Guild Wars 2

Ingros.7801:

Kind of a side note. Can anyone tell me where Anet has said that Guild Halls will be available to people without HoT since they are 2 zones in the Maguuma Jungle?

One of the conversations about it they mentioned that people without HoT will be able to participate in Guild Halls with their Guilds. What that means exactly I don’t know. I figure they’ll be able to use them but perhaps maybe not be able to create them? Just a guess.

Great comparison chart, OP. You can technically expand Verdant Brink to 3 zones and it still wouldn’t hold in comparison.

I think you can remove the PvP modes, since they’ll be available to everyone.

I’m sure this is entirely accurate and they are done announcing new zones, features, and abilities.

This is basically a $40 expansion, priced at $50. Not worth it. Throw in 800 gems or a free slot, and I’ll call it even.

A-net doesn’t owe me this. It’s just my personal precondition for buying the expansion.

Captain Unusual.9163:

I’m sure this is entirely accurate and they are done announcing new zones, features, and abilities.

That’s inconsequential. They’re asking money NOW, So we have to base our financial decision on what we know NOW.

You can hope for 47 new zones, but that’s not been confirmed.

MiniEquine.6014:

Did the previous GW1 expansions or stand-alones come with content patches too, or is this what came with them out of the box? I don’t recall too many games back then with huge content patches, but I could be mistaken on this.

Yes, GW1 did have content patches, and events. Not to mention the near continuous balancing of characters. Patching bugs the crept up. They patched so often, I don’t think they had a scheduled path day.

It also when released had live updates, Meaning it would update the game while you were playing and only when done or at a map change did you need to log out to the login screen.

Omocha.4931:

Lyndis.4653:

…

…

Calm down, I never said everything was bad in GW add-ons ! I’m not pretending to be able to do the comparison thoroughly nor to tell which one should be better.

I am just saying that the proposed comparison here is highly flawed and one shouldn’t give it too much credit.

The only people able to accurately estimate the worth of GW1 add-ons are the ones who played the game at the time and noone can really estimate the worth of HoT today (which is the main these pointless threads appear…).

I just wanted to add a little side note, when making this I did leave the tiny explorable zones out of the GW1 expansions. Technically there are more explorable zones per xpac, but I left them out since there wasn’t much too them, just left the big substantial zones in.

Well think of it this way would you buy a game at 50 bucks with 3 zones(maybe) 1 full class and 7 sub classes….. Oh and a glider?

webtoehobbit.4201:

Spent all day yesterday making this up, to compare what we received content wise from ArenaNet in the past with their other expansions to what has been officially announced so far with Heart of Thorns.

I will continue to update this as more info is revealed with Heart of Thorns, but here is what we have so far, enjoy!

Edit: This comparison is based off of features that were DAY 1 features and not added at a later date.

GW2 actually has more than over 300+ employees as of last year.

Dev Confirmation: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/bltc/What-to-buy-with-800-gems/first#post1218058

You’d think we’d be getting much more content because they have much more man power, that doesn’t seem to the case though…

People will say that GW2 requires more time to develop for than GW1 because of things like higher res models, more complex systems, etc. However that is not an excuse as development tools have also become more efficient over the past years (not to mention the increase of staff).

While we don’t fully know all the offerings of GW2:HoT yet, we should not set our expectations low considering the amount of people working on it and the time that they’ve had.

Inshiro.3620:

You’d think we’d be getting much more content because they have much more man power, that doesn’t seem to the case though…

Do you know what’s really, really funny, though?

A dev once said here that there were, at the time, more people playing WvW than the total amount of people playing the original Guild Wars at its peak.

Meanwhile… The original Guild Wars was released on April 2005. Two years later, on the third quarter of 2007, GW earned NCSoft 13 billion Won. GW2 was released on August 2012. Two years later, on the third quarter of 2014, GW2 earned 19,6 billion Won. Less than Lineage, Aion, and Blade & Soul.

Nearly twice as many people, with better technology, after all this time… And for what? Less than twice the earnings? Still less than a MMORPG released in 1998? Or that a game that has not even been released on the West yet?

I wonder, does ArenaNet think it was really worth it?

Inshiro.3620:

GW2 actually has more than over 300+ employees as of last year.

