But players defending a CS with convenience items because no items give advantage, this is one of those baby steps to where box price + CS + subscription will be the norm, and every time you die you are reminded that you could have avoided dying only if you had spent a bit more $.
Really?
How many times have the developers stated that the cash shop will offer cosmetic and convenience items and why is it hard to believe this? Yes, of couse, the developers want to create another revenue stream with a cash shop.
But they also want to create a relationship with the customer that does not feel exploitive because in a year, they're going to have an expansion to sell you for $40 (approx) and they want you to buy this. This is what they have done with GW1.
Now of course, they could alienate their entire community and start selling DLC throught the cash shop; they could go back on their word and start selling clear P2W items to the same effect, but does this make good business sense?
From information available so far, the ONLY in-game reminder that there is a cash shop are the locked boxes that drop from mobs. Keys do drop as well, but if you want that box open right then and there, you need to buy a key from the cash shop. I do not support this feature and won't be using it if it goes live.
they have already upped the rate of the keys dropping in the world and i'm pretty sure they're making it so you can buy keys on the auction house.. once again if thats the case.. players with money buying gems selling keys for gold getting ingame items with gold... everything is right with the world
Don't think we can issue an advance guarantee of anything. (Except the world ending late this year, anyway)
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Don't think we can issue an advance guarantee of anything. (Except the world ending late this year, anyway)
That is a forgone conclusion.
Dick Clark was the first sign. Fuckin' Mayans...
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
Convenience items don't bother me for one simple fact: I really don't care how fast or slow you level your character. It really doesn't matter to me that you got to play such and such zone earlier than me because I will get there eventually. I want to enjoy exploring and seeing all the game has to offer as I go, not zip through it and then go back to the areas I've just been in.
With the way GW2 is set up, I care even less (if that's possible). The leveling curve is flat across all levels and in PvP you are kicked up to the highest level so your not severly disadvantaged. So, XP potions and health potions etc. don't bother me at all. I don't consider them Pay2Win and probably won't buy them so it doesn't matter to me whether they're in the CS or not. Things that would bother me are overpowered weapons and armor, or anything else you can't get in the game just by playing it. Since Anet have said over and over that the things in the CS will be obtainable in game, I don't see any problem.
And, with the past being a good predictor of the future, since the CS in GW1 was not an issue, I don't think it will be an issue in GW2 either.
I forgot to add....For me, the CS issue needs to be evaluated on a case by case basis. I think that overall there are definitely things that the majority of people don't want to see in Cash Shops and companies will figure out what they are pretty quickly.
You want me to pay to play a game I already paid for???
The irony is that I think box prices and subscriptions are way too cheap. I'd happily pay up to $150, say, for a game I know won't manipulate me to spend while I play.
Discuss.
what subscribtions ? you find a subscribtion of zero too cheap?
if you want to discuss this please state loud and clearly if you prefer subscription or not. Because it's a very improtant distinction to determinate where this discussion could go.
the slope you are talking about is going to Pay to win (P2W) .
But basicly all convineice argument is based on its possible to have a road between P2W and subscribtion, something ArenaNet have shown in GW1 that they are able to follow.
I don't think either way really matters at all,it still comes down to "you get what you pay for" and is it a fair shake?
IMO cash shop is a definite big NO,not in any form what so ever and why i'll never play another SOE game ever thta uses cash shop.
What happens is what the OP was eluding to,it gets more and more accepted,fanbois almost never cry foul they paint a happy picture no matter what a develoepr does to rip them off.This allows the dev to release their game in any state becuae they know their fanbois are crying for it.
So this leaves us with the ONLY fair value ,either a one time pay or a sub fee and again both can work but you NEED to be a SMART consumer.
Here is a couple exampels to look for>>>content and depth.Both these areas have tons to talk about but i'll just tal kvaguely to save time.
Game A one time pay.Does the game have a full feature set?Wil lthe game instead release half a game and sell content that should be on release in xpacs?
Game B sub fee.Nothing changes here even though it is a sub fee you should determine if the game is releasing a full feature game or holding back content to sell you the rest of the game in xpacs.
I think 90% of the gamers SHOULD realize what a full feature set is and many should know what a developer is capable of doing without buying into all their excuses.That is what it comes down to,if you pay and support anything the dev sells you,then you make for poor game developement because the dev is more than happy to take your money for half an effort.
I just want to chip in here and point something on B2P and Sub... not arguing just wondering why this is always overlooked.
B2P is straight forward, buy once, get access forever right?
Sub based, you STILL PAY a box price, SW:TOR 60 bucks+sub, WAR 60+sub, WoW whatever their box price is + Sub. Rift as well.
Sub based are WAYYY more money to play, especially if you play for long periods of time, 1 year is 60+180, thats 240 bucks on your first year. Minus expansions
Just saying though, why do people refrence the sub model as just a sub? its anything but that IMO, you are paying the SAME box price up front, atleast for new games, and then paying 15 bucks monthly, why is that overlooked?
I think it's more despicable for games to have a box price+sub+CS, that is where we should be flaming. Box+Sub or Box+CS isn't bad IMO, so long as the CS IS just convenience items.
