Guild wars does well in the B2P niche.. i wouldnt pay a regular sub to play it though.. its not a AAA MMO..
What makes you think it isn't? It has over 250 people working on it for 4 years now. Convention builds (alpha stage) were more polished than most of games releasing to the market. They stick to "when it's ready" philosophy. Everything indicates they develop high quality, AAA MMO.
Guild wars does well in the B2P niche.. i wouldnt pay a regular sub to play it though.. its not a AAA MMO..
What makes you think it isn't? It has over 250 people working on it for 4 years now. Convention builds (alpha stage) were more polished than most of games releasing to the market. They stick to "when it's ready" philosophy. Everything indicates they develop high quality, AAA MMO.
No need to all defensive and I think he was refering to Guild Wars, as in the original Guild Wars, not Guild Wars 2. And Guild Wars was obviously not a AAA MMO. Heck, it wasn't even an MMO. Doesn't change the fact that GW2 will be a AAA MMO, without requiring its users to pay an ongoing fee to play the game and I think that's a good thing. Shame that other people still believe in the myth that an MMO cannot be Triple A or have free content patches, without a sub fee, or that a sub fee = more content.
If you are asking this question, you are missing the point.
Edit:
Originally posted by Kwansei I would , like in any MMO , pay a sub for a dedicated RP server with actual GMs doing events like they did in early-mid EQ1. Albeit not a server ruled by the RPolice who go in to seizures at a minor lore infraction...
This, I would happily pay for.
"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
Guild wars does well in the B2P niche.. i wouldnt pay a regular sub to play it though.. its not a AAA MMO..
What makes you think it isn't? It has over 250 people working on it for 4 years now. Convention builds (alpha stage) were more polished than most of games releasing to the market. They stick to "when it's ready" philosophy. Everything indicates they develop high quality, AAA MMO.
No need to all defensive and I think he was refering to Guild Wars, as in the original Guild Wars, not Guild Wars 2. And Guild Wars was obviously not a AAA MMO. Heck, it wasn't even an MMO. Doesn't change the fact that GW2 will be a AAA MMO, without requiring its users to pay an ongoing fee to play the game and I think that's a good thing. Shame that other people still believe in the myth that an MMO cannot be Triple A or have free content patches, without a sub fee, or that a sub fee = more content.
I think it was explained countless time now, people seam to think that a payment model is just that, and that it have no repercussion on the games you are paying for. But i think many people try to make understand that the way you pay for a game will change the way you play the game too. This mean payment model do have a very big influence in game design. I think many people now play those games for so many years and got so many false declaration about game design, that they finally understood payment method do a have a very deep connection to the game design, this mean the way you'll play. Stuff like endless leveling, grind, repetitive task was most certainly done so players would get attached to their games to pay them monthly subscription.
Look at Wow for exemple, they abolished xp grind at the beginning, but guess what, it didn't need long to put back in an other grrind, which was gear grind. Would have it been like this without monthly subsciption? thats a good question isn't it?
Anet already said they don't want that kind of game play, can't people just understand that once and for all. Its like the free2play models, yes in f2p they have deeply tweaked the gameplay so that people will make micro transactions; Its really not hard to spot on is it? It's really the same principals. So why do you ask for monthly fees? Do people really want to have a game design that push them to pay every month, rather than enjoy it as it develop (with expansions)? Honestly give it a chance, its worth a try imo, and maybe even more than one.
There's a poll over on gw2guru with the same title, the fanbase over there consists of a lot of GW fans, a large percentage seems to have bought GW simply because there is no sub fee and became fans through playing, to that end the results reflect that community. I'm just wondering if on a forum dedicated to the genre rather than the one game we would see a different result.
Before voting imagine that GW2 had always been developed as a subscription model, would it's list of features have you believe it is worth a monthly fee ? I also want you to take the item shop out of the equation, I want you to judge the game purely on its features.
For background on the game please look at:
Cali59's list of GW2 innovations, but please let's not get bogged down in semantics about the correct use of the word innovation
I think anyone who has played a Sub based game in the past will vote yes, as I did. However the great thing is we wont have too and they still offer all the innovation and all the content of a normal sub based AAA MMO. Whats not to like about that.
Playing: GW2 Waiting on: TESO Next Flop: Planetside 2 Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
Going to be having fun with SWTOR and the only reason I would be giving GW2 a look is soley on the fact that its B2P. If it was P2P I would never bother.
I'd pay $15/month as long as developers keep their other promises and GW2 meets my expectations. I simply want to play an MMO where PvP isn't affected by PvE. And guess what? There are no viable options now since WAR is dead and everything else is either pay2win or PvE2win. (To be completely honest, WAR was far from perfect too because it was grind2win.)
