Guild Wars 2

IndigoSundown.5419:

Dark Catalyst.1028:

The difference is that WoWs cash shop is all fluff, while GW2’s cash shop sells real improvements, like bag slots and bank tabs.

Ultimately, these arguments devolve down to, “Which game do you like better,” where that game is perceived to be superior.

• On bag slots — WoW gives you four bag slots for “free.” So does GW2. GW2 allows you to exceed the 4 bag slots, WoW does not.
• On the bank — WoW allows you to buy bag slots in your bank, which cost gold. You can spend gold in GW2 to buy gems, to then buy bank tabs.

I’m not seeing a ton of difference, other than that I can have more bag slots in GW2.

The only difference there is that the amount of gold you’d have to spend on gems is a lot more than the gold you spend in WoW to open bank tabs. But that’s being nitpicky.

Dark Catalyst.1028:

I just find it funny that the first thing many GW2 players cite as the reason for playing is the lack of a sub fee. You’d think they would mention the fun aspects or the “awesome” living story, but nope.

I really don’t get some of these arguments. I pay $8 a month for Netflix. So, am I “throwing my money away” if I don’t use the service 24/7? No, because I’m paying for a service and I understand what that entails. And that applies to sub MMOs as well.

Not having to pay a monthly fee changes the value proposition. Which is a better value? A $60 game that you can play for free as long as the servers are up or a $60 game that you can play for one month for free? A game I’m paying money every month to play has a much higher bar than a game I just paid $60 for. If Diablo III had a subscription model, I would have deeply regretted that purchase, but as it stands, I got my $60 worth of fun out of it. Secret World – that purchase was in the “not a good value” column until they went subscriptionless.

Netflix is different – I’m not paying $8 a month to watch one TV series. I’m paying $8 a month to have access to their entire catalog of digital content. One night I might feel like a martial arts movie, another night I might want to see why people like this Veronica Mars series so much, and some days I just want to watch Evil Dead over and over. I’m paying for the service so I don’t have to rent the content when I want to watch it.

Netflix is better compared to Sony’s Station Pass where you got access to a bunch of games for one fee.

Dark Catalyst.1028:

IndigoSundown.5419:

Dark Catalyst.1028:

The difference is that WoWs cash shop is all fluff, while GW2’s cash shop sells real improvements, like bag slots and bank tabs.

Ultimately, these arguments devolve down to, “Which game do you like better,” where that game is perceived to be superior.

• On bag slots — WoW gives you four bag slots for “free.” So does GW2. GW2 allows you to exceed the 4 bag slots, WoW does not.
• On the bank — WoW allows you to buy bag slots in your bank, which cost gold. You can spend gold in GW2 to buy gems, to then buy bank tabs.

I’m not seeing a ton of difference, other than that I can have more bag slots in GW2.

I can have four extra bag slots for free and use 28 slot bags + the 16 slot starter bag. It’s more than enough because I don’t have junk overflowing from my bags like I did in GW2. I can also buy 7 bank slots for gold in addition to the starter 24 slot bank for less that fifty cents worth of gold.

Who converts gold to gems anymore? The conversion rate is terrible.

• GW2 has 20 slot bags; it took WoW until Wrath to get them that big
• WoW does not have collectible deposit in the field; my “junk overflowing” experience was the opposite of yours
• WoW bank does not have a collectibles tab; I wonder how many bank bag slots that would equate to in WoW?
• Wtk is “fifty cents worth of gold” in WoW? And the original bank tab in GW2 was free.
• Someone must be exchanging gold for gems, unless there is also no one selling gems for gold

Honestly, we could go back and forth over this for some time, but it will still be you hating on GW2 and me hating on WoW.

Im Mudbone.1437:

Just because there are shops that sell used video games doesn’t make it legal to do, the GW2 EULA says you can’t.

Here in the UK it is perfectly legal to sell any commodity you own, including games. EULAs have no legal standing over here because 1) You cannot legally sign away your statutory rights (which many EULAs actually require you to do if you read the small print) and 2) you are never presented with an EULA until after you have purchased your game, which means the end user is perfectly entitled to ignore it. Licensing terms have to be presented prior to money changing hands, not after.

uknortherner.2670:

Im Mudbone.1437:

Just because there are shops that sell used video games doesn’t make it legal to do, the GW2 EULA says you can’t.

Here in the UK it is perfectly legal to sell any commodity you own, including games. EULAs have no legal standing over here because 1) You cannot legally sign away your statutory rights (which many EULAs actually require you to do if you read the small print) and 2) you are never presented with an EULA until after you have purchased your game, which means the end user is perfectly entitled to ignore it. Licensing terms have to be presented prior to money changing hands, not after.

Kewl for you blokes.

Ashen.2907:

Devata.6589:

It has taken a lot of items out of the game.. You can’t go on the hunt for mini’s, dyes (specific colors) skins and so on.

Which specific dye colors, skins, and minis were in the game world but were removed to be put into the gem shop ?

Do you have anything at all to show that they would have existed at all if not tied directly to a source of funding such as the gem shop ?

I said “It” so this cash-shop focus, has taken a lot out of the game. Because they are in the cash-shop and not in the game (where they else would have been) because of that cash-shop focus. So they have been taken out since day one.

No I do not have anything at all to show that they would have been in the game else-wise.

Ever heard of common sense? It are the kind of items that are in pretty much all MMORPG games. So it makes sense they would have been in GW2 as well.

Ashen.2907:

Seera.5916:

So you actually like having to get your favorite dye numerous times if you have alts and want to use it on them?

Having to spend time to “grow” each dye that I might want individually, one at a time, could mean spending months to be able to properly outfit a single character. Having those dyes then be available for alts is only beneficial if I intend to use the same exact colors on multiple characters.

Why would I be interested in pursuing color options for multiple characters if the system was so completely obnoxious for one ?

Seera.5916:

Once you unlock a dye on one character, it’s only unlocked for that character. You have to get lucky or buy the dye again to unlock it on another character and again and again and again.

Spending a few copper or silver, perhaps even a gold, to buy colors for an alt is much less restrictive than having to spend days.

The previous iteration of the dye system time gated dye access to the point that the current system, with character bound dyes, is much more alt friendly than the old system despite it being account bound.

Yeah I think it should be account-bound.

But the comment that you don’t like to grow one dye at a time is strange because thats is also the case in the current system. Only difference is if you can actively go for one specific color or not.

Also you say “Having those dyes then be available for alts is only beneficial if I intend to use the same exact colors on multiple characters.” When you hunt for a specific color you do get the dye colors you want (while maybe also some that you have no interest in).

Now you might get colors (multiple, the same ones) that you are not interested in at all and not get the ones you do want.

“Spending a few copper or silver, perhaps even a gold, to buy colors for an alt is much less restrictive than having to spend days. ”

This statement is also strange. The amount of gold you pay for a color depends also on the drop-rate (or / and popularity). So some require you to grind for gold longer and other require you to need less gold-grind.

That would not be different for when they are in the game. Some colors might be very easy to get other very hard. Difference is that in GW2 a lot of things are that boring gold grind while else you could go for the item you want. Thats just more fun imho and even if it isn’t more fun in your opinion there would still be the option to buy it from the TP after you would grind gold. That option would not go away.

Ashen.2907:

Seera.5916:

I’d rather have acquisition like it is now but unlocking them is account bound.

As would I.

I just wanted to point out that the system that existed prior to the current one was actually worse. What we have now is an improvement, changed because of beta player feedback, than what was originally designed.

However I was not comparing it to the original dye system.

