It doesn’t matter to the average player WHY the things they want are so expensive. The point is the ‘good stuff’ in the game is FAR out of reach of the average player. Anything constructive to say to the OP at all? Are you concerned at the price of stuff?
The good stuff being what? Even the average player should have zero issue outfitting themselves in full exotic … is that not considered ‘good’ enough for you? Full exotic armor is 1-2% lower stats than Ascended. Are you seriously suggesting that if a player can’t get BiS gear, it’s not good? That sounds a little stupid if you ask me, considering all permanent content in this game was crushed in the gear you aren’t classifying as ‘good’.
Not sure where you are getting your numbers. A full ascended zerker gear player does 20% more damage than the exact same zerker gear player in all exotics.
I didn’t say full ascended zerker … I said armor; I made that distinction because all the other ascended bits offer a reasonable return on players investment when armor does not. In the case of trinkets, obtained rather easily as well. The point of my post is that exotic gear is ‘good’ when the poster implied it was not. Even the OP complains he can’t get ‘nice things’ and admits he doesn’t play as much. Well … BiS gear doesn’t just fall in your lap buddy.
You can do fine full exotic in PvE, ascended doesn’t matter in sPVP but it does matter in WvW. So if you’re into WvW you’re at a serious disadvantage if you (decked out in exotic gear) run into an opponent decked out in ascended gear – the weapons do A LOT more damage, the armor SET does a lot more + you get those nifty little infusion slots that you can use to add even more stats (depending on you using an offensive or defensive WvW infusion) – it’s not quite like infantryman vs tank but I always know then I am attacking an ascended player – I do a lot less damage and they hit a lot harder.
Now see, that’s where I have a problem. YES the weapons give the damage advantage and yes in 1 vs. 1, odds are stacked against you …
… but that’s dependent on how the PLAYER decided to play. WvW is not all about 1 vs. 1 so if someone does get caught in a situation where they are at a disadvantage because of their gear, that’s their own fault.
Now, having said that, I don’t think it’s relevant to the discussion anyways because I think it’s understood that if someone plays casually and is average, Ascended gear will be harder to get for them than the hardcore player. Just because exotic doesn’t stack up to Ascended in WvW does not mean that ‘good gear’ is progressively out of reach. The whole thread is nonsense. Ascended gear is harder to get than exotic. That’s the always was, should be and will be. Inflation hasn’t changed that.
It doesn’t matter to the average player WHY the things they want are so expensive. The point is the ‘good stuff’ in the game is FAR out of reach of the average player. Anything constructive to say to the OP at all? Are you concerned at the price of stuff?
The good stuff being what? Even the average player should have zero issue outfitting themselves in full exotic … is that not considered ‘good’ enough for you? Full exotic armor is 1-2% lower stats than Ascended. Are you seriously suggesting that if a player can’t get BiS gear, it’s not good? That sounds a little stupid if you ask me, considering all permanent content in this game was crushed in the gear you aren’t classifying as ‘good’.
Camping GS is probably the most effective leveling weapon because you simply want to burst; mostly you will encounter trashy mobs that die quickly. Mace is also very good for that as well. GS preferred for AoE attack for multiple mob encounters. Stuff dies quickly so swapping strategies with other weapons is not needed. Therefore, supplement with a ranged (I like Scepter + Focus) and you’re set.
Traits will be harder to recommend but Virtue 1 and Zeal 2 are my ‘go to’ at the beginning.
Ascended items were never ment for the average player.
Yes. This is a problem.
I don’t understand why … the average player does not benefit from 1-2% increase in stats Ascended armor gives you.
Actually, funny thing about that. Sorry to beat on something so old, but, they did say something along the lines of everyone having the same stats gear at max level. That’s besides the point. The truly funny thing about that is that when they were releasing ascended gear they said it was to bridge the gap between exotics and legendaries, in terms of progression. Yup, bridge the gap between exotics and legendaries, the sad part is the gap still exists between ascended and legendaries – take a wild guess what it is.
None of that says anything about how Ascended items are meant for the average player. There are no legendary armor either, so there is no ‘bridge’ to gap there. I don’t even see a bridge that needs to be gaped for the weapon side. They have the same stats … ?
my point is either you won the virtual lottery or you’re one of those people with endless hours on your hand who can spend whole days in game. The rest of us have responsibilities. And you have to understand where this is coming from, I’m a legit farmer type player, I go out and get the goods and then sell them.
