Holy shit I didn't even know that this was gonna be more of an open world. I thought GW2 was gonna be mainly instanced just like the first. OMG I just can't wait anymore now! Every time I hear news about GW2 its something that sounds amazing!
Most people go through life pretending to be a boss. I go through life pretending I'm not.
It will be interesting to see what sort of game GWs 2 really is. Should it be full featured like a traditional P2P MMO and succeed with this pricing model it will probably lead to a radical shake up in the pricing structure of the industry.
But then again, we seem to be already headed for a future of alternative pricing models and options, so why not add one more to the mix.
As long as people are willing to pay the monthly sub, the sub is going no where. Making gw2 with no monthly sub is not even remotely going to jolt the industry. GW1 had zero impact, so thinking GW2 will just change everything is abit optomistic.
Guess what? Theres has been no major outcry against the subscription model. People are willing to pay it. Its here to stay. I personally think that some companies could even raise the price, and people would still pay it without thinking twice. I bet SW:TOR could get away with 20.00$ a month, and it wouldnt surprise me if they didnt charge more than 15 a month, because EA has there hand in the cookie jar and they are all about pulling out bigger and bigger cookies.
From a buisness standpoint Arena net is shooting themselves in the foot by not making GW2 a subscription. We tend to look at the subscription from a gamers point of view, but put your self on the buisness side of it and think of what your company could do with the extra revenue that a sub would bring in. Games are a business, reality is, its about money.
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore) Now Playing: N/A Worst MMO: FFXIV Favorite MMO: FFXI
It will be interesting to see what sort of game GWs 2 really is. Should it be full featured like a traditional P2P MMO and succeed with this pricing model it will probably lead to a radical shake up in the pricing structure of the industry.
But then again, we seem to be already headed for a future of alternative pricing models and options, so why not add one more to the mix.
As long as people are willing to pay the monthly sub, the sub is going no where. Making gw2 with no monthly sub is not even remotely going to jolt the industry. GW1 had zero impact, so thinking GW2 will just change everything is abit optomistic.
Guess what? Theres has been no major outcry against the subscription model. People are willing to pay it. Its here to stay. I personally think that some companies could even raise the price, and people would still pay it without thinking twice. I bet SW:TOR could get away with 20.00$ a month, and it wouldnt surprise me if they didnt charge more than 15 a month, because EA has there hand in the cookie jar and they are all about pulling out bigger and bigger cookies.
From a buisness standpoint Arena net is shooting themselves in the foot by not making GW2 a subscription. We tend to look at the subscription from a gamers point of view, but put your self on the buisness side of it and think of what your company could do with the extra revenue that a sub would bring in. Games are a business, reality is, its about money.
But lets be honest here, one reason it didn't have much impact is that it wasn't an MMORPG in most peoples minds, it lacked many of the features that a traditional P2P has so people understood why it was being offered for just the price of the box. Was really just a glorified single player game in reality, which is how most people spent their time...solo.
Now Arenanet is saying the are going to create a full featured, fun to play MMORPG and use the same low cost pricing model. If they actually pull this off it will shake up the pricing structure of the industry, because we customers are going to demand it.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
The first game was heavily instanced with only lobbyish "MMO" areas so I can understand how that could maybe cut down on costs. But how will a fully open world game remain subscription or MT free? Are they expecting enough from box costs alone?
If Anet can deliver a fully functional MMO without subcriptions or MT then we are just getting screwed by all of these other companies.
There is way too many things to factor in before we really know how they do it.
One example is active support,MOST games have none,while games like EQ2/FFXI to name a couple,you will eventually get active support while in game,sometimes it may take a awhile but you will get it.Most other games,there is nothing,you can stay logged in for days and nobody will ever respond to your petition or problem.
Some developers devote a lot of money in their production,example FFXi hired top notch people for music tracks ect ect.Some games have a lot of content that most players don't even notice,because they are too busy leveling ,instead of enjoying the develoeprs hard work.Some games don't have anything outside of just leveling via quests.
Some games need a LOT more work to release a ps3/xbox and pc version,while many of these cheaper games like the Runes of magic/lotro/Eve/GW ect ect are made just for PC.I would imagine ,many develoeprs do not recover their initial cost through sales,they rely and hope for ongoign subs,while a game liek Guild wars,may have easily recovered their cost through the initial sale.
Without sounding like i am defending the subscription base,there is no question that we are being duped,a fee of maybe 2-5 bucks max would be normal,but we are actually paying for these devs to develope the next content that they will charge us to buy.You figure a top notch game runs around 5 years ,then they charge us 60 bucks ,that is only 5 bucks a year.You figure they make about 60 bucks profit after 6 months,the same amount they charged us for a game that took 5 years to make,they should EASILY have us some VERY large ,GOOD xpacs every 6 months,for FREE !.
MMORPG has the staff and i am sure several people with knowledge in the industry,go figure they have not supported the users here,by asking developers in their interviews ,some REAL questions,that might shed some actual light.Instead the questions asked are incredibly obvious,making it easy for a developer to give their usual PR hype speech and BS of course.The questions have definitley favored the developers ,not the users of this site.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
As a long time GW player, I can hopefully give some insigh to how GW2 will be no sub like GW1. Its actually rather simple. GW came out with a new "chapter" each year that was both stand alone and linkable to an exsisting GW chapter...these were not expansiones but full games. These were under development even as GW Propheses went live. GW also introudced an ingame store...that offered skill unlock packs , pvp only versions of GW, downloadable ful game purchases, character renames, inventory expansions, character remodels...most recently costumes worn over armor. While this is like MT stores in other games..it is also vastly different...NONE Of the items offered in the GW store affected gameplay or gave anyone an advantage of anyone playing without store items. So the game supports itself by not forcing MT down our throats. Players are whom dont feel nickle and dimed to death by a game, are often more likely to by that fluff item like costumes. They are also more likely to show the game to a friend and say "hey try this one out, it has no monthly and they dont nicle and dime ya to death wtih RMT.