Dev Confirmation: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/bltc/What-to-buy-with-800-gems/first#post1218058

You’d think we’d be getting much more content because they have much more man power, that doesn’t seem to the case though…

People will say that GW2 requires more time to develop for than GW1 because of things like higher res models, more complex systems, etc. However that is not an excuse as development tools have also become more efficient over the past years (not to mention the increase of staff).

While we don’t fully know all the offerings of GW2:HoT yet, we should not set our expectations low considering the amount of people working on it and the time that they’ve had.

Thanks for the clarification on the number of employees.

And that’s the thing though, we don’t know how long they’ve been working on this game. I don’t think it’s been that long since during an interview with I think MattVisual during the time they were flown out to ANet to demo HoT Colin was asked how long they have been working on this, and he dodged the question by giving some vague answer like, “We’ve been working on some story elements for quite a while.”

I have always wanted to know when exactly the development on this game started.

Lyndis.4653:

(1) Calm down, I never said everything was bad in GW add-ons ! I’m not pretending to be able to do the comparison thoroughly nor to tell which one should be better.

(2) I am just saying that the proposed comparison here is highly flawed and one shouldn’t give it too much credit.

(3) The only people able to accurately estimate the worth of GW1 add-ons are the ones who played the game at the time and noone can really estimate the worth of HoT today (which is the main these pointless threads appear…).

(1) I just recently replayed through GW1 content on different classes with different builds (not the drool inducing SoS spammer). Tagging one of the best parts the community at that time was sad not to have in GW2 as a flaw kinda rubbed me the wrong way I guess All in all, looking at the core elements (not just the visual bling-blings) I fail to see anything bad within the pve section of GW1. Didn’t play enough pvp to have an opinion. Oh wait! There are two things: dailies in Presearing and reducing the required title tier required for the pve skills max efficiency (thus making half the work have less meaning all of a sudden)

(2) I totally agree with you, for different reasons. The 3 GW1 elements were additions to Prophecies, HoT looks and feels more like a remake of the core game – hence the comparison is invalid

(3) You can estimate the worth of a product based on similar features of similar products. It’s what mankind always does. “My dog’s better than yours”, “Grass is greener…” etc. If you compare – taking ANet’s words as true – this “expansion” to the other they’ve released (for GW1), HoT has the value of a Mail Carrier. But the comparison should be – again – done with “A Realm Reborn”, ‘cause when you alter the mechanics of a game the way they did, it is not an expansion, it’s a remake. How many other companies charged their customers twice for the same product?! And of those those, how many survived to tell the tale?!

Inshiro.3620:

GW2 actually has more than over 300+ employees as of last year.

Dev Confirmation: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/bltc/What-to-buy-with-800-gems/first#post1218058

So in comparison with GW1 expansions: Almost twice the devs and about 10 times less content? Makes me wonder how big is the development team is…. Could it be that 80% of those 300 employees are making coffee for the devs?

Ugh…
Except that a whole map in GW1 isn’t 1/4 of a GW2 map in level of detail,size and quality.

The detail,graphic,effects and details in GW2 are way harder to do than it was in GW1.
Also,GW2: HoT is an EXPANSION,it shouldn’t be compared with 2 STAND ALONE CAMPAIGNS.

The only fair comparasion would be GW:EotN and GW2:HoT

Sorean.5379:

Also,GW2: HoT is an EXPANSION,it shouldn’t be compared with 2 STAND ALONE CAMPAIGNS.

Why not? It’s a common argument that this a “normal price for expansion”. The prices are also same/cheaper, which they shouldn’t be considering HoT is not a standalone…

As for details….. yeah, gw2 looks better than gw1, but so far they haven’t shown much completely new content (using new textures and such) to make up for 10 times higher price / content unit ratio.

webtoehobbit.4201:

Spent all day yesterday making this up, to compare what we received content wise from ArenaNet in the past with their other expansions to what has been officially announced so far with Heart of Thorns.

I will continue to update this as more info is revealed with Heart of Thorns, but here is what we have so far, enjoy!

Edit: This comparison is based off of features that were DAY 1 features and not added at a later date.

Thank you so much for this I didnt have time to follow all tidbits being posted/said about expansion and anets website is very VERY vague about actual content.

Such a list is exactly what Ive been looking for for the last few days. Wiki is more detailed than anet website about expansion, but it is also very vague and using a lot of what I call “hype vocabulary”.