You’ve made some very poor assumptions about the kind of player I am and your point is weak because of it. We are the same kind of player; 95% of what I do is farming dailies by leveling alts and farming Orr/high priced mats; I’m the most boring player you can think of based on all the content available in the game.
I can’t explain why I have a legendary; based on your claim I shouldn’t have. I can only think that your view is because I must be more efficient/knowledge at farming and/or more aware of how to make money doing it than you think is possible.
At first I hated it but then the lightbulb went on … the whole reason is to make that content challenging and broaden player experience; perhaps there are some hints of skills to come being tested in that instance too.
That content would have been a joke if we were allowed to play our premade, optimized PVE characters. Can’t wait to play OTHER NPC builds.
I’m sure glad GW2 isn’t one of those ‘pay to progress’ themepark MMOs then. You don’t need to pay a dime aside from the original box to get the any level of gear, including BiS. In fact, you can’t even get the BiS gear by only paying. Smart team we get with Anet.
You have made a small but critical error in your post. You don’t need to satisfy the condition of prices going up AND purchasing power to go down to have inflation.
I don’t think this definition is actually correct and that does matter in this discussion. For instance, I don’t believe prices need to change for inflation to be a ‘thing’.
Sidebar … I did not know that people had come up with an acronym for META; most effective tactic available. Is this the same way everyone else thinks of it?
The most effective tactic available is not a static thing … there are instances where it will change slightly; Skills are chosen for what dungeons are being done, etc…
Of course, if you simply refer to meta as the highest damage dealing weapon combo and traits, then yes, it’s extremely restricted to not even a handful of builds. I don’t think that’s what the OP is asking for.
Actually, we’ve all missed what the OP is looking for: Meta is NOT a build that gives new players easy survival in dungeons or Orr because it’s not likely a new player asking this question in the forums is skilled with their active defenses enough to appreciate what a meta zerker build can do. Of course, the OP doesn’t know any of this, but we should be more responsible when making our suggestions to him.
I wish ANET would actually ignore players and deliver the game THEY want to give us. That way, there are no unreasonable expectations and demands from people that think the game should be based on their own personal vision. After two years, I would have hoped the nonsense of “This is what I think and Anet doesn’t do it” should have subsided. The fact it is not leads me to think the only failure here is Anet not being honest and telling players THEY develop the game according to THEIR vision, not ours. The people that think Anet have ‘strayed’ from whatever can’t leave soon enough.
Wow, every post in this thread so far is really pulling out the soapbox and preaching. Let me offer a more objective approach and provide an explanation which might enlighten you why these threads become battlefields.
Dear OP,
Since the game is structured to people using primarily active defenses, it’s optimal to use the highest damage output gear and use your traits/skills to give you whatever support you and your team need in PVE. I don’t know you’re skill level but if you’re short on gold like you say, I would advise you start with zerker gear because the cost difference isn’t that big between it and something else. If you need more defense, you can adjust your traits/skills to do so, even while you play. For example Signet of Judgement. IF that approach still doesn’t work for you, only then would I suggest you supplement your gear to include more defensive stats, mostly in the trinkets.
Our class defining feature is fragmented and situational.
In comparison:
Necro: Useful whenever lifeforce is available
Ranger: Pets are always used and can be chosen/swapped to suit
Thief: Give random effects but can be attached to damage and heal modifiers
Warrior: If your Burst is ready, you use it
There are situations where it’s effectiveness is diminshed but that’s the great thing … if you are up against a cleanser, you can simply NOT F1 and have a more frequent application of burning. Cleansing is not an issue if you play correctly.
It’s a bit indirect but people don’t understand that the way the game works like the level of difficulty, the gemstore, the lack of a trinity, etc… results in a healthy game with plenty of generally satisfied players to do things with. That’s much more important than someone’s personal perceptions and hang ups that shrink to the size of nothing when compared to the importance of the state of the game.
I feel that for what the game tries to do, Anet is rather successful in ‘hiding’ the fact that gems are purchased for gold/money. The only thing they could do better is to remove the money purchase options from the game and make it an internet transaction that is done COMPLETELY outside the game. The only real complaint I can see about ‘intrusion’ is when it starts going through the mechanics of paying for the gems in the game. That is a break in immersion but for me, it’s minor because buying gems isn’t really part of the immersion of the game anyways so if you see it, you’ve already chosen to break out of your immersion.
You’re talking about the core gameplay while he is talking about the core incentive to play this game. You’re right that skins don’t mess with the gameplay but they do mess with the incentive.