GW still has a decent enough playerbase and new players are arriving. GW2 will run the same way....and this just shows ya...GW survived 5 years without montly fees...is bout to launch GW2 with the same model...in todays economy...people will try this out...and box sales will provide.
Originally posted by Kyleran But lets be honest here, one reason it didn't have much impact is that it wasn't an MMORPG in most peoples minds, it lacked many of the features that a traditional P2P has so people understood why it was being offered for just the price of the box. Was really just a glorified single player game in reality, which is how most people spent their time...solo.
Now Arenanet is saying the are going to create a full featured, fun to play MMORPG and use the same low cost pricing model. If they actually pull this off it will shake up the pricing structure of the industry, because we customers are going to demand it.
I agree that the instancing was a big stumbling block for the game but I have to disagree with it being played mostly solo? Missions required team work and the hench (esp in chapter 1) were next to useless, Alesia was renowned for being the most ineffective, suicidal healer on the planet. All the interesting and challenging stuff required a group to complete (I'm not talking farm): ToPK, Urgoz's Warren, The Deep, FoW, UW, Mallyx all required team play and a significant time commitment. Sure if you played it to farm items then solo all the way but for fun, groups are where it's at.
As a long time GW player, I can hopefully give some insigh to how GW2 will be no sub like GW1. Its actually rather simple. GW came out with a new "chapter" each year that was both stand alone and linkable to an exsisting GW chapter...these were not expansiones but full games. These were under development even as GW Propheses went live. GW also introudced an ingame store...that offered skill unlock packs , pvp only versions of GW, downloadable ful game purchases, character renames, inventory expansions, character remodels...most recently costumes worn over armor. While this is like MT stores in other games..it is also vastly different...NONE Of the items offered in the GW store affected gameplay or gave anyone an advantage of anyone playing without store items. So the game supports itself by not forcing MT down our throats. Players are whom dont feel nickle and dimed to death by a game, are often more likely to by that fluff item like costumes. They are also more likely to show the game to a friend and say "hey try this one out, it has no monthly and they dont nicle and dime ya to death wtih RMT.
GW still has a decent enough playerbase and new players are arriving. GW2 will run the same way....and this just shows ya...GW survived 5 years without montly fees...is bout to launch GW2 with the same model...in todays economy...people will try this out...and box sales will provide.
I have to agree with you for the most part. I beleive GW2 will survive on the same model just fine. The guys at Arenanet aren't idiots and they've probably planned most of it out, if they even had a slight need for a sub they would probably use one to prevent problems.
The thing on the GW standalone campaigns is that they're not going to do that with GW2. It's been said that they're only going to make expansions for it to prevent the game from becoming to complex, like what happened with the first GW.
Also I read in some interview that their in-game store will be the same as the one in GW, some extra content and some costumes but nothing that with give someone a benefit over someone else. Anet really stresses the equality and fairness thing.
Expansions, expansions, expansions. Expect to see the first one at the end of a year, the second probably 9 months after that or so. There's always a way. People will keep buying the expansions if the game is good. Non-combat pets can probably be bought as well.
Plus people like to buy extra character slots, they like to buy aesthetic stuff, etc. And Arenanet is more than happy to oblige them with that stuff if they want it so badly.
Edit: They probably are already making the expansion and most of the developing they will have to do will be patching the vanilla for a while. That's the simple part.
PC Games: "How do you plan to do this? Building such a complex world which is shared by all players without having monthly fees?"
Strain:(laughing) "A very good question! Interestingly many people believe that the completely instantiated world was the reason for Guild Wars 1 to not need monthly fees. This is completely wrong! The existence or lack of a persistent world is totally unrelated to the running expenses which are needed to maintain an online roleplaying game."
PC Games: "What do you mean by that?"
Strain: "Really important are the innovative technologies which we developed for Guild Wars 1. They allow us to keep the running costs very low which then results in the huge advantage for the player: the absence of fees. We continue with that principle for Guild Wars 2: as soon as the game is available, we will begin our work on new content. Such content for which the player is free to decide if he wants to have it or not. Maybe that will be add-ons or complete campaigns or online-extensions with costs, we don't know. But one thing is very certain: we will again have in Guild Wars 2 the comprehensive support our fans are already familiar with!"
But lets be honest here, one reason it didn't have much impact is that it wasn't an MMORPG in most peoples minds, it lacked many of the features that a traditional P2P has so people understood why it was being offered for just the price of the box. Was really just a glorified single player game in reality, which is how most people spent their time...solo.
Now Arenanet is saying the are going to create a full featured, fun to play MMORPG and use the same low cost pricing model. If they actually pull this off it will shake up the pricing structure of the industry, because we customers are going to demand it.
True some people do not consider GW1 an mmo, but do you honestly think the majority of gamers wil really demand the GW payment model, all the while not playing any subscription based mmo?