Now i know ANet is fully capable of going P2W with a CS especially with NCSoft backing them up, but like stated earlier, what would you rather have, 1000 players spending on average of 2 bucks a months for CS stuff that isn't P2W, cause you don't really need the stuff that often, or 100 players spending 8 bucks a month because the game ran off all the other players due to the CS P2W? That just means when you release an expansion, you will have 100 buys, rather than 1000+. And those 900 by example adds up really freaking fast.
Also i think if i pay a sub fee, anything they release for the game should be FREE. I'M PAYING YOU MONTHLY, why should i pay for the new xpac i've already paid for 6 times over and then some just because you decided to take 2 years to make it. Those are the points that confuse me, why are people so ok with having a Box+Sub+pay for any further development? It's baffling to me, you are getting epicly effed, and manipulated worse than a meaningless CS.
Again i apologize if this came off a little.... argumentive, i don't mean it to be, and it isn't directed to you, but us gamers who pay for all these, then don't like ANets model for buisness.
The "Youtube Pro": Someone who watches video's on said subject, and obviously has a full understanding of what is being said about such subject.
I don't think either way really matters at all,it still comes down to "you get what you pay for" and is it a fair shake?
IMO cash shop is a definite big NO,not in any form what so ever and why i'll never play another SOE game ever thta uses cash shop.
What happens is what the OP was eluding to,it gets more and more accepted,fanbois almost never cry foul they paint a happy picture no matter what a develoepr does to rip them off.This allows the dev to release their game in any state becuae they know their fanbois are crying for it.
So this leaves us with the ONLY fair value ,either a one time pay or a sub fee and again both can work but you NEED to be a SMART consumer.
Here is a couple exampels to look for>>>content and depth.Both these areas have tons to talk about but i'll just tal kvaguely to save time.
Game A one time pay.Does the game have a full feature set?Wil lthe game instead release half a game and sell content that should be on release in xpacs?
Game B sub fee.Nothing changes here even though it is a sub fee you should determine if the game is releasing a full feature game or holding back content to sell you the rest of the game in xpacs.
I think 90% of the gamers SHOULD realize what a full feature set is and many should know what a developer is capable of doing without buying into all their excuses.That is what it comes down to,if you pay and support anything the dev sells you,then you make for poor game developement because the dev is more than happy to take your money for half an effort.
I do not quite follow what you posted above, but if I'm reading it correctly, what do you make of a model like World of Warcraft, where you pay a monthly sub to log into the game AND they have a cash shop. This model will also be used in TSW.
Ideally, one pays a subscription to support the regular development of content. I believe that this actually happens in a game like Rift, that has regular and significant content packages delivered. But if you've been playing WoW since Cata, you will have spent close to 2 years worth of sub money by the time MoP releases - that's about $300 depending on date of MoP. What have you purchased for that? Two reused/reworked 5 man dungeons, 3 new 5 man dungeons, 7 raid bosses in FL, and 8 fights/7 raid bosses in DS. Some people could argue that continuing to pay a sub for very little content allows developers to be "lazy".
I am not knocking WoW, I am using this as an example of what a subscription buys. The question is, is this worth the price, and only the gamer can answer that. On top of this, WoW allows people to buy BOE pets for cash and sell them in the AH for gold, and has released 3 (I believe) buyable mounts over the past 2 years at $25 a pop, and has paid character services including server transfer, faction change, race change, and name change. Again, I am not knocking this practice, I am using it for comparison.
We have yet to see what TSW offers, but we do know there is an in-game cash shop and a subscription fee. K-Tera has a cash shop, though it is unclear if this will be implemented in the NA/EU version.
With GW2, for one box price of $60, you get 5 character slots and I've seen estimates ranging from 200 hours of PvE content all the way up to 1000, with significant replayability because of the dynamic nature of events. This does not include the time spent in PvP at all. Yes there is a cash shop. If you spend 5 minutes you can google images of the cash shop from the NDA beta. Yes you can buy a hat, a pirate outfit, a 10% crafting experience bonus for an hour, another chacter slot, more bank space etc. Are these game breaking? Are these P2W? If you buy these are you making the game worse?
"Loading screens" are not "instances". Your personal efforts to troll any game will not, in fact, impact the success or failure of said game.
Lets break this down easy like. If you can live with a cash shop and what they have in it, and how they present it... buy the game, play the game. If you cant, dont. Vote with your wallet. If you bought the game and they change it to a way you dont like, stop playing the game and let them know that you stopped and will not be paying for any more of their servises.
Everyone has a personal level on what they will except. If enough people agree, they will loose money and have to re-do their games. If there is enough people that keep spending and playing where they make a good profit, they will keep it that way. This is how a free market works.
Personally, I'd like MMOs to take on the Buy Per Hour mentality they do on the East. I used this when playing I think it was the Korean Beta for Aion a while back. It seems to be cheaper when you do the Buy Per Hour, atleast it did for me. Now, if you play 20 hours a day that's one thing, and if that's the case someone should help you get laid.
I hate cash shops, but GW2 doesn't seem bad if it's only shooting for conevenice and fluff. When you lock out content, certain weapons, things like this then it starts to get sour.
If you don't like the cash shop then don't buy the game. If you think having a cash shop equates to pay-to-win then don't buy the game, you won't be missing out on anything since you wouldn't want to play a pay-to-win game. Nobody wants you to buy a game that you don't want to play. Do everyone a favor and don't buy the game.