Incentive to get a skin doesn’t change depending on how someone else gets it, which is really the point of the poster. A majority of skins are NOT in the gemstore … that’s just a ridiculous thing to say. I don’t even think issues with balance of skins between gemstore and ingame is even relevant. It has nothing to do with the ‘intrusive’ nature of the gemstore.
Some perspective here … The gemstore is MUCH LESS ‘intrusive’ than Anet dipping into our wallet for a monthly fee, however you wish to define intrusive. That’s the only alternative to cash stop.
The whole point of the thread is basically a realization that the ways this game makes money is more obvious while playing the game than other methods like paid expansions, etc… My problem with this realization is that it’s not a hidden secret that we just recently discovered. It’s been like this for 2 years. It’s all very naive actually to think that Anet isn’t going to try selling different things and expanding their gemstore offers to players.
Your performance in other games affects your experience the same way as skins affect your experience in GW2.
Poster is claiming that buying a skin is similar as buying stat-giving items because of how it “messes with game core” I can only assume that he’s talking about performance. Skins do not affect the ingame performance of your avatar.
Even if he is talking about gaming experience, the way skins affect your experience ingame is not the same way that stats do. Stats do not affect your visual pleasure. Skins only affect your visual pleasure. I don’t even see the relevance of the comparison.
Either way, I’m struggling to understand the language being used here; a skin, regardless of how it’s purchased is ‘intrusive’ because no one can tell how it was purchased. Again, we are left guessing what this means. It wrecks immersion?
Consider is competition or not, the whole game is build around cosmetics and then selling them or turning them into a gold grind because you want to make money on them is just as intrusive as selling stats in a game where everything is build around fighting each other. Because it messes with the core of the game.
It’s NOT the same as selling stats because stats impact performance. Skins do not. I still don’t understand what makes buying a skin, regardless of the currency source, intrusive so please do explain it.
From my perspective, someone else having a skin is not intruding on anyone’s ability to get, use or enjoy the same skin. In fact, that’s the intent of the game. The number of people that own and how they obtain those skins does not ‘devalue’ items in any way because the value of these skins is purely aesthetic for someone purchasing them. If I buy an item with in-game earned or gem-bought gold, it still looks the same on me and no one knows either way. It doesn’t affect you, you just think it does.
I still disagree and feel the gem conversion to be very invasive, it allows a new player to potentially catch up to my account in a fraction of the time it took me using money which I’m not ok with, it devalues my efforts. It also allows a bad player to have access to more skins than they’d earn.
That assessment is flawed because it’s applying competitive thinking to a non-competitive environment. There is no ‘catch up’ and purchases with gem-bought gold is earning as well, it’s simply a player’s decision to earn with RL money or time. You’re efforts are not devalued because someone values their time/money differently than you do. If anything, you devalue your own efforts because of your comparative approach.
Besides, it’s transparent to you. You have no idea how someone obtained loot, so you can’t claim it devalues what you have done to earn your own. It’s quite illogical to think in this manner.
You’re not suggesting very significant changes in content. The other feature you mention aren’t really invasive if you don’t use them.
I don’t think significant changes are needed too much,other than the ones outlined, just some barriers and understanding “right we won’t monetize anything in this section ever”.
I think that what gets put into a section is just a matter of opinion though, so there will always be things that people disagree with there. I don’t see alot of items that I think should not be in the gemstore and even if there are some, it’s in no way a game changer or invasive. It really doesn’t have a significant impact on people if a few exist.
The gems to gold exchange is probably the most profitable aspect of the gemstore. As long as the things that are ‘invasive’ to the game are minimized in the gemstore, I don’t see how this is an issue. It’s transparent to players if someone buys gold with gems or vice versa.
Apparently, analysis based on fiction is OK as long as it’s your own.
Seems that the poster doesn’t recognize that the game is successful so there isn’t any reason to radically change it. I’m all for improvement but for someone to claim it should change because it might have been even better a different way and will probably fail, based on irrelevant associations is crazy.
I would bet on it … considering that investors put money up front to fund the development based on that mode. IF income is dropping, making a radical move to change it is more risky than having better offerings in the gemstore.
“considering that investors put money up front to fund the development based on that mode.” You don’t know the pitch so you don’t know that.
“IF income is dropping” Yes it is as can be seen in the quarterly reports.
“making a radical move to change it is more risky than having better offerings in the gemstore.” Maybe but if income is dropping anyway and the game has provided the money investors wanted they might want to do that. All those games that where pitched with a P2P model that then completely failed did change there model to get at least the money they could with a cheap F2P model.
