What are you trying to say? This is exactly what I said. They don't want us to grind. They don't need to make us grind. They don't care whether we play for 2 weeks or two years, as long as we go to the shop and buy the game itself.
Expansions will come at a steady pace, but a year's wait between major content update + as said very little grind do not make this game a replacement for any MMO out there. There is no downside to playing GW2 and a subscription MMO, since you are only paying monthly for one. This game won't require all your time to progress either.
Why should they even threaten the industry if they don't have to? Does it help them? Why can't both this game and the rest of the MMO's coexist without "stealing" from each other? It is a stupid approach to take, but it seems only players feel that way, fortunately.
I would say they very much care how much people are playing. If they only cared as long as someone bought the box, we wouldn't see a great game, we'd see a great trailer for a game. That and that if people didn't like the game, they wouldn't buy the expansion.
I truly believe that GW2 will not be a success because it's B2P in a P2P world, but I also believe based on everything I've seen and read that it will be a superior product to the P2P MMOs I've played and what I've read and seen of upcoming ones. While yes, it's true that a person could buy GW2 and still pay a subscription, I believe that anyone paying a subscription will be paying vastly more for an inferior product. I'd say my frustration comes from not being able to convince people that GW2 will provide the same AAA MMO experience that you'd get from a P2P game, in terms of content, updates, longevity and customer support. I think it is a replacement for whatever P2P game people are playing now.
As I've said earlier, what I hope is that GW2 is a major success and that it will cause other companies to follow suit and proceed with their own AAA B2P games. You're right, a person could play GW2 on the side while they pay a subscription for another game. But you know what's better than that? Being able to choose between the 3-4 AAA B2P MMOs you own, playing whichever one you feel like, and paying no sub at all.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it."-Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
Not really GW2 will never be a industry killer simply because its never a choice. People will play GW2 AND another mmorpg. Largely because of the no fee situation GW2 has basically placed itself outside the ballpark.
Once you slap down your box price, you get to play ye later on there may be a few optional extras you can purchase and then the expanisons as they come out. bu there is no monthly drain on the resouces. So those people who DO play the subscription games will continue to do so, they just may also play GW2.
I would say they very much care how much people are playing. If they only cared as long as someone bought the box, we wouldn't see a great game, we'd see a great trailer for a game. That and that if people didn't like the game, they wouldn't buy the expansion.
I'd say my frustration comes from not being able to convince people that GW2 will provide the same AAA MMO experience that you'd get from a P2P game, in terms of content, updates, longevity and customer support. I think it is a replacement for whatever P2P game people are playing now.
It is because they only care about whether people are buying the box or not that we are getting a great game right from the get-go. The game can't afford "growing over-time", it acts like a single player game in the way that it has to be "ready" when it hits the shelves.
The game has to be good from the start to make the people buy it just like they would buy a single player title, and that doesn't mean the game will not be "great"- this is the approach all other companies have when it comes to gaming- the bottom line is that people need to buy the game, not how long they will play it- and to achieve that purpose the game needs to be good. Not good in a week or month, it has to be good on the release day. Not focusing on longevity does not make this a trailer of a game, otherwise the whole industry would be full of trailers and no real games.
Your second paragraph really has not much basis to go on, unfortunately. Everything points to the opposite, and the company has no proper reason to fulfill your wish. If the game sells 12 million copies while other MMO's still flourish, that is a win/win for everyone involved.
The important thing is to accept it and appreciate the game for what it is, not what it isn't.
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
What are you trying to say? This is exactly what I said. They don't want us to grind. They don't need to make us grind. They don't care whether we play for 2 weeks or two years, as long as we go to the shop and buy the game itself.
Expansions will come at a steady pace, but a year's wait between major content update + as said very little grind do not make this game a replacement for any MMO out there. There is no downside to playing GW2 and a subscription MMO, since you are only paying monthly for one. This game won't require all your time to progress either.
Why should they even threaten the industry if they don't have to? Does it help them? Why can't both this game and the rest of the MMO's coexist without "stealing" from each other? It is a stupid approach to take, but it seems only players feel that way, fortunately.
I would say they very much care how much people are playing. If they only cared as long as someone bought the box, we wouldn't see a great game, we'd see a great trailer for a game. That and that if people didn't like the game, they wouldn't buy the expansion.
I truly believe that GW2 will not be a success because it's B2P in a P2P world, but I also believe based on everything I've seen and read that it will be a superior product to the P2P MMOs I've played and what I've read and seen of upcoming ones. While yes, it's true that a person could buy GW2 and still pay a subscription, I believe that anyone paying a subscription will be paying vastly more for an inferior product. I'd say my frustration comes from not being able to convince people that GW2 will provide the same AAA MMO experience that you'd get from a P2P game, in terms of content, updates, longevity and customer support. I think it is a replacement for whatever P2P game people are playing now.
As I've said earlier, what I hope is that GW2 is a major success and that it will cause other companies to follow suit and proceed with their own AAA B2P games. You're right, a person could play GW2 on the side while they pay a subscription for another game. But you know what's better than that? Being able to choose between the 3-4 AAA B2P MMOs you own, playing whichever one you feel like, and paying no sub at all.
Seems to me it's more likely a player gets what they pay for with GW2 therefore any P2P had better be really high quality and that's a good result.
