Sorry I accidently posted before I finished so you can read the rest of what I had to say.
But I was responding to a so call double standard that was a false interpetation of what Jeff Strain said. See his quote.
Actually it isn't irrelevant, it's the whole point. There are other means to revenue which every game developer is entitled to. If the product is worth it than they should be able to make as much as they can off of it. I personally think people cry greed way to fast. These companies provide hundreds of people the ability to survive, to pay a mortgage, the ability to purchase things they want.
You can't exclude games from your arguement because they are successful, if anything it proves the point. When the time comes, WOW's last ditch effort to keep revenue will be going B2P. The amount of money they make in the cash shop will be enough to cover their costs and still make money.
I am a little suprised that I have to point out that if you buy GW1, you get 100% of the game and all the content that comes with it. You don't get that from F2P or P2P. So you ask what happend to the days... GW is where it is.
Do we really have write the math out again. Really. For the last year of WOW, it cost 1 box sale + plus a 12 month subscription minimum. Thats 50 + (13 x 12) = a minimum payment of $206 compared to a minimum of $50.00. That should be enough to get the point.
First I'm am not saying the cash shop is a bad approach, I'm not saying that B2P is either. Personally I'm not a cosmetic driven player, as I said in another thread on this subject they could cover me in Tar and Feathers for all I care.
I'm not arguing from a point of what you or I pay. The exact opposite actually, what i'm talking about is how these companies make money. As well as the idea that sub models are greed based. That's the double standard.
It's all greed based to some extent, they want to make as much money as possible. Whether it's B2p, F2P or P2P. They all have the same underlying goal, to part you from your money.
In the end if cash shop sales are not what they want them to be, they will add to that shop until they are. If cosmetics aren't making them money, they'll add something that will. My whole problem with what Jeff Strain and others from A-net (past and present) have said. Is that it gives the playerbase the wrong impression, that they are some sort of saint in a sea of criminals, which just isn't the case. They want your money as much as the next guy, and they need it just as much as everyone else.
You supported a claim of a double standard that didn't exist. Re-read Jeff Strains quote again. He said they subscription is still viable but you need to be ready to explain it. His point was to not count on subscriptions. He isn't trying to make Anet look like a saint, just stating what he feels and he is exaclty right. You are misinterperting what he and the rest of Arenanet is saying. Both you and I will pay a subscription but we have to be getting something for it. The old excuse is for server costs, which can't be used anymore. You are holding Jeff Strain to a higher standard simply because he pointed it out. That is your mistake. You are misinterpreting what he is saying.
It doesn't matter what they add to the cash shop if it remains a choice. You and I will pay only for things we deem worthy. Jeff Strain and Arenanet have never said anything bad about games that charge a subscription, only that they won't charge a subscription. They will use another method to get that revenue, one that provides a choice for the consumer which happens to always be better off in the long run. It doesn't matter what you are selling. Yes, if they save me $15.00 a month I am much more likely to buy a charr plushy.
Re-read what I said, I know what JS said, that's not the point, the point is threads like this.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Only " I " can decide if $15 a month is a good entertainment value to "me."
This^
I agree with both of you. But the whole point is would you pay it if you didn't have to.
Of course not lol, just like devs aren't running a charity, nor am I.
So you do get it. There is no point to pointing out that Game Developers make games for a living. We know. Remember we only pay for what we deem worthy of our money. They would have EARNED it.
FULL access to ALL content (and, yes, Fluff IS content) that is EARNABLE by PLAYING the game (in theory).
This.
And as I'm fond of saying, the average MMO monthly sub is $15.00
That's fifty cents per day.
If you can't afford that, stop playing so many games and get a job.
This.
$15.00 is NOTHING and if you cannot afford it, go get a damn job and stop gaming. Its simple as that.
I cannot even buy myself a decent dinner for $15. My wife and I can play an MMO for 30 days for the cost of $1 per day. The last time we went to dinner and a movie (3-4 hours worth of entertainment), we spent over $80. The last nice dinner we had was over $90! But she and I can have unlimited access to ALL content in a game, realistically play for well over 100+ hours a month if we wanted and all that for $15.....its a no-brainer to me.
In addition games that have fully or are partially funded by a cash shop tend to have other issues as well. From my experience, cash shop games have worse communities, more drama, etc... Example A: LOTRO before and after.
Its just the classic argument of people not thinking beyond the tip of their own noce and understanding why someone likes something they do not.