So again, thank you Your chart actually brought this expansion INTO context for me

I think they have said sometime ago that a single GW2 zone was the equivalent of a whole zone in GW1 or something like that.

Hell,you can even see it just by looking at Lions Arch. You could run around in GW1’s Lions Arch in like 1 minute,while it would take you like 5 to do that in GW2’s Lions Arch.

I think that the time it takes to create a GW2 map (like Verdant Brink) is enough to create a whole new Zone in GW1.
Not to mention that GW1 maps were very simple to do,they only had 1 possible path most of the time and like 70% of the map was made with inaccessible places (mountains etc)

Sorean.5379:

I think they have said sometime ago that a single GW2 zone was the equivalent of a whole zone in GW1 or something like that.

GW1 is full of monster groups with their own patrolling pattern. So you don’t use space in the same way. “running across the map” doesn’t happen unless you have a running build and know what you’re doing. Otherwise it takes some time to play through a map. You also can’t zerg of course because party size is capped.

The real question is does GW2 make good enough use of it’s open world maps to place such importance on a single one or two in HoT? And from what I’ve already seen that’s pretty iffy. Everything is zergable, removing all semblance of challenge. World events all loop usually well under an hour, so there’s no feeling of progression or stability to the open world. I don’t see how they’re going to make having less maps than ever a selling point, when they haven’t even really made the basics of those maps compelling.

Sorean.5379:

I think they have said sometime ago that a single GW2 zone was the equivalent of a whole zone in GW1 or something like that.

Regardless of whether this is true or not, the dev team is not limited to the map designers. There are profession designers, armour/weapon modellers, open world content designers, dungeon/fractal designers, etc.

Highly detailed maps don’t excuse the lack of other content. And in the end, maps are largely eye-candy, I won’t get my “thousand of hours of entertainment” by running around the map.

Comparing outpost with map and calling both zones

Lions Arch in GW2 -> map
Lions Arch in GW1 -> outpost

Rather go compare Lornar’s Pass (GW2) with Snake Dance (GW1). Both are “maps”.

I have to say, Im faster done completing Lornar’s Pass than vanquishing Snake Dance. But thats not really something speaking against GW2, it just means it’s two different systems. Open World vs Instanced Content. Map Completion vs Vanquishing. Etc.

After going over that list I still maintain that 50 bucks is too steep a price for what we know so far.

Funny thing is, seeing how literally thousands of people are reacting to that price, if they had set it to 40 bucks + characterslot, they probably would have sold the expansion already about several thousand times. But that would also mean all those people trying to play during beta weekends. Making each beta weekend rather a stresstest than about content beta.

Just keep that in mind and lets compare purchase prices when release date is fix

Well,I prefer GW2 over GW1 now,in 2015.
Maybe GW1 was fun…back in 2008.

Also,$50 was a lot of money back then (2006~) and they would be crazy to charge that much for it,while $50 isn’t worth much today,this is fact.
Maybe this analogy will suck but lets try:

Back in,lets say,2001 we had Kinder Surprise. It used to cost like 0,50 cents and it was an acceptable price.
Now,in 2015 the very same Kinder Surprise (not bigger,not better,don’t have better surprises) costs $1,50 (approx. 3,00 BRL here) and yet it is still an acceptable price.
Why? Because back then minimum wage was way less than it is today. Today minimum wage is more than it was,but if the prices stayed the same people would get…errr..“richer” and this is not how the world rolls lol.

Whats minimum wage? And Im sorry your currency got inflation going on, but mine actually… doesnt At least not more than the “usual” rate to keep currency “healthy”.
So 50 bucks is 50 bucks to me, back then the same as now.

Sorean.5379:

Not to mention that GW1 maps were very simple to do,they only had 1 possible path most of the time and like 70% of the map was made with inaccessible places (mountains etc)

Did you even play GW1? Or… are you sure you’re not confusing GW1 with FFXIII, ‘cause it sure looks like that given that statment Not that GW2’s landscapes don’t have mountains or other places you kinda need to go around much.

Also, the fact that you can jump over a rock doesn’t make the map that much different, especially with really wide spaces. Add to that that you don’t have to worry about aggroing things at all, ’cause most of the mobs are either dumb to smell you passing by or just to far apart.