“During the first beta weekend event, players were required to obtain Colorful Dye Seeds that required cultivation back in the “Home” area. Cultivation took either 24 real world hours, or the purchase of an item from the Gem shop. Once cultivated it would drop a soulbound, unidentified dye; that dye would unlock a new color. This system has since been replaced.”

I said they should drop as colors in specific places so you can go on a hunt to get the color you want.

Subscription model is dead. At least for me. I’ll never again start to play anything that requires a subscription. Paying over 150 euros per year after seeing Buy to Play or F2P models in games these days? never.

NTY!

I like the current model. I don’t like the heavy focus on gemstore, but it’s ok. I don’t mind.

I loved guild wars 1 for its no subscription/ no b2win model. and blindly followed arenanet to guild wars2 cause of the belief they would still deliver with a similar model.. and they have

- I have bought a ton of stuff off the gem store without spending a penny on gems. the last time i made a real money transaction was pre-ordering guild wars 2.

I’ve bought 60+ transmute crystals.
10 character slots (yes 10).
boxing gloves. riding broom. drill.
mini 3 pack (season 1).
Krytan armor set.

I don’t want to pay subs. I’d rather it be the way it is now that way i buy off the gem store when i want to.

No.
Gem-store is fine, doesn’t provide any advantage. It’s more of a donation to ANet/GW2 team.
Converting gems to gold does provide some advantage, but very negligible compared to other pay2win games.
Just because you pay $10-15/month doesn’t imply that the service is “good”, doesn’t really mean much… I would bring up WoW, as in where exactly does the $15/month go? Pretty sure the uptime of both WoW and GW2 are the same, the content* is about the same… Just WoW happily takes a subscription, justifying by various means (server fees! moar content! service support!… money in my pocket!), while GW2 says “donate if you like” (don’t think there’s any justification why to, or “if you donate we will do something”, simply a donation)…
Furthermore, having a subscription would actually provoke more time-gating or lengthen game time in general (possibly in more subtle ways then plain time gating)…

Content wise I mean:
GW2 releases some sort of non-permanent content every two weeks, you don’t get much except for some achievement rewards… Generally you do the same thing in them too…
WoW releases content every 4 months(?) or so free, plus expansions (which you pay for, on top of monthly). Each new content makes old content obsolete to a good degree. The new content involves the same quests in different settings with different names and numbers and possibly a new raid which is another mechanical dance routine that you typically learn in a few runs… rest of your time is spent on getting top gear before the next content arrives, to do the same thing in the next one. (PvP wise, if you lack skill, just grind out some conquest points, get a good set, and you should roll people easier). Oh yeah, some content release include dungeons, that follow the same principle as the previous ones…

Essentially, one releases temporary content, while the other replaces content with seeming new ones (old content->obsolete, new->same as old one, but “new”)…
Difference:
GW2 – you can donate if you like.
WoW – pay for all the glorious content and server up time (myth to a certain degree)…

People also compare it to other types of entertainment (say going to the movies every month)… and attempt to justify their subscription that way… People tend to justify also by their salary as well (pfft, 15/month? that’s nothing… you must live in a cave if you can’t pay that or make nothing)…

But hey! $15/month must mean that there’s more content and it’s better too, I’m just over-thinking things!

WatchTheShow.7203:

Ok, so far GW2’s cash shop is exactly like WoW’s cash shop. Most of the minis are available in game, BLTC, special events, meta achievements, or convert gold to gems. Only a few minis are available in the cash shop (holiday minis). What about RP elements in WoW where people collect all the minis? I’m sure they love the fact they have to pay $ for those 11 minis in the cash shop /sarcasm. At least in GW2, they can convert gold to gems, unlike WoW. This automatically makes GW2’s cash shop substantially better to WoW’s.

Haha you are really gonna try this? No most are NOT in game. Most are in the cash-shop. And yes you can get them by grinding gold ingame. Wasn’t that what I was complaining about as well? How it was all a gold grind in stead that you could play the game to work for the mini you want. I like to hunt down the items. Thats my game-play not grinding gold. So most of the mini’s require a gold-grind to buy them from the cash-shop or a achievement grind thats time-limited. Get it now or never. And two weeks later again and then again and again and so on. Still they are semi-ingame as it’s an achievement not as a drop. But I could live with that if it wasn’t temporary. But it is.

No they will not like that but they can easely exclude 11 mini’s from the collection and no you can’t get all mini’s in GW2 without paying.. well not if you have a life. There is so much gold-grind and much is temporary that you will never be able to grind all that gold all the time.

And I already said it was not good that it was like that in WoW. That does not make this better in GW2.

WatchTheShow.7203:

Why does WoW have any mounts in the cash shop? I’m sure these mounts are better than all the lvl 30 starter mounts in game. Anyone who pays for these mounts will have a better mount at an earlier level than those who do not. Guild wars 2 has one item that some consider a “mount”, the broom. It can only be worn as town clothes, and offers no speed boost. I think that is much more fair than WoW’s. Again, it looks like GW2’s “cash shop” is significantly better.

WoW should not have it. But that still does not make up for the way GW2 is totally influenced the game-play making everything a gold grind and having many things temporary.

No it does not make GW2’s shop better because WoW’s shop does not effect the game-play as much. In GW2 it effects it big-time (gold grind, temporary stuff) while in WoW the worse is missing out on 11 mini’s, 7 mounts and 3 helms. And no, the mounts in the the shop are not better then the one ingame.. yeah maybe then the lvl 30 ingame but then you are likely not able to use it on a lvl 30 character.

The comparison to broom is a little silly because I am not comparing specific items but comparing how the cash-shop effects the game / game-play. So far thats extremely limited in WoW while in GW2 it effects it a lot.

It’s funny what you try to do here. Oow and about a mount at lvl 30 and the broom if you really want to make that comparison. While in WoW you might have the advantage of not having to get a mount ingame in GW2 you can buy gold to buy items you want ingame. Giving you the benefit of having those stats without having to get it ingame.

WatchTheShow.7203:

So does Guild Wars 2. GW2’s cash shop offers name changes, full makeover, character transfers, and cosmetic armors. No race/profession changers at this time. So in this respect, WoW cash shop and GW2 cash shop are exactly alike.

Lol no now finally there is a point where GW2’s shop is better with one point (but like said, the problem is how the cash-shop in general effects the game-play not about specific items what you are trying to make of it) and you say they are similar. Those thinks don’t hurt the game-play so those things are fine to have in a cash-shop. Benefit of GW2 is that you can get them with ingame gold.

WatchTheShow.7203:

There is also no push to buy ANY of the GW2 items in the cash shop.

Yes there is. Getting many of those items requires a endless gold-grind what pusses you to simply buying gold with gems and then there are the many items that are only available temporary pushing you to get it now or lose out on it forever. Not to forget that they make the gold-grind for those items almost impossible.

So it turns the game in a gold-grind and pushes you to buy items and gold.

And that is what that WoW-store is not doing.

WatchTheShow.7203:

These things are also in GW2’s cash shop.

I first though this was some deliberate tactic of you to try and debunk my comment by simply not going into what my comment was about but by going into specific items but you really don’t get it do you?
It’s not about specific items it’s about how the cash-shop effects the game. In WoW the 11 mini’s, 7 mounts and 3 helmets effect the game only a little bid while in GW2 the hole way it’s set up and how game-play is build around the way that they try to get you to buy items hurts the game.

These things don’t effect the game. Does not matter if they are in or are not in the cash-shop. They don’t hurt the game. Thats why I said that.

WatchTheShow.7203:

It is still a cash shop, and you still have to buy a name changer which could cost anywhere between $10, and $25. The point of this thread is, pay to play should not, and does not, have a cash shop of any kind at all. This clearly is a good example. Shouldn’t this service be free since everyone is a paying subscriber? Yes, it should shouldn’kitten So why a cash shop at all?