Edit: @ ^Hyanman: There is the possibility GW2 will compete directly with P2P. What the price suggests is undercutting/opening a new niche (bit of both). The other thing is that it is MMO so the experience at T=1Hr, T=50Hrs, T=100HRs, T=200+HRs does still count especially for expansions as those will come out in a similar time-frame to GW and the quality has to exist for the next one (not for all buyers but a good number). So again it may start outcompeting shoddy P2P MMOs especially for casual gamers demographic that are slower at seeing all the content but want each play session to be more fun & less grind. It wil be shorter than usual P2P I agree, but how much will be interesting... there seems a lot of features here.
You could say it's opeing a larger market share also. But this is a good result as P2P will need to be really quality and quantity which I am hoping TOR is eg and this section of the MMO market who want this type of game want this too (not nec. TOR)!
I would say they very much care how much people are playing. If they only cared as long as someone bought the box, we wouldn't see a great game, we'd see a great trailer for a game. That and that if people didn't like the game, they wouldn't buy the expansion.
I'd say my frustration comes from not being able to convince people that GW2 will provide the same AAA MMO experience that you'd get from a P2P game, in terms of content, updates, longevity and customer support. I think it is a replacement for whatever P2P game people are playing now.
Your second paragraph really has not much basis to go on, unfortunately. Everything points to the opposite, and the company has no proper reason to fulfill your wish. If the game sells 12 million copies while other MMO's still flourish, that is a win/win for everyone involved.
What is pointing to the opposite exactly? GW1 is still running, it was being updated regularly with expansions, it's still being updated with free content, the customer support is there, they're banning botters. GW2 has 1600 events, 5 races, 8 professions, WvWvW PVP, 60 full length movies worth of dialog, I could go on and on.
Are you arguing because they don't need to fill their game with a grind in order to stretch out their content and keep extracting a subscription that it's not going to provide a AAA MMO experience?
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it."-Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
Not really GW2 will never be a industry killer simply because its never a choice. People will play GW2 AND another mmorpg. Largely because of the no fee situation GW2 has basically placed itself outside the ballpark.
Once you slap down your box price, you get to play ye later on there may be a few optional extras you can purchase and then the expanisons as they come out. bu there is no monthly drain on the resouces. So those people who DO play the subscription games will continue to do so, they just may also play GW2.
So no GW2 is not a threat.
Just my 2 cents
Gadareth
I dont get this logic at all, the reason Id never play 2 MMOs at once is because of the amount of time they require - both in pure gametime and spending time with whoever you get to meet ingame and what you get to pursuit, not the price of them.
ofc will see how much game time there is in GW2, but I d not expect to play other MMOs because its cheaper - can without problems pay for several MMOs at once as it is....only truth in this, I can see, is people would properbly be faster to drop it if or when they d not find it fun.
I understand the OP's arguements but I consider them to be far fetched. For one thing, while WoW is still running with the number og subscriptions they currently have other companies will try to achieve what they have accomplshied. We have also seen how many have failed.
And while GW2 certainly will be a fantastic game I'm convinced it will never become a leader of this genre. I for one will not be playing as I am simply fed up with fantasy games, and I'm sure others are as well. Furthermore the game apparently requires a PC with some good equipment. There are still lots of people with a computer only suitable for games like WoW. Correct me if I am wrong
This is starting to sound like a witch-hunt for anyone that does't agree GW2 is the best thing ever.
Each player must accept the cards life deals him or her: but once they are in hand, he or she alone must decide how to play the cards in order to win the game.
What is pointing to the opposite exactly? GW1 is still running, it was being updated regularly with expansions, it's still being updated with free content, the customer support is there, they're banning botters. GW2 has 1600 events, 5 races, 8 professions, WvWvW PVP, 60 full length movies worth of dialog, I could go on and on.
Are you arguing because they don't need to fill their game with a grind in order to stretch out their content and keep extracting a subscription that it's not going to provide a AAA MMO experience?
GW1 is not the same AAA experience in terms of content, updates and longevity.
Yes, that is exactly what I'm arguing. Good luck proving me wrong. Stretching out content = longevity. Subscription model = more frequent updates (depending on amount of subs, obviously).
I am not some pro-grind guy but I think you can put together 1+1 here. You need one for the other.
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
Edit: @ ^Hyanman: There is the possibility GW2 will compete directly with P2P. What the price suggests is undercutting/opening a new niche (bit of both). The other thing is that it is MMO so the experience at T=1Hr, T=50Hrs, T=100HRs, T=200+HRs does still count especially for expansions as those will come out in a similar time-frame to GW and the quality has to exist for the next one (not for all buyers but a good number). So again it may start outcompeting shoddy P2P MMOs especially for casual gamers demographic that are slower at seeing all the content but want each play session to be more fun & less grind. It wil be shorter than usual P2P I agree, but how much will be interesting... there seems a lot of features here.
You could say it's opeing a larger market share also. But this is a good result as P2P will need to be really quality and quantity which I am hoping TOR is eg and this section of the MMO market who want this type of game want this too (not nec. TOR)!
That would be interesting to see.
I agree that it will bring a lot of players to the MMO market in general, which is a benefit for not only this game but for the P2P MMO's as well.
