Guild Wars 2

Galen Grey.4709:

Devata.6589:

But no matter if some people have the self-control and other don’t, the pressure is there for all.

…….

So no I dont think Rift switched to F2P because it failed. And even if that was the case, I certainly dont think that happened because it did something wrong. Its just a sideeffect of that type of payment model. Subscriptions make it easy for you to loose players (try another game, run into hard times, need a break, busy month ahead etc…) and hard to get them back. Its a wall in a sort of way.

As for WoW’s cash shop, yes I agree up till now unless you were a collector it didnt pressure you much into buying anything. But WoW as a game has a very competititve enviroment that is all about getting to end game as quickly as possible and gearing up as quickly as possible. We know the cash shop is going to expand and we know for sure 2 new items will include XP boost and Lesser charms of good fortune (that essentially give you extra drops in raids) I think A LOT of players will feel pressured into buying those. But anyhow I think I disagree with your assessment that a game that has a subscription doesnt need to push for the cash shop as much as a game that just has a cash shop. In most companies those will be under different teams and each of them will have their own Key performance indicators. I dont see stock holders and board members ignoring KPIs of the cash shop teams just cause subscriptions are doing great. The team responsible for the cash shop will still do their utmost to have a great performance review at the end of the day. So I think the motivation cycle is likely to be the same in both type of games.

I have to disagree here as well I am afraid. I dont deny that some people feel pressured by the Gem store and for different reasons too. Some because they have to have gold in game others because they just cant not have a particular skin etc.. But its definitely not the case that the pressure is there and certainly not equal for all. I promise you I never felt any pressure what so ever to use the cash shop… in fact I didnt even really need to buy anything from the cash shop. What I bought I did just to support Arenanet cause I am having a lot of fun in the game and seems fair to give something back. For example I bought 2 character slots, I created the characters immediately (just cause you know hoping of Birthday presents like there was in Gw1) but to this day they’;re still there sitting on level 1.

Let’s not fool yourself. Rift hoped to make a lot of money with subscriptions.. just like nearly all the other MMO over the last year and they all had to move to F2P in 1 / 2 year. All of them. Thats not because suddenly they wanted to change thats because they lost income mainly because the players went away. You sort of say it yourself “played Rift when it was still P2P”.

Is it possible that a game go’s from sub-based to F2P without that you can say the subscription failed. Yes, Lineage 2 is a good example of that but games like Rift, LotFO, SWToR, Secret World and so on simply went to F2P because they subscription approached failed. They hoped to be able to match WoW.

You might not think Rift switched because it P2P failed for them and you might even find a quote from people behind Rift saying they moved to F2P not because P2P failed for them but because F2P would be better or is the new standard.

That you never felt pressured is then because they never put anything you liked in the gem-store (temporary). But thats why they did try to do. Put something in you like so you feel pressured to buy. If you don’t like any of those items you personal do not feel pressured but they try to make stuff people like so the pressure is there for anybody. Thats what I mean.. it’s not like only the buyers have that problem. I have seen some things come and go that I would like to have. Now I don’t buy it but still I would like to have it and it’s only available for a limited time so thats a pressure isn’t it?

Firefly.5982:

If only, if only the content wasn’t temporary. I really honestly believe this is the WORST choice possible – doing it on a 2 week basis and making everything temporary. If I ever can’t play every day anymore and have to take, say a 1 month brake, I will already miss 2 content patches. GW2 will become a game for the unemployed, the kids that go to school, seniors that are retired…people with a job will sooner or later not be able to keep up. Just sad.

Stop the temporary content. Seriously.

Colin said in a recent interview that only the story would still be temporary while the additions (content) would stay in.

However I also have the feeling they don’t really understand what temporary content means because while they promise to do something about that they not introduce a way to fuse crystals once a day and there will be a new crafting-material introduces that we can also only get in a limited number per dame. Next to the laurels thats more time-gated content and time-gated content has the same problem because in a way it is also temporary content.

That 1 laurel is only today available, do it tomorrow and you miss one. Same for those crystals and that new crafting material. Luckily they promised to take the worst version of it out but it doesn’t really help if at the same time they start introducing more and more other time-gated / temporary content.

morrolan.9608:

Devata.6589:

The design decisions I refer to I also put in my last comment but I will sum them up here for you again.

Temporary content (the temporary events with temporary achievements but also items temporary available in the gem-store), gold-driven system and RNG-boxes.

Yeah I’d also add the reduction in loot drops forcing players to the TP to buy what they need.

Thats the gold-driven system.

Wolfheart.1938:

Devata, can you please share your source regarding guild halls? Appreciated!

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Raids-and-housing-coming-to-GW2/first

But now reading it again they say it was a bad translation so I have to withdraw that statement. First they said the translation error was that it was about guild-halls and not about player-housing. Not it seems that they did not confirm anything about that.

Thats a shame and GW2 really needs housing and guild-houses because some big rivals that will release there game within a year have it and many people want it.

Talenna.4052:

I was hoping there would be something about guild halls. Will just have to keep waiting.

At least there is a lot of other good stuff to look forward to.

I missed the subject ‘guild’ as a total but that does not mean it is not coming as well. They already confirmed working on guild-halls.

Galen Grey.4709:

Ikcen.7518:

Galen Grey.4709:

For starter the game was never promised as a sandbox at all. It was promised as theme park thats has sandbox elements. Personally I feel thats exactly what they delivered.

For starters sandbox are not about changing the world at all. For example GTA is considered a sandbox and you dont change anything in the world there. The actual difference between theme park and sandbox is theme park provide a clear path you have to follow.

Man, you are totally wrong. GTA never been a sandbox, it’s open world, which is something different. Most MMOs now are open world, but that doesn’t make them sandbox. Sandbox is a game in which you change the things when you play, not only personal story but the whole game. Eve is a sandbox, Minecraft is a sandbox, Archeage and Black Desert are games with many sandbox elements, Lineage 2 is game with some sandbox elements, at other site WoW is a themepark, and for sure GW2 is clean themepark. But like Anets show us banners with mounted dolyaks, which are only “art”, they are talking all the time about players who are changing the game world. The question is – do Anets believe in their own words /which shows they are incompetent/ or all is just advertisement /which makes them liars/. Yes, I’m a little bit angry, cause they sold me themepark game in a sandbox pack.

I can assure you I am not the one who considers GTA a sandbox: here are 5 big publications that also consider it a sandbox:

http://www.shacknews.com/article/79012/grand-theft-auto-dna-the-art-of-sandbox-gaming

http://www.qj.net/qjnet/playstation-3/grand-theft-auto-4-redefining-the-sandbox-game.html

http://www.psu.com/Riccitiello--GTA-IV-is-gamings-Best-Picture--a003368-p0.php —> “Riccitiello feels that the highly anticipated sandbox title will back up his assertion that videogames will soon be viewed in the same entertainment capacity as the movie industries biggest films.”

http://www.giantbomb.com/grand-theft-auto/3025-6/ —> “It pushed the medium to new graphical and technical heights, massively popularized its style of open-ended sandbox gameplay”

http://www.pcworld.com/article/145116/article.html —> “series uses its astonishing $100 million budget so effectively, in fact, that it’s difficult to imagine this deluxe sandbox and crime spree simulator being a single penny better.”

but perhpas more importantly do rockstar feel GTA is a sandbox game… asnwer seems yes:
http://support.rockstargames.com/entries/20058817-Sandbox-Modes-and-Free-Roam-in-L-A-Noire —> " Is L.A. Noire a sandbox game like GTA IV? "

Simply speaking every sandbox game is open world but not every open world is a sandbox game. It depends how you handle your open world. If you’ve got an open world but are restricted where you can play in that open world because of level, story gate or whatever then thats not a sandbox. If you’re free to play anywhere in the open world then thats a sandbox. There is more to sandbox then just building.

For example you claim Black desert is a sandbox but in black desert you cant build anything on the open world as far as i know, the housing in that game is just predefined houses in towns that you can bid for. the sandbox elements thakittens being marked off are the life like open world where npcs go about their own daily lives. An extensive trading system. And House customization.

Guess which game has something similar to an life like open world where npc go on with their daily lives? Ergo if black desert is a sandbox Gw2 shares at least one characteristic with it hence that alone would make the statement that Gw2 has some sandbox elements true!

I already explained why some people name GTA a sandbox while it really isn’t one. So basically you can say those people are wrong or you can say.. if people use the word for that then it becomes true, fair enough but then it means sandbox is now a definition for more then one type while Ikcen was referring to the type where you can change the world. Personally I go for the idea people simply use the wrong word. Just because many people name a banana fruit does not yet make it fruit.

Ronah.2869:

Devata.6589:

Ronah.2869:

Ikcen.7518:

GW2 is doomed to failure when games as Archeage and Black desert come online. This game has too much imbalances, bugs, and fundamental problems to be competitive to real mmos. So I’m not surprised it will have no expansions. GW2 is good for losing time, nothing more. Sad that other companies decided to follow GW2 model. I’m talking about Neverwinter and Elder Scrolls. These two, like GW2, are online not mmo games – some new genre

Archage and Black Desert? LOL, Still fanboys of kill 10/10 MMOs with loot steal and quest grief-ing? Or warrior type girls fighting monsters wearing high heals shoes?
No wonder GW2 is still a twilight zone for you.

Lol, no he is more a fanboy of the Smash 150 Pinatas and eat 250 Zhaitaffy or to give 15 cows foot or to give 20 plants water or to collect 30 samples of something and warrior type (almost naked) girls fighting monsters wearing pinks quaggan backpacks.

Really don’t act like if GW2 is so different on those aspects. The hearth and event type of quest usually make them even more superficial where some traditional quest could give a more detailed story and let you really get to know some of the NPC’s. I would welcome some traditional quest in an example.. of course if they are more of a story then the examples you gave. (To bring is back to the subject of the the thread)

You wanna make me believe you actually read those quest tests other then the quest tracker? LOL, Nice try tho.

Sometimes I do sometimes I don’t. Totally depends on the quest and that I notice fast enough. Usually I don’t read them when taking them because like I said 90% are kill x this or kill x that. So I simply collect some and then I notice fast enough what quest are worth reading and what are not. But I would find an house in the middle of nowhere with one NPC having a quest I usually do read it immediate because I wonder what he is doing there. The quest usually give me an answer to that and they also tent to have more interesting quest. In the CoS example I said you where pretty much forced to read them.

Galen Grey.4709:

Devata.6589:

The craft time in WoW is just based on 1 item takes x time. Don’t tell me they just do that so it takes you longer. GW2 was very smart and reduces that with every try. It’s simply not something Blizzard did think of and I would not be surprised if they would introduce that in a future patch.