I think most people will grumble around saying GW2 doesnt have a monthly sub why does such and such have one, and those same people will sub up to future games. Thus not making an impact on the payment model at all. Money does the talking.
Now if a large group of people boycott subscription based MMO's then yes things might change but the majority of gamers are not like that. They will just complain about it, and pay the sub, and that doesnt change a thing.
Things are going to get worse before they get better, hell theres games with microtransactions AND subscriptions, Most companies are not going to short change themselves when they know they can get more. I cant blame them I know I would be trying to figure out how I could maximize my profits.
As for GW2 I am rather scared to see the microtransactions that they will implement.
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore) Now Playing: N/A Worst MMO: FFXIV Favorite MMO: FFXI
ummm, it hasn't been confirmed one way or another yet has it? I think you might just see NCSoft charge for it this time around and have a subscription of some form. If there is clarification somewhere I would love to see it, because I haven't heard anything official since sometime in 2007
I will be very surprised if this isn't subscription based.
Eric Flannum: We're basically the same pricing model as GW1
cool, but, he goes on to say: Eric Flannum:
"We’re basically the same pricing model as GW1. No monthly fee. Boxes, expansion and microtransactions for our revenue."
Guess it depends how much further they take that part whether this is truly free or is 'F2P' in the same way DDO, RoM etc are (i.e. you have to pay to actually really progress and enjoy on a serious level). I hope that there is nothing outside the box charge because I would like to check it out when it comes around again for the PVP but have zero interest in the 'leveling' part of it, and the PVE they are proposing. I want more of the original in other words what I don't want to see is, yet another, asian inspired generic fantasy grind MMO with levels.
I think the only reason many of us look forward to GW2 is for the 'instant max-level, all equipment, build your 'deck'' style PVP that the original did so well.Personally I would rather they had cut all PvE (but maybe a minority there) but as long as I can PVP as i did with GW without paying additional fees then I am in
Yeah, so the microtransactions will probably involve buying character slots, buying some costumes(that don't affect anything but appearance), etc. They won't be selling anything that makes a certain player "better" than others. That's if they are doing the same thing they did with GW1.
And yeah... Eric Flannum: We're basically the same pricing model as GW1
So you guys don't have to worry about this being subscription based.
Look at it this way. They handle the money. You handle the game.
"Some people feel the rain. Others just get wet." -Bob Marley
I'm probably one of those people who just get wet.
Guild Wars original plan was to release two campaigns per year. As it didn't work out like that (took around 1~2 years for the first campaign, Factions, to be released), they had to add a few of the microtransactions you see nowadays, but which had zero presence in day one. These cosmetic clothes and storage tabs are pretty recent. Back in the days you were expecting campaigns to be released all you had was the PvP purchaseable version w/ PvP skill unlocks (no PvE access) and character slots.
I still don't understand how we don't see MMOs released in this format - considering $50 every 6 months you'd face a $8,33 monthly fee that would be quite optional. But I guess it's much easier to develop some virtual items to sell rather than real content and features.
I think its funny how monthly subscription games can make xpacs that cost anything at all. Your already paying for a monthly subscription on top of the initital box sale. With ftp mmos this is fine, but why why must it be so for a p2p model. The only place expansions are nessasary is in a free to play game because this is when they update there game. With a paid to play game there are patches all the time that take the place of expansions. I just think this is an unessasary evil in current p2p games and only diminishes the good polished games with unfounded hype and unrealisitic expectations and shits on the vets of these games. The real player base that should be catered to is the vets that have stood by there game and when p2p games release expansions this only takes away from those players I personally belive. IF there was one thing I could change in the mmo industry it would do away with unessasary expansions for pay to play games and focus there attensions on better ideas and ways to actually improve there games instead of releasing copy and paste expansions that dont bring anything unique to the experience or to vets.
Theres a reason why great games end up unnoticed after so long, its because thats the nature of the beast. New games come out pushing the end user experience to new heights and thats what players want. They dony want useless advertisment for patch 90 that costs 59.99 at walmart. A good game can always be played, but a dumped on game that has been beaten to death ala star wars galaxies is just ruining what game everyone enjoyed in the first place for people to play again.
But lets be honest here, one reason it didn't have much impact is that it wasn't an MMORPG in most peoples minds, it lacked many of the features that a traditional P2P has so people understood why it was being offered for just the price of the box. Was really just a glorified single player game in reality, which is how most people spent their time...solo.
Now Arenanet is saying the are going to create a full featured, fun to play MMORPG and use the same low cost pricing model. If they actually pull this off it will shake up the pricing structure of the industry, because we customers are going to demand it.
True some people do not consider GW1 an mmo, but do you honestly think the majority of gamers wil really demand the GW payment model, all the while not playing any subscription based mmo?
I think most people will grumble around saying GW2 doesnt have a monthly sub why does such and such have one, and those same people will sub up to future games. Thus not making an impact on the payment model at all. Money does the talking.
Now if a large group of people boycott subscription based MMO's then yes things might change but the majority of gamers are not like that. They will just complain about it, and pay the sub, and that doesnt change a thing.
Things are going to get worse before they get better, hell theres games with microtransactions AND subscriptions, Most companies are not going to short change themselves when they know they can get more. I cant blame them I know I would be trying to figure out how I could maximize my profits.
As for GW2 I am rather scared to see the microtransactions that they will implement.
well hun..the MT are already there and they even said it will be teh same as is currenlty in GW1.