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
I understand the OP's arguements but I consider them to be far fetched. For one thing, while WoW is still running with the number og subscriptions they currently have other companies will try to achieve what they have accomplshied. We have also seen how many have failed.
And while GW2 certainly will be a fantastic game I'm convinced it will never become a leader of this genre. I for one will not be playing as I am simply fed up with fantasy games, and I'm sure others are as well. Furthermore the game apparently requires a PC with some good equipment. There are still lots of people with a computer only suitable for games like WoW. Correct me if I am wrong
WoW is established and players have an emotional investment in a well run/designed game. That's why GW2 B2P is not competing directly with it (at least at first glance) and that's a good idea as established MMOs the size of WoW have tons of content to compete with... :O
As for GW2 specs, not available but:
Though ArenaNet isn't ready to release minimum PC specs, they did say they deliberately develop on machines as old as three or four years -- the kind that you can't even replace the graphics cards in because they don't make them anymore -- to ensure that as many users on older rigs can enjoy Guild Wars 2 as possible."
Allows more potential customers and stylization of graphice are very nice.
I think your confusing something here, The amount one spends on a subscription for a game such as WoW is so much more than the cost of a B2P game, expansions and vanity items included. MT is a way for the game to increase the money they make sure, but it is in no way forced upon you like WoW forces its expansions and its sub; you can choose not to spend money in it. And on top of that, you cant expect Anet to just not make money, they got familes to feed and a company to grow. The point is, they can maintain a company, make games, and generate a deicent revenue without having to scam their consumers with monthly subscription fees. So basically its the best thing for every one, players get a good game and developers are still able to make an ok living.
Im not confusing anything... that red part basically is the only answer to the question , and its not really wise to expect otherwise.
Speaking of WoW .. yes i too have played it but didnt buy a single expansion for it because they indeed do borderline between good business and scam and have very little to offer in terms of expanding the game.
What i dont get is that how is monthly sub forced ... you really make the decicion upfront rather than loggin in and thinking " oh crap i have been fooled and now i must pay a monthly sub " .
If i play a game i like then 15€ / month is a price i happily pay to feed the nice guys that made the game for us to enjoy ... infact i would be willing to pay 20 even 30€ so that the company can grow , generate decent renevue and make more games so where does the part come where im ripped / scammed to pay subs for ex. Blizzard ... maybe the answer is what Mumbojambo said about emotional attachements .... if you feel you are being scammed by subscriptions u have or would have emotional attachement to a game and u feel its wrong that u need to pay to play , isnt that the thing F2P companies use to make u buy vanity items though the decicion isnt upfront when u start playing.
Now as we all know , players cannot decide the exact direction a dev will put our money into but theres a big difference between a sub game that does bad-ok-good-WoW and choosing to pay the sub or not is a good way to influence what kinda game you are playing after years ( who doesnt want to make more and more money ? ) .. i dont buy much single-player games anymore for the fact that they are made on basis to rip ur money right off the bat w/o any kinda plans of longetivity ( be it playtime , patches ) that is the problem ppl have been saying about MMO's in general , allthough this does not necessarily hold true on GW2.
IMO the whole business is a mess ... sp games charging MT's for content that was given free before on the idea that you are building a reputation ... mmo's going B2P / F2P and handing out content for the equilevant of sp games in the past.
sub model is fine .... dont judge the model based on one major MMO's decicion to rehash content just like we shouldnt judge F2P based on the some thousand nickle and diming asian grinders or B2P based on a handful of examples.
apoligies for the parts that might be out of context or simply dont make sense ... these kinda intellectual arguments aint my thing and quite possibly the subject would spiral into violence IRL lol /joke mode of
What is pointing to the opposite exactly? GW1 is still running, it was being updated regularly with expansions, it's still being updated with free content, the customer support is there, they're banning botters. GW2 has 1600 events, 5 races, 8 professions, WvWvW PVP, 60 full length movies worth of dialog, I could go on and on.
Are you arguing because they don't need to fill their game with a grind in order to stretch out their content and keep extracting a subscription that it's not going to provide a AAA MMO experience?
GW1 is not the same AAA experience in terms of content, updates and longevity.
Yes, that is exactly what I'm arguing. Good luck proving me wrong. Stretching out content = longevity. Subscription model = more frequent updates (depending on amount of subs, obviously).
I am not some pro-grind guy but I think you can put together 1+1 here. You need one for the other.
I'm talking about longevity as in the servers still running and supporting the player base. You're talking about stretching out content.
I don't even know that your argument makes sense. WoW has no leveling grind. You bang out the levels and then what is there left to do at cap? Do daily quests, raid weekly, PVP.
GW2 with their mentoring system and replayable events means the entire game world is open to you at level 80. Instead of doing those 5, 10, 20 dailies that are the only ones open to you, you could grind out gold and karma on any one of the 1600 events, or hit any dungeon in the game and be level appropriate for it. GW2 will have more difficult content that we don't know much about yet. They'll also have 4 PVP battlegrounds in addition to more arena style combat.