“You can’t compare flight paths with map travel for speed.” Not sure what you want to say with this. You did say flight paths where there so everything would take you longer didn’t you? I think they are there because it makes more sense as teleporting all over the map (more immersive) and so you get the feeling of a big world.

“Guild Wars 2 is particularly fast to get to max level and max gear” that part is true however personally I think the leveling is a little boring for alts. Kill x attacking centaur to scare them away, collect x that, find x samples. In other games many of the quest where similar but you could also go for the quest that had more of a story and usually they even gave you more xp. To make the leveling more fun in GW2 that would not be a bad addition. But indeed purely looking at the time it takes less time to get to 80 and some exotic lvl 80 gear (at least for the first char, alt chars tent to go faster then the first char in other MMO’s while in GW2 they all have the same speed).

This goes back to what I said in my previous post, at the end of the day the time it takes to craft an item is all fake. it takes a few ms for the game to create your item, its just posting an entry in a database. If you craft 1 or craft a 100000 items of the same type I assure you technically server side it takes precisely the same amount of time. Even the time it takes to craft stuff in Gw2 is artificially inflated. Its not that WoW didnt think of it, its actually an intended time sink.

Every quest in every game boils down to kill x of something, interact with object/personal y or move to location z. What makes them different as you say is the story. But Dynamic Events have that. Most them are nearly a small movie if you follow the whole chain. Also the fact that you just need 17 dynamic events to level up no matter what level you are is great. I dont know which MMOs you played but some have you doing 100s of quests to lvl up and in most cases creativity really takes a nose dive. first you’re given a generic reason to go kill X of Y you come back and they give you another generic reason to go kill another X of Y (y is the same create you just killed) and you want to strangle the NPC right there for not telling you to collect the teeth off the wolves last time when he had sent you to collect their hides.

In Gw2 while tasks might be very similar at their core there is a compelling story to you see unfolding right in front of your eyes. For me thats the best selling point of this game.

Of course you can easily change it and of course it’s an of course it is an ‘intended time sink’ but I don’t beleave it’s that way it WoW just to take take. It’s that way because it makes sense that if you ‘create’ something it takes time. And if you make 100 of it it takes 100 times that time. Thats why it is in WoW the way it is, not because they want to take time away, that I do not believe. Sure they can also take away the animation and the need for a crafting-station and just let you combine stuff and then you get when you need immediately but in a way they try to make it more like you are really crafting something thats why they do it that way, not to take away time.

To me the story’s are indeed a little shallow. It’s true that here you indeed see something while in many other game you don’t but in the end still nothing really changes in a way it might even change more with traditional quest. If you would speak to an NPC you helped he will give you an answer as how happy is you helped him while in GW2 if you scared away the centaurs 5 minutes later they are attacking again. No I don’t blame that for this. It;s just hard to make this any better. The animation you see is indeed great but I also don’t really have a solution to really have an lasting infect however I think a combination of the dynamic events and traditional quest would not be bad at all.

I did some WoW (not a lot as I don’t go for monthly sub) and there are also some other quest like one where you need to take care of a bird and bring it to some other guy, meanwhile you still had that bird flying with you. A game with really good quest was Chronicles of spellborn. Of course there you also find the kill x this and collect x that but it also had some real nice story quest.

Galen Grey.4709:

Devata.6589:

I don’t know how Rift did it but the fact that another company does something wrong does not make it a good excuse for you to do the same.
snip..

…

Rift did something wrong else they would not have lost a big part of there player base resulting in them having to transfer to a new payment-method. Thats what I was referring to.

I also did not say that the fact that stuff takes time is a bad thing. Vayne said that thats a big part of sub-based games and I only reacted on it saying that most mmo’s have things that take a lot of time and that in my opinion the example of crafting and flight paths where not so great as I don’t think they are in WoW just to take away time. I did not say that was a bad thing.

Anyway, for me temporary content and a gold-driven system is a bad thing and seeing the many reactions about it there are many people who feel the same. Luckily Anet already said they would in the future make the story temporary but the additions to the game permanent so if they keep there word and we don’t see any more temporary items / rewards / dungeons and other additions to the game while only the story is temporary I am fine with that. Still I do hope they will also go for expansions because if they don’t we are most likely see other techniques to try and get people to buy gems or they will simply not keep there promise. The next patch is in 5 days so we will see.

I also did not say anything negative about the limited storage space so you also don’t have to convince me thats not bad. They had that already at the release of the game and I was fine with that. You can trade gold for gems so you can buy it with money or with gems. No pressure no problem, just a nice extra for Anet if you would pay it with cakittenhink part of your reaction is more for Vayne then it is for me?

“Why would you say that if a game has a cash shop and a subscription they don’t have to push the cash shop as well?” Because they don’t. They can make there money on the subscription. I don’t say they won’t but I also don’t say they make the correct decisions. But indeed they don’t have to. One focus is enough, multiple will most likely alienate the player-base from you because they feel being milked for money. Same as changing from one to another. The player-base partly selected a game because of the payment-model and especially for GW2 this is very true. And you don’t maximize your profit be alienating your player-base. So far the cash-shop in WoW has never been a real issue (no pressure to buy anything) and it’s true that they want to expand it but we don’t know yet how that will work out so to early to take it as an example. It might backfire on them but if any game can get away with more then normal then it is WoW.

Like I said I think Raiderz has a similar system. I preferred GW2 cash-shop system better in the beginning of the game when there was no pressure to buy anything from it. About the lack of self control. The pressure I talked about will not work on anybody for example it did not work for me. The other way around. I was planning on buying gems for some extra char-slots but that was around the same time as we started seeing more temporary content and RNG-boxes making me decide that Anet would only get more money from me with expansions. But no matter if some people have the self-control and other don’t, the pressure is there for all.

Galen Grey.4709:

Devata.6589:

If your definition of sandbox would be correct all mmo’s would be sandbox while there is a clear difference between a sandbox mmo and a non-sandbox mmo. But your example of GTA is a little outdated. When GTA was released it was the first big game of it’s genre . type.. a genre / type that did not really have a name yet. Back then people tried to define it and some people named it sandbox but that was not really accurate other people named it ‘open world’ and it even got it’s own name ‘Grand Theft Auto clone’. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Theft_Auto_clone I think Open World does fit the best. And yes GW2 is also an open word like GTA but they are both not sandbox while looking at what Anet wants they seem to want a sandbox game while there aren’t a sand-box game.

Thats not really an issue for me I can life with both, however I think Anet should if they really want those thinks they say convert it into sandbox or else change what they want.

But this was just to comment on the GTA – sandbox comment.

Just to clarify I didnt say Gw2 is a sandbox I said it has sandbox elements and no I disagree that based on my description all MMOs are sandboxes. The key factor I mentioned is you have to be free to play the way you want and where you want. In WoW at max level I cant decide to go play in Elwynn Forest because there will be no quests for me to do and i get no reward / progression. If I am max level I am forced to play max level content. In those theme parks I am essentially guided on a path through content invalidation and gear gating. Thats different then what you’ll find in Gw2.
Think of it this way if you had to get a random player in WoW as they play you’ll see them following a vertical path (were low level content is at the bottom and high level content is at the top) In Gw2 you’ll see them all over the place.

As for games like GTA and Skyrim its more or less the same thing. there isnt a clear delineation of areas / level and you’re forced of doing missions / quests in those areas while at that level. You’re free to go any place on the map and play there. Thats what classifies them as sandboxes really.

Anyhow how does Arenanet seem to want a sandbox game? we dont even have housing yet which would probably the first thing anyone should implement on the road to a real sandbox game!

In WoW there are multiple area’s you can level but indeed area’s are bound to a level.. just as in GW2. GW2 makes it a little more rewarding to come back but it’s not really end-content and in WoW some high level quest also lead you back to low level area’s.

The big difference is if players change the world. Like in a sandbox where you can dig a whole or build a castle.. thats why they name it sandbox. WoW does not give that option and GW2 does not give you that option. The fact that you pretty much pick your own route makes it open world and both WoW and GW2 have that.

“how does Arenanet seem to want a sandbox game?” with the thinks they say. Even before release they said they wanted to give players an impact on the world. We did see that with scaring centaurs away and so a village would be saved. But the effect was very small because a few min later they would attack again. Now they talk about “the living world” and the how people effect it.

In the last interview from Colin he said more of the same. We want players to have an impact on the world. I will literally quote him “… living world and what that means to us, and also what that means in the future for our game. And I think that this release (the next one) is starting to give an idea to where we wanna take the living world content in the future. We really wanna make sure that this stuff has a more permanent impact on the world that it really feels like it makes a difference, that the gameplay players do really changes the content they experience”. And there are more comments Anet made about how they want players to effect the world. Thats something else as choosing they path. Changing the world is more sandbox. I don’t think thats bad, it can be really good but at this moment GW2 is not a sandbox.

Vayne.8563:

Devata.6589:

Vayne.8563:

Devata.6589:

Galen Grey.4709:

Vayne.8563:

Galen Grey.4709:

morrolan.9608:

Devata.6589:

..

….

…..

……

………

…….
Sub-based. The game is based on a subscription. Usually they will ask money for the box and expansions but thats not necessary. They might also have a cash-shop but there is no focus on it. They just put some items in there for some extra income. Game design is not based on getting people to buy something from the cash-shop.
There main income comes from the subscription.

B2P That games focuses on box-sales (online or real boxes) so the original box but also the expansions. They also might have a cash-shop with some fun or useful items in it but game-design it not based on getting people to buy something there. It’s a nice side-income. They focus on box-sales because thats where they get there main income from.

You left out one thing. Everything about subscription games that I’ve seen leads to slowing you down. Lockouts, RNG loot in dungeons so you have to run them umpteen times to get gear that you need to progress, flight paths, long amount of time crafting, long waits to level, that sort of thing.

If F2P games push you toward the cash shop, subscription games push you to play longer and slower.

In my opinion all mmo’s do that. Including GW2 and the F2P games.

Flight paths I think are more to make the game more immersive and show the size of the world. Lets face it.. teleporting all over the map is not the most immersive thing in GW2 and it makes the world much smaller.

About the rng loot in dungeons, usually you don’t ‘need’ that loot to go on, it is a nice to have, many times it are even mini’s or mounts. Sometimes the armor gives you a little bit extra power but not so much that you need it to go on. In GW2 you also need to do multiple runs to get your set from one dungeon (thats a nice to have) they just don’t have rare items drop from dungeons (I mean like the one we did have in MF and AR). In fact it could use some more rare drop from dungeons and mobs. It’s one part of the end-content many people are missing.

