Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Server autonomy

garretthgarretth Member UncommonPosts: 343

I've enjoyed reading all the posts for and against the cash shop.  Many of the posters are passionate about their views and I have found my perspective has changed slightly as I read through them...and have found myself seesawing a bit.    I have certainly given the CS much more thought.   What I have enjoyed most was the spirited discourse of sincere opinion (minus the obvious trolls).

I hate to see the passion go away.   It could be the lifeblood of the game if harnassed in a positive way.  If that energy and passion was funneled into the Mists, then we could have some memorable pvp.  How could that be done? 

One idea I mentioned in another post was to create a subscription server and a CS server...we could call it the 'Battle of the Budget' in a tongue in cheeky kinda way.  :)

Taking the idea further along, It seems apparent to me that servers NEED to have their 'own flavor' for pvp to thrive beyond expectations.  Each server could have a 'personality' and automony so that when you refer to a server EVERYONE knows what that server stands for.   Diversity among servers should be beacons to like-minded players.   Each server should have a Soul.

Server personalities could include, CS, Subscription, Anarchist, Explorer, Role-playing, DPS, Traders, Tycoons...etc.   Perhaps the server populations could 'vote' democratically to pick their 'personality'.     Of course, not everyone on a server would conform...and (for example) some folks could vote for their server to be role-playing (but not role-play) as a way to confuse the 'enemy'. 

But it would all be good...most especially when we finally meet each other in the Mists. 

 

 

Comments

  • BetakodoBetakodo Member UncommonPosts: 333

    Guild Wars 1 proved they didn't need subscriptions OR CASH SHOP to have an online game. Just the box purchase of each addition to the game.

    F2P games don't have you buy anything and they're persistant world. WvW has a server cap anyways.

    Simply put, $60 X number of players + (Expansion pack cost * buyers) etc.

    Oh yeah, don't forget to minus all the IPADS anet bought for their whole studio lol.

    http://www.arena.net/blog/join-the-club-arenanet-coder-launches-sketch-club-app

  • pacovpacov Member Posts: 311

    i'm afraid p2p serves would have a very scarce population... why would you pay $15 dollars a month for no cash shop when you could invest those $15 into cash shop a month and get a ton of gold or great items

    image
  • garretthgarretth Member UncommonPosts: 343

    Originally posted by pacov

    i'm afraid p2p serves would have a very scarce population... why would you pay $15 dollars a month for no cash shop when you could invest those $15 into cash shop a month and get a ton of gold or great items

    There are folks that feel their code of honor forbids CS.   They would have a way to show that their playstyle is in fact a cut above the other playstyles.

    It gives players 'something' to fight for ... they are fighting for their playstyle.

  • XthosXthos Member UncommonPosts: 2,740

    Originally posted by pacov

    i'm afraid p2p serves would have a very scarce population... why would you pay $15 dollars a month for no cash shop when you could invest those $15 into cash shop a month and get a ton of gold or great items

     Well, you could offer people that pay a sub (guaranteed money for the company) so much currency towards the cash shop, like 1.25 or 1.5 what $15 would buy you on the normal server, but people cannot buy stuff outside of the monthly total, but can bank it for something if it cost more than that...

     

    Not saying I am asking for the option, but just throwing it out there, they get guaranteed sub money, and people on the server are all on equal footing, without the ability to pump more money into the cash shop...

     

  • DOGMA1138DOGMA1138 Member UncommonPosts: 476

    Originally posted by Betakodo

    Guild Wars 1 proved they didn't need subscriptions OR CASH SHOP to have an online game. Just the box purchase of each addition to the game.

    F2P games don't have you buy anything and they're persistant world. WvW has a server cap anyways.

    Simply put, $60 X number of players + (Expansion pack cost * buyers) etc.

    Oh yeah, don't forget to minus all the IPADS anet bought for their whole studio lol.

    http://www.arena.net/blog/join-the-club-arenanet-coder-launches-sketch-club-app

    GW1 also didnt make that that much if any money over the years, and thats why they've dropped all support for it in terms of content. Also GW1 wasnt as big as GW2 was allmost completly based on local instances with Peer 2 Peer multiplayer client side instances except for some of the leveling zones and the lobby zones.

    GW2 has a persistant world which is managed on the server side the only local instances are the story mode which can be shared with other players. GW2 needs much more backend infrastructure to support it than GW1 ever did, epsecially if you count that more people registered for the beta than GW1 box sales.

    If GW2 sells 2M copies that's 120M, this doesnt covers the costs of the development of an MMO not to mention ANets rent for the past 5 years, they need another source of income to cover the development costs and to be able to pay the bills for the servers.

    GW1 was as much of an MMO as D2 was it didnt proved that that B2P model is viable for real MMO's no COOP RPG's or MOBA games.

  • Loke666Loke666 Member EpicPosts: 21,441

    I wouldn't mind a P2P server but I feel it kinda goes against the policy of ANET, which is that you really only need to buy the box.

    Personally would I as much see cashshop free servers in P2P game like Wow for a few bucks extra.