As many games already feature box + subscription + cash shop, most prominently WoW, GW2 won't blur any line regarding this.
Ironically enough, in may games turned F2P, a subscription is what is P2W, as former or current subscribers recieve stuff you can not get without. Even if you can get it without, if even a purely cosmectic item is P2W, a model like DDO has, the subscription could be seen as automatized cash shop.
Somehow, a subscription makes everything okay, no matter what is featured in the shop or what you get for subscribing (see DDO). If you pay $60 once and you can play until the severs shut down, the cash shop is an issue, but if you have to pay $15 a month or you can not play at all, it's okay to make people grind if they don't pay, or to offer benefits you can not get without paying? It's okay to have paid hundreds to thousand(s) of dollar over the years, and still having to buy the newest mount or pet from the shop?
Can someone explain to me why a subscription makes everything okay, but paying once and never again if you don't want to makes everything P2W?
This.
With all the other P2P games like EQ1, EQ2, AoC and LOTRO slipping into a 'Freemium' model with incentives for subscribing while also having 'convenience items' and cosmetic items - I find it strange that so many people are hung up on the GW2 B2P with convenience and cosmetic items payment method. GW2 at least has the decency not to charge you a monthly sub on top.
Agree with OP, it's a slippery slope. "It's only convenience" is not an argument.
The only thing you can do is buy the game and just quit when the impact of the cash shop starts to get annoying. Unitl then, you'll hopefully have some fun in the game.
I don't get it. There are not p2w items in the game. Period. Maybe there'll be in the future? Ok, maybe. But we have non-cosmetic stuff in there too. Unlocking bag slots (if u don't pay,u can carry less with u) that apply to one character only, unlocking bank slots, better salvaging item that it's sure to extract something when u salvage..
My question is: As long as there is not a single P2W item, anything ese is fine by you? I'm not being sarcastic here,it's a honest question. I'll play it anyway, but i don't like those "unlock this and that" in the CS. Reminds me too much of F2P games...
Agree with OP, it's a slippery slope. "It's only convenience" is not an argument.
The only thing you can do is buy the game and just quit when the impact of the cash shop starts to get annoying. Unitl then, you'll hopefully have some fun in the game.
It's funny because your saying the argument of "it's only convenicence" is invalid because of a informal fallacy argument "slippery slope" I'm not say it couldn't happen but to say that the slipper slope is some how more valid then "it's only a convenience" is false. To say your "gut feel" is that either will happen is actually what is going on here. My "gut feel " is that ANet certainly wants money but they also don't want to sacrifice customers they would as any busniness like to hit a sweet spot. I think they will use GW1 as a model. If your "gut feel" comes true and it ends up P2W I think ANet fails and the game after what looks like a big launch will fade fast as it become more of a P2W game.
If you approach every game with a slippery slope argument none of them will pass muster. Personally from what I've seen it looks like fun so do you it appears. If it stops being fun I'll quit but that's true of any game so what the hell are we talking about again?
I'm currently wrestling with the cash shop issue with GW2.
I've followed a few threads and read "as long as its only convenience, not real advantage I'm ok" quite a bit.
I understand playing GW2 anyway, but I don't understand the argument. It says you are ok with devs having an economic incentive to shape gameplay towards players buying convenience.
Shouldn't we as players be a bit more wary? It is an online game, the devs have the right to change the gameplay whenever and however they see fit. What follows is inconvenience creep because it will increase profits and as people keep saying Anet is a business and they are driven by profits. So little by little, concession by concession we welcome a business model into our home that manipulates and pressures us to spend money the whole time we play, not too much mind you and certainly it must balance with potential profits from expansions, but in baby steps.
The current state of the CS is irrelevant in this context, it is the presence of gameplay convenience for cash in what is likely to be a highly sucessful MMO and what will happen as the game evolves, and as the genre evolves.
Now, another creep point will be the balance "zone" between not peeving too many players and losing potential future profits from expansions versus more immediate profits by increasing players use of the CS. This is where I get really worried. I think it is shifting quite rapidly and companies are getting braver and braver.
I don't think I'll not buy GW2 but gradually this genre is slipping into business models that will annoy me too much to play.
The irony is that I think box prices and subscriptions are way too cheap. I'd happily pay up to $150, say, for a game I know won't manipulate me to spend while I play.
Discuss.
The way of a subscription based model is heading to extinct. Contrary to popular notions online games will continue to focus on Cash Shops and other avenue models because Sub based games are doomed to fail because they limit the amount of people who play. A game like Tera, SWTOR or Rift could increase their player base by 200% or more if they went to a B2P model.
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.
The irony is that I think box prices and subscriptions are way too cheap. I'd happily pay up to $150, say, for a game I know won't manipulate me to spend while I play.
Just along the idea of companies getting more and more greedy this statement is part of the problem. Instead consumers should be saying "I'll glady pay $60 for a game thats worth it but I will NOT pay a dime for a game that I know the company is going to nickle and dime me."
Unfortunatly people like me who will simply not buy games from companies that I know are going to screw me are few and far between. Alot of people like to complain about it but dont actually stand up for themselves.