I don’t buy it. You can’t compare flight paths with map travel for speed. In WoW when you craft 100 of something it takes six years. You might want to go make a snack. In Guild Wars 2, when you craft multiples of something, it speeds up. Guild Wars 2 is particularly fast to get to max level and max gear, except for ascended trinkets, but that doesn’t lock you out of content. That’s what all the subscription games tend to do. It’s what the gear treadmill is all about.

People complain about the dailies in this game…I guess they never saw the WoW dailies. I honestly don’t see how you can compare.

The craft time in WoW is just based on 1 item takes x time. Don’t tell me they just do that so it takes you longer. GW2 was very smart and reduces that with every try. It’s simply not something Blizzard did think of and I would not be surprised if they would introduce that in a future patch.

“You can’t compare flight paths with map travel for speed.” Not sure what you want to say with this. You did say flight paths where there so everything would take you longer didn’t you? I think they are there because it makes more sense as teleporting all over the map (more immersive) and so you get the feeling of a big world.

“Guild Wars 2 is particularly fast to get to max level and max gear” that part is true however personally I think the leveling is a little boring for alts. Kill x attacking centaur to scare them away, collect x that, find x samples. In other games many of the quest where similar but you could also go for the quest that had more of a story and usually they even gave you more xp. To make the leveling more fun in GW2 that would not be a bad addition. But indeed purely looking at the time it takes less time to get to 80 and some exotic lvl 80 gear (at least for the first char, alt chars tent to go faster then the first char in other MMO’s while in GW2 they all have the same speed).

Galen Grey.4709:

Devata.6589:

….

…….

Not really. As long as you have a cash shop technically its still in your best interest to push people into buying irrespective of what other revenue stream you have. That doesnt mean you’re going to. I am sure you’ll agree with me there are some cash shops that are worst then others. If you compare Atlantica Online with Swtor and Gw2 you can see different methods of pushing people into buying. In Atlantica Online you’re essentially forced to pay and a lot to be competitive. The best mercenaries can be bought for like $70 each. New ones are continually added and without them you stand no chance against someone who has a full set. On top of that there are various blessings you can get that speed up leveling a lot which is also a must to be competitive. These blessings one could claim are like a $30 a month subscription in fact.

Then you also have Swtor. They dont have anything in game thats severely affected by the cash shop but to enjoy the game properly you need to buy quite a few things.

All these games want to drive people to their cash shop, no doubt but just cuase they all drive people to their cash shop are they all equally bad?

In Atlantica online you’re not going to enjoy playing the game without spending a ton of money at high level. In Swtor you’re not going to be happy unless you spend a bit of money to get the missing functionality. In Gw2 you can play happily without ever spending a single cent.

That is not to say you’ll have everything you might desire from Gw2 without spending money but none of what there is negatively effects you experience while in those other examples there are things that negatively effect you experience. Driving people to your cash shop (which I agree everyone does and thats regardless of additional revenue streams) is different then doing everything humanly possible to drive people to your cash shop, thats what I am trying to say.

I don’t know how Rift did it but the fact that another company does something wrong does not make it a good excuse for you to do the same. Personally I think any P2P mmo would fail (the payment method) when released now in the near future or in the last years but Rift did fail with there P2P so it does not look like a good example. We try to find what is good, not what is bad. Maybe the financial people behind Rift tried to squeeze money out of there customers in any possible way. That did work for some time but now they are left with game where many people already left. So they did make some fast money but did lose potential income on the long run. Same can happen to GW2 if they do it wrong.

“As long as you have a cash shop technically its still in your best interest to push people into buying irrespective of what other revenue stream you have.” But thats not true.. yes in the short run but in the long run it might be very bad. Then again, thats exactly where many managers make the mistakes.. The current financial crisis can be blamed for a big part on managers and politicians focusing on the short run in staid of the long run effects of there decisions. So it’s a comment mistake by people who should know better bus obvious don’t. That does not yet make it right.

“I am sure you’ll agree with me there are some cash shops that are worst then others.”
Yeah I am pretty sure I even said that in the post you are commenting on. And GW2 still does not have the worst by far.. But don’t focus on ‘well it’s not the worst’ focus on ‘well it’s not yet the best’.

“In Gw2 you can play happily without ever spending a single cent.` well thats a matter of opinion. I get very frustrated by all the temporary content. When they want my money give me an expansion and I give them my money and I will even go for the CE. If they put a nice item in the game leave it there so I can get it whenever I want to go for it. Making it temporary frustrates me and takes part of the fun away.

Raven Paradox.1860:

You get a player to join GW2 with a single purchase of $50 or whatever. You get a single player to play WoW with 5 purchases of whatever price and loads of time invested to get caught up.

I think Living Story is better than having players being forced to buy expansions (or be completely excluded from a lot of current content) is a better way to go.

I just pray that this game will eventually have Elona and Cantha involved in it. Nightfall was an amazing campaign and Elona was an amazing landscape.

If you look at it that way it would even be better to get people to play on a F2P game with no cast to start at all.

It simply depends on how the person likes to pay. Some prefer more in one go and then have a good quality.

Other don’t mind if a product is trying to keep you buying more but the product itself is cheap / free.

And then there are the people who prefer to pay on a monthly base eventually paying more but usually less in the beginning and also getting a good quality.

So that depends on the person and what they are looking for but in your example those people would more likely go for a F2P game without any one-time payment.

Vol.5241:

Options:
-Convert our gear into consumables
-Allow us the option to change our MF item stat to something else

Option one has the problem that if you only have one set you end up with a naked char you need to get new exotic gear for.

Option 2 has the problem that if you have 2 sets of gear already for that char you don’t need yet another set with differed stats.

Personally I think the best is to allow you to remove runes and then go for your second option but also turning the soul-bound into account-bound so you can use it on alts. That should fix all the problems.

Most stuff I am oke with. Just the “Crafting Taken to 500!” does not make me happy. Where in some other MMO crafting was my main focus on the game in GW2 I did almost no crafting at all. It’s so boring because it only becomes useful at the highest level so you are crafting just to get to 400… well now you will just be crafting to get to 500. Then it becomes useful.

What they should do is implement fun crafts. The best example (because most people know it) is the engineer craft in WoW. But there are many crafts possible. Crafts where you make fun items. Those items will be fun from level one to level 400 / 500. Sometimes you then also need an item you craft with one of the other crafts. In that way crafting is fun from level 1 / max because you are always working to next next fun item in stead of just working to the highest level to then financially create something useful.

I also wonder how they are going to fix the magic-find issue. I have one full exotic set.. so can I pick any other set for that? But I already have a second full exotic set on that char (for when I am not want to use the MF set) so will the set I pick then be account-bound in stead of soul-bound so I can use it on an alt?

Vayne.8563:

Devata.6589:

Galen Grey.4709:

Vayne.8563:

Galen Grey.4709:

morrolan.9608:

Devata.6589:

snip

And after getting a lot of complains about those things expansions are now back on the table. So lets hope they go for that.

The “GW2 model” at this moment resembles more a F2P model then a B2P model. Thats the problem.

Yep I agree with this as well. But it won’t happen, too many design decisions have been embedded in the game funnelling players towards the gem shop and appealing to the ‘whales’. They would have to roll back these as well as get an expansion out.

Can you people be a bit specific… What game design decisions did Gw2 take that steers it towards the F2P in a bad way?

Also @Devata you claim Gw2 when more towards f2p then to b2p… compared to what exactly? there was only one other b2p game that I am aware of and thats Gw1 which you say you never played. So which B2P game did you play prior to Gw2 that you were hoping Gw2 business model would follow exactly?

Technically at this point, TSW is also buy to play.

The thing is, after playing many F2P MMOs, Guild Wars 2 is NOTHING like them. There’s no way to compare GW 2 to SWToR or Lotro or DDO, or Perfect World…it’s just a different system.

I mean in some of those games, content needs to be purchased separately for you to even play. SWToR is almost impossible to play without paying monthly. There’s no p2w in Guild Wars 2, there’s no content locked off by the cash shop.

So I’m not sure of Devata’s point.

………

Of course you get retorted with that because it was a P2P game and like I said just because you buy the game it does not really make it a B2P game. Yeah if you would literally read the words as if it is not more as that it would.

You say the lines are not very clear because most games share similar design decisions. Well let me make it clear.. or at least as how I define it.

F2P focuses on a cash-shop and so make design decisions based on that focus. Trying to get people to buy stuff with cash. If that is locked content, B2W items, items only available for a limited time, locked levels or what more. There focus is the cash-shop and so game design is based on that because thats where they get there main income from.

Sub-based. The game is based on a subscription. Usually they will ask money for the box and expansions but thats not necessary. They might also have a cash-shop but there is no focus on it. They just put some items in there for some extra income. Game design is not based on getting people to buy something from the cash-shop.
There main income comes from the subscription.

B2P That games focuses on box-sales (online or real boxes) so the original box but also the expansions. They also might have a cash-shop with some fun or useful items in it but game-design it not based on getting people to buy something there. It’s a nice side-income. They focus on box-sales because thats where they get there main income from.

You left out one thing. Everything about subscription games that I’ve seen leads to slowing you down. Lockouts, RNG loot in dungeons so you have to run them umpteen times to get gear that you need to progress, flight paths, long amount of time crafting, long waits to level, that sort of thing.

If F2P games push you toward the cash shop, subscription games push you to play longer and slower.

In my opinion all mmo’s do that. Including GW2 and the F2P games.

Flight paths I think are more to make the game more immersive and show the size of the world. Lets face it.. teleporting all over the map is not the most immersive thing in GW2 and it makes the world much smaller.

About the rng loot in dungeons, usually you don’t ‘need’ that loot to go on, it is a nice to have, many times it are even mini’s or mounts. Sometimes the armor gives you a little bit extra power but not so much that you need it to go on. In GW2 you also need to do multiple runs to get your set from one dungeon (thats a nice to have) they just don’t have rare items drop from dungeons (I mean like the one we did have in MF and AR). In fact it could use some more rare drop from dungeons and mobs. It’s one part of the end-content many people are missing.

Galen Grey.4709:

Ikcen.7518:

This game was promised as a sandbox MMO, but it’s not. It’s clean themepark. The difference between both is the interest. In themepark you play for losing time, or some statistics – GW2, in sandbox you play more, cause you change the game world. So many ideas in this game fail cause it’s themepark. Dynamic events fail, great bosses fail, WvW fail and etc. If you play or not, this change nothing in GW2. But Anet made other mistakes /for me/ too. They implement so much PvE solo, which with 4 guilds system, and lack of 1vs1 PvP, makes GW2 even not a real MMO, but some kind of classic single player game put on an online platform. That’s why I think GW2 will fade soon after the new generation MMO’s start.