You're either very well off financially, you live with Mommy and Daddy still, or you actually ARE married, but your wife is the one who writes out (or pays online) all the bills every month. Because no one with any amount of common sense or responsibilities in life, would say "$15.00 is NOTHING...." That's just ridiculous. Now, I'm not saying it's a fortune or anything, but to say it's NOTHING proves you don't know much in the way of costs and paying bills. Furthermore, for my family gaming will cost 30-45 dollars a month since there are 3 of us, so it's not a matter of 15 bucks, but a question of priorities and let's see....do we want Showtime or Netflix or gaming? It requires, at least for US.....making a choice.....because 15 dollars IS SOMETHING.
Cocky privileged attitudes just reek, if you ask me. If you're so well to do that 15 dollars is nothing to you, that's fine, but don't make it a declaration for the world as if 15 bucks should be "nothing" to EVERYONE. That's just arrogant and ignorant.
You're kidding me, right? I work a middle-class job and I have many bills. $15 a month is nothing for the value you get out of a decent subscription game.
Re-read what I said, I know what JS said, that's not the point, the point is threads like this.
Is this a switch-a-roo? I am responding to your reply. You didn't make a valid point.
You tried explaining to me what he said, where as I was talking about the interpretation of what he said, the one that i constantly see around here.
The whole purpose of this thread and others like it, were/are to say that Subs are all about greed and are never needed, which is completely taking his statements out of context. People use it to put Anet above all others, and make others look criminal, that was the point I was making.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
sometimes you're paying for quality service and a non crappy/buggy game with a good amount of content, but usually you're just paying for a bad game, as even most MMO's that charge a fee are bad.
it really comes down to what you think your experience is worth.
Re-read what I said, I know what JS said, that's not the point, the point is threads like this.
Is this a switch-a-roo? I am responding to your reply. You didn't make a valid point.
You tried explaining to me what he said, where as I was talking about the interpretation of what he said, the one that i constantly see around here.
The whole purpose of this thread and others like it, were/are to say that Subs are all about greed and are never needed, which is completely taking his statements out of context. People use it to put Anet above all others, and make others look criminal, that was the point I was making.
Please believe me when I say this because I am not trying to be mean here. But this is a switch-a-roo.
You said:
"My whole problem with what Jeff Strain and others from A-net (past and present) have said. Is that it gives the playerbase the wrong impression, that they are some sort of saint in a sea of criminals, which just isn't the case."
Now you are saying that others are taking his statements out of context. Now I agree with you that people do use his qoute out of context but you are replying to me who was trying to correct two poster's (yourself and WSIMike) accusing Anet and JS of a double standard. You never said that others are taking him out of context. If you did I would have agreed with you. As a matter of fact I stated that in one my previous reply's. That people push the Greed thing to much.
Again, I think I did a pretty good job of setting the record straight and you are changing your stance because of it.
Re-read what I said, I know what JS said, that's not the point, the point is threads like this.
Is this a switch-a-roo? I am responding to your reply. You didn't make a valid point.
You tried explaining to me what he said, where as I was talking about the interpretation of what he said, the one that i constantly see around here.
The whole purpose of this thread and others like it, were/are to say that Subs are all about greed and are never needed, which is completely taking his statements out of context. People use it to put Anet above all others, and make others look criminal, that was the point I was making.
Please believe me when I say this because I am not trying to be mean here. But this is a switch-a-roo.
You said:
"My whole problem with what Jeff Strain and others from A-net (past and present) have said. Is that it gives the playerbase the wrong impression, that they are some sort of saint in a sea of criminals, which just isn't the case."
Now you are saying that others are taking his statements out of context. Now I agree with you that people do use his qoute out of context but you are replying to me who was trying to correct two poster's (yourself and WSIMike) accusing Anet and JS of a double standard. You never said that others are taking him out of context. If you did I would have agreed with you. As a matter of fact I stated that in one my previous reply's. That people push the Greed thing to much.
Again, I think I did a pretty good job of setting the record straight and you are changing your stance because of it.
Well I see where the confusion lies, in that when I post I tend to float and make points outside of the convo we were already having. That was more or less a side note to this overall conversation. So no it was no switch a-roo, sorry..
And no my opinion has not changed that there is a double standard at work here.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
FULL access to ALL content (and, yes, Fluff IS content) that is EARNABLE by PLAYING the game (in theory).
This.
And as I'm fond of saying, the average MMO monthly sub is $15.00
That's fifty cents per day.
If you can't afford that, stop playing so many games and get a job.
This.
$15.00 is NOTHING and if you cannot afford it, go get a damn job and stop gaming. Its simple as that.
I cannot even buy myself a decent dinner for $15. My wife and I can play an MMO for 30 days for the cost of $1 per day. The last time we went to dinner and a movie (3-4 hours worth of entertainment), we spent over $80. The last nice dinner we had was over $90! But she and I can have unlimited access to ALL content in a game, realistically play for well over 100+ hours a month if we wanted and all that for $15.....its a no-brainer to me.