As far as GW2 goes I'm leery for sure. But Anet hasnt given me a reason to not trust them yet. If GW2 ever does go down a path where the only way to actually enjoy the game is getting nickled and dimed from the AH then I will stop playing the game and not trust Anet again in the future (not buy thier games or only buy them when on a huge sale).
Agree with OP, it's a slippery slope. "It's only convenience" is not an argument.
The only thing you can do is buy the game and just quit when the impact of the cash shop starts to get annoying. Unitl then, you'll hopefully have some fun in the game.
It's funny because your saying the argument of "it's only convenicence" is invalid because of a informal fallacy argument "slippery slope" I'm not say it couldn't happen but to say that the slipper slope is some how more valid then "it's only a convenience" is false. To say your "gut feel" is that either will happen is actually what is going on here. My "gut feel " is that ANet certainly wants money but they also don't want to sacrifice customers they would as any busniness like to hit a sweet spot. I think they will use GW1 as a model. If your "gut feel" comes true and it ends up P2W I think ANet fails and the game after what looks like a big launch will fade fast as it become more of a P2W game.
If you approach every game with a slippery slope argument none of them will pass muster. Personally from what I've seen it looks like fun so do you it appears. If it stops being fun I'll quit but that's true of any game so what the hell are we talking about again?
It's not an informal fallacy argument.
All cash shop items that effect gameplay add an incentive to change the gameplay only to sell more cash shop items. It doesn't matter whether those items are "P2W" or "convenience" items - in fact, the line between the 2 is very blurry. As soon as items like that exist, making profit equals adjusting gameplay to sell the maximum amount of items. It's not necessarily about making it a better game anymore. That's why the slippery slope is so dangerous.
ArenaNet explained "bad incentives" very well themselves - before they "iterated" their opinion a bit. ArenaNet making that decision indeed leaves us with nothing but our "gut feeling". Fanboy this, hater that, blah blah. I don't like where this is going.
Does that mean P2P is better? No. Does it mean that a cosmetics & content shop is better? Yes. (Unless buying new content is required to remain competitive in PvP, of course)
I've followed a few threads and read "as long as its only convenience, not real advantage I'm ok" quite a bit.
I understand playing GW2 anyway, but I don't understand the argument. It says you are ok with devs having an economic incentive to shape gameplay towards players buying convenience.
Shouldn't we as players be a bit more wary? It is an online game, the devs have the right to change the gameplay whenever and however they see fit. What follows is inconvenience creep because it will increase profits and as people keep saying Anet is a business and they are driven by profits. So little by little, concession by concession we welcome a business model into our home that manipulates and pressures us to spend money the whole time we play, not too much mind you and certainly it must balance with potential profits from expansions, but in baby steps.
The current state of the CS is irrelevant in this context, it is the presence of gameplay convenience for cash in what is likely to be a highly sucessful MMO and what will happen as the game evolves, and as the genre evolves.
The irony is that I think box prices and subscriptions are way too cheap. I'd happily pay up to $150, say, for a game I know won't manipulate me to spend while I play.
OP, you are a wise man and I've quoted the parts of your post that show it. He doesn't even mention gems, which is part of the concession that manupulates and pressures us. Apparently the players have taken Arenanet to be their parents, and whenever you speak bad about them or guild wars 2, thems fighting words. Let us remember that Final Fantasy XIV had people who defended it like crazy at launch.
Speaking against cash shop and gems gets you labeled as part of the entitlement generation apparently. Despite paying $60 for the game, or the fact that FREE to play games have cash shops.
Agree with OP, it's a slippery slope. "It's only convenience" is not an argument.
The only thing you can do is buy the game and just quit when the impact of the cash shop starts to get annoying. Unitl then, you'll hopefully have some fun in the game.
It's funny because your saying the argument of "it's only convenicence" is invalid because of a informal fallacy argument "slippery slope" I'm not say it couldn't happen but to say that the slipper slope is some how more valid then "it's only a convenience" is false. To say your "gut feel" is that either will happen is actually what is going on here. My "gut feel " is that ANet certainly wants money but they also don't want to sacrifice customers they would as any busniness like to hit a sweet spot. I think they will use GW1 as a model. If your "gut feel" comes true and it ends up P2W I think ANet fails and the game after what looks like a big launch will fade fast as it become more of a P2W game.
If you approach every game with a slippery slope argument none of them will pass muster. Personally from what I've seen it looks like fun so do you it appears. If it stops being fun I'll quit but that's true of any game so what the hell are we talking about again?
It's not an informal fallacy argument.
All cash shop items that effect gameplay add an incentive to change the gameplay only to sell more cash shop items. It doesn't matter whether those items are "P2W" or "convenience" items - in fact, the line between the 2 is very blurry. As soon as items like that exist, making profit equals adjusting gameplay to sell the maximum amount of items. It's not necessarily about making it a better game anymore. That's why the slippery slope is so dangerous.
ArenaNet explained "bad incentives" very well themselves - before they "iterated" their opinion a bit. ArenaNet making that decision indeed leaves us with nothing but our "gut feeling". Fanboy this, hater that, blah blah. I don't like where this is going.