Yep, the interest for GW2 is increasing player numbers in GW somewhat - how much is hard to say, but I played again a bit a week or 2 ago and in whatever town I went to, much to my surprise I saw people in each town and hub, even the remote ones.
Originally posted by EricDanie
Guild Wars original plan was to release two campaigns per year. As it didn't work out like that (took around 1~2 years for the first campaign, Factions, to be released), they had to add a few of the microtransactions you see nowadays, but which had zero presence in day one. These cosmetic clothes and storage tabs are pretty recent. Back in the days you were expecting campaigns to be released all you had was the PvP purchaseable version w/ PvP skill unlocks (no PvE access) and character slots.
I still don't understand how we don't see MMOs released in this format - considering $50 every 6 months you'd face a $8,33 monthly fee that would be quite optional. But I guess it's much easier to develop some virtual items to sell rather than real content and features.
I liked the idea of an expansion in 0.5-1 year too. I even read that they were working on another expansion named Utopia for GW which would have had an Aztec theme and alien technology - it reminded me a bit of the enemy faction you encounter in the game Rise of Legends and a little bit of the capital of the Asura as seen in the GW2 video.
But it seems that the ANet devs and designers in that time realized that they were approaching the limits in the game mechanics of GW regarding the realisation of their ideas, so they decided to start working on GW2 as the breeding place for their ideas and create Eye of the North instead for GW.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Essentially ArenaNet figures in the life expectancy of each player to be playing. They budget out their money very very carefully. They figure out the dev cost and expected sales. If you take a look at Guild Wars and at its expansions. Its business model had you paying more than the average sub cost of an MMO.
If they generate enough revenue per box and get that minimum box sales break even point low enough, then its a working model. I believe it may be a bit riskier depending on what you plan to pay for with that inital box sale, but most single-player games do not have sub costs and rely on box sales.
We'll see how it goes.
Are we getting screwed? Only if you believe that the money spent is not worth the time played. Then again, you are welcome to not pay money for something you don't believe is worth it.
I just want to know how any one person spends more buying Guild Wars and its expansions then if they bought WoW and all its expansions plus the monthly subs. Me thinks you should go rework your math.
"Never pay more than 20 bucks for a computer game."-Guybrush Threepwood "I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me."-Hunter S. Thompson
The first game was heavily instanced with only lobbyish "MMO" areas so I can understand how that could maybe cut down on costs. But how will a fully open world game remain subscription or MT free? Are they expecting enough from box costs alone?
If Anet can deliver a fully functional MMO without subcriptions or MT then we are just getting screwed by all of these other companies.
1. Yes, we are getting screwed by a good many of the publishers out there. Publishers are interested in maximum return on their product, not a maximum product generating maximum return. This is very important to remember, that and people don't like change. The biggest example of people not liking change is the prevalence of the subscription model, no reduced cost for loyal subscribers, and the 'F2P' column on this site. Publishers are in a business and, unfortunately, pleonexia rules their mindset, viz. sheer, naked greed. Games don't need to cost $14.99 a month (WoW/AION), $12.95 a month (FFXI) or $9.99 a month (EQ2). If they cost this much players deserve to expect better from cusomer support on all levels, not just merely account and techincal support to keep the subscriptions flowing, and they deserve to expect compelling content for that game. (note: I say this because compelling content for a game like EVE will be different from compelling content for a game like Warhammer Online.) That said, just because we are getting screwed by a good many of the publishers does not mean that the games themselves aren't good or quality games. They are, we're simply paying too much for them.
2. I think that ArenaNet mentioned in a early interview just how they did it and why. SImply put, they believe that it can be done and they found a way to make it work and make a damn good game. A lot of this had to do with the way they utilised their servers and the client to stream content. I don't remember enough of the specifics to comment further on that, but I'm sure that some of our other members have either taken care of that for you or will -alternatively, you can check with the Google.
3. NCSoft, a company known for really miserly behaviour, was the one to take the risk with them and it paid dividends. Not enough for NCSoft to put more money into a developer doing a fantastic job, but enough to buy the company and make them a wholly-owned subsidiary. I think that Guild Wars 2 is really going to challenge the ArenaNet model (yes, the ArenaNet model) because of the current state of MMORPG homogeneity. If they get enough stress on their servers NCSoft is either going to make or break the game by supporting it and this is the thing that makes me worry about Guild Wars 2. I think that there are going to be a wealth of great things going on and it is going to come down to NCSoft supporting the established ArenaNet model and not giving it too little support or changing the payment scheme.
(1)TL:DR must be your way of saying that thinking hurts. Then again, this may explain why it looks like you responded to the post without using your brain. (2) It's not about community, is it? You just have nothing better to do.
2. I think that ArenaNet mentioned in a early interview just how they did it and why. SImply put, they believe that it can be done and they found a way to make it work and make a damn good game. A lot of this had to do with the way they utilised their servers and the client to stream content. I don't remember enough of the specifics to comment further on that, but I'm sure that some of our other members have either taken care of that for you or will -alternatively, you can check with the Google.
PC Games: "How do you plan to do this? Building such a complex world which is shared by all players without having monthly fees?"
Strain:(laughing) "A very good question! Interestingly many people believe that the completely instantiated world was the reason for Guild Wars 1 to not need monthly fees. This is completely wrong! The existence or lack of a persistent world is totally unrelated to the running expenses which are needed to maintain an online roleplaying game."
PC Games: "What do you mean by that?"
