Guild Wars 2

Diva.4706:

The advantage of no sub for GW2 for my family, is it doesn’t cost us $60 a month to play. (yes we have 4 players in the home).

We don’t play standard F2P MMOs, because of the game breaking restrictions most of those impose

So for us GW2 B2P is perfect with no downside.

Edit: Also you can buy GW2 as a gift, unlike sub based MMOs : Here is a gift ,oh and btw you have to pay $15 a month

It’s 15 dollars a month. Yes 15 dollars lol.

Siigari.6587:

The bias in this thread is mind-boggling.

Having a subscription brings quite a few benefits to a game. For starters, GENERALLY most things that mean anything can only be acquired in-game.

That’s just scratching the surface. There are plenty more benefits, but that’s the main one. Everyone starts and ends on the same playing field.

here’s the biggest con to any sub game ever i’m surprised people haven’t realized it yet.

- in a sub game your characters are not really yours they are rented !
– if you don’t pay that sub you can’t access them at all (which explains why people still pay for wow subs in a way. they have invested years in their characters stopping the sub now is for them unthinkable even if deep down they know they should)

also

- they claim the sub fee is for future content updates but whenever really good content comes out they label it an expansion and tell you
sorry you will have to pay for this content as it is an “expansion”
not to mention most sub games also have a cash shop which to me is like WTF ?
double dipping much ?

- only buy 2 play games should charge for an expansion as they have no subscription fee to speak of.

Palador.2170:

In a subscription game, the game itself is what drives the game. They can afford to take a few risks, as it takes more to make people not give them money. This can allow devs more room to take risks with new things, and allows them to spend time focusing on the game, not on things that they hope you’ll pay more money for.

And yet subscription games change to f2p models more often than not. I think it’s the opposite, when sub games take risks they have a far higher chance of losing more of their revenue directly, as people who don’t like the changes will unsub → instant less profit. If f2p/b2p games take some risks they won’t lose as much, at least not immediately.

Latinkuro.9420:

here’s the biggest con to any sub game ever i’m surprised people haven’t realized it yet.

- in a sub game your characters are not really yours they are rented !
– if you don’t pay that sub you can’t access them at all (which explains why people still pay for wow subs in a way. they have invested years in their characters stopping the sub now is for them unthinkable even if deep down they know they should)

also

- they claim the sub fee is for future content updates but whenever really good content comes out they label it an expansion and tell you
sorry you will have to pay for this content as it is an “expansion”
not to mention most sub games also have a cash shop which to me is like WTF ?
double dipping much ?

- only buy 2 play games should charge for an expansion as they have no subscription fee to speak of.

Dude every game is like that. Plus if the F2P/B2P game goes under and you didn’t overdose on the item mall then you’re part of the reason to blame for never getting to see your character again.

The current generation of gamers (15-25) feel extremely entitled. I have played multiple P2P games and still sub to one (Eve Online.) I have max level characters on WoW and I was playing Tera back when it came out. Tera didn’t win me over though so I left. But I digress.

The fact is if it’s not free people won’t even look at it because they can play what they are playing already for free. Remember, the Ms in MMO mean “massively multiplayer” and once you establish a base of acquaintances and friends, why leave for something new?

GW2 is not innovative in any way. It has a very similar quest/loot/dungeon system like many other MMOs before it just with some weird facade placed on it. It took me till level 20 to realize this. I was still running around completing quests, dynamic events are more like static events on a timer and there’s no loot progression. Even further the game has implemented a system in which anything obtained for a certain form of currency (karma) can never be sold directly to a vendor, salvaged or otherwise made profitable. Some foods are account bound while others can be sold or TPd. Living Story is just a “main story arc” that is constantly going on. Many, many games have this sort of a system in place (even Eve!) In many ways this game is a step backwards. The restrictions enforced on players means if someone doesn’t agree completely with the developer’s visions then they’re going to feel like the devs don’t care about them and walk away.

Kinda like me. Sure I have a few friends on here and I’ll hop on and play with them when they’re around but otherwise I have no reason to play a game with no tangible benefits for being max level.

eisberg.2379:

See no advantage to Subscription at all. Take GW2 and WoW as an example, GW2 has already introduced more new content in 8 months, then WoW did in any 8 month period. And that is just 1 example.