Does that mean P2P is better? No. Does it mean that a cosmetics & content shop is better? Yes. (Unless buying new content is required to remain competitive in PvP, of course)
Seems like the ground has been gone over alot. Sure it's blurry because you have to define "win" and I doubt everyone uses the same definition. I see the argument is - by simply having a CS the gameplay is already tained toward the CS. Surely there is an intersection where the players tollerance of taint and the mindless focus on the CS at the expense of gameplay intersect so that going beyond is a losing proposition. (I'm sure there are more factors then two in this equation.) I've played games where you are slowly funneled to the CS, you can see it happening, I don't play them for long and I don't know anyone who thinks they are fun. These types of games do exist but as far as I know that gameplay model has never made it big. Seems like there is big risk in going too far.
couldnt care less about the cash shop. if it's anything like LoL's, i'll spend a few bucks for some aesthetic upgrades. i think i spent about $20-30 in LoL for runes and skins, which is more than reasonable for 200+ hours of fun.
oh and these guys aren't gonna screw us with pay to win. their entire philosophy goes against that. you can also see that from the cash shop leaks. nothing but experience and visual bonuses.
personally, i dont understand why anyone would be concerned.
I'm currently wrestling with the cash shop issue with GW2.
I've followed a few threads and read "as long as its only convenience, not real advantage I'm ok" quite a bit.
I understand playing GW2 anyway, but I don't understand the argument. It says you are ok with devs having an economic incentive to shape gameplay towards players buying convenience.
Shouldn't we as players be a bit more wary? It is an online game, the devs have the right to change the gameplay whenever and however they see fit. What follows is inconvenience creep because it will increase profits and as people keep saying Anet is a business and they are driven by profits. So little by little, concession by concession we welcome a business model into our home that manipulates and pressures us to spend money the whole time we play, not too much mind you and certainly it must balance with potential profits from expansions, but in baby steps.
The current state of the CS is irrelevant in this context, it is the presence of gameplay convenience for cash in what is likely to be a highly sucessful MMO and what will happen as the game evolves, and as the genre evolves.
Now, another creep point will be the balance "zone" between not peeving too many players and losing potential future profits from expansions versus more immediate profits by increasing players use of the CS. This is where I get really worried. I think it is shifting quite rapidly and companies are getting braver and braver.
I don't think I'll not buy GW2 but gradually this genre is slipping into business models that will annoy me too much to play.
The irony is that I think box prices and subscriptions are way too cheap. I'd happily pay up to $150, say, for a game I know won't manipulate me to spend while I play.
Discuss.
If you don't like what they are doing, do yourself a favor and vote with your wallet. Giving them your money when you don't support what they are doing is just training them to do what you don't like to do.
But the realy quesiton is this: do you have the ability to not get this game? Are you so hooked?
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
All cash shop items that effect gameplay add an incentive to change the gameplay only to sell more cash shop items. It doesn't matter whether those items are "P2W" or "convenience" items - in fact, the line between the 2 is very blurry. As soon as items like that exist, making profit equals adjusting gameplay to sell the maximum amount of items. It's not necessarily about making it a better game anymore. That's why the slippery slope is so dangerous.
ArenaNet explained "bad incentives" very well themselves - before they "iterated" their opinion a bit. ArenaNet making that decision indeed leaves us with nothing but our "gut feeling". Fanboy this, hater that, blah blah. I don't like where this is going.
Does that mean P2P is better? No. Does it mean that a cosmetics & content shop is better? Yes. (Unless buying new content is required to remain competitive in PvP, of course)
The GW1 cash shop may beg to differ with you in that regards... While it's true most MMOs throw in a cash shop and it skews the game, that doesn't mean that 'cash shops are bad', it means developers have been implementing them poorly. For example look at APB. There's nothing in the cash shop you can't get in game. It's mostly cosmetic, though some of it is also time saving. Champions Online is another good example. You also don't need to spend a dime, but you do get more customization for it.
To the point in red:
What I find hilarious about this statement is that it implies that with that 'buying new content to get an edge in PvP' is limited to a cash shop model. I can't think of one game that's had an expansion, where you didn't need to buy it to get the latest 'edge'. One of the most friendly I've played, would've been GW1, though nowadays you are at a disadvantage if you didn't buy any of the expansions. You still have everything you need to beat whatever campaign(s) you have, but you'd be missing out on a lot of customization & heroes (which are pretty much required now for solo PvE content).
I hate it when it's only convience and cosmectic items [and] the fact it's true, those counter arguments iritate me because as of [right now] it's true.
I also dislike the fact that the game mechanics and etc literally make the cash shop an option or want but not need and can't be used without real money.
At the end of the day with this whole rl cash to get in game gold, every single MMO has it or the possibilty is there it happens regardless.
What's intresting is with some mechanics GW 2 have to farm gold to sell for cash, could actually be hard in this MMO.
I realized like last year that when looking at game mechanics and such you can easily see if cash shop is ptw or not based on what it haves.
Other than sandboxes almost all MMOs so far "formula" wise have been literally the same. The things that make some MMOs p2w could possibly not be p2w if they had a different formula.
It's just how it is unfortunately, some of the simple things can have huge impacts, of course it goes both ways.
I might get banned for this. - Rizel Star.
I'm not afraid to tell trolls what they [need] to hear, even if that means for me to have an forced absence afterwards.