As far as updates go, looking at WoW's patch history, I admit there's a good amount. It appears that there's updates around every 5-6 months or so. That being said, I would still argue that GW1's updates are comparable. WoW adding a raid instance or a new zone every few months I think is on par with the much smaller GW1 team adding an entire standalone game every year or so. There's also no reason to think that GW2 couldn't (if it's what the playerbase wanted) follow WoW's model and release DLCs evey few months in addition or in place of major expansions. Especially since the GW2 team is much larger than GW1's.
Also, as far as grinds and "stretching out content" goes, GW1 has some ridiculous grinds. In order to get a Vanquisher title, you literally need to kill every mob in every explorable zone in the entire expansion on hard mode. Just to get a title! People do it. I gave up before I even killed all 129 mobs in the first zone.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it."-Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
I dont personally think that GW2 will change anything, B2P has been around quite a few years now, as has F2P, and the sheer number of F2P games, if anything, F2P also has a few 'unhealthy' connotations - how many of them are seen as being 'buy to win' with success in the game being measured by how much real money your prepared to sink into it, not F2P at all really, Microtransactions might be good business for the parent companies, but, are they really such a good thing for players? these are after all also the games where people often feel the most scammed, a few games, primarily DDO, and perhaps LOTRO, seem to be leading the way in making these games more 'honest' but all i can see is, every time there is a cash shop in a game, it becomes 'buy to win' will GW2 have this factor in their game, if it does, then it becomes not just a B2P game, but also that worst of all scenarios, the 'buy to win' game. P2P may not be everyones dish, but at least you know exactly where you stand with those games, and theres no 'buy to win' ..
I'm talking about longevity as in the servers still running and supporting the player base. You're talking about stretching out content.
Okay... but what's the point, exactly? I don't think anyone here disagrees with you on that front.
WoW is a subscription model game. They stretch out content, and offer frequent updates so that people keep playing. That's what it takes to keep people subscribed, and it's worth the effort.
I don't see how it would be worthwhile for ArenaNet to do the same. Even if the update frequency was similar in GW to WoW (which I still doubt), stretching out content is not necessary, so they can't be directly compared.
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
GW2 aint only upcoming game that has hype of "getting its spot in place of wow for top MMO". for example tera-online is coming too with great hype. also remember that wow expansion: catalysm is supposed to date up wow, so its still hard to shake the throne.
F2P works pretty well as, while some players never will pay, there exist number of players who either instant start pay to get most of it out, or those who start pay latter when they find game good enough and want to support it/ or see it worthwhile to invest ingame currency for character, and thats how lotro etc games that changed to f2p model were able to pick their money.
and yes F2P model were better opinion to them because of wows curently unshakeable position on P2P market. in estimate (by look current ) id think there can exists 3-5 P2P games simultaneous in market with all succeedin, but it only comes to that if game mechanics are truly good enough to attract playerbase.
even if GW2 alone makes good impact, it will NEVER get all of playerbase to itself, that cant happen due not 100% players like it over another game, thus it can shake little to none current payment models
I'm talking about longevity as in the servers still running and supporting the player base. You're talking about stretching out content.
Okay... but what's the point, exactly? I don't think anyone here disagrees with you on that front.
WoW is a subscription model game. They stretch out content, and offer frequent updates so that people keep playing. That's what it takes to keep people subscribed, and it's worth the effort.
I don't see how it would be worthwhile for ArenaNet to do the same. Even if the update frequency was similar in GW to WoW (which I still doubt), stretching out content is not necessary, so they can't be directly compared.
Ok, maybe we've been talking past each other a little bit. Always a danger when talking about terms without precise definitions.
I see what you're saying about the frequent updates. I'd say again it comes down to what people want. When you're paying a subscription, you just pay it automatically without a thought. Whereas in a B2P model, if there was a $15 DLC every 4 months, you'd be hesitant to pay for it even though in reality, you might be paying 1/4th what the subscription would be. On the other hand, WoW subscribers who never set foot in Ahn'Qiraj or BWL or 40 man Naxx paid for those dungeons. A DLC model at least lets people choose if they want the content or not.
I'm going to bed. Time to leave the discussion of what makes a AAA MMO for another day.
@Phry, here's a quote from the GW2 lead game designer. It's been posted here before, but it's the kind of thing that I don't think can be repeated too often. Here is a link to the original article.
“We haven’t decided on what exactly we are or aren’t going to offer for money post-release. We’re open to whatever our players seem most interested in. If, after release, you guys would like more story content, more dungeons, more events, more maps or whatever, it’s something that we have to consider because ultimately making you happy is what makes us successful. Whether we release that in DLC (like the bonus mission packs in GW1) or whether we do it through expansions (Like Eye of the North) is yet to be determined. As to whether or not there are going to be items like XP boosts available in the in game store, I can only reiterate what we’ve said before (and will continue to say,) that we’ll release details on it when they are available, and that our core philosophy of not requiring you to spend additional money to play the game and not making the game difficult or painful to play in order to encourage you to buy things from the store still stands.”
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it."-Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
I'm talking about longevity as in the servers still running and supporting the player base. You're talking about stretching out content.
Okay... but what's the point, exactly? I don't think anyone here disagrees with you on that front.
WoW is a subscription model game. They stretch out content, and offer frequent updates so that people keep playing. That's what it takes to keep people subscribed, and it's worth the effort.
I don't see how it would be worthwhile for ArenaNet to do the same. Even if the update frequency was similar in GW to WoW (which I still doubt), stretching out content is not necessary, so they can't be directly compared.