In addition games that have fully or are partially funded by a cash shop tend to have other issues as well. From my experience, cash shop games have worse communities, more drama, etc... Example A: LOTRO before and after.
Its just the classic argument of people not thinking beyond the tip of their own noce and understanding why someone likes something they do not.
You're either very well off financially, you live with Mommy and Daddy still, or you actually ARE married, but your wife is the one who writes out (or pays online) all the bills every month. Because no one with any amount of common sense or responsibilities in life, would say "$15.00 is NOTHING...." That's just ridiculous. Now, I'm not saying it's a fortune or anything, but to say it's NOTHING proves you don't know much in the way of costs and paying bills. Furthermore, for my family gaming will cost 30-45 dollars a month since there are 3 of us, so it's not a matter of 15 bucks, but a question of priorities and let's see....do we want Showtime or Netflix or gaming? It requires, at least for US.....making a choice.....because 15 dollars IS SOMETHING.
Cocky privileged attitudes just reek, if you ask me. If you're so well to do that 15 dollars is nothing to you, that's fine, but don't make it a declaration for the world as if 15 bucks should be "nothing" to EVERYONE. That's just arrogant and ignorant.
You're kidding me, right? I work a middle-class job and I have many bills. $15 a month is nothing for the value you get out of a decent subscription game.
You missed his point. It's the cost of multiple subs in a household that adds up...which is totally true. Plus, there are multiple games that require subs that many of us would like to play but can't justify additional subs.
Re-read what I said, I know what JS said, that's not the point, the point is threads like this.
Is this a switch-a-roo? I am responding to your reply. You didn't make a valid point.
You tried explaining to me what he said, where as I was talking about the interpretation of what he said, the one that i constantly see around here.
The whole purpose of this thread and others like it, were/are to say that Subs are all about greed and are never needed, which is completely taking his statements out of context. People use it to put Anet above all others, and make others look criminal, that was the point I was making.
Please believe me when I say this because I am not trying to be mean here. But this is a switch-a-roo.
You said:
"My whole problem with what Jeff Strain and others from A-net (past and present) have said. Is that it gives the playerbase the wrong impression, that they are some sort of saint in a sea of criminals, which just isn't the case."
Now you are saying that others are taking his statements out of context. Now I agree with you that people do use his qoute out of context but you are replying to me who was trying to correct two poster's (yourself and WSIMike) accusing Anet and JS of a double standard. You never said that others are taking him out of context. If you did I would have agreed with you. As a matter of fact I stated that in one my previous reply's. That people push the Greed thing to much.
Again, I think I did a pretty good job of setting the record straight and you are changing your stance because of it.
Well I see where the confusion lies, in that when I post I tend to float and make points outside of the convo we were already having. That was more or less a side note to this overall conversation. So no it was no switch a-roo, sorry..
Ok. But just throwing around random comments and then saying the opposite in the same thread may give the impression of a troll. And nobody likes trolls, so be a little more careful next time. Most people don't like to be seen as a troll.
Although, I do wonder if you only make this mistake in a GW2 discussion. Nah.. that can't be. Just a simple mistake.
Re-read what I said, I know what JS said, that's not the point, the point is threads like this.
Is this a switch-a-roo? I am responding to your reply. You didn't make a valid point.
You tried explaining to me what he said, where as I was talking about the interpretation of what he said, the one that i constantly see around here.
The whole purpose of this thread and others like it, were/are to say that Subs are all about greed and are never needed, which is completely taking his statements out of context. People use it to put Anet above all others, and make others look criminal, that was the point I was making.
Please believe me when I say this because I am not trying to be mean here. But this is a switch-a-roo.
You said:
"My whole problem with what Jeff Strain and others from A-net (past and present) have said. Is that it gives the playerbase the wrong impression, that they are some sort of saint in a sea of criminals, which just isn't the case."
Now you are saying that others are taking his statements out of context. Now I agree with you that people do use his qoute out of context but you are replying to me who was trying to correct two poster's (yourself and WSIMike) accusing Anet and JS of a double standard. You never said that others are taking him out of context. If you did I would have agreed with you. As a matter of fact I stated that in one my previous reply's. That people push the Greed thing to much.
Again, I think I did a pretty good job of setting the record straight and you are changing your stance because of it.
Well I see where the confusion lies, in that when I post I tend to float and make points outside of the convo we were already having. That was more or less a side note to this overall conversation. So no it was no switch a-roo, sorry..
Ok. But just throwing around random comments and then saying the opposite in the same thread may give the impression of a troll. And nobody likes trolls, so be a little more careful next time. Most people don't like to be seen as a troll.