It’s about how it effects the game! Not if they have a cash-shop or not. The question is how it effects the game!! And if they need to earn there money with the cash-shop they need to get people to buy from it. Thats why it’s more likely to effect the game. As we see in GW2 compaired to for example WoW.

WatchTheShow.7203:

I think I was dead on.

I think you don’t get it.. or don’t want to get it.

WatchTheShow.7203:

All cash shops are the same, you can pay for something in game with real money. This is why a cash shop exists, to generate income. Why should every pay to play MMO have one if you are paying monthly? Because they can generate even more money with a forced and unnecessary subscription.

You see you don’t get it. No they are not all the same. Yes they all generate income for the company. Thats something they have in common. There are many birds that can fly. That itself does not make all those birds the same.

The difference is that in GW2 there main income comes from the game while with expansion-based or sub-based models it’s just an extra income, so no need to try and push people to the cash-shop.. like in GW2 and many F2P games.

Devata.6589:

Not saying that there might be P2P games that still had a bad cash-shop and I also agree that the mini’s, mounts and helms should not be in the cash-shop of WoW but overall it’s still very limited.

WatchTheShow.7203:

Ok, first, every P2P game I can think of has a cash shop. If you know of any at all that has no cash shop, please mention it, because I frankly don’t know of any. You just said earlier that WoW’s cash shop wasn’t so bad because it was mostly cosmetic items, but then you list all the cosmetic items as being bad and you think shouldn’t be in there!

I said a BAD cash-shop as in “in influence the game”. But then again, that was the part you did not get. So it’s not about a P2P game that does not have a cash-shop but about a cash-shop that does not influence the game in a bad way and the cash-shop we used as comparison (WoW) does not influence the game a lot. Only very slightly buy requiring you to buy 11 minis, 7 mounts or 3 helmets if you want to have the full collection of any of those. Thats literally as far as the influence go so thats extremely limited.

“You just said earlier that WoW’s cash shop wasn’t so bad because it was mostly cosmetic items”
What? I never said that.

I go and see movies in the theater 1-2 times a month and come out satisfied at my purchase. As long as an MMO entertains me completely for a couple hours each month I’ve never had an issue with the concept of paying the sub.

But I am much more critical of sub-based games when they falter. If you are going to charge me the equivalent of a whole new game every 4 months, you have better (&^*&#$ing deliver something impressive no less than twice a year. Three times a year preferably.

Im Mudbone.1437:

Just because there are shops that sell used video games doesn’t make it legal to do, the GW2 EULA says you can’t.

Law trumps EULA every time. This is why most (if not all) EULA will include the, “applicable law,” clause. Any contract clause that violates local law is not applicable in areas covered by said law.

uknortherner.2670:

Im Mudbone.1437:

Just because there are shops that sell used video games doesn’t make it legal to do, the GW2 EULA says you can’t.

Here in the UK it is perfectly legal to sell any commodity you own, including games. EULAs have no legal standing over here because 1) You cannot legally sign away your statutory rights (which many EULAs actually require you to do if you read the small print) and 2) you are never presented with an EULA until after you have purchased your game, which means the end user is perfectly entitled to ignore it. Licensing terms have to be presented prior to money changing hands, not after.

Its very similar in California. An EULA that is not present at the time of purchase is not enforceable.

Nike.2631:

I go and see movies in the theater 1-2 times a month and come out satisfied at my purchase. As long as an MMO entertains me completely for a couple hours each month I’ve never had an issue with the concept of paying the sub.

But I am much more critical of sub-based games when they falter. If you are going to charge me the equivalent of a whole new game every 4 months, you have better (&^*&#$ing deliver something impressive no less than twice a year. Three times a year preferably.

Agreed.

A single ticket for a two hour movie generally runs $13.50 to $15.50 in my area. $15 per month for two hours a day (or more) of a game that I enjoy is a bargain.

WatchTheShow.7203:

I’ve played many MMOs. I’ve been around the block a lot. I can assure you cash shops have many faces but their agendas are all the same.

Even if that was true it would still not make them the same.
But it’s not true. They are always there to generate money but they are not always there as main source of income.
And of course I was taking about how some cash-shops effect the games while some cash-shops don’t.

Devata.6589:

Some people say GW2 cash-shop isn’t one of the worse because it does not have P2W items but thats only true if your main game-play is combat.

WatchTheShow.7203:

Please give me an example of what you think is pay to win in GW2’s cash shop. I don’t see any pay to win items. Maple Story’s cash shop has an item you can buy for $30 that you can use to automatically make yourself level 100. I don’t see anything in GW2’s cash shop that makes you instantly level 80. Heck, I don’t even see anything that makes you instantly level $20. There are games where the fastest mounts are available in the cash shop for $40 (I’m looking at you Neverwinter and Dragon’s Prophet) which clearly gives an advantage over players who do not want to spend $40 on a mount. So what exactly are you seeing in GW2’s shop that is so pay to win?

I could name you a few items but please read again. I did not say it was P2W. I said some people say GW2’s cash-shop is not bad because it’s not P2W. I say, no it can still be bad depending on your game-play. If you like to go into the world to collect mini’s and skins then GW2’s cash-shop is till bad, even if it’s not P2W.

WatchTheShow.7203:

Devata.6589:

For other people (that like the more RP elements like collecting mini’s) GW2’s cash-shop and how they influence the game to get you to buy items makes it among the worst cash-shops there are.

Ok, we’ve already established WoW’s cash shop has exclusive minis inside of it, yet their cash shop is fine according to you. Guild Wars 2 has a few exclusive minis via cash shop, and that makes it “…among the worst cash shops there are”.

You see, here I even went into the details of saying why it was bad for some players.. So makes no sense to ask for P2W items.

WoW has 11 exclusive minis. GW2 has most mini’s in the cash-shop meaning you can’t get those in any other way then grinding gold (or buying with cash). Thats how it influences the game for people that like to go into the world and collect them (not possible in GW2, only way to get that is by grinding gold) In WoW most mini’s are available in the game-world itself so you can go into the game to hunt for your mini’s.

And just for the record. I use mini’s as an example. On that place you can put many cosmetic / horizontal progression type of items, like skins, dye colors and so on.

WatchTheShow.7203:

Oh come now. Have you played any other MMO out there in the past 10 years? MapleStory, Mabinogi, Vindictus, Diablo III, WoW, Aion, Tera, Rift, Guild Wars 1, only to name a few all have gold grinds. Inflation is rampant in at least 4 of those games. Where it costs 1,300,000,000,000 (yeah you read that correctly) mesos to buy a level 100 weapon in Maple Story, when 5 years ago that same item only costed 1,000,000 mesos. Every MMO is a gold grind. Every. MMO. Is. A. Gold. Grind. Period.

Weren’t we talking about how a focus on micro-transaction influenced the game? Yes we where so why you you use so many F2P games (games that have a focus on micro-transactions to generate income) as examples? Yeah they are likely to indeed do. Especially if you can buy the money with cash. Thats how it works. They make a gold-grind ingame and then sell gold.
Well I will just ignore those examples and go back to the WoW example (luckily you also listed that here)

If I want a specific mini in WoW there is almost all of the time a specific way to get that mini. I have the option to grind for gold and get it but I can also just go for the mini itself. A quest, a dungeon-drop a mob-drop. Now let do the same in GW2. With the exception of 4 / 6 mini’s? The only way to get them is to grind gold and get them.

WatchTheShow.7203:

Again, I disagree, I think I hit the nail on the head. GW2’s cash shop is purely cosmetic. It is no different than WoW’s, except the fact WoW has mounts in its cash shop.