GW2 isn’t completely failing so radical moves like making a completely different game model isn’t necessary and would likely not be approved by investors. You’re right, I don’t know the pitch. I simply said I would bet on the pitch that we have now being the one that the investors bought into through evidence that it’s successful after 2 years.
I mean, we can argue all this back and forth. I’m not really interested in having an academic argument with someone that doesn’t understand the business relationships that drive the reasons we have cash stop or might change how it would work. The model we have works and it’s fair for everyone. It doesn’t need to change because a few people can’t ignore gem marketing or can’t get over the idea that the game doesn’t work the way they want it to. IMO, those are rather stupid reasons to upset what is generally a successful business model for GW2.
I would bet on it … considering that investors put money up front to fund the development based on that model. IF income is dropping, making a radical move to change it and hope it gives more revenue is more risky than simply having better offerings in the gemstore to boost income with the model that already exists. Investors do not like increased risk. You can invent whatever reality you want to think exists. That doesn’t change the reality of how the game model and the implications of changing it affects investor relations. Your statements haven’t taken any of that into consideration.
This all seems like a thinly-veiled attempt to justify removal of cash-stop while ignoring the likelihood that it’s working as intended and making revenue and ROI for investors. The reality of this industry is that it doesn’t take 2 years for major changes to happen to games that don’t deliver on those investments. I think cash-stop is here to stay.
Thats funny because you would think they pitched the model that worked so great for GW1 and also the one they told the customers we would get. And at release they said it was a B2P game and the cash-shop would only have a very minimized role.
There is also no reason why investors would not be satisfied with that B2P pitch especially because Anet could point towards GW1.
The whole LS is something they started with months after release so you can really wonder if that was part of the pitch as well.
The argument here isn’t that investors may have liked a similar model as GW1. The relevant argument is investors bought into the model that GW2 uses now. Your perception that we didn’t get the model we were pitched is just a matter of opinion. I think it’s disingenuous to claim the gemstore has anything but a minimal role in playing the game; nothing in the gemstore is necessary to play this game … for free. Again, if the model of the game doesn’t satisfy you for whatever reason, you have choices as a consumer to take your time/money to a game that does.
The point you make about LS is an interesting sidebar. IIRC, the pitch of an evolving game world was always there … LS fulfills that beyond my expectations. I’ve not played many games where the devs change the world to the extent I see in GW2. I think that’s awesome and makes me hope that at some point, PLAYERS will be able to have an effect in changing the world to the same extent. That’s exciting.
It wouldn’t work.. there would be less drive to buy gems for gold and well there would be no items in the cash-shop because they would be in the game where you could directly work towards them… what you can’t in the cash-shop.
That’s a nice ideal, academic point of view but that’s not how the game works. It’s not how the game could be changed to work either and this is why.
This isn’t a university experiment in MMO business models … it’s a real business that answers to investors who expect the business model they were pitched would make money. The reason it won’t change to a different model is is because it DOES satisfy the investors; as long as investors are satisfied, there is NO chance in hell that Anet or their parent company would propose screwing with the model they are using to make that money. It would be stupid. If anything, they would try to improve how it makes money by …. hold on to your hat …. MARKETING GEMS TO PLAYERS. Did I just see hundreds of points of light go off in people’s heads?
So based on real life things that knowledgeable people consider … it’s irrelevant if a direct or indirect rewards system COULD impact gemstore. The point is that it won’t in GW2 for the reason above. Maybe if the game starts tanking really bad, your position would have more merit but likely in those cases, Investors don’t stick around long enough to wait for that; game would likely just shut down. Heck, I’ve seen NCSOFT shut down games because they don’t make ENOUGH money (anyone remember Tabula Rasa?), so what I’m saying is very real.
Guards don’t rely on removing those boons to be effective though. Dervishes would stack enchants, burn their usefulness, and then remove them to cause other effects. This is unlike anything we have in GW2 right now.
This is true but what you are missing here is that you’re simply asking for a class that melds toolsets of classes that already exist. This isn’t new stuff, it’s just repacked content. The archetypes relevant to GW2 are already covered in one way or another. Start adding classes and it would be easy to accuse Anet of repacking content. Of course … we don’t really pay for that content so it wouldn’t be that sinful or abhorrent but I don’t think it would fool very many players into thinking they were doing something new and cool either. It’s a little empty.
It does because you said you can do the content you like to do. Well I like to work directly towards items. Thats the content I like to do. But you can´t really.