P2P LOGIC = If it's P2P it means longevity, overall better game, and THE BEST SUPPORT EVER!!!!!(Which has been rinsed and repeated about a thousand times)
Common Sense Logic = P2P logic is no better than F2P Logic.
OP, you are a wise man and I've quoted the parts of your post that show it. He doesn't even mention gems, which is part of the concession that manupulates and pressures us. Apparently the players have taken Arenanet to be their parents, and whenever you speak bad about them or guild wars 2, thems fighting words. Let us remember that Final Fantasy XIV had people who defended it like crazy at launch.
Speaking against cash shop and gems gets you labeled as part of the entitlement generation apparently. Despite paying $60 for the game, or the fact that FREE to play games have cash shops.
Don't buy the game. That is your choice as a consumer.
Arenanet as the makers of the game can do whatever they want to , because it is their game. If they are wrong they make less money or even lose money. If they are right, they will make more money.
You feel you are being manipulated. However no one is putting a gun to your head and forcing you to buy the game. The only way you have a say in the matter is with your wallet.
Comments
they have already upped the rate of the keys dropping in the world and i'm pretty sure they're making it so you can buy keys on the auction house.. once again if thats the case.. players with money buying gems selling keys for gold getting ingame items with gold... everything is right with the world
I love slippery slope.
Don't think we can issue an advance guarantee of anything. (Except the world ending late this year, anyway)
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
That is a forgone conclusion.
Dick Clark was the first sign. Fuckin' Mayans...
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
Convenience items don't bother me for one simple fact: I really don't care how fast or slow you level your character. It really doesn't matter to me that you got to play such and such zone earlier than me because I will get there eventually. I want to enjoy exploring and seeing all the game has to offer as I go, not zip through it and then go back to the areas I've just been in.
With the way GW2 is set up, I care even less (if that's possible). The leveling curve is flat across all levels and in PvP you are kicked up to the highest level so your not severly disadvantaged. So, XP potions and health potions etc. don't bother me at all. I don't consider them Pay2Win and probably won't buy them so it doesn't matter to me whether they're in the CS or not. Things that would bother me are overpowered weapons and armor, or anything else you can't get in the game just by playing it. Since Anet have said over and over that the things in the CS will be obtainable in game, I don't see any problem.
And, with the past being a good predictor of the future, since the CS in GW1 was not an issue, I don't think it will be an issue in GW2 either.
I forgot to add....For me, the CS issue needs to be evaluated on a case by case basis. I think that overall there are definitely things that the majority of people don't want to see in Cash Shops and companies will figure out what they are pretty quickly.
You want me to pay to play a game I already paid for???
Be afraid.....The dragons are HERE!
I just want to chip in here and point something on B2P and Sub... not arguing just wondering why this is always overlooked.
B2P is straight forward, buy once, get access forever right?
Sub based, you STILL PAY a box price, SW:TOR 60 bucks+sub, WAR 60+sub, WoW whatever their box price is + Sub. Rift as well.
Sub based are WAYYY more money to play, especially if you play for long periods of time, 1 year is 60+180, thats 240 bucks on your first year. Minus expansions
Just saying though, why do people refrence the sub model as just a sub? its anything but that IMO, you are paying the SAME box price up front, atleast for new games, and then paying 15 bucks monthly, why is that overlooked?
I think it's more despicable for games to have a box price+sub+CS, that is where we should be flaming. Box+Sub or Box+CS isn't bad IMO, so long as the CS IS just convenience items.
Now i know ANet is fully capable of going P2W with a CS especially with NCSoft backing them up, but like stated earlier, what would you rather have, 1000 players spending on average of 2 bucks a months for CS stuff that isn't P2W, cause you don't really need the stuff that often, or 100 players spending 8 bucks a month because the game ran off all the other players due to the CS P2W? That just means when you release an expansion, you will have 100 buys, rather than 1000+. And those 900 by example adds up really freaking fast.
Also i think if i pay a sub fee, anything they release for the game should be FREE. I'M PAYING YOU MONTHLY, why should i pay for the new xpac i've already paid for 6 times over and then some just because you decided to take 2 years to make it. Those are the points that confuse me, why are people so ok with having a Box+Sub+pay for any further development? It's baffling to me, you are getting epicly effed, and manipulated worse than a meaningless CS.
Again i apologize if this came off a little.... argumentive, i don't mean it to be, and it isn't directed to you, but us gamers who pay for all these, then don't like ANets model for buisness.
The "Youtube Pro": Someone who watches video's on said subject, and obviously has a full understanding of what is being said about such subject.
I do not quite follow what you posted above, but if I'm reading it correctly, what do you make of a model like World of Warcraft, where you pay a monthly sub to log into the game AND they have a cash shop. This model will also be used in TSW.
Ideally, one pays a subscription to support the regular development of content. I believe that this actually happens in a game like Rift, that has regular and significant content packages delivered. But if you've been playing WoW since Cata, you will have spent close to 2 years worth of sub money by the time MoP releases - that's about $300 depending on date of MoP. What have you purchased for that? Two reused/reworked 5 man dungeons, 3 new 5 man dungeons, 7 raid bosses in FL, and 8 fights/7 raid bosses in DS. Some people could argue that continuing to pay a sub for very little content allows developers to be "lazy".