303 quests in GW2 circling around dancing for cows and feeding some birds between the usual fetch or kill quests. Come to think of it, I believe GW had more than 303 quests in any of its continents. As for the events, yes, they make the places more dynamic. At launch, at first visit, or when needing some collection item (which you need to wait for a game patch to get). So, from this point of view, the dynamic events not connected to anything worthwhile are less of a reason to revisit a map than Vanquisher title was in GW1.

It’s a really bad idea though to compare these two games much. One has the looks, but the other one certainly has the soul. GW2 is focused on the bling-blings from Gem Store, GW1 was focused on player’s experience more. By the way! If they would’ve offered a Rainbow Mini Rocks Collection with the pre-purchase of HoT, I’m pretty sure they would’ve melted a lot more hearts and a lot of people would’ve forgot about content

Ya this can’t be called an expansion…maybe a feature pack. It does not offer stuff like real expansions do. New players pay 50$ for it (core game included which was 60$) so expansion is like 0$ ? or with 75% off its 15$ core game + 35$ expansion?

They know expansion is small so selling core plus expansion for 50$ is pretty good deal for newcomers but for 3 million veterans its just ripoff because they are selling same stuff to them twice.

Why they dont offer price of 25-30$ for expansion? Because its an ultimatum buy 50 or dont play stuff we give you. And thats just crappy move.

Srry if you did call it feature pack for 25$ I think 90% ppl would buy those (I would too) but paying twice for something so small is just ripoff.

Omocha.4931:

Sorean.5379:

Not to mention that GW1 maps were very simple to do,they only had 1 possible path most of the time and like 70% of the map was made with inaccessible places (mountains etc)

Did you even play GW1? Or… are you sure you’re not confusing GW1 with FFXIII, ‘cause it sure looks like that given that statment Not that GW2’s landscapes don’t have mountains or other places you kinda need to go around much.

Also, the fact that you can jump over a rock doesn’t make the map that much different, especially with really wide spaces. Add to that that you don’t have to worry about aggroing things at all, ’cause most of the mobs are either dumb to smell you passing by or just to far apart.

303 quests in GW2 circling around dancing for cows and feeding some birds between the usual fetch or kill quests. Come to think of it, I believe GW had more than 303 quests in any of its continents. As for the events, yes, they make the places more dynamic. At launch, at first visit, or when needing some collection item (which you need to wait for a game patch to get). So, from this point of view, the dynamic events not connected to anything worthwhile are less of a reason to revisit a map than Vanquisher title was in GW1.

Completely agree, yes GW2 maps may feel more dynamic fron the change of how questing is done, but the zones in GW1 almost felt bigger than the size of them in GW2. For example, the current zone Gendarran Fields, in GW2 the settlements are awfly close and cam be traversed rather quickly between them. But in GW1, I remember it took a bit longer to travel between the settlements outside of Lions Arch.

Do another column with what we got for free the last 3 years

and another one with what we got at release too

This is a comparison of what was available at launch of expansions, not quality of life updates or living world, those have nothing to do with the expansion.

Jitsuryoku.9038:

Inshiro.3620:

GW2 actually has more than over 300+ employees as of last year.

Dev Confirmation: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/bltc/What-to-buy-with-800-gems/first#post1218058

So in comparison with GW1 expansions: Almost twice the devs and about 10 times less content? Makes me wonder how big is the development team is…. Could it be that 80% of those 300 employees are making coffee for the devs?

Need to take into consideration and compare how long the content takes to produce (in which case the only thing we do know from a pre-launch interview is that dynamic events take 3x as long to produce than regular quests).

And technically, Living World isn’t free anymore to new players, so wouldn’t really sound favorable to show that.

webtoehobbit.4201:

This is a comparison of what was available at launch of expansions, not quality of life updates or living world, those have nothing to do with the expansion.

That’s what I’m saying, do a full comparison. What we got for free over the last 3 years, what we got at release, release Prophecies vs release Guild Wars 2 to have a complete list of things.

webtoehobbit.4201:

And technically, Living World isn’t free anymore to new players, so wouldn’t really sound favorable to show that.