Hold on…what?

Funset.7893:

eisberg.2379:

See no advantage to Subscription at all. Take GW2 and WoW as an example, GW2 has already introduced more new content in 8 months, then WoW did in any 8 month period. And that is just 1 example.

Hold on…what?

Played WoW for 2 years, rarely saw new content added other then a paid expansion, and 40 man raids that less then 10% of the their player base actually got to see.

eisberg.2379:

Funset.7893:

eisberg.2379:

See no advantage to Subscription at all. Take GW2 and WoW as an example, GW2 has already introduced more new content in 8 months, then WoW did in any 8 month period. And that is just 1 example.

Hold on…what?

Played WoW for 2 years, rarely saw new content added other then a paid expansion, and 40 man raids that less then 10% of the their player base actually got to see.

And you know what? Many people not seeing those 40 man raids meant there were multiple things a player could work for. Also, if you choose not to join a group of people who are running those raids, don’t expect to be a part unless you make the group yourself.

That’s how it works. That’s not a slap in the face, it’s just a barrier to entry. You either want in or you don’t.

Many in this thread have stated that there’s no benefit to having a subscription. I disagree.

Subscriptions keep a steady stream of income flowing into the game, which gives the gaming company an incentive to keep the quality up. Shoddy game? Loss of subscriptions. Quality game? Renewed subscriptions, plus the satisfied player base refers more players.

Games without subscriptions have to generate cash flow other ways, usually through cash shop sales. Thus, game content tends to funnel players toward “playing” the cash shop. Development of fresh cash shop related content takes resource time away from other aspects of the game, and quality suffers. As examples, look at all the broken/bugged/missing features in GW2 that have never been addressed, yet we get constant “updates” of temporary content that lead to cash shop items.

This doesn’t make non-sub games “bad,” rather they just have a different flavor. It’s important to remember a couple of things:

1) There is no free lunch. Anytime anything is advertised as free, it’s not.

2) If you want to understand why people do things, look at the incentives in the system. As much as we’d like to pretend otherwise, incentives drive our behavior.

Spiral Architect.6540:

Many in this thread have stated that there’s no benefit to having a subscription. I disagree.

Subscriptions keep a steady stream of income flowing into the game, which gives the gaming company an incentive to keep the quality up. Shoddy game? Loss of subscriptions. Quality game? Renewed subscriptions, plus the satisfied player base refers more players.

Games without subscriptions have to generate cash flow other ways, usually through cash shop sales. Thus, game content tends to funnel players toward “playing” the cash shop. Development of fresh cash shop related content takes resource time away from other aspects of the game, and quality suffers. As examples, look at all the broken/bugged/missing features in GW2 that have never been addressed, yet we get constant “updates” of temporary content that lead to cash shop items.

This doesn’t make non-sub games “bad,” rather they just have a different flavor. It’s important to remember a couple of things:

1) There is no free lunch. Anytime anything is advertised as free, it’s not.

2) If you want to understand why people do things, look at the incentives in the system. As much as we’d like to pretend otherwise, incentives drive our behavior.

WoW had bugged/broke stuff for years, lotro had bugged/broke stuff for years, EQ, Ultima, and so many other sub MMOs had bugged/broken stuff for years, There is no evidence that a sub game fixes things any better then a non sub game. New content is more often then not created by a different team then the team that works on bugs, and often the skill set are different enough that the content people can’t even work on bugs anyways, so no point in keeping them on hold while another team fixes the bugs.

Sub games tend to put in massive required grinds to get anywhere, because they need to make sure you stay subbed for as long as possible grinding things out to get anywhere. In Guild Wars 2, there is a massive grind for Legendary, but that Legendary is no different stat wise then another other level 80 exotic weapon which do not need any grind to achieve, so there is no required grind in this game.

Sub fee is inferior mostly because it creates this sense of urgency about playing the game, as you’re forced to always choose between being all-out or all-in. This creates pressure and stress and makes the game less enjoyable than it should be.

eisberg.2379:

Funset.7893:

eisberg.2379:

See no advantage to Subscription at all. Take GW2 and WoW as an example, GW2 has already introduced more new content in 8 months, then WoW did in any 8 month period. And that is just 1 example.