Strain: "Really important are the innovative technologies which we developed for Guild Wars 1. They allow us to keep the running costs very low which then results in the huge advantage for the player: the absence of fees. We continue with that principle for Guild Wars 2: as soon as the game is available, we will begin our work on new content. Such content for which the player is free to decide if he wants to have it or not. Maybe that will be add-ons or complete campaigns or online-extensions with costs, we don't know. But one thing is very certain: we will again have in Guild Wars 2 the comprehensive support our fans are already familiar with!"
I really wish these kind of people would just do some reading up on what it costs to run an MMO. I'ts not nearly as expensive as $15 a month from 2-5 millions gamers.
2. I think that ArenaNet mentioned in a early interview just how they did it and why. SImply put, they believe that it can be done and they found a way to make it work and make a damn good game. A lot of this had to do with the way they utilised their servers and the client to stream content. I don't remember enough of the specifics to comment further on that, but I'm sure that some of our other members have either taken care of that for you or will -alternatively, you can check with the Google.
PC Games: "How do you plan to do this? Building such a complex world which is shared by all players without having monthly fees?"
Strain:(laughing) "A very good question! Interestingly many people believe that the completely instantiated world was the reason for Guild Wars 1 to not need monthly fees. This is completely wrong! The existence or lack of a persistent world is totally unrelated to the running expenses which are needed to maintain an online roleplaying game."
PC Games: "What do you mean by that?"
Strain: "Really important are the innovative technologies which we developed for Guild Wars 1. They allow us to keep the running costs very low which then results in the huge advantage for the player: the absence of fees. We continue with that principle for Guild Wars 2: as soon as the game is available, we will begin our work on new content. Such content for which the player is free to decide if he wants to have it or not. Maybe that will be add-ons or complete campaigns or online-extensions with costs, we don't know. But one thing is very certain: we will again have in Guild Wars 2 the comprehensive support our fans are already familiar with!"
Excellent! Thank you, sidhaethe. It's not only good to see that ArenaNet is going to be following the same sort of streaming content model that worked so well in Guild Wars 1 but good for people viewing this thread to have immediate access to it.
(1)TL:DR must be your way of saying that thinking hurts. Then again, this may explain why it looks like you responded to the post without using your brain. (2) It's not about community, is it? You just have nothing better to do.
I'm kind of surprised how some people don't know that GW2 will be F2P. If Guild Wars is known for anything, for sure it's well known for being a game without a sub fee. GW2 is a sequel to an already successful game, these aren't virgin developers, these are people that already have experience and great history (read the background of some people working at Anet). They KNOW what they are doing, you have nothing to worry about.
...I like how some people come up with the argument that the GW pricing model is just like the P2P model. Some people should really start looking at the no sub fee model the same way they look at any other game. People also don't take into account the actual size of the content in GW, the fact that the prices at release have changed (you can buy the entire GW collection now very cheaply), and it's overall value.
It's no different then buying a game for your console, and there are many gamers that end up paying more for those.
Essentially ArenaNet figures in the life expectancy of each player to be playing. They budget out their money very very carefully. They figure out the dev cost and expected sales. If you take a look at Guild Wars and at its expansions. Its business model had you paying more than the average sub cost of an MMO.
Not even close. GW1 released 3 campaigns and 1 expansion over the course of 4 years at $60 a campaign and $30 for expansion. Thats $210 spent over the course of 4 years. Subscription games generally cost $15 a month as well as the cost for teh box and any expansions. Thats $720 from month fees ALONE. Add in box sales and one expansion thats over $800 dollars.
Your maths is so messed up it's ridiculously hilarious I mean really. Ofc percieved cost is in the eye of the beholder and some are willing to pay more for long term entertainment but regardless your maths is mind numbingly hilarious.
Ok, I'll bite.
1. Its been 5 years.
2. The original plan was one campaign every 6 months ($100/year)
3. They have sales from their online store
4. They designed the game to cost less to maintain by instancing out (districts) towns and zones
5. You're assuming every sale they've had has continued to play the game every day since they've purchased the box
6. You're assuming they're spending the same amount to maintain servers as non-instanced games
7. You don't look like a flaming fanboy if you can bother to type out full words and take a shot at grammar.
Ok I'll bite everything you said is completely irrelevant to what I said. I pointed out how his maths is blatantly wrong which it is. Thats it. My post had nothing to do with how A-net runs the game if you had read my post you would have realised that I was just pointing out that to the average customer that does not buy anything A-net offers online it would have cost them £210 to own all the campaigns and expansion compared to the over $800 spent on subscription on a p2p mmo. How much play time from the games to each person is irrelevant as those things are different to different people and had no purpose in the point I was trying to make.
If you had actually read my post you would have realised this but instead you replyed in a manner that sounded an awful lot like a flaming fanboy. I'm sorry if It came off as flaming but if I see someone telling people 2 + 2 = 10 then I am going to correct them. I probably shouldn't have laughed but it was a massive mathematical error and I find those things kinda funny I know it was wrong and I should and will turn down laughing but seriously next time read carefully what was said.
Comments
Holy shit I didn't even know that this was gonna be more of an open world. I thought GW2 was gonna be mainly instanced just like the first. OMG I just can't wait anymore now! Every time I hear news about GW2 its something that sounds amazing!
Most people go through life pretending to be a boss. I go through life pretending I'm not.
As long as people are willing to pay the monthly sub, the sub is going no where. Making gw2 with no monthly sub is not even remotely going to jolt the industry. GW1 had zero impact, so thinking GW2 will just change everything is abit optomistic.