For starter the game was never promised as a sandbox at all. It was promised as theme park thats has sandbox elements. Personally I feel thats exactly what they delivered.

For starters sandbox are not about changing the world at all. For example GTA is considered a sandbox and you dont change anything in the world there. The actual difference between theme park and sandbox is theme park provide a clear path you have to follow. A main story, Leveling quests from 1 -> max level that go one way etc.. Sandbox is more about the freedom of playing what you want. Gw2 has a little of that. Dynamic events are part of that for example. They dont have a set path you have to follow. They not tied to quest hubs which you go through as you level up like other theme parks. For example in Gw2 there is no problem reaching max level and then doing an event in Wayfarer hills. In typical Theme park that doesnt exist. Once you out level an area than that basically stops existing for that character. In Sandbox games like say Eve online though the whole world is your playground and Gw2 shares those elements.

The whole thing with Sandbox games is how you play the game is something you dictate rather then what the game dictates. However I dont get it, on side you claim to want a sandbox which I would imagine means you like sandbox games thus should be accustomed to playing your way rather then how a game forces you to play. Yet you then make this statement “They implement so much PvE solo”. The only solo play there is are hearts everything else is not really solo play at all. They implemented content that scales from 1 player to 10 players (every event in the world) and content that scales from 5 – 25 players (group events) and also content that scales to 100 people (world bosses)

if you’re playing solo is because you decided to play solo. Sure the game allows you to play solo if you want… thats one of the sandbox element, freedom of choice. But also rewards you if you team up. Team up with a guild member and you’ll get 5x the amount of influence you get solo for your guild. So do an event solo and you get 2 influence. Be in a group with 1 other guild member and you’ll get 10 influence. The event will also scale up with means more enemies which means more loot ergo more reward.

Right a lack of 1v1 makes a game not a real MMO. I mean a Massive Multiplayer Online game that supports 500vs500vs500 battles on 4 maps (so really at one time you can have 6000 players fighting against each other is not really a Massive Multiplayer Online Game cause you cannot have 1vs1 (though you can have that too with custom arenas but never mind….

Maybe it will fade like you’re saying who knows… Right now its probably the 2nd most profitable MMO and it hasnt even launched in the biggest MMO market yet so forgive me if I dont share your opinion on this.

If your definition of sandbox would be correct all mmo’s would be sandbox while there is a clear difference between a sandbox mmo and a non-sandbox mmo. But your example of GTA is a little outdated. When GTA was released it was the first big game of it’s genre . type.. a genre / type that did not really have a name yet. Back then people tried to define it and some people named it sandbox but that was not really accurate other people named it ‘open world’ and it even got it’s own name ‘Grand Theft Auto clone’. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Theft_Auto_clone I think Open World does fit the best. And yes GW2 is also an open word like GTA but they are both not sandbox while looking at what Anet wants they seem to want a sandbox game while there aren’t a sand-box game.

Thats not really an issue for me I can life with both, however I think Anet should if they really want those thinks they say convert it into sandbox or else change what they want.

But this was just to comment on the GTA – sandbox comment.

Galen Grey.4709:

Vayne.8563:

Galen Grey.4709:

morrolan.9608:

Devata.6589:

But there is no need for the cash-shop focus if they go for an expansion-pack focus. The problem was that they suddenly started to focus on the gem-store and had no plants for expansions anymore. That means that they sort of took the model of a F2P game and I agree thats bad. But if they indeed turn back to the expansion pack focus they can drop the gem-store focus and the thinks you dislike about it should also go away.

And after getting a lot of complains about those things expansions are now back on the table. So lets hope they go for that.

The “GW2 model” at this moment resembles more a F2P model then a B2P model. Thats the problem.

Yep I agree with this as well. But it won’t happen, too many design decisions have been embedded in the game funnelling players towards the gem shop and appealing to the ‘whales’. They would have to roll back these as well as get an expansion out.

Can you people be a bit specific… What game design decisions did Gw2 take that steers it towards the F2P in a bad way?

Also @Devata you claim Gw2 when more towards f2p then to b2p… compared to what exactly? there was only one other b2p game that I am aware of and thats Gw1 which you say you never played. So which B2P game did you play prior to Gw2 that you were hoping Gw2 business model would follow exactly?

Technically at this point, TSW is also buy to play.

The thing is, after playing many F2P MMOs, Guild Wars 2 is NOTHING like them. There’s no way to compare GW 2 to SWToR or Lotro or DDO, or Perfect World…it’s just a different system.

I mean in some of those games, content needs to be purchased separately for you to even play. SWToR is almost impossible to play without paying monthly. There’s no p2w in Guild Wars 2, there’s no content locked off by the cash shop.

So I’m not sure of Devata’s point.

True but If I brought up TSW I am sure I will get retorted with TSW didnt start B2P it started P2P.

I personally do not see the clear lines between B2P, F2P and P2P some people suggest there are. Especially now a days all models share the same design decisions and sell the same kind of stuff in their cash shops. For a while having cash shops in P2P was unheard of, now they all have it (or nearly all) like wise things change for the better. A long time ago F2P meant you could buy the best equipment in the game, now thats essentially gone. What I am trying to say is now a days you can never say in B2P and P2P business model you will never find X because thats something only F2P do. Those rules just dont exist. At the end of the day is what you get.

You dont like game design X , thats perfectly fine but dont blame it on the business model cause most likely thats got nothing to do with it. Besides now more or less games are trying to include every type of business model Just look at Swtor or Lotro they’re free to play, buy to play and have a subscription as well. P2P have introduced cash shop or in case of TSW straight out started with one. Lines between what it means to be P2P, B2P and F2P are just no there, definitely not any longer.

Of course you get retorted with that because it was a P2P game and like I said just because you buy the game it does not really make it a B2P game. Yeah if you would literally read the words as if it is not more as that it would.

You say the lines are not very clear because most games share similar design decisions. Well let me make it clear.. or at least as how I define it.

F2P focuses on a cash-shop and so make design decisions based on that focus. Trying to get people to buy stuff with cash. If that is locked content, B2W items, items only available for a limited time, locked levels or what more. There focus is the cash-shop and so game design is based on that because thats where they get there main income from.

Sub-based. The game is based on a subscription. Usually they will ask money for the box and expansions but thats not necessary. They might also have a cash-shop but there is no focus on it. They just put some items in there for some extra income. Game design is not based on getting people to buy something from the cash-shop.
There main income comes from the subscription.

B2P That games focuses on box-sales (online or real boxes) so the original box but also the expansions. They also might have a cash-shop with some fun or useful items in it but game-design it not based on getting people to buy something there. It’s a nice side-income. They focus on box-sales because thats where they get there main income from.

Vayne.8563:

Galen Grey.4709:

morrolan.9608:

Devata.6589:

But there is no need for the cash-shop focus if they go for an expansion-pack focus. The problem was that they suddenly started to focus on the gem-store and had no plants for expansions anymore. That means that they sort of took the model of a F2P game and I agree thats bad. But if they indeed turn back to the expansion pack focus they can drop the gem-store focus and the thinks you dislike about it should also go away.

And after getting a lot of complains about those things expansions are now back on the table. So lets hope they go for that.

The “GW2 model” at this moment resembles more a F2P model then a B2P model. Thats the problem.

Yep I agree with this as well. But it won’t happen, too many design decisions have been embedded in the game funnelling players towards the gem shop and appealing to the ‘whales’. They would have to roll back these as well as get an expansion out.

Can you people be a bit specific… What game design decisions did Gw2 take that steers it towards the F2P in a bad way?

Also @Devata you claim Gw2 when more towards f2p then to b2p… compared to what exactly? there was only one other b2p game that I am aware of and thats Gw1 which you say you never played. So which B2P game did you play prior to Gw2 that you were hoping Gw2 business model would follow exactly?

Technically at this point, TSW is also buy to play.

The thing is, after playing many F2P MMOs, Guild Wars 2 is NOTHING like them. There’s no way to compare GW 2 to SWToR or Lotro or DDO, or Perfect World…it’s just a different system.

I mean in some of those games, content needs to be purchased separately for you to even play. SWToR is almost impossible to play without paying monthly. There’s no p2w in Guild Wars 2, there’s no content locked off by the cash shop.

So I’m not sure of Devata’s point.

All those games also got released as sub-based games. And besides I did not compaire them to those games to I am not sure what point you are referring to.

If you mean that GW2 took a F2P model and your point is.. look at those games, they are F2P and are not like GW2 so GW2 does not use a F2P model??

Many of those games also make different decisions so thats not a valid point. There are multiple ways a F2P model can work. The similarity is that they all make decisions in the game to try and get people ti buy stuff from the cash-shop. Being it P2W items or locked content and so on. GW2 does it for example with temporary content.. what is in a way also locked content as there is no way you would be able to get all those temporary items without buying gems with money.

It’s de focus on the cash-shop that makes it a F2P model.. not the way they focus because there are many ways to do that. Is GW2 now doing it in the worst way possible? No far from.. like you say no P2W and there is also not a level lock or any of that stuff. Then again your examples are games that first had a sub-based model.. thats even worse then F2P imho.

I think Raiderz for example has a similar system as GW2 does at this moment. Bad thing there is that you cant transfer ingame gold into Zen (There gems) but then again, they have other ways to earn free Zen. But I don’t want a F2P system like Raiderz but a B2P system (Like GW1).

Just for the record, just because you need to pay the first game does not yet make it a B2P model. TSW uses a F2P model at this time. But I think we had that discussion before so I will leave it to that.

Galen Grey.4709:

morrolan.9608:

Devata.6589:

But there is no need for the cash-shop focus if they go for an expansion-pack focus. The problem was that they suddenly started to focus on the gem-store and had no plants for expansions anymore. That means that they sort of took the model of a F2P game and I agree thats bad. But if they indeed turn back to the expansion pack focus they can drop the gem-store focus and the thinks you dislike about it should also go away.

And after getting a lot of complains about those things expansions are now back on the table. So lets hope they go for that.

The “GW2 model” at this moment resembles more a F2P model then a B2P model. Thats the problem.

Yep I agree with this as well. But it won’t happen, too many design decisions have been embedded in the game funnelling players towards the gem shop and appealing to the ‘whales’. They would have to roll back these as well as get an expansion out.

Can you people be a bit specific… What game design decisions did Gw2 take that steers it towards the F2P in a bad way?

Also @Devata you claim Gw2 when more towards f2p then to b2p… compared to what exactly? there was only one other b2p game that I am aware of and thats Gw1 which you say you never played. So which B2P game did you play prior to Gw2 that you were hoping Gw2 business model would follow exactly?