Although, I do wonder if you only make this mistake in a GW2 discussion. Nah.. that can't be. Just a simple mistake.
What did I say the opposite of? ANd of course now you pull the GW2 hater card, I'll stop that with one sentence, I am very much looking forward to GW2, what I am saying has nothing at all to do with my like or dislike or GW2.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Re-read what I said, I know what JS said, that's not the point, the point is threads like this.
Is this a switch-a-roo? I am responding to your reply. You didn't make a valid point.
You tried explaining to me what he said, where as I was talking about the interpretation of what he said, the one that i constantly see around here.
The whole purpose of this thread and others like it, were/are to say that Subs are all about greed and are never needed, which is completely taking his statements out of context. People use it to put Anet above all others, and make others look criminal, that was the point I was making.
Please believe me when I say this because I am not trying to be mean here. But this is a switch-a-roo.
You said:
"My whole problem with what Jeff Strain and others from A-net (past and present) have said. Is that it gives the playerbase the wrong impression, that they are some sort of saint in a sea of criminals, which just isn't the case."
Now you are saying that others are taking his statements out of context. Now I agree with you that people do use his qoute out of context but you are replying to me who was trying to correct two poster's (yourself and WSIMike) accusing Anet and JS of a double standard. You never said that others are taking him out of context. If you did I would have agreed with you. As a matter of fact I stated that in one my previous reply's. That people push the Greed thing to much.
Again, I think I did a pretty good job of setting the record straight and you are changing your stance because of it.
Well I see where the confusion lies, in that when I post I tend to float and make points outside of the convo we were already having. That was more or less a side note to this overall conversation. So no it was no switch a-roo, sorry..
Ok. But just throwing around random comments and then saying the opposite in the same thread may give the impression of a troll. And nobody likes trolls, so be a little more careful next time. Most people don't like to be seen as a troll.
Although, I do wonder if you only make this mistake in a GW2 discussion. Nah.. that can't be. Just a simple mistake.
What did I say the opposite of? ANd of course now you pull the GW2 hater card, I'll stop that with one sentence, I am very much looking forward to GW2, what I am saying has nothing at all to do with my like or dislike or GW2.
First you said
"My whole problem with what Jeff Strain and others from A-net (past and present) have said. Is that it gives the playerbase the wrong impression, that they are some sort of saint in a sea of criminals, which just isn't the case."
then you said
"...which is completely taking his statements out of context. People use it to put Anet above all others, and make others look criminal, that was the point I was making."
Two very different things about the same thing.
Please do not jump to conclusions. I do not think you are a GW2 hater. Just a SWTOR fan that likes to constantly nit pick GW2. You feel the need to pick at it to keep us GW2 fans from getting overexcited.
I won't claim to know the numbers involved with F2P vs. B2P vs. P2P, so I won't refute the "facts" that most of you seem to be throwing about, seeing that much of it is being pulled out of your collective asses to start with. But I will give one reason why I prefer non-subscription to the others: convenience.
I played CoX and paid a sub for it and was happy. I came back last year for a couple of months, paid a sub fee and was mostly happy. I wasn't going to resub again because, although I wouldn't mind spending a few hours in there now and again, I didn't feel it was worth subbing for -- neither the money nor the bother of reactivating my account. Now that it's F2P, I plan on visiting it again because I can come or go as I please and never have to worry about a subscription lapsing.
GW? I've been in and out of that game since the day it was released. I could always put it aside when I felt like it and return just as easily -- say for special events or for something as silly and mundane as grabbing a screenshot of a character. No f***ing around with credit card information required. Like so many of my other games, which happen to be single player, when I felt moved to play again, I'd start it and go. And if I only decided to play for a couple of hours out of the month, NO PROBLEM.
Price is mostly immaterial. I'd sub for GW2 is that was the model it was going with, but luckliy I won't have to. I don't care about the cost. I just like to be able to walk away and come back whenever I feel like it because eventually, no matter how good it is, I'll want to try something new. Knowing that I can come back anytime for any reason will keep me plugged into it for years, not a stupid subscription. In fact, that would have the opposite effect -- it would tend to keep me away.
There are other games I'm looking at and I'm fully prepared to pay a sub for them if necessary, but they won't keep me for the long-term. I'll always be going back to GW2 eventually, just as I've done with it's predecessor for the past six plus years.
"My whole problem with what Jeff Strain and others from A-net (past and present) have said. Is that it gives the playerbase the wrong impression, that they are some sort of saint in a sea of criminals, which just isn't the case."
then you said
"...which is completely taking his statements out of context. People use it to put Anet above all others, and make others look criminal, that was the point I was making."
Two very different things about the same thing.