Guess what? Theres has been no major outcry against the subscription model. People are willing to pay it. Its here to stay. I personally think that some companies could even raise the price, and people would still pay it without thinking twice. I bet SW:TOR could get away with 20.00$ a month, and it wouldnt surprise me if they didnt charge more than 15 a month, because EA has there hand in the cookie jar and they are all about pulling out bigger and bigger cookies.
From a buisness standpoint Arena net is shooting themselves in the foot by not making GW2 a subscription. We tend to look at the subscription from a gamers point of view, but put your self on the buisness side of it and think of what your company could do with the extra revenue that a sub would bring in. Games are a business, reality is, its about money.
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore)
Now Playing: N/A
Worst MMO: FFXIV
Favorite MMO: FFXI
But lets be honest here, one reason it didn't have much impact is that it wasn't an MMORPG in most peoples minds, it lacked many of the features that a traditional P2P has so people understood why it was being offered for just the price of the box. Was really just a glorified single player game in reality, which is how most people spent their time...solo.
Now Arenanet is saying the are going to create a full featured, fun to play MMORPG and use the same low cost pricing model. If they actually pull this off it will shake up the pricing structure of the industry, because we customers are going to demand it.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
There is way too many things to factor in before we really know how they do it.
One example is active support,MOST games have none,while games like EQ2/FFXI to name a couple,you will eventually get active support while in game,sometimes it may take a awhile but you will get it.Most other games,there is nothing,you can stay logged in for days and nobody will ever respond to your petition or problem.
Some developers devote a lot of money in their production,example FFXi hired top notch people for music tracks ect ect.Some games have a lot of content that most players don't even notice,because they are too busy leveling ,instead of enjoying the develoeprs hard work.Some games don't have anything outside of just leveling via quests.
Some games need a LOT more work to release a ps3/xbox and pc version,while many of these cheaper games like the Runes of magic/lotro/Eve/GW ect ect are made just for PC.I would imagine ,many develoeprs do not recover their initial cost through sales,they rely and hope for ongoign subs,while a game liek Guild wars,may have easily recovered their cost through the initial sale.
Without sounding like i am defending the subscription base,there is no question that we are being duped,a fee of maybe 2-5 bucks max would be normal,but we are actually paying for these devs to develope the next content that they will charge us to buy.You figure a top notch game runs around 5 years ,then they charge us 60 bucks ,that is only 5 bucks a year.You figure they make about 60 bucks profit after 6 months,the same amount they charged us for a game that took 5 years to make,they should EASILY have us some VERY large ,GOOD xpacs every 6 months,for FREE !.
MMORPG has the staff and i am sure several people with knowledge in the industry,go figure they have not supported the users here,by asking developers in their interviews ,some REAL questions,that might shed some actual light.Instead the questions asked are incredibly obvious,making it easy for a developer to give their usual PR hype speech and BS of course.The questions have definitley favored the developers ,not the users of this site.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
As a long time GW player, I can hopefully give some insigh to how GW2 will be no sub like GW1. Its actually rather simple. GW came out with a new "chapter" each year that was both stand alone and linkable to an exsisting GW chapter...these were not expansiones but full games. These were under development even as GW Propheses went live. GW also introudced an ingame store...that offered skill unlock packs , pvp only versions of GW, downloadable ful game purchases, character renames, inventory expansions, character remodels...most recently costumes worn over armor. While this is like MT stores in other games..it is also vastly different...NONE Of the items offered in the GW store affected gameplay or gave anyone an advantage of anyone playing without store items. So the game supports itself by not forcing MT down our throats. Players are whom dont feel nickle and dimed to death by a game, are often more likely to by that fluff item like costumes. They are also more likely to show the game to a friend and say "hey try this one out, it has no monthly and they dont nicle and dime ya to death wtih RMT.
GW still has a decent enough playerbase and new players are arriving. GW2 will run the same way....and this just shows ya...GW survived 5 years without montly fees...is bout to launch GW2 with the same model...in todays economy...people will try this out...and box sales will provide.
I agree that the instancing was a big stumbling block for the game but I have to disagree with it being played mostly solo? Missions required team work and the hench (esp in chapter 1) were next to useless, Alesia was renowned for being the most ineffective, suicidal healer on the planet. All the interesting and challenging stuff required a group to complete (I'm not talking farm): ToPK, Urgoz's Warren, The Deep, FoW, UW, Mallyx all required team play and a significant time commitment. Sure if you played it to farm items then solo all the way but for fun, groups are where it's at.
I have to agree with you for the most part. I beleive GW2 will survive on the same model just fine. The guys at Arenanet aren't idiots and they've probably planned most of it out, if they even had a slight need for a sub they would probably use one to prevent problems.
The thing on the GW standalone campaigns is that they're not going to do that with GW2. It's been said that they're only going to make expansions for it to prevent the game from becoming to complex, like what happened with the first GW.
Also I read in some interview that their in-game store will be the same as the one in GW, some extra content and some costumes but nothing that with give someone a benefit over someone else. Anet really stresses the equality and fairness thing.
Expansions, expansions, expansions. Expect to see the first one at the end of a year, the second probably 9 months after that or so. There's always a way. People will keep buying the expansions if the game is good. Non-combat pets can probably be bought as well.
Plus people like to buy extra character slots, they like to buy aesthetic stuff, etc. And Arenanet is more than happy to oblige them with that stuff if they want it so badly.