Hold on…what?

Played WoW for 2 years, rarely saw new content added other then a paid expansion, and 40 man raids that less then 10% of the their player base actually got to see.

40 man raids were abolished in Vanilla… Naxx being the last. That’s like 5 or 6 years ago. The new 5.2 patch had more content than GW2 put out since launch, and 5.3 is on the way. You can’t compare the tiny GW2 staff to the mammoth Blizzard is.

Sephyros.9652:

eisberg.2379:

Funset.7893:

eisberg.2379:

See no advantage to Subscription at all. Take GW2 and WoW as an example, GW2 has already introduced more new content in 8 months, then WoW did in any 8 month period. And that is just 1 example.

Hold on…what?

Played WoW for 2 years, rarely saw new content added other then a paid expansion, and 40 man raids that less then 10% of the their player base actually got to see.

40 man raids were abolished in Vanilla… Naxx being the last. That’s like 5 or 6 years ago. The new 5.2 patch had more content than GW2 put out since launch, and 5.3 is on the way. You can’t compare the tiny GW2 staff to the mammoth Blizzard is.

And you’re talking about a game how much years into its lifespan?

well it’s true that Blizzard is huge, it has 4,700 employees compared to ArenaNet’s 300

although I contest that dailies and raids (for non raiders) are significant content

Sephyros.9652:

eisberg.2379:

Funset.7893:

eisberg.2379:

See no advantage to Subscription at all. Take GW2 and WoW as an example, GW2 has already introduced more new content in 8 months, then WoW did in any 8 month period. And that is just 1 example.

Hold on…what?

Played WoW for 2 years, rarely saw new content added other then a paid expansion, and 40 man raids that less then 10% of the their player base actually got to see.

40 man raids were abolished in Vanilla… Naxx being the last. That’s like 5 or 6 years ago. The new 5.2 patch had more content than GW2 put out since launch, and 5.3 is on the way. You can’t compare the tiny GW2 staff to the mammoth Blizzard is.

When you pay a full price do you expect to get the full game or do you expect to get pieces of it as the years go by? You see all those patch you so proudly mention, many of not all is not new content its just the rest of the game. In other words you play full price for an incomplete game.

Dikeido.8436:

When you pay a full price do you expect to get the full game or do you expect to get pieces of it as the years go by? You see all those patch you so proudly mention, many of not all is not new content its just the rest of the game. In other words you play full price for an incomplete game.

And that’s the wrong way of thinking. What you bought at the start of GW2 was the full GW2. A game with enough content to warrant being a game. You payed for it knowing exactly what you get. Now you get lots of free stuff – pvp maps, fractals, guild missions, living story, such events as SaB and then you tell us that that’s nothing because it should have been in the game since the start. Sorry, but nothing should have been.If I was a developer updating a game constantly and you were my only buyer, I would stop updating the game right now. You don’t really deserve those updates.
And if you look at it this way does it mean that every expansion in WoW and update was supposed to be in vanilla? After all all of those races and all of their stories we saw in Warcraft strategy games, so why was the MMO so unfinished that it didn’t have all of that?
Double standards much?

Dikeido.8436:

When you pay a full price do you expect to get the full game or do you expect to get pieces of it as the years go by? You see all those patch you so proudly mention, many of not all is not new content its just the rest of the game. In other words you play full price for an incomplete game.

When you pay full price for a sub game, do you expect to get pieces of it as time goes by? Subscription games also add content to the game as time passes. In fact, that is one of the advantages those in favor point to when they argue that subscription games are better. Why is that a beneficial feature in a sub game but in B2P its “just the rest of the game” that should have been in at launch?

Con …. month after month of broken kitten and no incentive to fix it.

Slither Shade.4782:

Con …. month after month of broken kitten and no incentive to fix it.

bingo

Slither Shade.4782:

Con …. month after month of broken kitten and no incentive to fix it.

except that subbed games have stuff stay broken for months as well. WoW at launch had so little servers for months that lines to use them were for literally days and not hours, SWOTR had so many things broken. The upcoming WoW patch has even more fixes that were there since Pandaria release. Sub games are not faster on fixes than the non sub games.

yet 10 months after they launched the game they had 5 million subs. you can cry all you want over how wow is a giant, but quit being an uneducated hater. Go search their patch history since day one to see how much they put into their game.

