between characters. It allows more account/character customization and less buyers remorse when you change your “main.”

Abbehemoth.2471:

Acinonyx Rex.8609:

Some of you are so prompt to take Anet defense that you don’t want to hear other people opinions. What’s the point ? Are you trying to get some moderator status or something ?

Personally I am tryign ti explain to people how a company needs money to stay up and that what for you as the consumer seems like a very fair and nice deal isn’t do good for the company.

If anyone has heard of Smite, a MOBA that was goign under they decided to switch their monetary model to a one time buy. That game got a huge boost after that but now the money has more or less stopped coming in which is risking the future of the game.

If a company wants a consumer’s money it needs to provide a product that the consumer considers worth paying for. Consumers in this thread are informing the company of a product they are willing to pay for. This entire process is an effort to provide Anet with income from these consumers (in return for a service of course) that they would otherwise not get.

Now, it would be up to Anet to figure out how to act on the request (or to not act on it) in order to maximize revenue.

I am fond of the idea of a two tiered pricing model where account slots are significantly more expensive but character specific slots remain at the current price.

If they do make it account-wide, then a price like 1600 gems might be good.

Think about it, with EVERY character getting a slot unlocked, even at that steep cost of $20, once you have several characters, it becomes more sensible to buy bag slots instead of another storage mule at the above price.

Price per Inventory space aside, it’s still an added convenience you may want to get early on.

Ashen.2907:

If a company wants a consumer’s money it needs to provide a product that the consumer considers worth paying for. Consumers in this thread are informing the company of a product they are willing to pay for. This entire process is an effort to provide Anet with income from these consumers (in return for a service of course) that they would otherwise not get.

So the loud minority is what they should listen to? If the model did not work do you not think that Anet would change it?
You cannot sell a brand new say smart phone for 50$ just because a few think that is a fair price. The product must pay for it production cost and preferably give a little bit of profit.
The production cost here would be keeping the GW2 server, staff etc up and running.

Now, it would be up to Anet to figure out how to act on the request (or to not act on it) in order to maximize revenue.

So I should just not try to explain how getting paid more = more revenue for the company?
The account wide idea would maybe give an increase in revenue short term, how would that help a game that needs to generate revenue over a long time?

I am fond of the idea of a two tiered pricing model where account slots are significantly more expensive but character specific slots remain at the current price.

Significantly being what 3x the price of a specific? How that net a long term loss in revenue or not? We don’t know but can assume that since they have not made this happen (how would they solve the prolbem of people having bought slots feeling slighted etc?).

Abbehemoth.2471:

Ashen.2907:

If a company wants a consumer’s money it needs to provide a product that the consumer considers worth paying for. Consumers in this thread are informing the company of a product they are willing to pay for. This entire process is an effort to provide Anet with income from these consumers (in return for a service of course) that they would otherwise not get.

So the loud minority is what they should listen to? If the model did not work do you not think that Anet would change it?
You cannot sell a brand new say smart phone for 50$ just because a few think that is a fair price. The product must pay for it production cost and preferably give a little bit of profit.
The production cost here would be keeping the GW2 server, staff etc up and running.

Now, it would be up to Anet to figure out how to act on the request (or to not act on it) in order to maximize revenue.

So I should just not try to explain how getting paid more = more revenue for the company?
The account wide idea would maybe give an increase in revenue short term, how would that help a game that needs to generate revenue over a long time?

I am fond of the idea of a two tiered pricing model where account slots are significantly more expensive but character specific slots remain at the current price.

Significantly being what 3x the price of a specific? How that net a long term loss in revenue or not? We don’t know but can assume that since they have not made this happen (how would they solve the prolbem of people having bought slots feeling slighted etc?).

The production cost of a single digital item in game is not the entirety of the cost of maintaining the game. Particularly when said item can be reproduced, essentially, at will at almost no cost.

Higher price does not necessarily equate to more revenue. If it did Anet would be foolish to not charge hundreds of dollars, or more, per slot. Reducing a price, especially on something with essentially no current production costs, might eat into per unit margin but can produce both greater revenue and greater profit over time. With a per unit cost to produce of $.50 would you rather sell 100 units of product x at a $1.00 pricepoint or 500 units at $.75? I am not saying that these numbers are what Anet is dealing with, but rather that higher price does not necessarily equate to greater revenue.

Something not having been done yet is not an indication of what would be beneficial to do or of what will be done.

At one point there were no infinite harvesting tools in game. That was, obviously now, not an indication that they were not going to be added (and continue to be expanded upon).

At one point there was no announcement of an expansion, which does not mean that there never will be such.

At launch of the game none of the things that were added post launch were in the game. This was not an indication that those things were not going to be added or that they were bad ideas.