I don’t need to have played it to know there payment model. Yeah GW1 was a good example where you buy the game and buy expansions and that was the focus of that game. Besides many games work like that, you mean MMO games. There are not many MMO’s that use a B2P system. They mainly use sub-based or F2P. The fact that GW2 is at this moment the only real B2P MMO (or well, was) was the main reason for my interest in GW2. But to answer that question.. I hope they would follow there GW1 business model.

The design decisions I refer to I also put in my last comment but I will sum them up here for you again.

Temporary content (the temporary events with temporary achievements but also items temporary available in the gem-store), gold-driven system and RNG-boxes.

Galen Grey.4709:

Obsidian.1328:

2 years ago I would have agreed with you Vayne, but seeing how much of an influence the cash-shop can have on non-sub game content…I hate it.

I’ve heard this argument many times before but it was never accompanied by compelling evidence. In fact most arguments I heard can be easily disproved. Thing is its easy to link stuff together and its easy to see a reason behind that link but that doesnt necessarily make it so.

Example A common argument I hear often is games that dont have a subscription limit storage space as to force you to buy extra space. Link being most f2p / b2p games do in fact sell extra storage space and a logical thinking if they sell it, they obviously want people to buy it so they logically limit it in order to force people to buy it.

Is that true however? Aion, Rift, WoW and many other MMOs when they were subscription based also employed a limited inventory that required the players to buy expansion for it using in game money. There is no doubt in such games that limited inventory is a game mechanic and not a way to push people into spending money. Yet just because Gw2 is selling inventory expansion I’ve seen people blame its free to play nature for that. (like Aion, rift and WoW before hand you can also expand the inventory using in game money if you want to) So really is that “limited” inventory the result of no subscription or just one more goal for people to reach?

This can be said for many other things. Low in game income can be blamed on the gems to in game money but it can also be tight control on inflation. XP boosters can be blamed for slow leveling up curve even though clearly it was much harder to level up in P2P MMOs that sold no XP boosters. etc.. etc.. It is easy to blame something one might not like on the cash shop but that doesnt automatically mean that design choice was made in service to the cash shop.

Yeah and some things might be because of the cash-shop and some won’t. Fact is that if they need to get there income from a cash-shop they will try to make people buy from it in one way or the other. They simply need to. Nobody can ever proof what decision is made directly because of that and what is decision is not.. well except if somebody secretly records a meeting where the financial people talk about it and he puts it online. But you do know that if they focus on the gem-store some decisions are based on it.

As you know I blame the temporary content (being it temporary in-game stuff or items only temporary available in the gem-store), gold-driven system (thats something else as low income) and rng-boxes to that. Yeah I think the limited char slots have to do with it but giving you 5 and even giving you the option to buy more with ingame gold seems totally fair to me. No complain there.

You say “In fact most arguments I heard can be easily disproved.” but thats also not true. You mean you can always find some possible reason why they would have made a decision in a way that the gem-store was not the reason. And yeah I can also come up with some theoretical reason why they did some of those thinks I blame to the gem-store focus without it being because of the gem-store focus but that also dot not make it true.

Fact is that if a company needs to get there income from the cash-shop they will try to get people to buy from it and so make ingame decisions to try them to do so. Decisions people notice and some people may not like. B2W is the most infamous example but there are many more that are not B2W.

With a focus on expansions there is no need for a focus on the gem-store and so no need for decisions that infect the game and are there to try to get people to buy gems. So whatever those decisions will be there is no need for them anymore.

morrolan.9608:

Devata.6589:

Archeage and Black desert are both sandbox mmo’s while GW2 is not but sort of tries to be one. They want an ever changing world where people influence the world and so on. They try to do that with the living story but in the end it will not have the possibility’s an sandbox mmo has if it comes to those thinks so if Anet really wants to go on with the “player change the world” what does seem as a good think to me they might want to evolve there game into a sandbox mmo. However then there is still a lot of work to do.

GW2 will never be a sandbox, a sandbox is a world where the content is largely player created. The world of GW2 may change but its all done largely by the developer.

But look at what you are saying (and is 90% accurate) a sandbox is a world where the content is largely player created. (90% because the content is still developed by the developers but the gamers sort of decides where everything is. They put there house somewhere and so on.)

Now look at what Anet says they want. The want the players to have an effect on the world. The players need to ‘change’ the world, the players need to have an effect on the world. Thats what they are going for now. But thats what you have in sandbox games and GW2 is not a sandbox game.

So they have the option to change into a sandbox game or try to be something they aren’t. But if this is really what they want then change it into a sandbox-game.

Because really if I hear Colin talk what he describes is a sandbox game. Players change the world.

See this: http://www.twitch.tv/guildwars2/c/2585362

Ronah.2869:

darkace.8925:

Ronah.2869:

You forgot the bi-weekly updates. People have things to do and a new zone will have a story that has driven you there. The new zone won’t be filled up with hearts quests like it would be if there was a full expansion. Remember, this game didn’t have hearts in the original script, they introduced them after because people were disoriented on what to do.

Bi-weekly updates don’t guarantee new zones will be implemented twice a month. And even if they are, people are still going to devour the zones like a plague of locusts in a field of crops and then complain that there’s nothing to do or updates are too slow.

And personally, I’d be very disappointed if the new zones (whenever they’re added) don’t have renown hearts, points of interest, vistas, and all the other trappings that the existing zones already have.

Besides, the cash shop as they do it now is very profitable: it is not a pay to win and the things sold in there are purely optional, they don’t increase your effectiveness in the game, only your looks
So why should they force a paid expansion onto people who are happy with the game as it is and possibly they won’t buy it when have it all free for all and supported by the cosmetics?

Just think about WoW. Do you see any new player buying the game and all expansions at once? I don’t think so. So, a new player buys GW2 from the shop in some years. What will have buy? One game of 60USD that instead of 17Gb download as we have now, he will have 28Gb. What do you think this buyer will feel when he will read: you need to buy the game plus the 2 expansions: 60USD + 40 USD + 40 USD.
I am sure hew will say “i’ll pass”

The expansion is needed because else there is the need for the gem-store focus. Yeah the gem-store might be profitable but that does not mean it is good for the game. And just because it is not B2W does not yet make it good. It’s the gem-store focus that driven the temporary content that many people hated so much. Now they promise to not do that anymore but they still need to make many.. so do they try to get people to buy gems (and so come up with tricks to get them to do that, being it B2W items or temporary content).

They don’t force people to buy the expansion. The expansion will simply give access to the new stuff.

About WoW., yeah what you do is that when releasing a new expansion the older one become cheaper and with the 3th expansion you make the older one cheaper again and with the 3th expansion the 1 expansion will be free. So in total there is the game you buy and 3 expansion where 2 are cheap. The price for the game itself has already been lowered so it will be more 40, 30, 40 or maximum 40, 20, 30, 40. And then you have a game with 3 or more expansions and no cash-shop focus and there is no need to buy them all at once.

morrolan.9608:

Obsidian.1328:

2 years ago I would have agreed with you Vayne, but seeing how much of an influence the cash-shop can have on non-sub game content…I hate it. That’s great if you would rather have free, watered-down content than fork over 20 bucks a month, but I would rather pay for the good stuff. And if you think this stuff we have now is “good” well I can’t argue personal taste I guess, it’s beyond me though.

Spot on this is exactly why I have come to dislike the GW2 model.

But there is no need for the cash-shop focus if they go for an expansion-pack focus. The problem was that they suddenly started to focus on the gem-store and had no plants for expansions anymore. That means that they sort of took the model of a F2P game and I agree thats bad. But if they indeed turn back to the expansion pack focus they can drop the gem-store focus and the thinks you dislike about it should also go away.

And after getting a lot of complains about those things expansions are now back on the table. So lets hope they go for that.

The “GW2 model” at this moment resembles more a F2P model then a B2P model. Thats the problem.

LanfearShadowflame.3189:

Devata.6589:

I am not sure what you are trying to prove to me as I did say they were on a slippery slope but I did not say they where doomed. And for sure people will stay playing but there is a difference between a success and people stay playing it and a total failure.

I can not name one sub-based game and I did not expect one as I am saying that about sub-based games for many years now. But the financial people behind those games believed that could work.

I think there are some F2P games that did reach there potential in the beginning like League of Legends (2009). But I was also not talking about reaching full potential. Once again there is also a difference between a game that reached it’s full potential and a game where you can say “it has a lot of potential” where I think the last one is how you hear many people (those positive and those negative about GW2) talk about GW2. You need to use that potential (not finalized the full potential) before other games might come and take your playerbase away because if those games do thinks better it will be a big drawback. And yes still people will play it but there is a difference between a success and ‘people play it’.

As MMO you need to bound people to you and normally you have a pretty short time for that. I have the idea the GW2 has a problem bounding people to them-self.. I know this from what I see in the guild.. many people simply stop playing. And there will also be people that sit for the ride until another ‘better’ ride comes along while GW2 should have those people already bound to them.

Or to say it different, they do not yet have a very loyal playerbase… loyal does not mean having some fanboy’s of course. I think Anet does have it’s fair share of those.

Lol, silly me, I took out the line where I disagreed about them being on a slippery slope, which was sort of where the debate was going.

Any venture that maintains a profit, is technically considered a success. So even if GW2 were to become only a niche game with only 500k people playing, as long as it continued to turn a profit, it would still be a ‘success.’ Not a roaring success, sure, but there really aren’t a lot of those anymore once the excitement wears off and the rose colored glasses get removed.

In regards to potential, only when a game reaches its full potential (and since you used the phrase ‘reach its potential’ the full part is implied) can you ever stop saying ‘it has potential’ whether it be a lot or a little, and of course how much potential is almost always going to be subjective. While I’ve never played LoL, from my understanding is that isn’t quite the same thing as what we’re looking at here, but I’m not going to argue one way or the other regarding it.

Customer loyalty is important to almost all companies. Yes, generally you have a relatively small time frame to grab that customer’s attention, gain their trust, and then bind them to you; however, I don’t think Anet has as much of an issue as you, and many others, seem to think. But, I could be wrong. Truthfully, only time will tell.

No, for a businesses something is a success if it fulfills or exceeds the financial goals.

To be exact I even said ‘finalized the potential’ but I also said I was talking about how people talk about it. So how many people now still talk about it as it has potential while they don’t talk about all the finalized potential.

I also never played LoL and indeed it’s not exactly the same but all MMO’s from the last years where sub-based and I can’t defend those as I don’t believe in that payment model. And those games kinda proved me right as they all had to stop being sub-based. But then let me state it differed. The last one big successful MMO there was, WoW for sure managed to make there imprint and gain the community’s loyalty and attention within a year.