Stop comparing GW2 to wow at launch…it’s not a valid comparison. GW1 released before WoW did..so arenanet has been in the business LONGER than blizzard, and has enough experience to know what is current in the market. I mean how many excuses can you possibly make, it’s starting to get ridiculous.

Newsflash: 2013 isn’t 2004. LOL

dcypher.2590:

yet 10 months after they launched the game they had 5 million subs. you can cry all you want over how wow is a giant, but quit being an uneducated hater. Go search their patch history since day one to see how much they put into their game.

Stop comparing GW2 to wow at launch…it’s not a valid comparison. GW1 released before WoW did..so arenanet has been in the business LONGER than blizzard, and has enough experience to know what is current in the market. I mean how many excuses can you possibly make, it’s starting to get ridiculous.

Newsflash: 2013 isn’t 2004. LOL

I’m not crying about it being a giant, I’m just saying that it too took long to fix its problems. Also Blizzard was in business before they released MMOs. Don’t forget that what made WoW popular wasn’t the MMO, but rather the strategy game.
SWOTR released not in 2004 and yet it too had a bunch of problems and bugs and took forever to fix them.
Don’t go to GW2 forums to fanboy about WoW please. Go and play it if you love it.

The fact that I would’ve never bought this game in the first place if it was subscription based, which I think was the mindset of most customers when they bought GW2 at first, is a pro. Also, unless they constantly keep adding stuff to attract new people, it’s going to become a con for Anet.

Mirta.5029:

dcypher.2590:

yet 10 months after they launched the game they had 5 million subs. you can cry all you want over how wow is a giant, but quit being an uneducated hater. Go search their patch history since day one to see how much they put into their game.

Stop comparing GW2 to wow at launch…it’s not a valid comparison. GW1 released before WoW did..so arenanet has been in the business LONGER than blizzard, and has enough experience to know what is current in the market. I mean how many excuses can you possibly make, it’s starting to get ridiculous.

Newsflash: 2013 isn’t 2004. LOL

I’m not crying about it being a giant, I’m just saying that it too took long to fix its problems. Also Blizzard was in business before they released MMOs. Don’t forget that what made WoW popular wasn’t the MMO, but rather the strategy game.
SWOTR released not in 2004 and yet it too had a bunch of problems and bugs and took forever to fix them.
Don’t go to GW2 forums to fanboy about WoW please. Go and play it if you love it.

yeaa call me the fanboy and the troll yet you were the one who brought the games into the discussion int he first place. I do play it..and it’s great fun. I own GW2 and as an owner I can share my views on it as well.

Comparing the game to 2004 just makes your argument look bad anyway, as if you couldn’t come up with anything better. This game has it’s cons, and that is indisputable. Unless of course the game is perfect. That’s not realistic.

Getting back to the original topic before we got sidetracked… The sub fees have a con and it is that you are required to pay every month whether or not there is content. B2P and F2P games have cons too, one of the most glaring is things like RNG boxes. Another con I see with this game in particularly is that they crackdown on farming, but offer no solution. This is probably because with limited resources they focus on other things such as the living story. It’s a flaw..a con.

dcypher.2590:

yeaa call me the fanboy and the troll yet you were the one who brought the games into the discussion int he first place. I do play it..and it’s great fun. I own GW2 and as an owner I can share my views on it as well.

Comparing the game to 2004 just makes your argument look bad anyway, as if you couldn’t come up with anything better. This game has it’s cons, and that is indisputable. Unless of course the game is perfect. That’s not realistic.

I do agree that WoW has its good points too and I apologize for calling you a fan boy. However in my opinion the statement that “sub games fix their bugs faster” is wrong because I’ve seen sub, B2P and F2P games taking long to fix their bugs.
Other than that I could add that 2004 was an easier year to release an MMO in, therefore I think that comparing a game from that time-frame to a game released today is completely fine, however I did mention SWOTR because it’s a newer game that is also sub based.

Mirta.5029:

dcypher.2590:

yeaa call me the fanboy and the troll yet you were the one who brought the games into the discussion int he first place. I do play it..and it’s great fun. I own GW2 and as an owner I can share my views on it as well.