It’s not something to agree or disagree in. Games get effected in differed ways.. or not effected at all. Thats a fact, not something to agree or disagree on. You say you disagree well you don’t disagree you are just wrong.

And like I said before many times. It does not matter if it’s just cosmetic. If it’s your type of game-play to go into the world and collect those cosmetics then it very much effects the game for you.

WatchTheShow.7203:

They only affect the game with cute minis and pink heart shaped weapons that offer no increase in stats. Cmon, they’re not selling legendaries for cash here.

Finally we come to agreement!!!
It DOES effect the game!!
Thats what I said.
No maybe not with stats. Did I not said many times before it depends on your game-play.
Can you really not understand that some people are not just focused on some kitten stats?

That some people enjoy going into the world to work there way to heart shaped weapons. Just because they like that? you really can’t understand that for some people thats there game-play?
Well it is and so for the people with that game-play this cash-shop effects the game big-time.

WatchTheShow.7203:

Devata.6589:

I would much rather have them focusing on expansion to generate income. That could potentially solve many problems.. if they then indeed undo all the stuff with the cash-shop.

Wow has had many expansions and still has a cash shop. How will making an expansion eliminate the need for a cash shop? It clearly has not worked in other MMOs. Aion, Rift have also had expansions and they still have cash shops.

I said FOCUS on expansions to generate income. You know what GW2 is doing.. Focusing on micro-transactions to generate income. Yes WoW has expansions and a cash-shop. But WoW focuses on subs to generate income. There cash-shop does not have the focus it’s just an extra. Thats also why they don’t need to think of ways to get people to buy items from it (Like GW2 HAS to do) and thats why there cash-shop does effect the game way way way less then GW2’s cash-shop effects GW2.

WatchTheShow.7203:

Devata.6589:

Because while a focus on the cash-shop is a guarantee for a bad cash-shop and a game negatively effect by it. No focus on it is not a guarantee for that to be gone. Some of your examples where indeed P2P with a bad cash-shop. But not all.

Please try any MMO out there. I can guarantee their cash shops are far worse. I’ve played the worst MMOs out there and the best MMOs out there and I can tell you this cash shop has been the tamest one. Heck, even Assassin’s Creed and Red Dead Redemption, (WHICH ARE NOT MMOS!!!!!!!!) have had “expansions” and a “cash shop” with things like overpowered new weapons that break the game, new clothes and unlockable characters, upgrades not normally accessible through gameplay, etc.

Why do you split up the because. Thats why I have to explain everything twice. I did explain it in the last post but here you comment on the part before the explanation with a question that is already explained. And then you comment on the explanation.

Anyway, to answer you question:
I did play multiple MMORPG’s and I am not denying some are worse but not they are not all worse and while you try to tell me the whole time how bad WoW cash-shop is. That one for example is not even close to as bad as GW2’s cash-shop. But that makes sense because they don’t need to generate there money with it.

Ashen.2907:

Nike.2631:

I go and see movies in the theater 1-2 times a month and come out satisfied at my purchase. As long as an MMO entertains me completely for a couple hours each month I’ve never had an issue with the concept of paying the sub.

But I am much more critical of sub-based games when they falter. If you are going to charge me the equivalent of a whole new game every 4 months, you have better (&^*&#$ing deliver something impressive no less than twice a year. Three times a year preferably.

Agreed.

A single ticket for a two hour movie generally runs $13.50 to $15.50 in my area. $15 per month for two hours a day (or more) of a game that I enjoy is a bargain.

:P You’re just trying to justify the spending… Not really asking yourself if the game itself deserves it, or what gets you the from the subscription vs a game without a subscription… What’s the $15 worth? Kind of hard to explain…

That argument is almost on, or nearing, the lines of… what you can’t afford to spend $15? People typically say that too… sure $15 is not much, but… why should i pay it? what do i get from it? It’s a bit more than just affording $15 worth of something… If $15 is nothing, give it to me, i will tell you some random fact… What you can’t afford to spend $15?

Both just trying to justify the spending, or the ability to spend…

Nothing personally against you.

Devata.6589:

how bad WoW cash-shop is. That one for example is not even close to as bad as GW2’s cash-shop. But that makes sense because they don’t need to generate there money with it.

And this is why its a matter of agree/disagree not right/wrong. I find WoW’s cash shop to be much worse than GW2’s.

WatchTheShow.7203:

Dark Catalyst.1028:

The mounts in the WoW cash shop are purely cosmetic and do not offer a speed, or any other, advantage. Yes, they also sell minis but you forget that players are able to collect hundreds of pets in the open world.

Yes, and you forget there are hundreds of minis you can collect in Guild Wars 2 without spending a dime of real money on them. Most minis are less than a gold each on the trading post. Some minis are from achievements and special events. Some minis drop from mobs (Southsun Cove minis).

Whenever it’s in the cash-shop but not account-bound you consider it in-game. But no you can’t collect them in-game. You collect gold in-game to then buy them

So getting the mini’s is all a gold grind (indeed there are a few exceptions) and that gold-grind is how it effects the game.

Some people like to go into the world and do a quest or a dungeon or farm a mob to get that drop.. the mini. That is there game-play. Thats how you can get hundreds of mini’s (ad other items) in WoW. In GW2 you can get idk 4/6 mini’s like that. Some others by grinding temporary availible achievements and then another few hindered by grinding gold.

You see the difference?

Ashen.2907:

Devata.6589:

how bad WoW cash-shop is. That one for example is not even close to as bad as GW2’s cash-shop. But that makes sense because they don’t need to generate there money with it.

And this is why its a matter of agree/disagree not right/wrong. I find WoW’s cash shop to be much worse than GW2’s.

If it’s bad or not yes. Not if it effects the game in different ways.

btw please explain why you think WoW’s cash-shop is worse? Only thing I see worse in a way is that you can only buy from it with real cash. But the way it effects the game is nearly non-existing while in GW2 that is huge.

Zero Day.2594:

:P You’re just trying to justify the spending…

Not at all. Its identifying a personal standard for satisfaction and applying it uniformly.

Not really asking yourself if the game itself deserves it

Are you kidding? I apply INTENSE scrutiny to subscription games when I’m involved with them. I’m constantly evaluating “are they delivering enough consistent bang for MY buck?” And when a Subscription game Dev comes out and says “oh, we’ll have it soon…” I’m not shy at all about dropping the sub and coming back a month after Patch X actually released and had the first two inevitable hot fixes.

I’m way more patient with GW2’s pace than I’ve ever been with a game that has the audacity to expect me to pay in every month.

or what gets you the from the subscription vs a game without a subscription… What’s the $15 worth? Kind of hard to explain…

Comparing 4 months of sub fees and a complete new game is exactly that kind of analysis. A few sub games have held up against for years (CoH), a few lasted until a major systems change blew my entire guild out of the game near simultaneously (EQII), and some have sent me packing after 4-6 months and an abject failure to manage an ongoing MMO after the initial release played itself out (too dang many to list).

That argument is almost on, or nearing, the lines of… what you can’t afford to spend $15?

Never. It is “Is the 15$ going to be worth it? Be honest with yourself. If it’s not, don’t spend it.”

Im Mudbone.1437:

frans.8092:

Spiuk.8421:

frans.8092:

Spiuk.8421:

Karizee.8076:

I don’t rent games.

Yes, you do.

No, you don’t. You can buy it, use it and then sell it. You can not do that when you rent.

Read the Guild Wars 2 EULA “again”, you rented an account until Anet says so.

And no explanations will be given upon termination.

Do read them, I am sure there’s something about applicable law in most, if not all EULA’s. I can sell my copy of a game no matter what you think about it. We have shops buying and reselling used games and software.