Or maybe I just suck at writing a fully coherent post? As too me I said the same thing in both posts? I'll try and say it coherently, My whole problem is that Jeff strains words were too vague, and from the outside looking in are seriously misunderstood. Better?
Please do not jump to conclusions. I do not think you are a GW2 hater. Just a SWTOR fan that likes to constantly nit pick GW2. You feel the need to pick at it to keep us GW2 fans from getting overexcited.
BTW, congrats on the beta pass to SWTOR.
No I just nitpick at what I view as false statements or unrealistic predictions. I'm as much a fan of GW2 as I am TOR so no, I don't nitpick at any group of posters more. When I post it does not come from a standpoint of for or against any game. It's only toward the subject at hand.
I don't believe that sort of position is one any real gamer would take, I want all games to be good, and I support any studio making a game I have an interest in and GW2 is one of them.
Be as excited as you want what does that matter to me?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
"My whole problem with what Jeff Strain and others from A-net (past and present) have said. Is that it gives the playerbase the wrong impression, that they are some sort of saint in a sea of criminals, which just isn't the case."
then you said
"...which is completely taking his statements out of context. People use it to put Anet above all others, and make others look criminal, that was the point I was making."
Two very different things about the same thing.
Or maybe I just suck at writing a fully coherent post? As too me I said the same thing in both posts? I'll try and say it coherently, My whole problem is that Jeff strains words were too vague, and from the outside looking in are seriously misunderstood. Better?
Please do not jump to conclusions. I do not think you are a GW2 hater. Just a SWTOR fan that likes to constantly nit pick GW2. You feel the need to pick at it to keep us GW2 fans from getting overexcited.
BTW, congrats on the beta pass to SWTOR.
No I just nitpick at what I view as false statements or unrealistic predictions. I'm as much a fan of GW2 as I am TOR so no, I don't nitpick at any group of posters more. When I post it does not come from a standpoint of for or against any game. It's only toward the subject at hand.
I don't believe that sort of position is one any real gamer would take, I want all games to be good, and I support any studio making a game I have an interest in and GW2 is one of them.
Be as excited as you want what does that matter to me?
Sorry but I am not going to let you off that easily. No it didnt get better. Writing a non-coherent post does not excuse claims that JS or Anet make other developers look like crimminals when JS actual quotes states that the subscription model is a viable model. His quote nor any of Anet's quotes have ever said that other developers are crimminals like you are insinuating. You incorrectly interpeted that by others posters use of the word greed. That does not make JS or Anet guility of your charge.
So are you going to nitpick yourself for making a false statement or for an unrealistic interpretation. Obviously not, that doesn't make any sense. About as much sense in claiming your correcting false statements in your replies to me because none or your replies to me are correcting false information or statements.
My original post to you and the other guy stands. There is not a double standard, and you and Mike where trying to make something out of nothing.
Well of course GW2 won't need a subscription... They'll have a cash shop, just like GW1 does! And it's already been noted by folks in the indusry that cash shops can potentially monetize players for far more than a flat monthly sub fee could... especially if you're selling items that players deem as valuable or beneficial to their gameplay. Items such as such as, say, full skill sets available for purchase in one bundle, instead of having to earn them through gameplay. Or, say, enhancements which benefit the player in PvP...
That said, let's see what kind of things we can find in GW1's cash shop and, potentially, expect to find in GW2's shop as well...
10 for a PvP Upgrade pack with some very compelling, game-affecting items
$10 a pop for each of the "core skill" packs from the core game and each expansion so you don't even have to play any of the campaigns to unlock them
A pet upgrade pack for $10
Storage upgrade for another $10...
A whole bunch of special costumes ("fluff items") for $7 a pop...
An extra character slot for $10
And so on.
2 purchases, of even the $7 costumes, equals the standard sub fee for a P2P MMO ($14-$15), and you know as well as I do that there are people spending at least that much, if not more, to obtain those items.
And that's all on top of the box fee that so many love to claim is "all ANet needs to maintain the game".
I literally laughed out loud at the sheer sanctimony in the assertion made by of the the ANet folks (forget their name at the moment) about "P2P developers having to justify subscriptions". I believe I actually said "what a freaking hypocrite" out loud when I read it.
While he's making such "bold assertions" about how developers "can't justify charging extra money for their MMOs" in the form of subscriptions, he's selling skill packs and other items via a cash shop in his own game.
When GW does away with the cash shop and truly exists on box sales alone... then people like the ANet guy will have the right to question the validity of subscription fees. Until then, it's pure hypocrisy and spin-doctoring.