I am not knocking WoW, I am using this as an example of what a subscription buys. The question is, is this worth the price, and only the gamer can answer that. On top of this, WoW allows people to buy BOE pets for cash and sell them in the AH for gold, and has released 3 (I believe) buyable mounts over the past 2 years at $25 a pop, and has paid character services including server transfer, faction change, race change, and name change. Again, I am not knocking this practice, I am using it for comparison.
We have yet to see what TSW offers, but we do know there is an in-game cash shop and a subscription fee. K-Tera has a cash shop, though it is unclear if this will be implemented in the NA/EU version.
With GW2, for one box price of $60, you get 5 character slots and I've seen estimates ranging from 200 hours of PvE content all the way up to 1000, with significant replayability because of the dynamic nature of events. This does not include the time spent in PvP at all. Yes there is a cash shop. If you spend 5 minutes you can google images of the cash shop from the NDA beta. Yes you can buy a hat, a pirate outfit, a 10% crafting experience bonus for an hour, another chacter slot, more bank space etc. Are these game breaking? Are these P2W? If you buy these are you making the game worse?
"Loading screens" are not "instances".
Your personal efforts to troll any game will not, in fact, impact the success or failure of said game.
Oh boy ANOTHER cash shop thread.
Lets break this down easy like. If you can live with a cash shop and what they have in it, and how they present it... buy the game, play the game. If you cant, dont. Vote with your wallet. If you bought the game and they change it to a way you dont like, stop playing the game and let them know that you stopped and will not be paying for any more of their servises.
Everyone has a personal level on what they will except. If enough people agree, they will loose money and have to re-do their games. If there is enough people that keep spending and playing where they make a good profit, they will keep it that way. This is how a free market works.
Wouldn't worry about it too much OP.
Personally, I'd like MMOs to take on the Buy Per Hour mentality they do on the East. I used this when playing I think it was the Korean Beta for Aion a while back. It seems to be cheaper when you do the Buy Per Hour, atleast it did for me. Now, if you play 20 hours a day that's one thing, and if that's the case someone should help you get laid.
I hate cash shops, but GW2 doesn't seem bad if it's only shooting for conevenice and fluff. When you lock out content, certain weapons, things like this then it starts to get sour.
If you don't like the cash shop then don't buy the game. If you think having a cash shop equates to pay-to-win then don't buy the game, you won't be missing out on anything since you wouldn't want to play a pay-to-win game. Nobody wants you to buy a game that you don't want to play. Do everyone a favor and don't buy the game.
This.
With all the other P2P games like EQ1, EQ2, AoC and LOTRO slipping into a 'Freemium' model with incentives for subscribing while also having 'convenience items' and cosmetic items - I find it strange that so many people are hung up on the GW2 B2P with convenience and cosmetic items payment method. GW2 at least has the decency not to charge you a monthly sub on top.
Agree with OP, it's a slippery slope. "It's only convenience" is not an argument.
The only thing you can do is buy the game and just quit when the impact of the cash shop starts to get annoying. Unitl then, you'll hopefully have some fun in the game.
Hype train -> Reality
I don't get it. There are not p2w items in the game. Period. Maybe there'll be in the future? Ok, maybe. But we have non-cosmetic stuff in there too. Unlocking bag slots (if u don't pay,u can carry less with u) that apply to one character only, unlocking bank slots, better salvaging item that it's sure to extract something when u salvage..
My question is: As long as there is not a single P2W item, anything ese is fine by you? I'm not being sarcastic here,it's a honest question. I'll play it anyway, but i don't like those "unlock this and that" in the CS. Reminds me too much of F2P games...
=/
It's funny because your saying the argument of "it's only convenicence" is invalid because of a informal fallacy argument "slippery slope" I'm not say it couldn't happen but to say that the slipper slope is some how more valid then "it's only a convenience" is false. To say your "gut feel" is that either will happen is actually what is going on here. My "gut feel " is that ANet certainly wants money but they also don't want to sacrifice customers they would as any busniness like to hit a sweet spot. I think they will use GW1 as a model. If your "gut feel" comes true and it ends up P2W I think ANet fails and the game after what looks like a big launch will fade fast as it become more of a P2W game.
If you approach every game with a slippery slope argument none of them will pass muster. Personally from what I've seen it looks like fun so do you it appears. If it stops being fun I'll quit but that's true of any game so what the hell are we talking about again?
The way of a subscription based model is heading to extinct. Contrary to popular notions online games will continue to focus on Cash Shops and other avenue models because Sub based games are doomed to fail because they limit the amount of people who play. A game like Tera, SWTOR or Rift could increase their player base by 200% or more if they went to a B2P model.
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.
Just along the idea of companies getting more and more greedy this statement is part of the problem. Instead consumers should be saying "I'll glady pay $60 for a game thats worth it but I will NOT pay a dime for a game that I know the company is going to nickle and dime me."
Unfortunatly people like me who will simply not buy games from companies that I know are going to screw me are few and far between. Alot of people like to complain about it but dont actually stand up for themselves.
As far as GW2 goes I'm leery for sure. But Anet hasnt given me a reason to not trust them yet. If GW2 ever does go down a path where the only way to actually enjoy the game is getting nickled and dimed from the AH then I will stop playing the game and not trust Anet again in the future (not buy thier games or only buy them when on a huge sale).