You have to argue within the context of the game if you want to have a reasonable discussion about how the game works. You’re perspective is not relevant to the context of GW2 because we know GW2 doesn’t work that way. If you don’t like not being directly rewarded in GW2, you know what the answer to that is.
I still don’t see how your issue with no-direct rewards is relevant to the thread. Even if you WERE rewarded directly with things you wanted, I don’t see that having an influence on how the gemstore works or how Anet markets gems to players.
People lack perspective here. You don’t like Anet pushing gems on you? Would you rather have Anet push a monthly fee AND expansion fees on you? I don’t know about you guys but I’m more tolerant of gem marketing than I am subscription-based business models.
I find it fun to directly work towards an item I am interested in.
Sure but that doesn’t have anything to do with what I’ve said. There isn’t a way to be directly rewarded with anything in this game with the exception of gold, so arguments based on “I like direct rewards for stuff I want” are meaningless. Anet allows players to have fun and earn gold doing anything. Players still have the choice of getting gems with their gold ingame or money outside the game. Either approach doesn’t change the value of something a player buys in the gemstore. The perceived value of someone else’s items to other players is simply irrelevant.
It’s a game, it’s supposed to be fun, it’s not supposed to be a real live simulator.
That’s the nice thing about GW2 … you can play content you want to and it will reward you with fun AND gold at the same time. Anet don’t actually make you choose between your time and your RL money. You can use one or the other, or a mixture of the two. It’s a really smart and player-conscious approach.
The implication that one has to choose between having fun OR grinding gold makes Anet’s approach to pushing gem sales unfair/biased/unreasonable is nonsense.
“unintended farming” = “that part of farming which is unintended”.
That doesn’t answer my question and it’s clear you’re missing a rather subtle point so I will be more direct:
It’s up to the individual to decide if focusing on specific content to make the most of their MF bonus is better value to them than doing content where it doesn’t. That’s not a problem for ANet to fix. If you want your MF to matter more often so you don’t feel punished, simply choose to do content where MF would matter more often to reward yourself.
I fully agree with OP.Anet doesn’t care to give us challenging content anymore.They prefer to gain new people more then to keep veterans to stay.Problem is that Anet thinks vary wrong here.Players that are interested in game,wont mind to discover themselves how to dodge or heal…those that want everything simple are those that have no interest in learning,which means no interest in really playing game for long.
Anet made some really big mistakes with NPE where they sort of declared us as kittens that dont know how to press 1 button and dodge.
Anet….Player who know to install game is also smart enough to know how to do those “hard tasks” that 3 years old kid can do anytime so there is no reason to make this game simple and dump.
Keep in mind that Buy To Play games are usually those that older people play,not little kids.Reverse the changes of NPE
To be fair, Anet has not changed the level of challenge this game offered since release day to catering to people they ‘prefer’. While I feel that NPE is really dumbed down, it’s actually harder to play since traits access is task-locked and more restricted by level than it was when the game was released. I certainly feel it appeals to a dumber player, but it’s not easier. To me that’s why it fails.
I don’t get how age, maturity or experience has much to do with whether GW2 is the game for you. For me the differentiator is time. For example, I CAN’T play games like SWTOR or WoW … I just can’t commit the time to ‘keep up’ with everyone else or be online for a specific time to do a raid. In GW2, I can keep up on MY time.
The thing I like about condi builds is that burning is applied so often that even if people cleanse it gets reapplied quickly. With the build I use, every time I block I apply 800+ burning for at least 5 seconds. It is a given most classes can escape from a fight, with burning builds if my teleport is on cd, and they run burning will get them.
OH BINGO! Glad someone pointed this out. Everyone thinks you need 5 conditions and huge durations for a condition build to work. My build uses passive VoJ … CAN’T be cleansed ever AND does quite high damage on well mitigated targets. Yes, it suffers on already-squishy targets … I don’t care, I let my Direct Damage team mates handle them.
Like the OP says, it’s strengths are ignoring the traditional defenses as well as some of the common cleansing strategies.
So not contributing with anything ( i like that ) you let your ’’teammates,, do your work ,and then what you face and oponent 1v1 what do you do (run) knowing that you have 1 condition and the base dmg is dead slow while the the vs has 5 condition acces and a larger base dmg . And defence what defence you go that path you just play with him while other come to mow you down ( from long range most of the cases)
After I descrambled this mess of a sentence, I came up with an appropriate reply:
No one implied these kinds of builds don’t contribute. Stop being obtuse.