For anyone to even imply that ANet could get by on box sales alone is either the height of gullibility, willful ignorance or dishonesty. And if ANet truly could do just fine on box sales alone - rendering their cash shop sales entirely superfluous and entirely for extra profit - then the remarks made by that individual would be doubly hypocritical and damning.
Further still, each developer has its own circumstances and expenses based on how the company is set up, based on how the finances are set up and based on their overhead compared to their income. So there is no way to make such blanket statements as "developers don't need to charge a subscription". Unless someone knows the specific circumstances of each and every single developer charging a sub, they have no grounds to make that claim.
The fact that you cannot see the difference between people buying content to support a company and people paying $15 with no guarantee of any new content for that money is hilarious. Do you just pay a store when you go in to buy clothes on the off chance that they will have clothes you like next month? God I love the reasoning and logic people use on forums it is the best! If you believe that I will start a store and you all can come give me $15 a month and I might get stuff in sometimes that you will like and other times you might not, but as long as you are willing to keep giving me $15 a month I will be happy.
Also have you even looked at NCsoft finical records before you started to preach your view of the world? ANet when they were still making expansion for GW made more money than City of Heroes did which has a subscription. If box sales were not enough for them to make a profit why in that time period when they were producing expansions did their revenue top a subscription base game? Of course that does not mean the GW store does not add to their income, it is a continues income stream compared to box sales and every company on this earth wants that compared to one time sales. And when it comes down to it all companies exist to make money for the people that are in control of it, so why would any of them turn down more profit.
But if you really believe MMO developers need that subscription for their server and bandwidth cost more power to you then! Have fun with your life, I am just glad you do not control my finances!
A
lso for your things that are in GW1 cash shop that might be in GW2 cash shop: PVP upgrade pack? What the hell would be the point you get everything unlocked right when you enter into completive PVP, there is no unlocking. Yep you really did your research there didn’t you?
Core skill pack: You do realize that they way you get skills is completely different in GW2 compared to GW1, again no point in purchasing this. Yep some more great research and logic here!
Yep I should really believe you and your prediction when you do not even know what the hell you are talking about with GW2! Maybe next time actually look at the game you are talking about before you start talking, believe me it helps!
Originally posted by Quesa
then nickle and dime
The great part is none of you can see that pay to play is just another form of nickel and diming. Ah I love it, I love pay to play so it is best and you all are being fools!
Also for all you people out there saying cash shop this and cash shop that for Free to play and buy to play games, can you all point me to all the pay to play games without cash shops. Oh yeah that is right it is a dying breed that hardly exist anymore. But that is all right you guys are smarter and wiser because you say pay to play (which is becoming pay to play with a cash stop) is such a better deal for consumers everywhere. LOL God I love these forums!
I am not sure this is really true in reality but paying for a game sometimes filters out the community and garners you the possibility of more mature players. When you demand a payment generally the people who pay may be loath to behave poorly.
Also f2p will focus on the shop rather than the game.
F2p games also will probably allow cheating and other aspect to go unchecked as they can use the excuse that it is f2p whereas p2p cannot do the same since you are paying for them to solve that issue. Not that less cheating occurs in p2p.
Paying a sub fee means more mature players? Have you PLAYED WoW? Seriously.
And I wish you folks would stop talking about F2P because thats not what the article posted was about. At all. It was about the benefits of Buy to Play in regards to GW2. There's a difference. B2P does not equal F2P.
These are all classic arguments for sub fees. But in the end people, you're not getting squat for that 15 bucks a month. Not sure why any of you think otherwise.
The article was genious. Ive been saying the same thing for about a year now, but the author put it better than I ever could. Very well said. Thanks for the link OP.
Well all I can say is that the people behind GW2 are getting cash from another source to fund servers, and pay the staff..
Box sales alone wont last forever and yes running a server with lots of people on costs money, paying staff costs money, developnig and patching the game costs money... it all does. Most companies will get that cash from subscriptions... I guess the people behind GW2 get it from doing other things..
I dont pretend to know how they get the cash but they obviously do.
Well all I can say is that the people behind GW2 are getting cash from another source to fund servers, and pay the staff..
Box sales alone wont last forever and yes running a server with lots of people on costs money, paying staff costs money, developnig and patching the game costs money... it all does. Most companies will get that cash from subscriptions... I guess the people behind GW2 get it from doing other things..
I dont pretend to know how they get the cash but they obviously do.
They'll do it the same way they're STILL doing in GW1... simple as that...
"Happiness is not a destination. It is a method of life." -------------------------------
Comments
Re-read what I said, I know what JS said, that's not the point, the point is threads like this.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I agree with both of you. But the whole point is would you pay it if you didn't have to.