    I don't think I actually would play on it myself. As an alternative could they have a deluxe version that cost a lot more to purchase initially without the shop (150 bucks like the CE sounds fair), that one I would actually buy myself.

  • CromicaCromica Member UncommonPosts: 657

    Originally posted by pacov

    i'm afraid p2p serves would have a very scarce population... why would you pay $15 dollars a month for no cash shop when you could invest those $15 into cash shop a month and get a ton of gold or great items

    Why spend the $15 at all when you can get all the same items just by doing the content and enjoying the game?

     

    I don't think you can ever have it both ways, it just wouldn't work.

  • Loke666Loke666 Member EpicPosts: 21,441

    Originally posted by DOGMA1138

    GW1 also didnt make that that much if any money over the years, and thats why they've dropped all support for it in terms of content. Also GW1 wasnt as big as GW2 was allmost completly based on local instances with Peer 2 Peer multiplayer client side instances except for some of the leveling zones and the lobby zones.

    GW2 has a persistant world which is managed on the server side the only local instances are the story mode which can be shared with other players. GW2 needs much more backend infrastructure to support it than GW1 ever did, epsecially if you count that more people registered for the beta than GW1 box sales.

    If GW2 sells 2M copies that's 120M, this doesnt covers the costs of the development of an MMO not to mention ANets rent for the past 5 years, they need another source of income to cover the development costs and to be able to pay the bills for the servers.

    GW1 was as much of an MMO as D2 was it didnt proved that that B2P model is viable for real MMO's no COOP RPG's or MOBA games.

    What do you mean? They still add stuff to GW, like war in kryta and whatever that Canthan campaign is called.

    ANET have 20 times so many people working for them now as in the start, that would not have happened if GW wouldn't earn money. GW was high on NC softs list to which game that pulled in most money and it is one of the best sold PC games ever.

    GW have gotten in many times what it have cost, anything else is BS.

    Why do you think it is more expensive to have 100 players in the same instance as having one instance for each one of them? The bandwidth you use is very close.

  • DOGMA1138DOGMA1138 Member UncommonPosts: 476

    I dont think it's their policy as much as they've realized that they cant make a P2P game out of GW1 at the time they were too small and needed to release somthing since NCSoft isnt excalty the richest kid on the block.

    No one would've paid 15US to play GW1 it had little content for an MMO and at first very little PVP veriaty too, they've tried to pump out expansion as fast as they cant even did 2 a year for the last too but still that wasnt really enough to justify the ongoing level of support an "MMO" or a game that starts to be one requires.

    As for GW2 i really belive it was more about not being able to compete with other MMO's out there since even tho WoW is bleeding out subs left and right they still dont seem to go any where in perticular and since GW2 is as far form WoW as you can get with in the Theme Park range they cant count on grabbing players who want WoW 2.0 or WoW Vanilla.

    That said as with any other cash shop MMO i do belive that both ANet and NC expect to gain atleast the equivilent of 10US per active player per month and they dont care if 1 player pays 50  a month to cover him and another 4 who are getting a free ride.

    ANnet are not saints and are not philantropists they are a company and their only goal is to make money only if to make more games and they sure as hell didn't make enough from GW1 to support it and to develope GW2.

    There's also little we know atm about their content roadmap in which mostlikely they'll jump on the DLC bandwaggon by releasing optional content updates that people will might want to buy every few months, and an expact that people "must buy" ever year or so.

    They need to make money, no amount of box sales can cover the initial and upkeep costs of an MMO to a point in which the company and its shareholders are satisfied even before getting to the being greedy part.

  • Shroom_MageShroom_Mage Member UncommonPosts: 863
    Can you even imagine the backlash if ArenaNet announced, "Guild Wars 2 will now have an optional subscription!" right after announcing the cash shop details? The people who actually want a monthly fee are in an extreme minority. The ones complaining about the cash shop are mostly people who don't understand that ArenaNet is a business and not a charity.

    "Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." -Dr. Seuss

  • fiontarfiontar Member UncommonPosts: 3,682

    Wait....Ummm....What?

    Are people actually suggesting that there be P2P servers, where people would pay $15/month just to play on a server with no Cash Shop access? Well, much of the Cash Shop discussion has already veered off into Twilight Zone territory, so why not?

    The game is Buy to Play with a very optional Cash Shop. No Pay to Win. Cosmetic Items, Account Services and very limited boost items. It's just not a big deal. Arenanet will tune the controversial items, but B2P plus benevolent Cash Shop is the business model and it's a superior model for the vast majority of customers. I really have trouble believing that anyone who actually planned on playing this game would boycott it over such a mild cash shop.

    It's a great issue for trolls, haters and the easily manipulated, but by the time the game launches, there should be nothing about the cash shop to disuade fans and those just looking to try a promising new MMORPG with no subscription fee.

    Want to know more about GW2 and why there is so much buzz? Start here: Guild Wars 2 Mass Info for the Uninitiated
    image

Sign In or Register to comment.