The thing I like about condi builds is that burning is applied so often that even if people cleanse it gets reapplied quickly. With the build I use, every time I block I apply 800+ burning for at least 5 seconds. It is a given most classes can escape from a fight, with burning builds if my teleport is on cd, and they run burning will get them.
OH BINGO! Glad someone pointed this out. Everyone thinks you need 5 conditions and huge durations for a condition build to work. My build uses passive VoJ … CAN’T be cleansed ever AND does quite high damage on well mitigated targets. Yes, it suffers on already-squishy targets … I don’t care, I let my Direct Damage team mates handle them.
Like the OP says, it’s strengths are ignoring the traditional defenses as well as some of the common cleansing strategies.
That’s just a lack of comprehension. There is no motivation for Anet to tell us their future plans because players threaten to not buy gems; the idea is laughable when you think about why people buy gems in the first place. Players buy gems because they want to buy something from the gemstore, or perhaps flip them for gold or whatever. I’m discounting philanthropy where players simply buy gems to support the game because I assume that number is very insignificant.
There is also no motivation for Anet to change that policy because obtuse players claim they want to know ‘something’ is coming, considering we get somethings very frequently (and we don’t directly pay for them). It’s irrelevant if it would hurt them. In fact, due to same obtuse players, not following up on future developments DOES hurt them. If I were Anet, I would want to keep flexible design approach in my back pocket too. You can’t do that if you tell someone something is coming in 1 year. Y’all are just blinded by your lack of objectivity and perspective.
Clearly I do need to know it as I’m not exchanging money for gems until I know it.
This is the beauty … I don’t think Anet really minds if you don’t buy gems until you know because they don’t expect to give you anything BUT gems in that exchange; there is no motivation from that perspective to change their approach to telling us stuff. So as much as you claim you need that information to buy gems, it’s not a guarantee you WILL buy gems. It doesn’t fit into your profile as a player who buys gems for money in their business model.
That’s an important distinction because their business model factors in these kinds of things and helps them decide on policies like not telling us ‘stuff’. In essence, you just defined yourself as a consumer and properly placed yourself and your ‘voice’ in the hierarchy of their business model … which they understand pretty well I imagine.
Edit: And as the OP says, we don’t need details. We’re not asking for industry secrets. We’re not demanding to know every inch of any new maps that might come out before they’re released. We just want to know that there’s something.
Well, then you and the OP aren’t being very reasonable because we know there is always ‘something’. That’s just silly … when has there NOT been something? We get somethings all the time, in fact MORE often than other MMOs. You might complain it’s not the something you want, or the quality of it, but don’t be so obtuse that you don’t see something on the horizon when Anet’s track record for something is not arguably quite good.
I’m not arguing with you that you’re an investor because it’s stupid. You paid money and got gems. THAT is the expectation Anet gives you for that exchange and they deliver, nothing more. Anything above and beyond that exchange you expect is one you fabricate to justify your demands for information that you DON’T need as someone who exchanges money for gems.
There isn’t anything strict here. Revamping definitions to recast what you view yourself as in the business model doesn’t change why Anet’s policy exists and why it’s a reasonable one. It simply your self-justification for why you think you NEED to know the game’s future developments.
I don’t disagree with that, but it doesn’t mean you’re an investor. Investors provide money with the expectation for financial ROI. Consumers provide money with the expectations for goods and services. Those motivations mean different interactions between Anet and those groups. As a consumer, you aren’t in the group that approves how Anet or it’s parent directs the business unless Anet thinks it’s a good direction. I can see why Anet would think divulging future plans is NOT a good direction for the game. The way we ‘voice’ ourselves as consumers isn’t the same as an investors.
Regardless of whatever academic argument you intend on having with the definition of ‘investor’, I was exactly referring to the definition of ‘investor’ that Bernie is describing to explain why I think this thread is not reasonable. From that definition (a widely accepted one in fact), players are not investors, they are consumers. That’s even MORE true and SIMPLE in this game because you exchange money for gems. People don’t go to Wal mart, buy and TV and say they’re a Wal Mart investor. That’s no different here. You pay money for gems. That financial exchange is finished; the ‘commitment’ that Anet gives you something YOU DEFINE beyond that exchange is unreasonable, including the expectation they ‘grow and make the game better’. That’s not where you ‘fit’ in the business food chain as a consumer. That’s what the ‘real’ investors do by voicing their opinion through provided (or approved) funding for development.
It’s interesting to see people re-defining things to justify their own desires and not recognizing where they fit into the business model of the game. It’s totally indicative of why this thread exists from people that think in this perceived manner. Check out reality sometime.