Only if I enjoy the game, I feel the best value out there for the money right now is AOC.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Of course not lol, just like devs aren't running a charity, nor am I.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Is this a switch-a-roo? I am responding to your reply. You didn't make a valid point.
So you do get it. There is no point to pointing out that Game Developers make games for a living. We know. Remember we only pay for what we deem worthy of our money. They would have EARNED it.
You're kidding me, right? I work a middle-class job and I have many bills. $15 a month is nothing for the value you get out of a decent subscription game.
You tried explaining to me what he said, where as I was talking about the interpretation of what he said, the one that i constantly see around here.
The whole purpose of this thread and others like it, were/are to say that Subs are all about greed and are never needed, which is completely taking his statements out of context. People use it to put Anet above all others, and make others look criminal, that was the point I was making.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
sometimes you're paying for quality service and a non crappy/buggy game with a good amount of content, but usually you're just paying for a bad game, as even most MMO's that charge a fee are bad.
it really comes down to what you think your experience is worth.
Please believe me when I say this because I am not trying to be mean here. But this is a switch-a-roo.
You said:
"My whole problem with what Jeff Strain and others from A-net (past and present) have said. Is that it gives the playerbase the wrong impression, that they are some sort of saint in a sea of criminals, which just isn't the case."
Now you are saying that others are taking his statements out of context. Now I agree with you that people do use his qoute out of context but you are replying to me who was trying to correct two poster's (yourself and WSIMike) accusing Anet and JS of a double standard. You never said that others are taking him out of context. If you did I would have agreed with you. As a matter of fact I stated that in one my previous reply's. That people push the Greed thing to much.
Again, I think I did a pretty good job of setting the record straight and you are changing your stance because of it.
Well I see where the confusion lies, in that when I post I tend to float and make points outside of the convo we were already having. That was more or less a side note to this overall conversation. So no it was no switch a-roo, sorry..
And no my opinion has not changed that there is a double standard at work here.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
You missed his point. It's the cost of multiple subs in a household that adds up...which is totally true. Plus, there are multiple games that require subs that many of us would like to play but can't justify additional subs.
As some one on the inside looking out. I wish I could tell you guys that deffend subs what the people that are taking your cash think about you.
My theme song.
Ok. But just throwing around random comments and then saying the opposite in the same thread may give the impression of a troll. And nobody likes trolls, so be a little more careful next time. Most people don't like to be seen as a troll.
Although, I do wonder if you only make this mistake in a GW2 discussion. Nah.. that can't be. Just a simple mistake.
What did I say the opposite of? ANd of course now you pull the GW2 hater card, I'll stop that with one sentence, I am very much looking forward to GW2, what I am saying has nothing at all to do with my like or dislike or GW2.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
First you said
"My whole problem with what Jeff Strain and others from A-net (past and present) have said. Is that it gives the playerbase the wrong impression, that they are some sort of saint in a sea of criminals, which just isn't the case."
then you said
"...which is completely taking his statements out of context. People use it to put Anet above all others, and make others look criminal, that was the point I was making."
Two very different things about the same thing.
Please do not jump to conclusions. I do not think you are a GW2 hater. Just a SWTOR fan that likes to constantly nit pick GW2. You feel the need to pick at it to keep us GW2 fans from getting overexcited.
BTW, congrats on the beta pass to SWTOR.
I won't claim to know the numbers involved with F2P vs. B2P vs. P2P, so I won't refute the "facts" that most of you seem to be throwing about, seeing that much of it is being pulled out of your collective asses to start with. But I will give one reason why I prefer non-subscription to the others: convenience.
I played CoX and paid a sub for it and was happy. I came back last year for a couple of months, paid a sub fee and was mostly happy. I wasn't going to resub again because, although I wouldn't mind spending a few hours in there now and again, I didn't feel it was worth subbing for -- neither the money nor the bother of reactivating my account. Now that it's F2P, I plan on visiting it again because I can come or go as I please and never have to worry about a subscription lapsing.
GW? I've been in and out of that game since the day it was released. I could always put it aside when I felt like it and return just as easily -- say for special events or for something as silly and mundane as grabbing a screenshot of a character. No f***ing around with credit card information required. Like so many of my other games, which happen to be single player, when I felt moved to play again, I'd start it and go. And if I only decided to play for a couple of hours out of the month, NO PROBLEM.
Price is mostly immaterial. I'd sub for GW2 is that was the model it was going with, but luckliy I won't have to. I don't care about the cost. I just like to be able to walk away and come back whenever I feel like it because eventually, no matter how good it is, I'll want to try something new. Knowing that I can come back anytime for any reason will keep me plugged into it for years, not a stupid subscription. In fact, that would have the opposite effect -- it would tend to keep me away.