Just because there are shops that sell used video games doesn’t make it legal to do, the GW2 EULA says you can’t.

Depends on your country. The GW2 EULA is just that an EULA. But if there is compulsory law that says you are allowed to sell a copy thats the law. EULA is no law and will then not overrule that law.

Zero Day.2594:

Ashen.2907:

Nike.2631:

I go and see movies in the theater 1-2 times a month and come out satisfied at my purchase. As long as an MMO entertains me completely for a couple hours each month I’ve never had an issue with the concept of paying the sub.

But I am much more critical of sub-based games when they falter. If you are going to charge me the equivalent of a whole new game every 4 months, you have better (&^*&#$ing deliver something impressive no less than twice a year. Three times a year preferably.

Agreed.

A single ticket for a two hour movie generally runs $13.50 to $15.50 in my area. $15 per month for two hours a day (or more) of a game that I enjoy is a bargain.

:P You’re just trying to justify the spending… Not really asking yourself if the game itself deserves it, or what gets you the from the subscription vs a game without a subscription… What’s the $15 worth? Kind of hard to explain…

You might want to reread what you quoted. I said, “a game that I enjoy.” The primary thing that a game can provide to “deserve” any payment is enjoyment. So, by definition, the game in question (as I specified one that I enjoy) is providing what is desired/expected of it.

Beyond the, “was it fun,” factor an entertainment expense, assuming a limited budget, can be measured in terms of how else the entertainment budget could have been spent. The possibility of (for some dedicated players) eight hours a day thirty days a month for a total of two hundred and forty hours…for $15, compared to two hours for the same cost, assuming that one finds the game to be enjoyable, is a reasonable comparison.

Zero Day.2594:

That argument is almost on, or nearing, the lines of… what you can’t afford to spend $15? People typically say that too… sure $15 is not much, but… why should i pay it? what do i get from it? It’s a bit more than just affording $15 worth of something… If $15 is nothing, give it to me, i will tell you some random fact… What you can’t afford to spend $15?

Both just trying to justify the spending, or the ability to spend…

Nothing personally against you.

Actually what I said was nothing even close to what you are claiming.

I made no comment about what others can or cannot spend. I made a very specific comment about agreeing that I (note: I, not you, not other people) do not have any inherent problem with paying $15 per month for a game that I enjoy so long as it provides at least as much entertainment value as I would receive from spending that money on another form of entertainment.

Devata.6589:

Ashen.2907:

Devata.6589:

how bad WoW cash-shop is. That one for example is not even close to as bad as GW2’s cash-shop. But that makes sense because they don’t need to generate there money with it.

And this is why its a matter of agree/disagree not right/wrong. I find WoW’s cash shop to be much worse than GW2’s.

If it’s bad or not yes. Not if it effects the game in different ways.

btw please explain why you think WoW’s cash-shop is worse? Only thing I see worse in a way is that you can only buy from it with real cash. But the way it effects the game is nearly non-existing while in GW2 that is huge.

1) WoW requires that I pay a sub fee. If I am paying an ongoing sub fee to support servers and fund future development I consider charging extra for cash shop items to be worse than a game that does not charge a sub fee but has a cash shop. Note that this does not mean that I find the sub plus cash shop to be some great evil that must be destroyed or anything, just that I find it to be “worse” than no sub plus cash shop.

2) GW2 allows one to trade time for currency to purchase cash shop items. I rather like the fact that my purchase of gems is somehow making the game better for someone else. I like the win/win/win (gold buyer, gem buyer, ANet) aspect of gem/gold conversion. In WoW if some kid doesn’t have the cash to buy the mount that would totally make the character for him….tough luck.

Yaj.5973:

NTY!

I like the current model. I don’t like the heavy focus on gemstore, but it’s ok. I don’t mind.

I loved guild wars 1 for its no subscription/ no b2win model. and blindly followed arenanet to guild wars2 cause of the belief they would still deliver with a similar model.. and they have.

Uhhm they haven’t. For the most part GW1 focused there income on expansions. It was much later that the cash-shop was introduced and still had a much smaller impact on the game.

GW2 focuses mainly on the cash-shop to generate income. So no they did not deliver with a similar model. I did go for GW2 expecting the GW1 system but sadly they came with this stuff.

Devata.6589:

Uhhm they haven’t. For the most part GW1 focused there income on expansions. It was much later that the cash-shop was introduced and still had a much smaller impact on the game.

Interesting how your “much later” refers to something that was released just a few months after their 2nd campaign (Factions) and before both Nightfall and Eye of the North.

So clearly it wasn’t added “much later” than the expansions. In fact it was added before the majority of them.

Ashen.2907:

Devata.6589:

Ashen.2907:

Devata.6589:

how bad WoW cash-shop is. That one for example is not even close to as bad as GW2’s cash-shop. But that makes sense because they don’t need to generate there money with it.

And this is why its a matter of agree/disagree not right/wrong. I find WoW’s cash shop to be much worse than GW2’s.

If it’s bad or not yes. Not if it effects the game in different ways.

btw please explain why you think WoW’s cash-shop is worse? Only thing I see worse in a way is that you can only buy from it with real cash. But the way it effects the game is nearly non-existing while in GW2 that is huge.

1) WoW requires that I pay a sub fee. If I am paying an ongoing sub fee to support servers and fund future development I consider charging extra for cash shop items to be worse than a game that does not charge a sub fee but has a cash shop. Note that this does not mean that I find the sub plus cash shop to be some great evil that must be destroyed or anything, just that I find it to be “worse” than no sub plus cash shop.

2) GW2 allows one to trade time for currency to purchase cash shop items. I rather like the fact that my purchase of gems is somehow making the game better for someone else. I like the win/win/win (gold buyer, gem buyer, ANet) aspect of gem/gold conversion. In WoW if some kid doesn’t have the cash to buy the mount that would totally make the character for him….tough luck.

1 I agree but we where comparing the cash-shops by itself. You now say “it’s worse because you are paying a sub” and while I agree that does not change anything about the cash-shop itself.

The whole point of the discussion I was having was that the fact that GW2 uses the cash-shop to generate income does make the shop different from WoW’s cash-shop where they generate money with subs.

2 (that are 2 in in one) So the fact that you can buy gems with gold. Yes it’s worse in WoW that you can’t do so, I agree. But at the same time it does not make it much better in GW2 because it has so many things and temporary that it’s almost impossible to get all the stuff buy transferring gems to gold and it really has turned the whole game into a gold-grind. So in a way it made it worse in GW2.

So if you take the WoW shop do not change anything ingame or in the cash-shop and then allow to transfer ingame gold to buy the cash-shop items it would make that shop better.

In GW2 however that by itself does not make the cash-shop better because of the way it works. It would make it even worse if you couldn’t but it by itself does not make it better then WoW’s cash-shop.

About that your purchase makes the game better. Sorry to say but no. It makes the game worse. If nobody would buy gems they would not focus on it to make money. It’s the fact that people buy gems that they can focus on the cash-shop and that has turned GW2 in a terrible big grind. So you help to destroy it (at least for some peoples game-play) not to make it better.

lordkrall.7241:

Devata.6589:

Uhhm they haven’t. For the most part GW1 focused there income on expansions. It was much later that the cash-shop was introduced and still had a much smaller impact on the game.

Interesting how your “much later” refers to something that was released just a few months after their 2nd campaign (Factions) and before both Nightfall and Eye of the North.

So clearly it wasn’t added “much later” than the expansions. In fact it was added before the majority of them.