Edit: They probably are already making the expansion and most of the developing they will have to do will be patching the vanilla for a while. That's the simple part.
From the horse's mouth: http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Guild_Wars_2:_The_Status_Quo
PC Games: "How do you plan to do this? Building such a complex world which is shared by all players without having monthly fees?"
Strain: (laughing) "A very good question! Interestingly many people believe that the completely instantiated world was the reason for Guild Wars 1 to not need monthly fees. This is completely wrong! The existence or lack of a persistent world is totally unrelated to the running expenses which are needed to maintain an online roleplaying game."
PC Games: "What do you mean by that?"
Strain: "Really important are the innovative technologies which we developed for Guild Wars 1. They allow us to keep the running costs very low which then results in the huge advantage for the player: the absence of fees. We continue with that principle for Guild Wars 2: as soon as the game is available, we will begin our work on new content. Such content for which the player is free to decide if he wants to have it or not. Maybe that will be add-ons or complete campaigns or online-extensions with costs, we don't know. But one thing is very certain: we will again have in Guild Wars 2 the comprehensive support our fans are already familiar with!"
True some people do not consider GW1 an mmo, but do you honestly think the majority of gamers wil really demand the GW payment model, all the while not playing any subscription based mmo?
I think most people will grumble around saying GW2 doesnt have a monthly sub why does such and such have one, and those same people will sub up to future games. Thus not making an impact on the payment model at all. Money does the talking.
Now if a large group of people boycott subscription based MMO's then yes things might change but the majority of gamers are not like that. They will just complain about it, and pay the sub, and that doesnt change a thing.
Things are going to get worse before they get better, hell theres games with microtransactions AND subscriptions, Most companies are not going to short change themselves when they know they can get more. I cant blame them I know I would be trying to figure out how I could maximize my profits.
As for GW2 I am rather scared to see the microtransactions that they will implement.
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore)
Now Playing: N/A
Worst MMO: FFXIV
Favorite MMO: FFXI
Yeah, so the microtransactions will probably involve buying character slots, buying some costumes(that don't affect anything but appearance), etc. They won't be selling anything that makes a certain player "better" than others. That's if they are doing the same thing they did with GW1.
And yeah... Eric Flannum: We're basically the same pricing model as GW1
So you guys don't have to worry about this being subscription based.
Look at it this way. They handle the money. You handle the game.
"Some people feel the rain. Others just get wet." -Bob Marley
I'm probably one of those people who just get wet.
Guild Wars original plan was to release two campaigns per year. As it didn't work out like that (took around 1~2 years for the first campaign, Factions, to be released), they had to add a few of the microtransactions you see nowadays, but which had zero presence in day one. These cosmetic clothes and storage tabs are pretty recent. Back in the days you were expecting campaigns to be released all you had was the PvP purchaseable version w/ PvP skill unlocks (no PvE access) and character slots.
I still don't understand how we don't see MMOs released in this format - considering $50 every 6 months you'd face a $8,33 monthly fee that would be quite optional. But I guess it's much easier to develop some virtual items to sell rather than real content and features.
I think its funny how monthly subscription games can make xpacs that cost anything at all. Your already paying for a monthly subscription on top of the initital box sale. With ftp mmos this is fine, but why why must it be so for a p2p model. The only place expansions are nessasary is in a free to play game because this is when they update there game. With a paid to play game there are patches all the time that take the place of expansions. I just think this is an unessasary evil in current p2p games and only diminishes the good polished games with unfounded hype and unrealisitic expectations and shits on the vets of these games. The real player base that should be catered to is the vets that have stood by there game and when p2p games release expansions this only takes away from those players I personally belive. IF there was one thing I could change in the mmo industry it would do away with unessasary expansions for pay to play games and focus there attensions on better ideas and ways to actually improve there games instead of releasing copy and paste expansions that dont bring anything unique to the experience or to vets.
Theres a reason why great games end up unnoticed after so long, its because thats the nature of the beast. New games come out pushing the end user experience to new heights and thats what players want. They dony want useless advertisment for patch 90 that costs 59.99 at walmart. A good game can always be played, but a dumped on game that has been beaten to death ala star wars galaxies is just ruining what game everyone enjoyed in the first place for people to play again.
Simple answer, ArenaNet rocks. Plain and simple.
Actually I'm pretty sure it's back up close to 2 million or more.
All this hype GW2 is getting is bringing old players back and new players in.
The good thing about GW is that you can pick it up and play whenever you feel like it, which makes it so popular.
well hun..the MT are already there and they even said it will be teh same as is currenlty in GW1.
Yep, the interest for GW2 is increasing player numbers in GW somewhat - how much is hard to say, but I played again a bit a week or 2 ago and in whatever town I went to, much to my surprise I saw people in each town and hub, even the remote ones.
I liked the idea of an expansion in 0.5-1 year too. I even read that they were working on another expansion named Utopia for GW which would have had an Aztec theme and alien technology - it reminded me a bit of the enemy faction you encounter in the game Rise of Legends and a little bit of the capital of the Asura as seen in the GW2 video.
But it seems that the ANet devs and designers in that time realized that they were approaching the limits in the game mechanics of GW regarding the realisation of their ideas, so they decided to start working on GW2 as the breeding place for their ideas and create Eye of the North instead for GW.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
I just want to know how any one person spends more buying Guild Wars and its expansions then if they bought WoW and all its expansions plus the monthly subs. Me thinks you should go rework your math.