Something not implemented now, without statement from Anet, is not an indication of that thing’s merit, merely that the thing has not been implemented.

1/2

Ashen.2907:

Abbehemoth.2471:

Ashen.2907:

If a company wants a consumer’s money it needs to provide a product that the consumer considers worth paying for. Consumers in this thread are informing the company of a product they are willing to pay for. This entire process is an effort to provide Anet with income from these consumers (in return for a service of course) that they would otherwise not get.

So the loud minority is what they should listen to? If the model did not work do you not think that Anet would change it?
You cannot sell a brand new say smart phone for 50$ just because a few think that is a fair price. The product must pay for it production cost and preferably give a little bit of profit.
The production cost here would be keeping the GW2 server, staff etc up and running.

Now, it would be up to Anet to figure out how to act on the request (or to not act on it) in order to maximize revenue.

So I should just not try to explain how getting paid more = more revenue for the company?
The account wide idea would maybe give an increase in revenue short term, how would that help a game that needs to generate revenue over a long time?

I am fond of the idea of a two tiered pricing model where account slots are significantly more expensive but character specific slots remain at the current price.

Significantly being what 3x the price of a specific? How that net a long term loss in revenue or not? We don’t know but can assume that since they have not made this happen (how would they solve the prolbem of people having bought slots feeling slighted etc?).

The production cost of a single digital item in game is not the entirety of the cost of maintaining the game. Particularly when said item can be reproduced, essentially, at will at almost no cost.

Abbehemoth.2471:

The production cost here would be keeping the GW2 server, staff etc up and running.

Higher price does not necessarily equate to more revenue. If it did Anet would be foolish to not charge hundreds of dollars, or more, per slot. Reducing a price, especially on something with essentially no current production costs, might eat into per unit margin but can produce both greater revenue and greater profit over time. With a per unit cost to produce of $.50 would you rather sell 100 units of product x at a $1.00 pricepoint or 500 units at $.75? I am not saying that these numbers are what Anet is dealing with, but rather that higher price does not necessarily equate to greater revenue.

500 units at .75? How is this even a question? What you are proposing is a one/few time sell that would need to be expensive as hell to cover the future revenue loss from not selling repeated sales of the product..
The bolded part is my argument.
Unlimited 5$ sells of inventory expansion > a 15$ permantent unlock for all present and future characters.. This is what I have been trying to convey in the thread..

Something not having been done yet is not an indication of what would be beneficial to do or of what will be done.

You just stated yourself that a one time sell for a higher price probably isn’t the best idea??

At one point there were no infinite harvesting tools in game. That was, obviously now, not an indication that they were not going to be added (and continue to be expanded upon).

What is the argument here? Anet added another way for getting funds for the game and that is a reason why they should now reducing the ways they generate revenue?

2/2

At one point there was no announcement of an expansion, which does not mean that there never will be such.

How is this relevant? A new expansion increases intrest in the game, sales of the game and will most probably lead to a significant number of inventory expansions being bought. Adding an expansion does in no way help the argument of one/few time buys.

At launch of the game none of the things that were added post launch were in the game. This was not an indication that those things were not going to be added or that they were bad ideas.

..would you rather sell 100 units of product x at a $1.00 pricepoint or 500 units at $.75?

..but rather that higher price does not necessarily equate to greater revenue.

As in more sales generate more money even at a lower price, your very own words!?

Something not implemented now, without statement from Anet, is not an indication of that thing’s merit, merely that the thing has not been implemented.

Five sentences of saying the same things without gettign any point across since you yourself debunked the argument of “Higher Price, Lower Sales>Lower Price, Lots of Sales”??

To clarify for you, the current model generates more steady revenue for Anet than a one/few time buy would do over a long period of time which is the perspective an expensive to run MMO needs to survive, long term economy.

To all the “Me, my friends, my distant family, the neighbours dog and cat and that bird over does not buy X because so expensive 5 dollers!”-crowd.
Just because a person does not buy a Big Mac and none of that persons friends does, others obviously do otherwise McD would not survive. (The rest of the menu would be the other in-game store items so not need to bring that argument up..)

lol ‘anet needs to rein in some of its greed’ what a hoot…

i’m too lazy to argue on the internet, so put shortly, i agree. it is definitely not worth the money to me as it is right now, and i’m not even an alt-o-holic. I would be tempted to buy it if it were account wide though.

ITheNormalPerson.9275:

i’m too lazy to argue on the internet, so put shortly, i agree. it is definitely not worth the money to me as it is right now, and i’m not even an alt-o-holic. I would be tempted to buy it if it were account wide though.