If i’m correct it was released just before the Nightfall and Nightfall really was the last expansion. Eye of the North was more of a thing to link GW1 to GW2. The main focus had then already shifted to GW2 what explains why they added the cash-shop around Nightfall.

Still it did effect the game less then GW2’s cash-shop does simply because it did not have a focus on the cash-shop but on expansion, thats why they did not have a cash-shop in the first place and that was what I was talking about.

GW2 focus completely on the cash-shop and had it’s cash-shop from the beginning.

Factions was released in April, in-game store (which required you to pay real money) was released in July and Nightfall was released in October.
That would put the in-game store release about 3 months from Factions and about 3 months from Nightfall, which would mean it was just as close to Nightfall as it was to Factions.

And suddenly not counting Eye of the North is quite silly. If you are going to compare something you should compare it fully and not just ignore the bits that doesn’t support your view.

Devata.6589:

1 I agree but we where comparing the cash-shops by itself. You now say “it’s worse because you are paying a sub” and while I agree that does not change anything about the cash-shop itself.

Not sure you can argue that we were comparing the cash shop, “by itself,” while also speaking about the cash shop’s impact on the game.

For me the sub fee does change something about the cash shop. It makes the cash shop look like a means of squeezing extra cash out of players who are already paying for the game’s future development as opposed to a means of allowing people, who are not required to fund ongoing development, to do so if they wish as we see in GW2.

Devata.6589:

The whole point of the discussion I was having was that the fact that GW2 uses the cash-shop to generate income does make the shop different from WoW’s cash-shop where they generate money with subs.

I agree, to an extent. The two cash shops are different in that one’s existence allows people to continue playing a game that they potentially love without requiring additional payment that they may not be able to afford. The other asks people already paying for the development of the contents of the cash shop to pay for them again.

I say, “to an extent,” because the differences exist on the micro level. On the macro level they are essentially identical. They produce revenue by enticing funds from those with the ability to pay more than the minimum requirement to play the game.

Devata.6589:

2 (that are 2 in in one) So the fact that you can buy gems with gold. Yes it’s worse in WoW that you can’t do so, I agree. But at the same time it does not make it much better in GW2 because it has so many things and temporary that it’s almost impossible to get all the stuff buy transferring gems to gold and it really has turned the whole game into a gold-grind. So in a way it made it worse in GW2.

This is why that whole agree/disagree thing is so important to discussions of this sort. That, “almost impossible,” to get everything (without spending real money) you mention about GW2 applies double to WoW because you cannot get any cash shop items there without spending real money. You think that not being able to get everything in the cash shop readily in GW2 without spending money makes its shop worse than a game where you cannot get ANYTHING without spending real money, on top of a sub fee.

I personally do not find it better to have to pay for the contents of the cash shop twice, as in WoW, than to pay once, and potentially not have to pay at all, as in GW2.

Devata.6589:

So if you take the WoW shop do not change anything ingame or in the cash-shop and then allow to transfer ingame gold to buy the cash-shop items it would make that shop better.

It would make it better than it is now, but not better than GW2’s shop because currently a subscriber is already paying for the development of those cash shop items. Asking him to pay a second time is not better than the GW2 approach IMO.

Devata.6589:

About that your purchase makes the game better. Sorry to say but no. It makes the game worse. If nobody would buy gems they would not focus on it to make money. It’s the fact that people buy gems that they can focus on the cash-shop and that has turned GW2 in a terrible big grind. So you help to destroy it (at least for some peoples game-play) not to make it better.

Again that agree to disagree thing. Completely subjective. I don’t find the game to have been made worse by the cash shop. I know others that feel the same. It is unfortunate that some feel that the game has been lessened or even ruined for themselves by the existence of the cash shop, but the reality of the matter is that there would be people for whom the game would be ruined by the addition of a sub fee or the addition of paid expansions, etc.

Since the game was advertised and sold as having a cash shop, and lacking a sub fee…

Also,

There were three paid content expansions to GW1 (note that I am not counting Prophecies because it was the base game).

1) Factions
2) Nightfall
3) Eye of the North
4) Bonus Mission Pack (it was paid content addition, even if smaller than the other additions)

So the cash shop was added before 3/4 of the paid content expansions.

Ashen.2907:

Devata.6589:

Ashen.2907:

Devata.6589:

how bad WoW cash-shop is. That one for example is not even close to as bad as GW2’s cash-shop. But that makes sense because they don’t need to generate there money with it.

And this is why its a matter of agree/disagree not right/wrong. I find WoW’s cash shop to be much worse than GW2’s.

If it’s bad or not yes. Not if it effects the game in different ways.

btw please explain why you think WoW’s cash-shop is worse? Only thing I see worse in a way is that you can only buy from it with real cash. But the way it effects the game is nearly non-existing while in GW2 that is huge.

1) WoW requires that I pay a sub fee. If I am paying an ongoing sub fee to support servers and fund future development I consider charging extra for cash shop items to be worse than a game that does not charge a sub fee but has a cash shop. Note that this does not mean that I find the sub plus cash shop to be some great evil that must be destroyed or anything, just that I find it to be “worse” than no sub plus cash shop.

2) GW2 allows one to trade time for currency to purchase cash shop items. I rather like the fact that my purchase of gems is somehow making the game better for someone else. I like the win/win/win (gold buyer, gem buyer, ANet) aspect of gem/gold conversion. In WoW if some kid doesn’t have the cash to buy the mount that would totally make the character for him….tough luck.

Now tell us what the gold->gem conversation rate is, and how much time it would take to, say, earn enough gold for an 800 gem item. And tell us what you would be doing if you weren’t grinding for that gold. Be honest.

Ashen.2907:

Nike.2631:

I go and see movies in the theater 1-2 times a month and come out satisfied at my purchase. As long as an MMO entertains me completely for a couple hours each month I’ve never had an issue with the concept of paying the sub.

But I am much more critical of sub-based games when they falter. If you are going to charge me the equivalent of a whole new game every 4 months, you have better (&^*&#$ing deliver something impressive no less than twice a year. Three times a year preferably.

Agreed.

A single ticket for a two hour movie generally runs $13.50 to $15.50 in my area. $15 per month for two hours a day (or more) of a game that I enjoy is a bargain.

And how many people in the US go: that’s too much to pay to see a movie, I’ll just wait until it’s on tv or I can buy it, etc.

A large number of them do. I am one of them. The movie better look like it’s going to be really really great for me to even consider seeing it. I see maybe one movie in a theater a year if even that.

Because $15 for a single viewing of a movie and that’s not even counting the popcorn and drink is just too expensive for the average movie.

That’s why there is no right or wrong answer to this question. Because so many things factor into the decision on whether or not sub for a game or not.

1. How fun it is. And that’s the most variable thing there is and it’s hard to put a concrete value for it.

2. How much money a person has to put towards entertainment.

3. Personal views towards a game with a sub. Some people just don’t like the model at all and speak with their wallet. That POV is a valid one just as it is a valid one to like the sub model.

4. The relationship between the cost of the sub and how fun it is and where the “that’s cheap enough based on how much it is” line is can vary from person to person. For some, like you, it just has to entertain you for two hours and that’s all fine and good. But for others it means that the game really has to be great to earn them as a customer. And that definition of great can and does vary from person to person.

Seera.5916:

And how many people in the US go: that’s too much to pay to see a movie, I’ll just wait until it’s on tv or I can buy it, etc.

My wife and I will often look at each other after seeing a movie trailer and say, “Redbox.” We generally only make a point of seeing a movie in the theater if it seems likely to benefit from the huge screen.

Seera.5916:

That’s why there is no right or wrong answer to this question.

You are mistaken. You quoted me as regards to whether or not I find a sub fee for a game I enjoy to be worthwhile. There is absolutely a right answer to that, and I gave it.