Comparing the game to 2004 just makes your argument look bad anyway, as if you couldn’t come up with anything better. This game has it’s cons, and that is indisputable. Unless of course the game is perfect. That’s not realistic.

I do agree that WoW has its good points too and I apologize for calling you a fan boy. However in my opinion the statement that “sub games fix their bugs faster” is wrong because I’ve seen sub, B2P and F2P games taking long to fix their bugs.
Other than that I could add that 2004 was an easier year to release an MMO in, therefore I think that comparing a game from that time-frame to a game released today is completely fine, however I did mention SWOTR because it’s a newer game that is also sub based.

Alright that’s fine. I apologize for being a kitten. GW2 is fun at times and I play every now and then..I feel it could be better for every type of player in some regard or another. I’d still buy an expansion pack. I’d still hang out with my guild. In comparison to SWTOR this game is better in my opinion…and wow was pretty lame when it came out. I love playing wow but also have many aspects that I hate about it…like OP mages.

So maybe I’ll start cutting arenanet some slack..but I feel even if they find one of my posts valuable then maybe all of them were worth it.

Slither Shade.4782:

Con …. month after month of broken kitten and no incentive to fix it.

Wrong, very very wrong. There is zero evidence of a sub game getting things fixed any faster than a non sub game. A non sub games Buy to play game relies on players to buy the game, and then continuing to spend money in the store, and if there is bug or broken stuff that players do not like and make them leave then they lose that revenue, which just so happens to be the same exact thing as a sub game, broken/bugged stuff also makes players either not buy the game and also not sub.

So both sub and non sub games have an incentive to get things fixed.

There is plenty of evidence of sub games having broken/bugged stuff in their games for many months to years, and having a sub didn’t make that stuff getting fixed any quicker.

Also, have you been looking at Guild Wars 2 patches? Can you show me 1 patch where they did not fix something? Clearly they they have been fixing stuff, it might not be something that is bothering you the most, but they are in fact making fixes to their game, and some fixes are going to take longer then others, just like how in a sub game some fixes can take months to years to finally get fixed.

The No subscription fee is the biggest selling point of GW2 and the main reason of it’s success so far.
If there was a subscription fee, i don’t think the game would’ve been through the first 3 months (with launch problems and the whole Lost Shores + Ascendant crap fiasco) so easily.

Valanga.5942:

The No subscription fee is the biggest selling point of GW2 and the main reason of it’s success so far.
If there was a subscription fee, i don’t think the game would’ve been through the first 3 months (with launch problems and the whole Lost Shores + Ascendant crap fiasco) so easily.

And what does that tell you about the quality of the game, if its main selling point is that it is free? All the original P2P games are still around, still charging after over a decade.

I’ve to no beef with different models of play, but in my experience the ones with a sub fee are much better.

^.^

Anglvamp.5632:

And what does that tell you about the quality of the game, if its main selling point is that it is free? All the original P2P games are still around, still charging after over a decade.

I’ve to no beef with different models of play, but in my experience the ones with a sub fee are much better.

^.^

you forgot that the previous B2P game (GW1) is still around as well. Time will show what will hold and what won’t. A lot of new games though had to abandon the subscription model (Tera, Rift), so I don’t think that a generalization such as “B2P games are bad and P2P games are good” can be said.

Pros: free to play <3
Cons: no end game stuff, pray to RNG God for pre (in this game)

IndigoSundown.5419:

Yes, I am biased against games that require a subscription. Why? Because these games all copy the gear-progression repetitive-content mechanics refined by Blizzard, which are essentially designed to keep people p(l)aying every month. I will no longer rent MMO’s. If I want to rent a game I’ll buy a console and go to Redbox.

GW2 has plenty of OCD exploiting mechanisms designed to keep you playing and spending cash in the gem shop.

All I’m saying is you get what you pay for.

^.^

Anglvamp.5632:

All I’m saying is you get what you pay for.

^.^

well it doesn’t hold up in all situations. Example: Mac specs compared to PC specs if you spend the same amount on both.

I prefer a subscription based model. I just believe that everything in game should be acquired by ‘playing’ the game not purchasing it. Quite often with f2p or b2p games there are benefits handed to players that use the cash shop, whether that’s unique (and quite often the best looking) gear, mounts, etc or it may be more bank space, bag slots, character slots, etc (which actually turn out to be required in most cases). A sub based game also has an obligation to produce well designed and meaningful content at a reasonable rate or risk losing their subscribers.