With your last sentence you seem to again imply I am saying GW2 will die. But I am not. If I did I would not bother coming to this forum. In the latest interview Colin promised that only the story’s will be temporary while additions / other content will be permanent and he also said expansions are on the table (before it was said they wanted to do anything with the living story). That means that they are listening so there is for sure a good possibility they will go the right way. NCsoft also pretty much gave them the thumps up for an expansion.

But yeah it’s a slippery slope because they can still turn the wrong way.

Appoh.2875:

Devata.6589:

Appoh.2875:

An expansion would do this game so much good. also if they want money ADD MORE TO MERCHANDISE STORE! i’ve wanted one of those fuzzy quaggan hats since it was in the gem store. add more stuff for R/L plox

If you want an expansion don’t buy gems because then they will focus on the gem-store and not on the expansion. Sadly thats where we at.

Expansions are back on the table (see the latest interview with Colin http://www.twitch.tv/guildwars2/c/2585362 ) but it’s not 100% sure yet.

So if you really want expansions you maybe better transfer gold to gems to get something from the gem-store and support them some extra with the expansion by buying the collector edition.

The merchandise store is on there website… you get the plush charr books etc. I want more real life stuff. do you understand now?

Yeah but I was not referring to your comment about the merchandise store but about the gem-store. “i’ve wanted one of those fuzzy quaggan hats since it was in the gem store.” But you mean you mean you want a real life version. That wasn’t really clear to me from your first post. I thought you where basically talking about both.

Ronah.2869:

Ikcen.7518:

GW2 is doomed to failure when games as Archeage and Black desert come online. This game has too much imbalances, bugs, and fundamental problems to be competitive to real mmos. So I’m not surprised it will have no expansions. GW2 is good for losing time, nothing more. Sad that other companies decided to follow GW2 model. I’m talking about Neverwinter and Elder Scrolls. These two, like GW2, are online not mmo games – some new genre

Archage and Black Desert? LOL, Still fanboys of kill 10/10 MMOs with loot steal and quest grief-ing? Or warrior type girls fighting monsters wearing high heals shoes?
No wonder GW2 is still a twilight zone for you.

Lol, no he is more a fanboy of the Smash 150 Pinatas and eat 250 Zhaitaffy or to give 15 cows foot or to give 20 plants water or to collect 30 samples of something and warrior type (almost naked) girls fighting monsters wearing pinks quaggan backpacks.

Really don’t act like if GW2 is so different on those aspects. The hearth and event type of quest usually make them even more superficial where some traditional quest could give a more detailed story and let you really get to know some of the NPC’s. I would welcome some traditional quest in an example.. of course if they are more of a story then the examples you gave. (To bring is back to the subject of the the thread)

Vayne.8563:

Nick.6972:

As good as 4 Warriors + Mesmer?

You could do any dungeon with a gimmicky team consisting of 5 Perma Stealth Thieves too.

What does as good as mean? Do you mean you get better rewards? More achievement points?

Better to me means more fun. If you can run that dungeon easy as pie with a team in 25 minutes and there’s no challenge to it, no thanks. That wouldn’t entertain me at all.

You’re welcome to do that if you want to. But that doesn’t make rangers terrible in dungeons.

I’ve often found in life that the easy way to do something is seldom the best way to do it.

Faster is what he talks about. And yes you can use any group but it would be best if there where not some professions that are ‘much’ better (faster) in general then other professions. It’s no problem if in dungeon x guardians and warriors are in favorite while in dungeon y rangers and thief’s are and in dungeons z you need a team of 5 differed professions.

But in reality to do a dungeon easy / fast a team is many warrior and guardian with full berserker and that should simply not be the case. I think that is his point and lets not act as if those professions are not the most wanted for dungeons because then you are simply closing your eye’s for the facts.

Anyway, I only reacted on the fact that somebody wanted the AR dungeon to be modified ‘dumbed down’ because according to him you could not really do it with medium armor and I disagree with that. So lets not go on to a new subject from that. It was not my intention to change the thread into what professions are better or worse, there are other threads about that.

Chopps.5047:

Devata.6589:

Chopps.5047:

Anet, for the love of Dwyana, please think about medium armor professions when reworking AR. Thank you.

Why rework it? It was fun. Please do not rework it.
I got all the achievements in AR with a ranger.. thats medium armor. Just the 15 min achievement was a little hard. You basically need to have 2 guardians and one warrior with you But all the rest was no problem.

2200 hours on ranger here and no I don’t want more discrimination in high level fractals from people whining that rangers suck on AR because pet’s die in aoe.

It’s about perception. I beat AR too and got all the achieves with ranger. I’m not happy with it, sorry my opinion differs from yours. Maybe you haven’t been around as long as me to see the hate train in action.

Oh, and for the record, you are proving the hate train. “You only need some guards and a warrior blah blah blah”. Dude. We got AR unfriendly skies with 3 rangers in the party (Durzlla, Hoppr, and myself).

It’s perception.

Well my comment was only about the fact that the dungeon was not possible for medium armor.

I do think the pets are kinda useless / bad overall and in AR especially in the laser part but thats has more to do with the pet AI not with AR where the comment was about.

And yes you could do it with multiple rangers but 2 guardians and 1 warrior was simply the easiest combination and that is a problem that could use some work imho.

They took away the holy trinity but did not really make a new system for it. It would be nice if every profession really has it’s own role.

And I have been here since pre-release where the ranger has always been my main.

I would not like to see some nerved version of AR. The fact that is was not a very easy dungeon made it fun. There are plenty easy dungeons available.

LanfearShadowflame.3189:

Devata.6589:

…..

There have been doom sayers for this game since practically the moment it launched. There are for every game. I gave but one example. How many people said WoW would fail when it first came out? (Answer: A kitten of a lot) It really holds no water. People say SWTOR is dead/doomed/dying, and while yes they went free to play, they’re still puffing along. Sure, they don’t have 8 billion subscriptions or a million active players, but really, they don’t have to. Eve sure as heck don’t. It’s got what half a million players, less? And its rolling along quite solidly.

Trying something different does not [necessarily] doom the venture to failure. Living story has not doomed GW2 to failure. Heck, ascended and its uproar didn’t even ‘doom them to failure’ and boy did we see a lot of apparently clairvoyant people on here at that point. [Side note, anyone that has been paying attention since the initial implementation of LS, has heard them tell us repeatedly that things would start coming faster, we would have more perm content, etc, they just needed to work out the kinks. And now, tada, they are telling us to start expecting it with the upcoming updates. Imagine that.]

Are they going to have competition? Sure, its expected. Is it going to suddenly put them out of business? I highly doubt it. This is like saying that Burger King put McDonalds out of business by opening up (which is obviously didn’t). Competition is healthy. Will they lose players to these other games? Sure. Will some of them come back for any number of reasons that I’m not going to bother listing? Sure. Just like people still go back to play GW1. Or people opt to eat as McDonalds instead of BK.

sigh Name me one (relatively recent) MMO that achieved its potential in its first year? Fully and completely, with an expansion, complete polish, no bugs, etc. While I admittedly haven’t played that many MMOs, I can’t think of one. Still, I’d be perfectly happy to be proven wrong.

I am not sure what you are trying to prove to me as I did say they were on a slippery slope but I did not say they where doomed. And for sure people will stay playing but there is a difference between a success and people stay playing it and a total failure.

I can not name one sub-based game and I did not expect one as I am saying that about sub-based games for many years now. But the financial people behind those games believed that could work.

I think there are some F2P games that did reach there potential in the beginning like League of Legends (2009). But I was also not talking about reaching full potential. Once again there is also a difference between a game that reached it’s full potential and a game where you can say “it has a lot of potential” where I think the last one is how you hear many people (those positive and those negative about GW2) talk about GW2. You need to use that potential (not finalized the full potential) before other games might come and take your playerbase away because if those games do thinks better it will be a big drawback. And yes still people will play it but there is a difference between a success and ‘people play it’.

As MMO you need to bound people to you and normally you have a pretty short time for that. I have the idea the GW2 has a problem bounding people to them-self.. I know this from what I see in the guild.. many people simply stop playing. And there will also be people that sit for the ride until another ‘better’ ride comes along while GW2 should have those people already bound to them.

Or to say it different, they do not yet have a very loyal playerbase… loyal does not mean having some fanboy’s of course. I think Anet does have it’s fair share of those.

Xenon.4537:

Krosslite.1950:

Vayne.8563:

There are two points I’d like to make, regarding recent posts in this thread.

1. The reason, in my opinion, temporary content is temporary..particularly things like dungeons, is because after a month or two, those dungeons would take traffic away from everything else. Anet wants people in the open world, not in a handful of dungeons. People who like dungeons and come from other games were dungeons are central don’t get this at all. Dungeons aren’t really central in this game. Anet wants the world to be bigger than the dungeons. Leaving the dungeons in divides the playerbase. They saw this with fractals. Everyone complains there are less people in the world. Right. Because five people at a time in a dungeon means less people in the open world.

2. People say subscription games are better because when a game uses the cash shop to fund itself, everything becomes about the cash shop…and to a degree that’s true. What those same people aren’t saying is that when a game is a subscription everything about the game is put in there to get people to play LONGER. Everything about the game is slower. You level slower. You have dungeon/raid lockouts. You have very slow crafting. You have flight paths. You have no instant travel. You may or may not like any of those things, but the whole idea is, the longer they can keep you playing, the happier you are.

I’ve played many subscription games over the years and I don’t like them. By the same token I’ve played many free to play games and I don’t necessarily like them. Lotro cost me a small fortune because much of the content had to be paid for. SWToR can’t really be played, unless you pay. This feels like a lie to me.

So far at least, I can play Guild Wars 2 without paying a fortune in the cash shop and I don’t have those annoying lockouts or things that really slow me down. I can just play the entire game.

It’s a matter of personal taste, but I’ll never play a subscription game again, because subscription games are designed to slow you down….far more than a game like Guild Wars 2 is.

You get a +1 from me bro and totally agree.

I think it is due to the fact that we have been in MMOs longer then most posting here

Only a +1 for him? I give him a +2.

Totally agree. I don’t like it when a game’s designed is held back by the ball and chain of it’s subscription fee OR cash shop.

In my ideal game design environment, there would be no subscriptions or micro transactions. It would be like Skyrim or Bioshock. All the money would have to be made on the initial package and nothing else (except for traditional expansions), which would force the developer to make absolutely sure that the initial package was extremely good. Think about it this way: the developer is a business company like any other. They have their eye on the money. Where’s the money? In WoW its in the subscription, so they design around maximizing the profits from subscriptions. In GW2 it’s in the cash shop. So logically they would want to focus there (Are they doing that? That’s another argument), and in Bioshock the money is in the initial box, so the focus goes to the game itself.