No. I’m talking to include all the temporary updates too. How many zones changed, some completely, over the last 3 years? Every single change should be in

I could but the issue here is related to expansions, maybe at a later time I could do a comparison of base games, but that isn’t very relevant now I don’t think

webtoehobbit.4201:

I could but the issue here is related to expansions, maybe at a later time I could do a comparison of base games, but that isn’t very relevant now I don’t think

It is. You added the GW1 expansions with their release dates it’s only proper to add what we got in GW2 from release til the expansion for FREE and add all those to the price.

The changes that happened pre Heart of Thorns is not what we are paying for in Heart of Thorns, adding that info would be irrelevant for this comparison.

+1 OP, thanks for posting.

webtoehobbit.4201:

The changes that happened pre Heart of Thorns is not what we are paying for in Heart of Thorns, adding that info would be irrelevant for this comparison.

In a way you do. A complete comparison of updates:

G1 + all expansions = 50+50+50+40

vs GW2 + all FREE content 50+50

Do that comparison so the price of what we got is clear

maddoctor.2738:

webtoehobbit.4201:

The changes that happened pre Heart of Thorns is not what we are paying for in Heart of Thorns, adding that info would be irrelevant for this comparison.

In a way you do. A complete comparison of updates:

G1 + all expansions = 50+50+50+40

vs GW2 + all FREE content 50+50

Do that comparison so the price of what we got is clear

It’s meaningless to add in the FREE (that really isn’t FREE) content when looking at PAID expansions.

MMOGamer.6175:

maddoctor.2738:

webtoehobbit.4201:

The changes that happened pre Heart of Thorns is not what we are paying for in Heart of Thorns, adding that info would be irrelevant for this comparison.

In a way you do. A complete comparison of updates:

G1 + all expansions = 50+50+50+40

vs GW2 + all FREE content 50+50

Do that comparison so the price of what we got is clear

It’s meaningless to add in the FREE (that really isn’t FREE) content when looking at PAID expansions.

No but you can check how much content you got overall for what price.
GW1: 190$ for everything
GW2: 100$ for everything

Comparing content and price can lead to much more interesting conclusions. The price tag of HoT becomes much better if you think what you’ve got for free so far compared with getting nearly nothing in-between expansions.

The comparison isn’t even up to date currently, we know of already about an unnamed second PvE map from the specialization reveals (some of the pre-recorded clips are outside of Verdant Brink). We also know of the “Golden City” which is either part of a map, that is not Verdant Brink, or a map in itself like the current cities. We also know we have two Guild Halls which have to be connected to the world through zones, and the one we have seen at least does not appear to connect with Verdant Brink (can’t say for sure if it is adjacent to the second map we know of, because the total dimensions of the maps are not known).

maddoctor.2738:

MMOGamer.6175:

maddoctor.2738:

webtoehobbit.4201:

The changes that happened pre Heart of Thorns is not what we are paying for in Heart of Thorns, adding that info would be irrelevant for this comparison.

In a way you do. A complete comparison of updates:

G1 + all expansions = 50+50+50+40

vs GW2 + all FREE content 50+50

Do that comparison so the price of what we got is clear

It’s meaningless to add in the FREE (that really isn’t FREE) content when looking at PAID expansions.

No but you can check how much content you got overall for what price.
GW1: 190$ for everything
GW2: 100$ for everything

Comparing content and price can lead to much more interesting conclusions. The price tag of HoT becomes much better if you think what you’ve got for free so far compared with getting nearly nothing in-between expansions.

GW1 had FREE content also.

Thanks for the info

But you forgot hero system for Nightfall in the “Other main feature”.

Improved later to 7 heroes (full party) for free !

maddoctor.2738:

Comparing content and price can lead to much more interesting conclusions. The price tag of HoT becomes much better if you think what you’ve got for free so far compared with getting nearly nothing in-between expansions.

Not really. That’s actually completelly irrelevant.

Living World, and all the etcs are part of the core release, not a part of HoT.

What people are saying isn’t that the core game wasn’t worth 50$, rather that HoT isn’t worth 50$.

Which makes your request rather pointless. The table in this post is not comparing the core release of GW2 with what we got in each GW1 chapter. It’s comparing what we will get with HoT with what we got in each GW1 chapter.

And incidentally, it’s far, FAR less.

Were do you take your confirmation from, that there will only be one zone?

Test.8734:

And incidentally, it’s far, FAR less.