Ok, maybe we've been talking past each other a little bit. Always a danger when talking about terms without precise definitions.
I see what you're saying about the frequent updates. I'd say again it comes down to what people want. When you're paying a subscription, you just pay it automatically without a thought. Whereas in a B2P model, if there was a $15 DLC every 4 months, you'd be hesitant to pay for it even though in reality, you might be paying 1/4th what the subscription would be. On the other hand, WoW subscribers who never set foot in Ahn'Qiraj or BWL or 40 man Naxx paid for those dungeons. A DLC model at least lets people choose if they want the content or not.
I'm going to bed. Time to leave the discussion of what makes a AAA MMO for another day.
@Phry, here's a quote from the GW2 lead game designer. It's been posted here before, but it's the kind of thing that I don't think can be repeated too often. Here is a link to the original article.
“We haven’t decided on what exactly we are or aren’t going to offer for money post-release. We’re open to whatever our players seem most interested in. If, after release, you guys would like more story content, more dungeons, more events, more maps or whatever, it’s something that we have to consider because ultimately making you happy is what makes us successful. Whether we release that in DLC (like the bonus mission packs in GW1) or whether we do it through expansions (Like Eye of the North) is yet to be determined. As to whether or not there are going to be items like XP boosts available in the in game store, I can only reiterate what we’ve said before (and will continue to say,) that we’ll release details on it when they are available, and that our core philosophy of not requiring you to spend additional money to play the game and not making the game difficult or painful to play in order to encourage you to buy things from the store still stands.”
selling dungeons etc (adventure packs?) is imo, a legitimate use for a 'cash shop' and personally i have no problem with that, its when they start selling stat boosting, item boosting, xp boosting etc. etc. items .. that i see the game default to being a 'buy to win' game, ... as for vanity items... not many games don't have meaningless fluff for sale these days, i'd make some sexist remark about it keeping the female players happy.. but i'd best not
Not really GW2 will never be a industry killer simply because its never a choice. People will play GW2 AND another mmorpg. Largely because of the no fee situation GW2 has basically placed itself outside the ballpark.
Once you slap down your box price, you get to play ye later on there may be a few optional extras you can purchase and then the expanisons as they come out. bu there is no monthly drain on the resouces. So those people who DO play the subscription games will continue to do so, they just may also play GW2.
So no GW2 is not a threat.
Just my 2 cents
Gadareth
I disagree with this. While it's true that some people can and will play two MMORPGs at the same time, I think these people are in a very small minority. I would wager that most of us only have enough time to play one MMO at a time, only the most hardcore have enough time to support 2 MMO's.
Therefore, if GW2 "wins over" a player, they will likely cancel any other MMO accounts.
What are you trying to say? This is exactly what I said. They don't want us to grind. They don't need to make us grind. They don't care whether we play for 2 weeks or two years, as long as we go to the shop and buy the game itself.
Expansions will come at a steady pace, but a year's wait between major content update + as said very little grind do not make this game a replacement for any MMO out there. There is no downside to playing GW2 and a subscription MMO, since you are only paying monthly for one. This game won't require all your time to progress either.
Why should they even threaten the industry if they don't have to? Does it help them? Why can't both this game and the rest of the MMO's coexist without "stealing" from each other? It is a stupid approach to take, but it seems only players feel that way, fortunately.
I would say they very much care how much people are playing. If they only cared as long as someone bought the box, we wouldn't see a great game, we'd see a great trailer for a game. That and that if people didn't like the game, they wouldn't buy the expansion.
I truly believe that GW2 will not be a success because it's B2P in a P2P world, but I also believe based on everything I've seen and read that it will be a superior product to the P2P MMOs I've played and what I've read and seen of upcoming ones. While yes, it's true that a person could buy GW2 and still pay a subscription, I believe that anyone paying a subscription will be paying vastly more for an inferior product. I'd say my frustration comes from not being able to convince people that GW2 will provide the same AAA MMO experience that you'd get from a P2P game, in terms of content, updates, longevity and customer support. I think it is a replacement for whatever P2P game people are playing now.
As I've said earlier, what I hope is that GW2 is a major success and that it will cause other companies to follow suit and proceed with their own AAA B2P games. You're right, a person could play GW2 on the side while they pay a subscription for another game. But you know what's better than that? Being able to choose between the 3-4 AAA B2P MMOs you own, playing whichever one you feel like, and paying no sub at all.
Seems to me it's more likely a player gets what they pay for with GW2 therefore any P2P had better be really high quality and that's a good result.
Edit: @ ^Hyanman: There is the possibility GW2 will compete directly with P2P. What the price suggests is undercutting/opening a new niche (bit of both). The other thing is that it is MMO so the experience at T=1Hr, T=50Hrs, T=100HRs, T=200+HRs does still count especially for expansions as those will come out in a similar time-frame to GW and the quality has to exist for the next one (not for all buyers but a good number). So again it may start outcompeting shoddy P2P MMOs especially for casual gamers demographic that are slower at seeing all the content but want each play session to be more fun & less grind. It wil be shorter than usual P2P I agree, but how much will be interesting... there seems a lot of features here.