For me a $15 sub fee is worthwhile for a game I enjoy. Period. Do note that I made no comment whatsoever as to whether or not that same sub fee for any given game is a good value for you or anyone else. I do not presume to decide for you what is a good value for you.

Anyone who wants something that’s in a cash shop in any game — and who prefers to “earn” it by playing versus by paying — is going to perceive that cash shop negatively. This goes for mounts in WoW or minis in GW2. I certainly have issues with GW2, but not with the way they’ve monetized their game.

Ashen.2907:

Seera.5916:

That’s why there is no right or wrong answer to this question.

You are mistaken. You quoted me as regards to whether or not I find a sub fee for a game I enjoy to be worthwhile. There is absolutely a right answer to that, and I gave it.

For me a $15 sub fee is worthwhile for a game I enjoy. Period. Do note that I made no comment whatsoever as to whether or not that same sub fee for any given game is a good value for you or anyone else. I do not presume to decide for you what is a good value for you.

Wasn’t saying that you did, or that Nike did. I was just countering your statement.

And then added on that this was a thread that will go on for ages and ages because of the fact that that the answer isn’t a definite. But a question was asked by the OP and it does not have a right or wrong answer. Just like what’s your favorite color doesn’t have a right or wrong answer. The OP can’t come in and say: nope, you’re wrong or even yep, you’re right, and the OP hasn’t. That’s what I meant by there isn’t a right or wrong answer.

Seera.5916:

Ashen.2907:

Seera.5916:

That’s why there is no right or wrong answer to this question.

You are mistaken. You quoted me as regards to whether or not I find a sub fee for a game I enjoy to be worthwhile. There is absolutely a right answer to that, and I gave it.

For me a $15 sub fee is worthwhile for a game I enjoy. Period. Do note that I made no comment whatsoever as to whether or not that same sub fee for any given game is a good value for you or anyone else. I do not presume to decide for you what is a good value for you.

Wasn’t saying that you did, or that Nike did. I was just countering your statement.

And then added on that this was a thread that will go on for ages and ages because of the fact that that the answer isn’t a definite. But a question was asked by the OP and it does not have a right or wrong answer. Just like what’s your favorite color doesn’t have a right or wrong answer. The OP can’t come in and say: nope, you’re wrong or even yep, you’re right, and the OP hasn’t. That’s what I meant by there isn’t a right or wrong answer.

Ahh, ok then. My apologies. I read that as a comment on my own post about my personal preferences.

Personally I don’t mind either way for myself, but like the option for those who cannot justify or afford a sub fee to be able to play the game.

lordkrall.7241:

Factions was released in April, in-game store (which required you to pay real money) was released in July and Nightfall was released in October.
That would put the in-game store release about 3 months from Factions and about 3 months from Nightfall, which would mean it was just as close to Nightfall as it was to Factions.

And suddenly not counting Eye of the North is quite silly. If you are going to compare something you should compare it fully and not just ignore the bits that doesn’t support your view.

I did not ‘not count EofN’, I just pointed out that they then already focused on GW2 so they knew GW1 expansions where coming to an end and so they put in a cash shop to still support some income when GW1 expansions stopped to exist, or at least thats how I see it. But all this still does not change the fact that GW1’s main income was generated with expansions (that was there model) and GW2 uses mainly the cash-shop to generate the income so they changed there model from GW1 to GW2 and that was what my comment was about.

Meehael.8240:

It’s going to be very interesting to see how ESO will fare among competition.

ESO sucks so much they should be paying people to play it. As far as I’m concerned it might as well be the first Reverse P2P business model.

personally i like the gem store.. though i haven’t spend much

Ashen.2907:

Not sure you can argue that we were comparing the cash shop, “by itself,” while also speaking about the cash shop’s impact on the game.

For me the sub fee does change something about the cash shop. It makes the cash shop look like a means of squeezing extra cash out of players who are already paying for the game’s future development as opposed to a means of allowing people, who are not required to fund ongoing development, to do so if they wish as we see in GW2.

I mean how the cash-shop itself effects the game. And that indeed is related to what model the company uses. I just mean to say that what you say there is not really a change to the game or the cash-shop. It’s more a feeling of justice is guess. I agree that it’s not ‘good’ from WoW to do that but it does not literally changes the cash-shop or how it effects the game.

About supporting the game I already said I really don’t see the cash-shop as a good way to fund ongoing development because yes you will but while steering it in a bad direction. Rather have nobody would buy cash-shop items so companies can’t earn money that way and they earn money in ways that don’t effect the game quality in a negative way as this does.

Ashen.2907:

I agree, to an extent. The two cash shops are different in that one’s existence allows people to continue playing a game that they potentially love without requiring additional payment that they may not be able to afford. The other asks people already paying for the development of the contents of the cash shop to pay for them again.

No the cash-shop does not make that difference. That is the sub-model vs no sub-model.
And in GW2’s case it’s indeed that they focus on a cash-shop to generate income so that cash-shop support a game without a sub (and for it to do that you get the stuff we have now and I dislike so much) but a focus on expansions would just as well be an alternative. So yes this cash-shop is one way to make that possible (if thats what you mean).

Ashen.2907:

I say, “to an extent,” because the differences exist on the micro level. On the macro level they are essentially identical. They produce revenue by enticing funds from those with the ability to pay more than the minimum requirement to play the game.

But the micro level does effect the way it works, how it effects the game and so on. What the whole discussion was about

Ashen.2907:

Well I would agree if the cash-shop and the game would be the same except for this change. But it’s completely different. The game is effected a lot.. WoW has many mini’s in the world with the exception of a few (including the 11 in the cash-shop) while GW2 has most in the cash-shop with the exception of a few in the world and a few behind temporary achievements.

That’s put everything in totally different perspectives. Yes the one fact that you can not get WoW cash-shop items with gold while the GW2 cash-shop items you can is better for the GW2 cash-shop then for WoW. That one fact is indeed better. But there are more things that just that one fact. GW2 has a lot of things in the cash-shop WoW almost nothing, GW2 puts a lot of things in there temporary as far as I know WoW has everything forever. GW2 makes the gold very important trying to get you to buy gold. WoW does not anything in the game trying to push you to buy it except for having those few items in the cash-shop. So it’s not so simple as looking as just one elements. The question is how it effects the game and that in total is effect more with GW2.

And the agree disagree. Again. The thing that was about was if different cash-shop effect games in different ways. Thats a fact, thats not a agree disagree thing. If it effects a game is a bad way is a agree disagree thing. I also said that if people don’t care about cosmetics or going into the world to collect them and so on then they might not dislike the GW2 cash-shop as it does not effect there personal game-play.

Ashen.2907:

It would make it better than it is now, but not better than GW2’s shop because currently a subscriber is already paying for the development of those cash shop items. Asking him to pay a second time is not better than the GW2 approach IMO.

But it’s not about the subscription. I was now purely comparing the cash-shops.
It’s very nice that this cash-shop support this game if it wasn’t for the fact that for many people it sucks the fun out of the game the way is does so.

What you are basically are saying is. Well the GW2 cash-shop is never worse because you don’t need to pay a subscription because of it.
But that fact has not made the cash-shop better. The cash-shop is still bad. And the reason it is so bad is exactly because they use the cash-shop to generate income instead of another model like a sub (no fan of that) or expansions sale.

GW2 can not have a cash-shop like WoW if GW2 would not focus on subs or expansion sales to generate income because the WoW shop would not generate them enough income.