Not sure how you can give +points for it.

He is explaining why sub-based games are not good. Well I do not think many people in here disagree. The topic is about expansions, not about subscription. Yeah I agree sub-based is bad but thats not the issue here.

And for the reason why hey have temporary content.. I did see him already give many reasons changing it all the time. If people like to do dungeons let them. If you take out what they like they might also leave the game and then you also don’t see them somewhere else.

Beside in another thread he said people would not do the temporary stuff anymore anyway or would be not smart enough to find it (he said people don’t like to think so you should just give them multiple options) what go’s directly against what he is saying now.

Yeah when you keep the dungeons in some people will do that in stead of doing the new stuff that they can do at another time.. but that will only mean there are a few people less in that area. New stuff will still have many people because people check out new stuff. it’s that easy. And many parts of the world will stay empty anyway.

LanfearShadowflame.3189:

Ikcen.7518:

GW2 is doomed to failure when games as Archeage and Black desert come online. This game has too much imbalances, bugs, and fundamental problems to be competitive to real mmos. So I’m not surprised it will have no expansions. GW2 is good for losing time, nothing more. Sad that other companies decided to follow GW2 model. I’m talking about Neverwinter and Elder Scrolls. These two, like GW2, are online not mmo games – some new genre

Hmmm…I remember comments very similar to this in regards to GW1 too. No subscription can’t last, blah blah. Sure, it was a niche game, but its still going.

chuckle ‘doomed to failure’ yeah yeah, please share whatever you’re smoking.

Still thats a big difference. There are some people who feel very strong about subscription-based games and company’s like to listen to them because they see money but in the end there simply aren’t enough people who are still willing to pay monthly and are willing to switch to a new game.

I did say exactly the same the other way around in the bet-forums of Chronicles of Spellborn and Rift. I said, subscription based mmo’s do not work anymore. Eventually you need to go F2P and then you already lost a big playerbase.

CoS does not exist anymore and Rift has indeed moved to F2P.

I do not agree with Ikcen that they are doomed. Colins last interview gave some hope as he promised that only the story would be temporary but all the upgrade / content would be permanent. So doomed they are not but they are for sure on a slippery slope. If one of the big releases that will come soon are going B2P as well and do promise a focus on expansion in stead of there cash-shop and GW2 would not have solved there biggest problems by then it could indeed go bad for GW2. But they still have some time to handle there issue’s. It still has a lot of potential. However after almost a year you might expect you don’t still need to say it has potential but that they finalized the potential they have.

Ikcen.7518:

GW2 is doomed to failure when games as Archeage and Black desert come online. This game has too much imbalances, bugs, and fundamental problems to be competitive to real mmos. So I’m not surprised it will have no expansions. GW2 is good for losing time, nothing more. Sad that other companies decided to follow GW2 model. I’m talking about Neverwinter and Elder Scrolls. These two, like GW2, are online not mmo games – some new genre

Archeage and Black desert are both sandbox mmo’s while GW2 is not but sort of tries to be one. They want an ever changing world where people influence the world and so on. They try to do that with the living story but in the end it will not have the possibility’s an sandbox mmo has if it comes to those thinks so if Anet really wants to go on with the “player change the world” what does seem as a good think to me they might want to evolve there game into a sandbox mmo. However then there is still a lot of work to do.

Have a look on this page:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/suggestions/Guild-System-Improvements/page/4#post2195992

That thread has been running for 9 months. I would suggest posting your idea’s about the guild management system there to keep everything together.

At page 4 there is a list of all suggestions / missions guild features that I could found in the threads.

Chopps.5047:

Anet, for the love of Dwyana, please think about medium armor professions when reworking AR. Thank you.

Why rework it? It was fun. Please do not rework it.
I got all the achievements in AR with a ranger.. thats medium armor. Just the 15 min achievement was a little hard. You basically need to have 2 guardians and one warrior with you But all the rest was no problem.

Wolfheart.1938:

Allow me to disagree: what made the dungeons fun (for me) were the dungeons themselves, not their rewards or their lenght. The dungeons would’ve been the same to me if they gave no jetpack/monocle. But you are entitled to your opinion, of course.

Now you should definitely check out the recent livestream with Colin Johanson because if I recall correctly it also addresses the issue of limited-time items and he says both the jetpack and the monocle are NOT coming back. But don’t quote me on that as I’m not 100% sure.

If anything, I see them adding slightly reworked versions of the dungeons as fractals with normalized rewards and scalable difficulty. But that’s just me and we don’t know much about what they have in store for FotM.

I did see the livestream and was very carefully watching what he was saying and he did say that in the future the story would be temporary but all upgrades / additions to the world would stay. Items / rewards are not ‘the story’ but additions so they should stay in the future.

Of course thats no guarantee for the jetpack/monocle because the were all from before this interview while Colin was taking about upcoming patches (so basically starting next week). But he also did no say they would not come back.

What you most likely remember is a question. WoodenPotatoes also complained about the temporary content but he is a story junky so he was mainly talking about the story, he said he would not mind if rewards would be temporary. But thats of course the problem with temp content.. if you like story’s you miss the story, if you like achivements you miss achivements and if you like items you miss items. In this interview one of the questions was pretty much literally what WoodenPotatoes said (most likely the asker got that from WP). But when asked Colin did repaid that the story would go away but you would still be able to read / see it while all the other stuff would be permanent.

Morrigan.2809:

Devata.6589:

Temporary content is bad by itself. This is just one example but we did see this with multiple temporary content. Not only this one.

Anet had to stop they temporary content stuff, but it comes out of a gem-store focus. Make temporary content and get so pressure people to play and buy gems.

If you really want this to stop don’t buy gems (and buy the expansion if available), if you really like temporary content buy gems (and don;t buy an expansion).. And be aware, I am talking about temporary content, not regular patches.. people seem to mix those two up a lot on the forums.

You say this in every thread- we get it-

Thats good.

alamore.1974:

The holy trinity is a relic if the past. All it does is restric class builds and makes games simple. Make players predictable. All aroind borning
O look a rouge glass cannon
Here come a cleric healer.
Ect… There is no thinking there.

In gw2 ypu can have one class play mutiple rules. Support .tank .dps.

Mostpeople that still insist that the holy trininty is still ‘gawd’ are avid WoW players who prefear simple and basic games. And they will nvr change there minds abput how WoW is still gawd of all mmos

I did not touch the the holy trinity but I do have an opinion about that as well (no surprise there). The idea of taking away the holy trininty is not bad in my opinion. I don’t think the holy trininty is bad but trying something else is also not bad.

However it worked out wrong. The fact is that many matches require less tactics and many people now only want 2 or professions for there run (Guardian and Warrior mainly) because the rest slows them down.

Personally I would love to have seen that when taking the holy trininty away they would make sure that all professions where still very useful and all had there own necessary task. So you need for example at least 4 (maybe even 5) different classes and different builds to successfully complete a dungeon or complete a mission where every profession had it’s own task.

I do understand thats hard to do but it’s doable and would imho be much more fun. Done correctly it could be more fun then the holy trininty but as it is now I think the holy trininty is better because it requires more tactics and people more have there own task.

Ronah.2869:

I dont want an expansion either. I’d rather see new zones, races, weapons, etc introduced with this living story mechanic. It is much worth it then a regular expansion because keeps people busy ever 2 weeks and not like rushers finishing the whole map and getting the legendary in 2 months and then complaining there is no endgame

You are defending 2 week patches, not temporary content plus you can have regular patches including expansions. But with the expansions the need for temporary content is gone. No need to try and pressure people to buy gems and so on.

Complains about end-content stay, the 2 weeks content are not considered end-content by many people and while we already have it I still here people complaining about it So that will not take those complains away.

A thing I did not mention before because I don’t have the numbers but I am pretty sure that all temporary content gets people burned out faster. I think that would even be the case when it was not temporary but with temporary even more because they have more pressure to do it now. And if they then leave because they are burned out it’s less likely they come back because they missed a lot of content.

Anyway, good that you came here for that discussion. The other thread you placed it was not so good for that.

Wolfheart.1938:

@ DoctorOverlord
I’m not against people posting opinions different from mine. I don’t even know why would you address me when you seem to understand that my issue is not with a differing opinion but with spreading poison in every single thread you can.

@Devata
Problem is if some fractals take a lot more than others people will inevitably skip them, which makes the whole point of adding more fractals moot. Having each fractal take a similar amount of time/effort would be ideal imo.

Yeah but they also said they work on the fractals itself. Personally I loved MF and AR but I would not like them as one of the fractals that I might come up against. I like them as they where with the length that they had and the rewards that they gave. All of that makes them the goof dungeons they are.

I hope but also think that the change to fractals means that there will be some changes to it so you can simply select a moment in history and replay that. Now you can say, but why would you then pick MF if the other dungeons are faster. Because MF is fun, because you get and are able to get the jet back-pack or the mini.

Or AF because it’s fun and can give you the eye-skin (not sure what the name was) and 1 gold. So depending on what you want you pick one of the dungeons you like and ‘fractals’ is nothing more as a time-machine.

We will see but thats what I hope for and because they say they are working on the fractals itself and it’s the only real way they can really get AR and MF in there I think thats the way they will do it.

Flubble.8093:

i bought a kite, then realised i got a free kite (the same kite) in my mail :’(

so i turned one into a guild kite so it wasn’t all bad lol

thanks a-net!

Kite of shame. Thats a cool name for it. It only worked for when they where not yet available in the gem-store but still. I do like the kite’s (sun one) btw. Nothing wrong with that, and if not temporary also a nice addition to the gem-store.

According to Colin’s last interview only the story’s will be temporary while the rest will be permanent so we will see. And expansions are back on the table. Thats also good news.

Aevic.9675:

Stopped playing after Dragon Bash again for the 3rd time now.

-No permanent content = bad I feel alienated and left out because I can’t see all the content or have any idea what’s been happening

-Gear is still a real issue in this game for me. I’ve been stuck with rares for a while and getting a group to go farm exotics is a hassle for me for when I play. Spamming LFG XXX dungeon all night brings me nothing which brings me to another issue

-No LFG tool still? I might consider playing again if more convienence was added to this game. Like I said it still feels like a hassle to have or feel like you are on level with everyone else if you only play casually like I do.

First one is just a fact but according to Collin’s last interview the content will be permanent only the story will be temporary but still viewable. If it’s really like thats, thats great.

Exotic gear cost about 3 gold per item. Thats doable I think.

LFG is also coming soon. They are already testing it in there internal beta servers.