"Never pay more than 20 bucks for a computer game."-Guybrush Threepwood
"I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me."-Hunter S. Thompson
1. Yes, we are getting screwed by a good many of the publishers out there. Publishers are interested in maximum return on their product, not a maximum product generating maximum return. This is very important to remember, that and people don't like change. The biggest example of people not liking change is the prevalence of the subscription model, no reduced cost for loyal subscribers, and the 'F2P' column on this site. Publishers are in a business and, unfortunately, pleonexia rules their mindset, viz. sheer, naked greed. Games don't need to cost $14.99 a month (WoW/AION), $12.95 a month (FFXI) or $9.99 a month (EQ2). If they cost this much players deserve to expect better from cusomer support on all levels, not just merely account and techincal support to keep the subscriptions flowing, and they deserve to expect compelling content for that game. (note: I say this because compelling content for a game like EVE will be different from compelling content for a game like Warhammer Online.) That said, just because we are getting screwed by a good many of the publishers does not mean that the games themselves aren't good or quality games. They are, we're simply paying too much for them.
2. I think that ArenaNet mentioned in a early interview just how they did it and why. SImply put, they believe that it can be done and they found a way to make it work and make a damn good game. A lot of this had to do with the way they utilised their servers and the client to stream content. I don't remember enough of the specifics to comment further on that, but I'm sure that some of our other members have either taken care of that for you or will -alternatively, you can check with the Google.
3. NCSoft, a company known for really miserly behaviour, was the one to take the risk with them and it paid dividends. Not enough for NCSoft to put more money into a developer doing a fantastic job, but enough to buy the company and make them a wholly-owned subsidiary. I think that Guild Wars 2 is really going to challenge the ArenaNet model (yes, the ArenaNet model) because of the current state of MMORPG homogeneity. If they get enough stress on their servers NCSoft is either going to make or break the game by supporting it and this is the thing that makes me worry about Guild Wars 2. I think that there are going to be a wealth of great things going on and it is going to come down to NCSoft supporting the established ArenaNet model and not giving it too little support or changing the payment scheme.
(1)TL:DR must be your way of saying that thinking hurts. Then again, this may explain why it looks like you responded to the post without using your brain.
(2) It's not about community, is it? You just have nothing better to do.
The quote is here: http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Guild_Wars_2:_The_Status_Quo (already posted, but here for posterity)
PC Games: "How do you plan to do this? Building such a complex world which is shared by all players without having monthly fees?"
Strain: (laughing) "A very good question! Interestingly many people believe that the completely instantiated world was the reason for Guild Wars 1 to not need monthly fees. This is completely wrong! The existence or lack of a persistent world is totally unrelated to the running expenses which are needed to maintain an online roleplaying game."
PC Games: "What do you mean by that?"
Strain: "Really important are the innovative technologies which we developed for Guild Wars 1. They allow us to keep the running costs very low which then results in the huge advantage for the player: the absence of fees. We continue with that principle for Guild Wars 2: as soon as the game is available, we will begin our work on new content. Such content for which the player is free to decide if he wants to have it or not. Maybe that will be add-ons or complete campaigns or online-extensions with costs, we don't know. But one thing is very certain: we will again have in Guild Wars 2 the comprehensive support our fans are already familiar with!"
I really wish these kind of people would just do some reading up on what it costs to run an MMO. I'ts not nearly as expensive as $15 a month from 2-5 millions gamers.
Excellent! Thank you, sidhaethe. It's not only good to see that ArenaNet is going to be following the same sort of streaming content model that worked so well in Guild Wars 1 but good for people viewing this thread to have immediate access to it.
(1)TL:DR must be your way of saying that thinking hurts. Then again, this may explain why it looks like you responded to the post without using your brain.
(2) It's not about community, is it? You just have nothing better to do.
I'm kind of surprised how some people don't know that GW2 will be F2P. If Guild Wars is known for anything, for sure it's well known for being a game without a sub fee. GW2 is a sequel to an already successful game, these aren't virgin developers, these are people that already have experience and great history (read the background of some people working at Anet). They KNOW what they are doing, you have nothing to worry about.
...I like how some people come up with the argument that the GW pricing model is just like the P2P model. Some people should really start looking at the no sub fee model the same way they look at any other game. People also don't take into account the actual size of the content in GW, the fact that the prices at release have changed (you can buy the entire GW collection now very cheaply), and it's overall value.
It's no different then buying a game for your console, and there are many gamers that end up paying more for those.
Because Guild Wars is the only company charging for expansions no?
Ok I'll bite everything you said is completely irrelevant to what I said. I pointed out how his maths is blatantly wrong which it is. Thats it. My post had nothing to do with how A-net runs the game if you had read my post you would have realised that I was just pointing out that to the average customer that does not buy anything A-net offers online it would have cost them £210 to own all the campaigns and expansion compared to the over $800 spent on subscription on a p2p mmo. How much play time from the games to each person is irrelevant as those things are different to different people and had no purpose in the point I was trying to make.
If you had actually read my post you would have realised this but instead you replyed in a manner that sounded an awful lot like a flaming fanboy. I'm sorry if It came off as flaming but if I see someone telling people 2 + 2 = 10 then I am going to correct them. I probably shouldn't have laughed but it was a massive mathematical error and I find those things kinda funny I know it was wrong and I should and will turn down laughing but seriously next time read carefully what was said.