There are other games I'm looking at and I'm fully prepared to pay a sub for them if necessary, but they won't keep me for the long-term. I'll always be going back to GW2 eventually, just as I've done with it's predecessor for the past six plus years.
No I just nitpick at what I view as false statements or unrealistic predictions. I'm as much a fan of GW2 as I am TOR so no, I don't nitpick at any group of posters more. When I post it does not come from a standpoint of for or against any game. It's only toward the subject at hand.
I don't believe that sort of position is one any real gamer would take, I want all games to be good, and I support any studio making a game I have an interest in and GW2 is one of them.
Be as excited as you want what does that matter to me?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Sorry but I am not going to let you off that easily. No it didnt get better. Writing a non-coherent post does not excuse claims that JS or Anet make other developers look like crimminals when JS actual quotes states that the subscription model is a viable model. His quote nor any of Anet's quotes have ever said that other developers are crimminals like you are insinuating. You incorrectly interpeted that by others posters use of the word greed. That does not make JS or Anet guility of your charge.
Here is a link to the entire speech. http://www.guildwars.com/events/tradeshows/gc2007/gcspeech.php You should read it so that you know what you are commenting on.
So are you going to nitpick yourself for making a false statement or for an unrealistic interpretation. Obviously not, that doesn't make any sense. About as much sense in claiming your correcting false statements in your replies to me because none or your replies to me are correcting false information or statements.
My original post to you and the other guy stands. There is not a double standard, and you and Mike where trying to make something out of nothing.
The fact that you cannot see the difference between people buying content to support a company and people paying $15 with no guarantee of any new content for that money is hilarious. Do you just pay a store when you go in to buy clothes on the off chance that they will have clothes you like next month? God I love the reasoning and logic people use on forums it is the best! If you believe that I will start a store and you all can come give me $15 a month and I might get stuff in sometimes that you will like and other times you might not, but as long as you are willing to keep giving me $15 a month I will be happy.
Also have you even looked at NCsoft finical records before you started to preach your view of the world? ANet when they were still making expansion for GW made more money than City of Heroes did which has a subscription. If box sales were not enough for them to make a profit why in that time period when they were producing expansions did their revenue top a subscription base game? Of course that does not mean the GW store does not add to their income, it is a continues income stream compared to box sales and every company on this earth wants that compared to one time sales. And when it comes down to it all companies exist to make money for the people that are in control of it, so why would any of them turn down more profit.
But if you really believe MMO developers need that subscription for their server and bandwidth cost more power to you then! Have fun with your life, I am just glad you do not control my finances!
A
lso for your things that are in GW1 cash shop that might be in GW2 cash shop: PVP upgrade pack? What the hell would be the point you get everything unlocked right when you enter into completive PVP, there is no unlocking. Yep you really did your research there didn’t you?
Core skill pack: You do realize that they way you get skills is completely different in GW2 compared to GW1, again no point in purchasing this. Yep some more great research and logic here!
Yep I should really believe you and your prediction when you do not even know what the hell you are talking about with GW2! Maybe next time actually look at the game you are talking about before you start talking, believe me it helps!
The great part is none of you can see that pay to play is just another form of nickel and diming. Ah I love it, I love pay to play so it is best and you all are being fools!
Also for all you people out there saying cash shop this and cash shop that for Free to play and buy to play games, can you all point me to all the pay to play games without cash shops. Oh yeah that is right it is a dying breed that hardly exist anymore. But that is all right you guys are smarter and wiser because you say pay to play (which is becoming pay to play with a cash stop) is such a better deal for consumers everywhere. LOL God I love these forums!
Paying a sub fee means more mature players? Have you PLAYED WoW? Seriously.
And I wish you folks would stop talking about F2P because thats not what the article posted was about. At all. It was about the benefits of Buy to Play in regards to GW2. There's a difference. B2P does not equal F2P.
These are all classic arguments for sub fees. But in the end people, you're not getting squat for that 15 bucks a month. Not sure why any of you think otherwise.
The article was genious. Ive been saying the same thing for about a year now, but the author put it better than I ever could. Very well said. Thanks for the link OP.
Depends on what it gets you surely?
IF $0 a month gets you the same thing as $15 then yeah, its worth it.
Well all I can say is that the people behind GW2 are getting cash from another source to fund servers, and pay the staff..
Box sales alone wont last forever and yes running a server with lots of people on costs money, paying staff costs money, developnig and patching the game costs money... it all does. Most companies will get that cash from subscriptions... I guess the people behind GW2 get it from doing other things..
I dont pretend to know how they get the cash but they obviously do.
They'll do it the same way they're STILL doing in GW1... simple as that...
"Happiness is not a destination. It is a method of life."
-------------------------------