At the end of the day a sub based game at $15 is approximately 0.48 cents per day, I’d love to see another source of entertainment that is comparable in terms of value for money. There aren’t any.

Most people will pay to have the things they want.
P2P, or F2P, it doesn’t matter—the challenge for both of these models is to provide the things people want. If a developer can’t provide these things, neither model gets any money.

morrolan.9608:

IndigoSundown.5419:

Yes, I am biased against games that require a subscription. Why? Because these games all copy the gear-progression repetitive-content mechanics refined by Blizzard, which are essentially designed to keep people p(l)aying every month. I will no longer rent MMO’s. If I want to rent a game I’ll buy a console and go to Redbox.

GW2 has plenty of OCD exploiting mechanisms designed to keep you playing and spending cash in the gem shop.

In GW2 I can ignore things like Legendaries and RNG boxes without thinking I’m missing anything. In most sub games, I am locked out of a percentage of new content unless I gear up for it. In GW2 I can control what I spend based on whether I think it is worth it or not. My choice in a sub game is to pay or leave.

Salt.4621:

I prefer a subscription based model. I just believe that everything in game should be acquired by ‘playing’ the game not purchasing it. Quite often with f2p or b2p games there are benefits handed to players that use the cash shop, whether that’s unique (and quite often the best looking) gear, mounts, etc or it may be more bank space, bag slots, character slots, etc (which actually turn out to be required in most cases). A sub based game also has an obligation to produce well designed and meaningful content at a reasonable rate or risk losing their subscribers.

At the end of the day a sub based game at $15 is approximately 0.48 cents per day, I’d love to see another source of entertainment that is comparable in terms of value for money. There aren’t any.

Arenanet has created more content since release then Blizzard did in any given 8 month period when I played that game for 2 years, and creating raids that a very small minority will actually use does not count. Also as far as bank space, bag slots, character slots, well think of this, you pay $15 a month for that, where as with Guild Wars 2, it is a one time fee. When it comes right down to it, the real difference between a Buy to play game and a Pay to play game, is you are spending $15 a month to access the game and for your character slots/bag slots, where as with a Buy to play game, you pay a one time fee for each. Other then that, there is literally no difference, because having a sub does not mean more content would be created faster or more frequently, because there is zero evidence of that.

Siigari.6587:

The bias in this thread is mind-boggling.

Having a subscription brings quite a few benefits to a game. For starters, GENERALLY most things that mean anything can only be acquired in-game.

That’s just scratching the surface. There are plenty more benefits, but that’s the main one. Everyone starts and ends on the same playing field.

Except for certain mounts and mini pets which end up in a cash shop.

Einlanzer.1627:

Sub fee is inferior mostly because it creates this sense of urgency about playing the game, as you’re forced to always choose between being all-out or all-in. This creates pressure and stress and makes the game less enjoyable than it should be.

That there is why I don’t play subscription games. I have the personality type where if I’m subscribed to something, I always feel this subconscious pressure to get the most out of my money, so I play the game as much as possible. I don’t want to feel like I can’t enjoy my other games outside of GW2 because every second I’m not playing GW2 is money I’m wasting.

Drew.1865:

Diva.4706:

The advantage of no sub for GW2 for my family, is it doesn’t cost us $60 a month to play. (yes we have 4 players in the home).

We don’t play standard F2P MMOs, because of the game breaking restrictions most of those impose

So for us GW2 B2P is perfect with no downside.

Edit: Also you can buy GW2 as a gift, unlike sub based MMOs : Here is a gift ,oh and btw you have to pay $15 a month

It’s 15 dollars a month. Yes 15 dollars lol.

Which is quite the amount. There’s not many things I’d sub 15 dollars a month for, unless they’re legally or de facto required. Videogames are not required.

People often make it seem like 15 euros a month is not a whole lot, and it isn’t. But it really is when you look at what it is: 180 euro’s a year. And that’s suddenly a whole lot of money for a videogame. Not that I don’t want to pay, but at least give me a choice and let me have something for it that’s not merely access rights.