Ashen.2907:

Again that agree to disagree thing. Completely subjective. I don’t find the game to have been made worse by the cash shop. I know others that feel the same. It is unfortunate that some feel that the game has been lessened or even ruined for themselves by the existence of the cash shop, but the reality of the matter is that there would be people for whom the game would be ruined by the addition of a sub fee or the addition of paid expansions, etc.

Since the game was advertised and sold as having a cash shop, and lacking a sub fee…

Thats what I said.. depending on your game-play.

It was soled as B2P game. They never said it would focus on micro-transactions to generate income nor did Anet have a name as doing so with GW1, the opposite.

Having a cash-shop does not mean much yet. It could be a cash-shop like WoW has for example (but then they would not be able to run the game on that).

Yeah different models might have there own problems but in all honestly I think expansion-based models would effect the game the least for the most people.

The only people you are hitting are the people not able to buy expansions I think, then again they would likely even not be able to buy the first game so would also not have GW2 only F2P games (so compared to GW2 it’s almost nobody). Besides it’s reasonable to pay for a product.

Now in GW2 things have literally changed the game mechanics. I can not get mini’s or skin or colored dyes in a way I deem fun. I could pay and buy it but thats not fun for me.

IndigoSundown.5419:

Anyone who wants something that’s in a cash shop in any game — and who prefers to “earn” it by playing versus by paying — is going to perceive that cash shop negatively. This goes for mounts in WoW or minis in GW2. I certainly have issues with GW2, but not with the way they’ve monetized their game.

Indeed and GW2 has lots and lots of items in the cash-shop and many of it only in the cash-shop so by default many more people are going to have a bigger problem with that cash-shop.

You are also forgetting one part. The part where the focus on the cash-shop changes part of the game-play itself
(usually to benefit the cash-shop sales, like how in GW2 they mainly use world-drop loot so gold because the most effective way to get items you want.. trying to get you to buy gold, but also the temporary nature of many things is a example of that in GW2).

People negatively effected by those game-play ‘changes’ also will have a more negative feeling about the game.. Not all maybe understanding where that game-play comes from.

I think sub prices are stupidly high at 14.99. I think a reasonable sub price for a video game, which we can’t forget the base price we’ve paid, would be 4.99 or something.

Great game so I wouldn’t mind but at the same time I’d demand deeper classes with more abilities and a better engine that doesn’t eat away your cpu.

Ashen.2907:

Seera.5916:

And how many people in the US go: that’s too much to pay to see a movie, I’ll just wait until it’s on tv or I can buy it, etc.

My wife and I will often look at each other after seeing a movie trailer and say, “Redbox.” We generally only make a point of seeing a movie in the theater if it seems likely to benefit from the huge screen.

We’ve got a 3D TV, so my husband and I take it one step further – it’s about the same cost for us to pre-order a 3D blu-ray from Amazon as it it for both of us to go see it in 3D at the theater. We can make our own popcorn, have espresso instead of soda, and pause the movie, so the trailer has to look really spectacular before we go see it in the theater.

So, yes, everyone’s situation different and we all have different things that are important to us. I play all sorts of games – F2P, B2P, subscription and what it really comes down to is whether the fun I’m having is worth what I’m paying. As soon as I get annoyed by an aggressive cash shop, or too many time sinks, or whatever, I go play another game until the company sorts it out (or doesn’t).

What I don’t get is folks that think a subscription model somehow will “fix” a game to be more to their liking (and I’m not directing that at anyone in particular – it’s just a common sentiment I’ve come across in a lot of the game forums I read). I look at the game as it exists and what it costs me at that moment when I’m deciding whether it’s “worth it”. I let the company publishing the game worry about whether they’re going to be profitable enough to continue providing me that experience at the price they’re charging. If they’re charging too much for what they’re offering and aren’t getting enough customers, they’ll either drop their price, or offer more, or go out of business. C’est la vie.

Devata.6589:

… So when you are done with collecting them all then there are those 11 left in the store (maybe thats then the only push there is?).

For a collector it really doesn’t matter if it’s 1 or 11 mini that is missing, the collection remains incomplete and anyone collecting them is basically forced to spend real money.

Edit: $10 gets you 800 gems, for $10-15 p.month you can get a lot of RP items from the cash-shop. At least you have the choice.

frans.8092:

Devata.6589:

… So when you are done with collecting them all then there are those 11 left in the store (maybe thats then the only push there is?).

For a collector it really doesn’t matter if it’s 1 or 11 mini that is missing, the collection remains incomplete and anyone collecting them is basically forced to spend real money.

Edit: $10 gets you 800 gems, for $10-15 p.month you can get a lot of RP items from the cash-shop. At least you have the choice.

Thats not completely true. For myself I said in the few games I did play for a while (including WoW) I said well the mini’s in the cash-shop and those they give as game-conventions do not count.

It’s a very small part that you can set yourself aside because they are only obtainable out of the game. Funny enough, GW2 did try to do this for you at launch. Meaning some they count as in-game while some they did not. Thats why some don’t count for the achievements and are in other tabs. The big difference is the amount. If you have a few of those mini’s in the cash-shop it’s easy to say “ok they do not count” but if there are only a few in-game that the hole idea of collecting them is ruined.

Problem is that there are pretty much non in-game but they simply count all the ones that are not account-bound and are in the cash-shop as in-game. But collecting them is not fun because it’s all a gold-grind. So even if you consider them as in-game (as I not really do because you can’t get them in the open world) the problem is that because of there implementation they are not included in a fun way. It;s all gold grind gold grind and gold-grind.

About buying them.. Well first of all I am not a fan of sub-based I prefer expansion-based. But like I said before (you might have missed that comment) what I consider fun is going into the world to hunt down my mini’s. That is my game-play. That is how I have fun, how I play an MMO. (not only that, but it’s part of it) So buying it is not a solution. Yes I have a collection but it does not feel nice because I did not do anything for it.

Besides if you where not able to play for 4 weeks in GW2 that might mean you missed out on a mini or a skin or something like that forever what makes it worse for 2 reasons. If you missed it you missed it but it also sort of ‘forces’ you to grind the achievements burning you out very fast.

SilverWF.4789:

Swagger.1459:

SilverWF.4789:

Meehael.8240:

So, would you pay $10 a month for the game if the Gem Store ceases to exist, no need to buy bag and bank slots, expand this, expand that. Pay for boosters of various kind. Buy unlimited mining picks. What not…
That would probably also include less time gating, maybe a bit higher drop rates… You name it!

In short, you get a full service for $10 a month. I’d say if the game’s good, I’d pay that money.

I’m already have full service for free, so… Not, I’ll not pay 10 bucks per month for the same game.

so how would you feel about an optional subscription model that had a ton of extra perks that the f2p model didn’t have?

What kind of perks? What they can do to make this game more easier? O.o

hypothetically, what if they did something optional like this?

“Ready for the big leagues?

Step up to the plate and join the elite group of VIP members. Only VIP members enjoy the exclusive benefits that make like [sic] worth living. Enroll today and find out what you’ve been missing!
•Gemstore Discounts
•Convenient Banking
•Extra Bank Space
•Teleport to Friend
•Convenient Trading
•Ressurection Buff
•Additional Bag Slot
•Additional Character Slot
•Gift Bag
•Additional Skill Points
•Prestige and recognition
•and much more!"

Meehael.8240:

So, would you pay $10 a month for the game if the Gem Store ceases to exist, no need to buy bag and bank slots, expand this, expand that. Pay for boosters of various kind. Buy unlimited mining picks. What not…
That would probably also include less time gating, maybe a bit higher drop rates… You name it!

In short, you get a full service for $10 a month. I’d say if the game’s good, I’d pay that money.

if you want a sub based gw2 just pretend it is and buy $10 worth of gems every month.
there problem solved, now stop ruining the game for the rest of us.