You could say it's opeing a larger market share also. But this is a good result as P2P will need to be really quality and quantity which I am hoping TOR is eg and this section of the MMO market who want this type of game want this too (not nec. TOR)!
Completely agree, and this is the point I have been trying to make all along. If GW2 is very successful in the 'AAA' MMORPG space, which is generally relegated to P2P titles, then any P2P game released after GW2 will have to be 'better' than GW2 or it probably won't sell well.
It's just the way the market works. If you want to charge a higher price, then you have to have a superior product. If GW2 is the best product on the market, then it sets the price.
I'm talking about longevity as in the servers still running and supporting the player base. You're talking about stretching out content.
Okay... but what's the point, exactly? I don't think anyone here disagrees with you on that front.
WoW is a subscription model game. They stretch out content, and offer frequent updates so that people keep playing. That's what it takes to keep people subscribed, and it's worth the effort.
I don't see how it would be worthwhile for ArenaNet to do the same. Even if the update frequency was similar in GW to WoW (which I still doubt), stretching out content is not necessary, so they can't be directly compared.
Really?
The content gap between Icecrown Citadel and Cataclysm was exactly one year.
The content gap between the GW expansions was ~9 months.
I can never understand the Subscription = More content theory. As far as I know, the only reason subscriptions exist is because it's money grabbing (and that MMO players are all brainwashed to believe it should be the norm and always will be).
Its a big IF, and IF they have to bleed people through a cash shop for profit also, then it is no IF that I will continue to play it.
I like my games p2p, and am fine with b2p....most f2p models are disappointing and I am skeptical of change that would make even the good ones pay to win eventually....To skeptical to try them, and have them change the way it works on me, after I have invested a lot of time into something....Fair or not.
p.s.
You could also say its as big a IF, that if it bombs and cannot sustain itself without a massive cash shop, that it will then kill B2P as a viable stand alone model!
The content gap between Icecrown Citadel and Cataclysm was exactly one year.
The content gap between the GW expansions was ~9 months.
I can never understand the Subscription = More content theory. As far as I know, the only reason subscriptions exist is because it's money grabbing (and that MMO players are all brainwashed to believe it should be the norm and always will be).
Were GW expansions similar in scope with Cataclysm?
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
Lets say they get as big as World of Warcraft and they peck out at 12million players and they just make money on B2P then they will start losing money and shit will go to hell and the game will be forced to do somthing for profit... MMOs don't run for free.
Look at this from a logical stand point 12million people bought boxes. then after the box sell start going down you still have to support 12million players. they will turn too Fluff items for money or things like skills packs in GW1.
Comments
I would say they very much care how much people are playing. If they only cared as long as someone bought the box, we wouldn't see a great game, we'd see a great trailer for a game. That and that if people didn't like the game, they wouldn't buy the expansion.
I truly believe that GW2 will not be a success because it's B2P in a P2P world, but I also believe based on everything I've seen and read that it will be a superior product to the P2P MMOs I've played and what I've read and seen of upcoming ones. While yes, it's true that a person could buy GW2 and still pay a subscription, I believe that anyone paying a subscription will be paying vastly more for an inferior product. I'd say my frustration comes from not being able to convince people that GW2 will provide the same AAA MMO experience that you'd get from a P2P game, in terms of content, updates, longevity and customer support. I think it is a replacement for whatever P2P game people are playing now.
As I've said earlier, what I hope is that GW2 is a major success and that it will cause other companies to follow suit and proceed with their own AAA B2P games. You're right, a person could play GW2 on the side while they pay a subscription for another game. But you know what's better than that? Being able to choose between the 3-4 AAA B2P MMOs you own, playing whichever one you feel like, and paying no sub at all.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." -Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
Not really GW2 will never be a industry killer simply because its never a choice. People will play GW2 AND another mmorpg. Largely because of the no fee situation GW2 has basically placed itself outside the ballpark.
Once you slap down your box price, you get to play ye later on there may be a few optional extras you can purchase and then the expanisons as they come out. bu there is no monthly drain on the resouces. So those people who DO play the subscription games will continue to do so, they just may also play GW2.
So no GW2 is not a threat.
Just my 2 cents
Gadareth
It is because they only care about whether people are buying the box or not that we are getting a great game right from the get-go. The game can't afford "growing over-time", it acts like a single player game in the way that it has to be "ready" when it hits the shelves.
The game has to be good from the start to make the people buy it just like they would buy a single player title, and that doesn't mean the game will not be "great"- this is the approach all other companies have when it comes to gaming- the bottom line is that people need to buy the game, not how long they will play it- and to achieve that purpose the game needs to be good. Not good in a week or month, it has to be good on the release day. Not focusing on longevity does not make this a trailer of a game, otherwise the whole industry would be full of trailers and no real games.
Your second paragraph really has not much basis to go on, unfortunately. Everything points to the opposite, and the company has no proper reason to fulfill your wish. If the game sells 12 million copies while other MMO's still flourish, that is a win/win for everyone involved.
The important thing is to accept it and appreciate the game for what it is, not what it isn't.
Seems to me it's more likely a player gets what they pay for with GW2 therefore any P2P had better be really high quality and that's a good result.