Wolfheart.1938:

Nuka Cola.8520:

Is this supposed to be a good news? No one liked them… and i can assure you that for lev40+ EVERYONE will be skipping these two. So this is just two additional fractals everyone will skip like they skip dredge/shaman/cliffside. GG.

Can you stop crapping on other people’s fun? Move on already and leave this forum. I enjoyed both dungeons and they’re probably gonna be reduced in lenght to be a fractal.

I also liked them but then you should not want them to be reduced in length. They said they are going to change the fractals so it’s possible you can select what and how many fractals you do where some fractals might not even work with agony (as that should not be in MF) and have other rewards. The fractals has always been some sort of time-machine. The Asura have simply perfected there technique so you can now pick to what event in time you like to go. Thats possible.

Quick Mouse.7635:

Devata.6589:

Just to get an idea.. most console games cost about 60 dollar so thats 3000 / 60 = 50. 365 / 7,5 days. And then I forgot about the fact that you payed for the GW2, you most likely did buy gems and GW2 is not a year old. But still you own them 3000 dollar. Hmm you have pretty low expectations of games if you think 60 dollars for a game should pay you less then 7,5 days of play-time.

That’s some fuzzy math you got there lol. I still can’t figure out how you got 7.5 days lol.
Edit: I think you’re just mad you didn’t get a kite lol

I presumed GW2 already existed for a year.. It’s less but that would only make the number (7,5) smaller. You say you own Anet 3000 dollar as you compare it to your console game sales / time spend. Most console games sell for about 60 dollar. So I divide 3000 by 60 thats 50 console-games you can buy for that 3000 dollar. Now one year (as if GW2 already exist for one year) has 365 days. So I divide 365 days by 50 to see how much time you expect to get from one game. Thats 7,3 days to be exact. Rounded to 7,5 day’s for one console-game.

Hope to have answered your question and else you can PM me.

@ Your edit: No, check this https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Too-Much-Temporary-Content-Can-Only-Harm-GW2/page/12#post2425899 or this https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/GW2-unlikely-to-get-expansions-Interview/page/11#post2426040 thread. Then you see I am already talking about the gem-store focus for much longer. Nice try in ending a argument with a useless accusation. You see that a lot in on-line discussions when people don’t have a valid argument against it. But in this case there is a valid one.. Just say.. Oow I love a gem-store focus. I love how they pressure people to play and buy gems because I buy them anyway.. And then we agree to disagree on that part. You see, very easy.

@Ronah
You can still have regular patches and have those work up to an expansion. Then you have what you want but with an expansion and so no need for a gem-store focus.

Appoh.2875:

An expansion would do this game so much good. also if they want money ADD MORE TO MERCHANDISE STORE! i’ve wanted one of those fuzzy quaggan hats since it was in the gem store. add more stuff for R/L plox

If you want an expansion don’t buy gems because then they will focus on the gem-store and not on the expansion. Sadly thats where we at.

Expansions are back on the table (see the latest interview with Colin http://www.twitch.tv/guildwars2/c/2585362 ) but it’s not 100% sure yet.

So if you really want expansions you maybe better transfer gold to gems to get something from the gem-store and support them some extra with the expansion by buying the collector edition.

Galen Grey.4709:

Devata.6589:

No really not as thats not what I am saying. I am not comparing it to an sub-scription based game and I also don’t play them. I am comparing B2P to F2P.

Whats bad about F2P.. or better whats bad about cash-shop focus. Well in the case of GW2 thats the temporary content. I don’t like temporary content thats there to pressure people to play and buy gems. I prefer a B2P game where I buy the game and expansions and then have always access to all the aspects of the game based on the fact that I did buy the game and the expansion. No temporary stuff to try and get me to play / buy gems. No currency-driven system because they want me to buy gems and convert it to gold in stead of farming mats. No game where decisions ingame are based on the question “how do we get people to buy gems” in stead of “how do we get the game to be so good people will also buy the expansions”.

You might not have a problem with gem-store focus, I do.

And you don’t have to compare it to an sub-based game as this thread is about the other option.. expansion based / B2P.

You know how many assumptions you’re doing here? For starters you say that you choose b2p because you buy the game and then get access to everything. That was never promised by anyone, not Gw2, not Gw1 not any other B2P game I am aware off. In fact I am not aware of any B2P game that doesnt charge for extras.

The currency driven system is a good thing. It means you can play any content of the game you want and still get the stuff you want. Gw1 did that too. Just cause you can use gems as a short cut it doesnt mean the game is forcing you to buy gems. If Gw1 had RMT you’d have felt the same. Plenty of stuff in that game that was a nightmare to farm. Diamonds, Some of the hero armor, Sapphires, etc.. the Guild wars series was always about getting the most powerful stuff easily but then the nice cosmetic stuff required dedication.

As discussed in other threads I concede that putting stuff for a short period of time on trade post can in some cases make you pay more. But your other arguments here are pure speculation. Just cause you’re offered a short cut it doesnt mean you’re being forced to take it. And most certainly B2P itself is not in it self any sort of guarantee of how the game will grow in the future in the sense of what direction devs are going to take.

GW1 became big as being B2P where indeed expansion where the focus. No temporary stuff.

Still farming for currency seems to be more boring and help to get people to transfer gems to gold. I did not say they force people to buy anything, I said they pressured. Thats something else. So indeed they do not force you.. thats also why I did not say that. That does not mean currency’s are bad but to much of it is bad. For example, getting tokens from a dungeon to get that dungeon-set is fine. But at the same time also put a rare drop in it.. like they did in MF or AR. Do the same with some mobs. Give a few mobs that are a lot of (in one place) a rare mini of them-self as drop. Those who like it can farm it other people don’t. Make mats farmable if you really want to farm it. Now for many things currency’s are the only or at least the most viable options.
I never played GW1 but if it’s one item like a weapon, a mini a skin it’s fine if it’s a nightmare to farm, as long as it’s farmable.. so there are mobs or whatever in an area where people can run around and kill them.. For mats.. so stuff you need a lot of, farming should be less hard because the difficulty there is getting the number you need.

And for the last part your again saying I make assumption because I say it forces you to.. no I did not, I said it pressures. Thats really something else.

You are correct that you never can be sure in what direction a game might go. But thats why I am here. Trying to prevent if from going in the wrong direction.

Krosslite.1950:

Devata.6589:

Some big news.. if they keep there word.

Collin said:
“They will permanently upgrade the game and the world so everybody can experience that. The Story will go away but the change will last forever.”

This it not literally his words but it is literally what he was saying.

Have a look here: http://www.twitch.tv/guildwars2/c/2585362 it’s a 3 minutes.

So the story will go away but the changes and upgrades to the game will stay. Items, rewards, dungeons are for sure not ‘the story’ but are part of the upgrades / changes so they will stay. Thats great news.

Achievements are still a little in the dark. They will stay but can still be linked to the items (with exception of those that give a reward as thats part of the changes / upgrades). So with a little bid of luck they will also all be linked to the non-temporary stuff.

I still need to see it first but I hope they keep there promises. This would be great news for GW2.

They also said the MF and AR are coming back in the fractals. I do hope they will not come back as part of a the dungeons in fractals like they are now where it’s just one of the 3 / 4 dungeons, and I also hope they still have the same rewards because else it would still not be very good but they also said they would change fractals so it’s very possible that you can simply select what fractal you like to do and are not required to do 3 or 4 of them. So lets see about that.

And what gave me more trust in this statement is that they also seem to backing up to the idea of no expansion.. Where they first said they wanted to do it with the living story now it is still “undecided”.

So lets hope they decide to go for expansions. Then they can also keep there promise on only having the story itself temporary.

this is the point many of us have been stating all along in this thread Devata

What is? That Anet would maybe change there mind / tactic? I never disagreed on that. But they will not change it when people don’t speak up.

Some big news.. if they keep there word.

Collin said:
“They will permanently upgrade the game and the world so everybody can experience that. The Story will go away but the change will last forever.”

This it not literally his words but it is literally what he was saying.

Have a look here: http://www.twitch.tv/guildwars2/c/2585362 it’s a 3 minutes.

So the story will go away but the changes and upgrades to the game will stay. Items, rewards, dungeons are for sure not ‘the story’ but are part of the upgrades / changes so they will stay. Thats great news.

Achievements are still a little in the dark. They will stay but can still be linked to the items (with exception of those that give a reward as thats part of the changes / upgrades). So with a little bid of luck they will also all be linked to the non-temporary stuff.

I still need to see it first but I hope they keep there promises. This would be great news for GW2.

They also said the MF and AR are coming back in the fractals. I do hope they will not come back as part of a the dungeons in fractals like they are now where it’s just one of the 3 / 4 dungeons, and I also hope they still have the same rewards because else it would still not be very good but they also said they would change fractals so it’s very possible that you can simply select what fractal you like to do and are not required to do 3 or 4 of them. So lets see about that.

And what gave me more trust in this statement is that they also seem to backing up to the idea of no expansion.. Where they first said they wanted to do it with the living story now it is still “undecided”.

So lets hope they decide to go for expansions. Then they can also keep there promise on only having the story itself temporary.

UrMom.4205:

Colin just confirmed it on the live stream, Molten Alliance and Aetherblade retreat are coming back. Boom our voices have been heard!

It has been confirmed already before that MF would come back in a dutch article cited in this thread: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Low-priority-on-Guild-management-tools/first#post2370603 .

But lets wait to see how it will come back. I don’t want it as part of the fractals where it is part of 3/4 dungeons.

I just like the same dungeon with the same rewards. The only thing they might change if it’s up to me is the NPC walking with us and what they say. As it would make more sense if they would now say something else.

I did like this “Temporary story but permanent changes.”. If it is true.. Because achievements and for sure items are not ‘a story’. So that means they will have a temporary story that makes changes in the world and we will see achievements and items linked to that. No more temporary achievements and items / rewards would be great. However I need to see it first.

Also the fact that they talked about expansions is good. But I will watch the video as I base this purely on a transcript.

Nabrok.9023:

Oh relax, there isn’t a single thing on the gem store that you “need” to buy. This is not anywhere close to where most F2P games are.

And a lot of people like the temporary content, and honestly I don’t really want an expansion if it means I need to regear all my characters. No thanks.

It’s not about the need to buy it’s the pressure to buy and thats what they do with making stuff temporary.

Now you may not mind temporary content by I and many other do not like it. Have a look at the reactions under this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HK6GK3bxGuk (that was after asked to leave a message if you did not agree but still)

And needing to regear is not depended on an expansion. They can make expansions where it is not needed and they can add content with the living story that does require it. But if you really want to talk more about this I would suggest to PM me as it’s now already going on more then my intention was in this thread.