But there are many legit concerns about sub-based MMOs. As people have already mentioned in this thread, monthly fees = regular content patches = more of the same to keep people busy. Essentially, if you have a sub-base business model you want as many subs as possible for as long as possible. And unfortunately, there's only one known solution to this problem: grind. Grind is bad enough in PvE and absolutely horrible in PvP.
So I don't see how could GW2 possibly be the game it's supposed to be and have a monthly fee at the same time.
MMORPG genre is dead. Long live MMOCS (Massively Multiplayer Online Cash Shop).
Comments
Guild wars does well in the B2P niche.. i wouldnt pay a regular sub to play it though.. its not a AAA MMO..
Nope. I am going to play it as my main fantasy game, but if it was P2P I wouldn't since I will be playing SWTOR.
Im curious to know what you THINK is a AAA game?
Just a little mind boggling seeing how much money has gone into development of this game.
"The problem with quotes from the Internet is that it's almost impossible to validate their authenticity." - Abraham Lincoln
What makes you think it isn't? It has over 250 people working on it for 4 years now. Convention builds (alpha stage) were more polished than most of games releasing to the market. They stick to "when it's ready" philosophy. Everything indicates they develop high quality, AAA MMO.
No need to all defensive and I think he was refering to Guild Wars, as in the original Guild Wars, not Guild Wars 2. And Guild Wars was obviously not a AAA MMO. Heck, it wasn't even an MMO. Doesn't change the fact that GW2 will be a AAA MMO, without requiring its users to pay an ongoing fee to play the game and I think that's a good thing. Shame that other people still believe in the myth that an MMO cannot be Triple A or have free content patches, without a sub fee, or that a sub fee = more content.
If you are asking this question, you are missing the point.
Edit:
This, I would happily pay for.
"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
WTF? No subscription fee?
My bad, obviously.
The poll is missing my opinion, I would pay more than the current average if the game is significantly better than the current MMOs.
I would like to know how many people spent money in their shops on a monthly basis and how much did they spend.
I think it was explained countless time now, people seam to think that a payment model is just that, and that it have no repercussion on the games you are paying for. But i think many people try to make understand that the way you pay for a game will change the way you play the game too. This mean payment model do have a very big influence in game design. I think many people now play those games for so many years and got so many false declaration about game design, that they finally understood payment method do a have a very deep connection to the game design, this mean the way you'll play. Stuff like endless leveling, grind, repetitive task was most certainly done so players would get attached to their games to pay them monthly subscription.
Look at Wow for exemple, they abolished xp grind at the beginning, but guess what, it didn't need long to put back in an other grrind, which was gear grind. Would have it been like this without monthly subsciption? thats a good question isn't it?
Anet already said they don't want that kind of game play, can't people just understand that once and for all. Its like the free2play models, yes in f2p they have deeply tweaked the gameplay so that people will make micro transactions; Its really not hard to spot on is it? It's really the same principals. So why do you ask for monthly fees? Do people really want to have a game design that push them to pay every month, rather than enjoy it as it develop (with expansions)? Honestly give it a chance, its worth a try imo, and maybe even more than one.
I think anyone who has played a Sub based game in the past will vote yes, as I did. However the great thing is we wont have too and they still offer all the innovation and all the content of a normal sub based AAA MMO. Whats not to like about that.
Everything you need to know about Elder Scrolls Online
Playing: GW2
Waiting on: TESO
Next Flop: Planetside 2
Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
not after being promised it online free. otherwise? no. dont pay for online games
Going to be having fun with SWTOR and the only reason I would be giving GW2 a look is soley on the fact that its B2P. If it was P2P I would never bother.
I'd pay $15/month as long as developers keep their other promises and GW2 meets my expectations. I simply want to play an MMO where PvP isn't affected by PvE. And guess what? There are no viable options now since WAR is dead and everything else is either pay2win or PvE2win. (To be completely honest, WAR was far from perfect too because it was grind2win.)
But there are many legit concerns about sub-based MMOs. As people have already mentioned in this thread, monthly fees = regular content patches = more of the same to keep people busy. Essentially, if you have a sub-base business model you want as many subs as possible for as long as possible. And unfortunately, there's only one known solution to this problem: grind. Grind is bad enough in PvE and absolutely horrible in PvP.
So I don't see how could GW2 possibly be the game it's supposed to be and have a monthly fee at the same time.
MMORPG genre is dead. Long live MMOCS (Massively Multiplayer Online Cash Shop).
Make something fun and I'll pay money for it. GW2 sounds fun and I would pay a sub for it if I had to.
This is not a game.