Edit: @ ^Hyanman: There is the possibility GW2 will compete directly with P2P. What the price suggests is undercutting/opening a new niche (bit of both). The other thing is that it is MMO so the experience at T=1Hr, T=50Hrs, T=100HRs, T=200+HRs does still count especially for expansions as those will come out in a similar time-frame to GW and the quality has to exist for the next one (not for all buyers but a good number). So again it may start outcompeting shoddy P2P MMOs especially for casual gamers demographic that are slower at seeing all the content but want each play session to be more fun & less grind. It wil be shorter than usual P2P I agree, but how much will be interesting... there seems a lot of features here.
You could say it's opeing a larger market share also. But this is a good result as P2P will need to be really quality and quantity which I am hoping TOR is eg and this section of the MMO market who want this type of game want this too (not nec. TOR)!
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
What is pointing to the opposite exactly? GW1 is still running, it was being updated regularly with expansions, it's still being updated with free content, the customer support is there, they're banning botters. GW2 has 1600 events, 5 races, 8 professions, WvWvW PVP, 60 full length movies worth of dialog, I could go on and on.
Are you arguing because they don't need to fill their game with a grind in order to stretch out their content and keep extracting a subscription that it's not going to provide a AAA MMO experience?
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." -Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
I dont get this logic at all, the reason Id never play 2 MMOs at once is because of the amount of time they require - both in pure gametime and spending time with whoever you get to meet ingame and what you get to pursuit, not the price of them.
ofc will see how much game time there is in GW2, but I d not expect to play other MMOs because its cheaper - can without problems pay for several MMOs at once as it is....only truth in this, I can see, is people would properbly be faster to drop it if or when they d not find it fun.
I understand the OP's arguements but I consider them to be far fetched. For one thing, while WoW is still running with the number og subscriptions they currently have other companies will try to achieve what they have accomplshied. We have also seen how many have failed.
And while GW2 certainly will be a fantastic game I'm convinced it will never become a leader of this genre. I for one will not be playing as I am simply fed up with fantasy games, and I'm sure others are as well. Furthermore the game apparently requires a PC with some good equipment. There are still lots of people with a computer only suitable for games like WoW. Correct me if I am wrong
This is starting to sound like a witch-hunt for anyone that does't agree GW2 is the best thing ever.
Each player must accept the cards life deals him or her: but once they are in hand, he or she alone must decide how to play the cards in order to win the game.
GW1 is not the same AAA experience in terms of content, updates and longevity.
Yes, that is exactly what I'm arguing. Good luck proving me wrong. Stretching out content = longevity. Subscription model = more frequent updates (depending on amount of subs, obviously).
I am not some pro-grind guy but I think you can put together 1+1 here. You need one for the other.
That would be interesting to see.
I agree that it will bring a lot of players to the MMO market in general, which is a benefit for not only this game but for the P2P MMO's as well.
WoW is established and players have an emotional investment in a well run/designed game. That's why GW2 B2P is not competing directly with it (at least at first glance) and that's a good idea as established MMOs the size of WoW have tons of content to compete with... :O
As for GW2 specs, not available but:
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
I'm talking about longevity as in the servers still running and supporting the player base. You're talking about stretching out content.
I don't even know that your argument makes sense. WoW has no leveling grind. You bang out the levels and then what is there left to do at cap? Do daily quests, raid weekly, PVP.
GW2 with their mentoring system and replayable events means the entire game world is open to you at level 80. Instead of doing those 5, 10, 20 dailies that are the only ones open to you, you could grind out gold and karma on any one of the 1600 events, or hit any dungeon in the game and be level appropriate for it. GW2 will have more difficult content that we don't know much about yet. They'll also have 4 PVP battlegrounds in addition to more arena style combat.
As far as updates go, looking at WoW's patch history, I admit there's a good amount. It appears that there's updates around every 5-6 months or so. That being said, I would still argue that GW1's updates are comparable. WoW adding a raid instance or a new zone every few months I think is on par with the much smaller GW1 team adding an entire standalone game every year or so. There's also no reason to think that GW2 couldn't (if it's what the playerbase wanted) follow WoW's model and release DLCs evey few months in addition or in place of major expansions. Especially since the GW2 team is much larger than GW1's.
Also, as far as grinds and "stretching out content" goes, GW1 has some ridiculous grinds. In order to get a Vanquisher title, you literally need to kill every mob in every explorable zone in the entire expansion on hard mode. Just to get a title! People do it. I gave up before I even killed all 129 mobs in the first zone.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." -Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
I dont personally think that GW2 will change anything, B2P has been around quite a few years now, as has F2P, and the sheer number of F2P games, if anything, F2P also has a few 'unhealthy' connotations - how many of them are seen as being 'buy to win' with success in the game being measured by how much real money your prepared to sink into it, not F2P at all really, Microtransactions might be good business for the parent companies, but, are they really such a good thing for players? these are after all also the games where people often feel the most scammed, a few games, primarily DDO, and perhaps LOTRO, seem to be leading the way in making these games more 'honest' but all i can see is, every time there is a cash shop in a game, it becomes 'buy to win' will GW2 have this factor in their game, if it does, then it becomes not just a B2P game, but also that worst of all scenarios, the 'buy to win' game. P2P may not be everyones dish, but at least you know exactly where you stand with those games, and theres no 'buy to win' ..
Okay... but what's the point, exactly? I don't think anyone here disagrees with you on that front.