It's not an informal fallacy argument.
All cash shop items that effect gameplay add an incentive to change the gameplay only to sell more cash shop items. It doesn't matter whether those items are "P2W" or "convenience" items - in fact, the line between the 2 is very blurry. As soon as items like that exist, making profit equals adjusting gameplay to sell the maximum amount of items. It's not necessarily about making it a better game anymore. That's why the slippery slope is so dangerous.
ArenaNet explained "bad incentives" very well themselves - before they "iterated" their opinion a bit. ArenaNet making that decision indeed leaves us with nothing but our "gut feeling". Fanboy this, hater that, blah blah. I don't like where this is going.
Does that mean P2P is better? No. Does it mean that a cosmetics & content shop is better? Yes. (Unless buying new content is required to remain competitive in PvP, of course)
Hype train -> Reality
OP, you are a wise man and I've quoted the parts of your post that show it. He doesn't even mention gems, which is part of the concession that manupulates and pressures us. Apparently the players have taken Arenanet to be their parents, and whenever you speak bad about them or guild wars 2, thems fighting words. Let us remember that Final Fantasy XIV had people who defended it like crazy at launch.
Speaking against cash shop and gems gets you labeled as part of the entitlement generation apparently. Despite paying $60 for the game, or the fact that FREE to play games have cash shops.
I really like the idea that we can trade other players cash shop gems for in-game gold.
It's a fantastic idea that is just now getting proper attention!
I can see why most games are becoming cash shop games. It just makes sense.
Seems like the ground has been gone over alot. Sure it's blurry because you have to define "win" and I doubt everyone uses the same definition. I see the argument is - by simply having a CS the gameplay is already tained toward the CS. Surely there is an intersection where the players tollerance of taint and the mindless focus on the CS at the expense of gameplay intersect so that going beyond is a losing proposition. (I'm sure there are more factors then two in this equation.) I've played games where you are slowly funneled to the CS, you can see it happening, I don't play them for long and I don't know anyone who thinks they are fun. These types of games do exist but as far as I know that gameplay model has never made it big. Seems like there is big risk in going too far.
couldnt care less about the cash shop. if it's anything like LoL's, i'll spend a few bucks for some aesthetic upgrades. i think i spent about $20-30 in LoL for runes and skins, which is more than reasonable for 200+ hours of fun.
oh and these guys aren't gonna screw us with pay to win. their entire philosophy goes against that. you can also see that from the cash shop leaks. nothing but experience and visual bonuses.
personally, i dont understand why anyone would be concerned.
If you don't like what they are doing, do yourself a favor and vote with your wallet. Giving them your money when you don't support what they are doing is just training them to do what you don't like to do.
But the realy quesiton is this: do you have the ability to not get this game? Are you so hooked?
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
The GW1 cash shop may beg to differ with you in that regards... While it's true most MMOs throw in a cash shop and it skews the game, that doesn't mean that 'cash shops are bad', it means developers have been implementing them poorly. For example look at APB. There's nothing in the cash shop you can't get in game. It's mostly cosmetic, though some of it is also time saving. Champions Online is another good example. You also don't need to spend a dime, but you do get more customization for it.
To the point in red:
What I find hilarious about this statement is that it implies that with that 'buying new content to get an edge in PvP' is limited to a cash shop model. I can't think of one game that's had an expansion, where you didn't need to buy it to get the latest 'edge'. One of the most friendly I've played, would've been GW1, though nowadays you are at a disadvantage if you didn't buy any of the expansions. You still have everything you need to beat whatever campaign(s) you have, but you'd be missing out on a lot of customization & heroes (which are pretty much required now for solo PvE content).
I hate it when it's only convience and cosmectic items [and] the fact it's true, those counter arguments iritate me because as of [right now] it's true.
I also dislike the fact that the game mechanics and etc literally make the cash shop an option or want but not need and can't be used without real money.
At the end of the day with this whole rl cash to get in game gold, every single MMO has it or the possibilty is there it happens regardless.
What's intresting is with some mechanics GW 2 have to farm gold to sell for cash, could actually be hard in this MMO.
I realized like last year that when looking at game mechanics and such you can easily see if cash shop is ptw or not based on what it haves.
Other than sandboxes almost all MMOs so far "formula" wise have been literally the same. The things that make some MMOs p2w could possibly not be p2w if they had a different formula.
It's just how it is unfortunately, some of the simple things can have huge impacts, of course it goes both ways.
I might get banned for this. - Rizel Star.
I'm not afraid to tell trolls what they [need] to hear, even if that means for me to have an forced absence afterwards.
P2P LOGIC = If it's P2P it means longevity, overall better game, and THE BEST SUPPORT EVER!!!!!(Which has been rinsed and repeated about a thousand times)
Common Sense Logic = P2P logic is no better than F2P Logic.
Don't buy the game. That is your choice as a consumer.
Arenanet as the makers of the game can do whatever they want to , because it is their game. If they are wrong they make less money or even lose money. If they are right, they will make more money.
You feel you are being manipulated. However no one is putting a gun to your head and forcing you to buy the game. The only way you have a say in the matter is with your wallet.