The OP forgot a lot of things in his post, for example zones that we KNOW are coming just not their full names. Do you recall before Factions they released the names of all the zones that were going to be in the expansion? No they didn’t. So at this point it’s impossible to count the number of zones so how do you know it’s not less, but FAR FAR less?

Kaputsid.5169:

Thanks for the info

But you forgot hero system for Nightfall in the “Other main feature”.

Improved later to 7 heroes (full party) for free !

Yeah that was epic back in the day.

maddoctor.2738:

webtoehobbit.4201:

The changes that happened pre Heart of Thorns is not what we are paying for in Heart of Thorns, adding that info would be irrelevant for this comparison.

In a way you do. A complete comparison of updates:

G1 + all expansions = 50+50+50+40

vs GW2 + all FREE content 50+50

Do that comparison so the price of what we got is clear

GW1 also had WiK, HotN and WoC which all 3 were permanent and free. You go there now, you get to do all that stuff.
GW2 had content that was a) removed, b) half-free. Neither of them is of much support for your statement. LW is not permanent, nor free. (Please note it’s “is” not “was”)
Free content is pretty much what GW1 also had, Easter/Wintersday/CNY/Dragon/Birthday and the small things inbetween.

One more thing, no one’s doubting Anet’s ability to deliver high quality content. Neither than they can do it without a price tag. This, again, seems to be falling in the same poophole.

Bad wording and bad marketing is what HoT is suffering from.
Let me try to explain: Factions, Nightfall and EotN didn’t change the mechanics, fabric, core – however you wanna call it – of the original GW1. They added content to the existing mechanics. HoT adds very little content. So little that it isn’t actually more than a DLC. But the changes it brings are drastic, deep and the foundation (from what Anet kept saying) for everything to come. Hence, they’ve remade the bone structure of GW2. Muscles and skin (the topography and all the props) are roughly the same (probably with the same buggy events too). Remember that even the story gets rewriten a bit. As such, it’s a remake, remaster, reset. Can’t compare it with any available means of adding to an existing game: too small for a stand-alone or expansion; too deeply altering the experience for a dlc, too similar with GW2 to be called new game.

As such, I’m wondering: If Anet would come tomorrow and say “Hey guys, HoT is actually a reset of GW2, designed so that it can accomodate new mechanics a more enjoyable leveling experience and an easier to balance and control skills and traits component. We’ve added an extra class to balance the armor types and the whole LWS3” would you react any better to this than to the feint of “exp+free core”?

Some things become obvious if you focus on them long enough, and from this point of view, I’d say that if that is the case, then maybe the wording and packaging were chosen to avoid an even bigger uprising. I’d probably support this move if they’d come clean about it though (and maybe fix the character slots hiccup).

Test.8734:

Living World, and all the etcs are part of the core release, not a part of HoT.

Actually, they are part of neither vanilla release or HoT. They are content in between releases presumably funded by the Gem Store. The sales of the core game covered development costs of said core game (ie. any of ArenaNet’s own investments and publisher funding pre-launch) as well as turned profit for ArenaNet/NCSoft eventually.

Regardless of the exact division, it is factually incorrect to say that the the core game actually covers the Living World and feature packs in any way. The Living World and most live updates are an investment from ArenaNet and NCSoft not something that has had its costs covered by something else. This free content is created based on funding received in advance so that the service will continue to turn profit during its lifespan it is hardly a risk free venture.

Additionally something like the 23rd’s specialization update is a corner case, since it was designed and created for HoT, even if it comes to everyone at no extra cost, it would not exist without HoT and is thus arguably definitely more part of HoT than the core game if you have to think of it as part of one or the other.

When you purchased the core game you paid for access to a service and the content present at the time of release of said service. Anything that was created or changed after the core game was considered finished is not something covered by that purchase in any way. Your continued access to the service (or soon to be parts of it) is what is covered by it at this point.

Crise.9401:

… This free content is created…

Funny then, ‘cause this “free” content is neither free, nor available. LWS2 costs. LWS1 is part of the game’s history. Would you still say that GW2 has FotM if they remove it tomorrow, only because you have the fractal gear from that place?

What players can get from LWS1 is a few extra places to visit and a backpack, if they buy the recipe and sprockets/mining pick.

LWS2 is anything but free now too, hm?! Unless 2k gems don’t mean anything.