WoW is a subscription model game. They stretch out content, and offer frequent updates so that people keep playing. That's what it takes to keep people subscribed, and it's worth the effort.
I don't see how it would be worthwhile for ArenaNet to do the same. Even if the update frequency was similar in GW to WoW (which I still doubt), stretching out content is not necessary, so they can't be directly compared.
GW2 aint only upcoming game that has hype of "getting its spot in place of wow for top MMO". for example tera-online is coming too with great hype. also remember that wow expansion: catalysm is supposed to date up wow, so its still hard to shake the throne.
F2P works pretty well as, while some players never will pay, there exist number of players who either instant start pay to get most of it out, or those who start pay latter when they find game good enough and want to support it/ or see it worthwhile to invest ingame currency for character, and thats how lotro etc games that changed to f2p model were able to pick their money.
and yes F2P model were better opinion to them because of wows curently unshakeable position on P2P market. in estimate (by look current ) id think there can exists 3-5 P2P games simultaneous in market with all succeedin, but it only comes to that if game mechanics are truly good enough to attract playerbase.
even if GW2 alone makes good impact, it will NEVER get all of playerbase to itself, that cant happen due not 100% players like it over another game, thus it can shake little to none current payment models
Ok, maybe we've been talking past each other a little bit. Always a danger when talking about terms without precise definitions.
I see what you're saying about the frequent updates. I'd say again it comes down to what people want. When you're paying a subscription, you just pay it automatically without a thought. Whereas in a B2P model, if there was a $15 DLC every 4 months, you'd be hesitant to pay for it even though in reality, you might be paying 1/4th what the subscription would be. On the other hand, WoW subscribers who never set foot in Ahn'Qiraj or BWL or 40 man Naxx paid for those dungeons. A DLC model at least lets people choose if they want the content or not.
I'm going to bed. Time to leave the discussion of what makes a AAA MMO for another day.
@Phry, here's a quote from the GW2 lead game designer. It's been posted here before, but it's the kind of thing that I don't think can be repeated too often. Here is a link to the original article.
“We haven’t decided on what exactly we are or aren’t going to offer for money post-release. We’re open to whatever our players seem most interested in. If, after release, you guys would like more story content, more dungeons, more events, more maps or whatever, it’s something that we have to consider because ultimately making you happy is what makes us successful. Whether we release that in DLC (like the bonus mission packs in GW1) or whether we do it through expansions (Like Eye of the North) is yet to be determined. As to whether or not there are going to be items like XP boosts available in the in game store, I can only reiterate what we’ve said before (and will continue to say,) that we’ll release details on it when they are available, and that our core philosophy of not requiring you to spend additional money to play the game and not making the game difficult or painful to play in order to encourage you to buy things from the store still stands.”
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." -Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
selling dungeons etc (adventure packs?) is imo, a legitimate use for a 'cash shop' and personally i have no problem with that, its when they start selling stat boosting, item boosting, xp boosting etc. etc. items .. that i see the game default to being a 'buy to win' game, ... as for vanity items... not many games don't have meaningless fluff for sale these days, i'd make some sexist remark about it keeping the female players happy.. but i'd best not
To clarify, I'm not saying GW2 can't be an AAA MMO. It has a good chance of being one.
I am just extremely skeptical that it will be replacing anything in the genre, or stealing subs from other games.
I disagree with this. While it's true that some people can and will play two MMORPGs at the same time, I think these people are in a very small minority. I would wager that most of us only have enough time to play one MMO at a time, only the most hardcore have enough time to support 2 MMO's.
Therefore, if GW2 "wins over" a player, they will likely cancel any other MMO accounts.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
Completely agree, and this is the point I have been trying to make all along. If GW2 is very successful in the 'AAA' MMORPG space, which is generally relegated to P2P titles, then any P2P game released after GW2 will have to be 'better' than GW2 or it probably won't sell well.
It's just the way the market works. If you want to charge a higher price, then you have to have a superior product. If GW2 is the best product on the market, then it sets the price.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
Really?
The content gap between Icecrown Citadel and Cataclysm was exactly one year.
The content gap between the GW expansions was ~9 months.
I can never understand the Subscription = More content theory. As far as I know, the only reason subscriptions exist is because it's money grabbing (and that MMO players are all brainwashed to believe it should be the norm and always will be).
Its a big IF, and IF they have to bleed people through a cash shop for profit also, then it is no IF that I will continue to play it.
I like my games p2p, and am fine with b2p....most f2p models are disappointing and I am skeptical of change that would make even the good ones pay to win eventually....To skeptical to try them, and have them change the way it works on me, after I have invested a lot of time into something....Fair or not.
p.s.
You could also say its as big a IF, that if it bombs and cannot sustain itself without a massive cash shop, that it will then kill B2P as a viable stand alone model!
Were GW expansions similar in scope with Cataclysm?
Lets say they get as big as World of Warcraft and they peck out at 12million players and they just make money on B2P then they will start losing money and shit will go to hell and the game will be forced to do somthing for profit... MMOs don't run for free.
Look at this from a logical stand point 12million people bought boxes. then after the box sell start going down you still have to support 12million players. they will turn too Fluff items for money or things like skills packs in GW1.
I'm sorry just a B2P model does not work...