For a 75$ price? 150$?
How high do you think they would have to go to replace the 5$ buys people do and how would this prevent revenue loss in the future?

LanfearShadowflame.3189:

lol ‘anet needs to rein in some of its greed’ what a hoot…

You have an overview on their budget? Can I see?

Abbehemoth.2471:

LanfearShadowflame.3189:

lol ‘anet needs to rein in some of its greed’ what a hoot…

You have an overview on their budget? Can I see?

Their budget and their supposed “greed” aren’t the same thing.

But we do have the quarterly income reports that NCSoft puts out and people post on these forums without fail, which shows an overall decrease in income. That doesn’t scream “greed” by any means.

Now….oil companies making record profits every quarter on the other hand…..

Abbehemoth.2471:

500 units at .75? How is this even a question? What you are proposing is a one/few time sell that would need to be expensive as hell to cover the future revenue loss from not selling repeated sales of the product..
The bolded part is my argument.
Unlimited 5$ sells of inventory expansion > a 15$ permantent unlock for all present and future characters.. This is what I have been trying to convey in the thread..

As sad as it can be to say that… Guild Wars 2 will not exists for centuries, nor that players stay for decades.

There’s many factors that make a “all characters” bag slot not a bad idea.
- New players will still have to buy them.
- Old players will still be willing to buy gem store items instead of bag slots.
- Arena.net will not stop to add new products to the gem store for players.
- More people could be willing to buy an “all characters” bag slot than people willing to buy several times a current bag slot.
- People could go to other MMO and will not pay things in GW2 anymore.
- Arena.net could make GW3 and everything bought will be lost anyway.

I don’t know what ANet should or shouldn’t do or whether or not it would be more profitable to make bag slots account wide at a slightly higher price. But I can say that I have personally never bought a bag slot and will never buy one, not even with gems from converting gold, as long as they are character bound. It is a very cost ineffective purchase for the way I play since I play a lot of alts. Instead, I will just live with the default slots. But I would definitely buy (using gems bought with real money) account bound bag slot(s) even at a much higher (3-4 times) price than what they currently charge for character bound ones. I suspect there are quite a few players with views similar to this, though I do not know how many. Not sure how ANet would make the determination of how to price bag slots and/or whether account bound or character bound is more profitable. But they have surely done analyses of not only that pricing but of all their other gem store prices. Of course their analyses may not always be correct. They have changed some of their pricing on certain gem store items in the past, right?

Also, a couple of ideas proposed above seem pretty good. I’d consider buying bag slots that are shared across all characters on the account. I think a lot of players would find that very useful and would buy those even at a pretty high gem cost. People might find those useful for sharing between characters account bound items like ascended armors, boosts, etc. Also, offering both the current (relatively cheap) character bound bag slots as well as account bound ones at a significant additional cost seems like a good idea. Selling both together might work well. At 400 gems for the character bound and 1200 gems (or maybe even 1600) for the account bound ones, a lot of people would buy account wide slots even if they had already bought individual slots. That would also keep ANet from having to automatically upgrade everyone who has previously bought character bound bag slots. Offering both could even result in a lot of additional sales to people who have already bought slots.

William Bradley Knight.2609:

I don’t know what ANet should or shouldn’t do or whether or not it would be more profitable to make bag slots account wide at a slightly higher price. But I can say that I have personally never bought a bag slot and will never buy one, not even with gems from converting gold, as long as they are character bound. It is a very cost ineffective purchase for the way I play since I play a lot of alts. Instead, I will just live with the default slots. But I would definitely buy (using gems bought with real money) account bound bag slot(s) even at a much higher (3-4 times) price than what they currently charge for character bound ones. I suspect there are quite a few players with views similar to this, though I do not know how many. Not sure how ANet would make the determination of how to price bag slots and/or whether account bound or character bound is more profitable. But they have surely done analyses of not only that pricing but of all their other gem store prices. Of course their analyses may not always be correct. They have changed some of their pricing on certain gem store items in the past, right?

Yeah, this.

I didn’t read every single post, but what if 400 gems opened all bag slots for 1 character. That would be a good compromise.

This would be awesome even if it was 800 gems. Yea there is the whole “But anet will lose money from people who buy 8 slot upgrades for all 64 of their characters!”, and that makes sense, but they also lose money from people who dont think its worth it to upgrade one character but would do so if it was acc wide

No idea which option would be more $$$ (probably the way it is now), but personally id vote for acc wide, even if its less revenue its more convenient which = happier players = more time logged in = more gem sales (thats how it works right?!?!)

Darkwolfer.7819:

I didn’t read every single post, but what if 400 gems opened all bag slots for 1 character. That would be a good compromise.

Nobody liked my idea?