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).
It is not part of "the problem", it is your problem with the direction that many game developers are taking. If it was really part of "the problem" as you suggest, companies that adopted this approach would be going bankrupt. As it stands now many cash shop games are more profitable than their subscription brethen.
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).
The part in orange seens to be the problem..As many have said before, GW and GW2 r very different games. GW 2 have things in CS that affect gameplay, unlike GW. Loot bag slots, for instance. You can't carry the same number of item bags as someone who paid for it. More space in banh. A improved salvager to use in your items. I mean, it's there already
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.
Slippery slope, paranoia based fear mongering about a benevolent Cash Shop? Really?
If the game ever goes down the route you describe, you can always just unsubscribe! Oh, wait, there is no subscription!
Seriously. The game packs in hundreds of hours of content for $60. You'll get more than your money's worth even if your paranoia becomes reality and Arenanet decides to throw away the concept of continually building presense through ongoing box sales in order to cash in on a temporary cash shop boost that would just cause the game to implode as a result.
Arenanet's strategy is to continually build a playerbase over the months and years that follow launch, with the business model based on box sales of the original game and future expansions, supplemented by some completely optional cash shop action for those who want to further support the game.
So, why would they ever pull a cash shop "bait and switch"?
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).
The part in orange seens to be the problem..As many have said before, GW and GW2 r very different games. GW 2 have things in CS that affect gameplay, unlike GW. Loot bag slots, for instance. You can't carry the same number of item bags as someone who paid for it. More space in banh. A improved salvager to use in your items. I mean, it's there already
Even though you can get that stuff without using rl money, I must ask though what, well how does for example loot bags and etc affect someone else who doesn't have it?
Is it a need because that stuff can be obtained in game as well
There is a difference between needs and wants, maybe it's bad to sell wants that are good wants, some may want em instantly.
P2W shouldleast mean that if you don't buy it you won't be able to beat someone who does have it or that you can't enjoy the game without it.
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.
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).
The part in orange seens to be the problem..As many have said before, GW and GW2 r very different games. GW 2 have things in CS that affect gameplay, unlike GW. Loot bag slots, for instance. You can't carry the same number of item bags as someone who paid for it. More space in banh. A improved salvager to use in your items. I mean, it's there already
GW2 cash shop is very different and this is the reason that threads are not the best source of information. We should wait to see what is in it and what to see what it will take to get stuff out of it before we start alot of speculation. I am not saying that anything in the cash shop goes but your missing the biggest point to the cash shop in GW2. If the extra space loot bag is in the cash shop, you will have two ways to get. 1) real money for the convience. 2) In game gold. Everything in the cash shop sells for gems. When you use real money, you are buying gems. You can also use in game gold to buy gems. Therefore you don't have to spend real money to get the extra slot bag. Everyone can get it. This is awesome as long as Arenanet doesnt make it incredibly hard to purchase gems with gold. We will have to wait and see before we complain about it. At least we should.
The reason I have not prepurchased this game is because of the cash shop. I wont do this until we have full disclosure on what items are going to be in the cash shop.
I think its very clever of ANet to get everyones preorder money before announcing whats going to be in their cash shop, but I'm not going to fall for that!!
Cluck Cluck, Gibber Gibber, My Old Mans A Mushroom
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).
The part in orange seens to be the problem..As many have said before, GW and GW2 r very different games. GW 2 have things in CS that affect gameplay, unlike GW. Loot bag slots, for instance. You can't carry the same number of item bags as someone who paid for it. More space in banh. A improved salvager to use in your items. I mean, it's there already
GW2 cash shop is very different and this is the reason that threads are not the best source of information. We should wait to see what is in it and what to see what it will take to get stuff out of it before we start alot of speculation. I am not saying that anything in the cash shop goes but your missing the biggest point to the cash shop in GW2. If the extra space loot bag is in the cash shop, you will have two ways to get. 1) real money for the convience. 2) In game gold. Everything in the cash shop sells for gems. When you use real money, you are buying gems. You can also use in game gold to buy gems. Therefore you don't have to spend real money to get the extra slot bag. Everyone can get it. This is awesome as long as Arenanet doesnt make it incredibly hard to purchase gems with gold. We will have to wait and see before we complain about it. At least we should.
I agree. Even with doubts about the CS, i'm pretty sure i'll have fun playing it. I don't believe they'll put P2W items, but one things is worth mentioning: Some months ago, ppl who support GW 2 with their souls would say:
-It's only cosmetic, no gameplay involved in CS.
Now they say something like
-It's not P2W, and what matters if they have something powerful because of money? That doesn't make you weaker.
I dunno, sometimes i have the impression that even if they went full P2W (which i don't believe they will), ppl would still defend the game/devs/whatever and say: -If you're poor or don't like it, get out. It's their game.
Then, it's all about threshold. When does it reach the limit for you guys? For me, the moment they put more gameplay changes than loot bag slots and bank slots, it's enough.
All cash shop items that effect gameplay add an incentive to change the gameplay only to sell more cash shop items.
The GW1 cash shop may beg to differ with you in that regards...
The part in orange seens to be the problem..As many have said before, GW and GW2 r very different games. GW 2 have things in CS that affect gameplay, unlike GW. Loot bag slots, for instance. You can't carry the same number of item bags as someone who paid for it. More space in banh. A improved salvager to use in your items. I mean, it's there already
GW2 cash shop is very different and this is the reason that threads are not the best source of information. We should wait to see what is in it and what to see what it will take to get stuff out of it before we start alot of speculation. I am not saying that anything in the cash shop goes but your missing the biggest point to the cash shop in GW2. If the extra space loot bag is in the cash shop, you will have two ways to get. 1) real money for the convience. 2) In game gold. Everything in the cash shop sells for gems. When you use real money, you are buying gems. You can also use in game gold to buy gems. Therefore you don't have to spend real money to get the extra slot bag. Everyone can get it. This is awesome as long as Arenanet doesnt make it incredibly hard to purchase gems with gold. We will have to wait and see before we complain about it. At least we should.
Alright... a number of points to clear up here:
Yes, they are different games. However, a lot of people are using that as an excuse to treat Anet like a completely different developer. They are using the same design philosophy that created the first game, they are just expanding on it in the second. So while, yes, that does mean individual mechanics are quite different, it's still being approached in the same way.
The loot bags people are freaking out about, function very much like keys do in GW1. The bag space is a little bit different, but again you can get extra bags ingame. Furthermore extra bank space exists in GW1 as well. If you want to expand your storage passed a certain point, you need to pay for it. The salvager is the same way as well. You can pay it or get it in game. Most of the stuff people are freaking out about in the shop are convenience items.
What SteelJanz says is also absolutely right. You aren't forced to buy them if you don't want to. The game doesn't require you to get anything in the cash shop. Is there an incentive? Of course there is, it's a store. They aren't going to sell things they don't think people will buy. However, they aren't imblanancing the game to tilt people in the direction of the CS, like silkroad or Allods does. It's not the same.
- Furthermore, and here is a huge part, you aren't subscribing to this game! So, you can either ignore the CS completely, or you can use some of the money you would normally use to pay for a subscription on convenience items. Hell, for the price of a 1 month subscription you can get extra storage easily. You could also get extra character slots, or the loot bag if you really want it (though, honestly, they are a complete waste of money. It's not that hard to get good weapons in game).
First, this is a AAA game release, not your Korean import or a game downgraded to free after failing at an initial loss. So give me an example of a AAA game that is released for free? A AAA MMORPG game? I don't think you'll find one.
I save this statement specifically for these threads, hoping to enlighten folk on the finer concepts of economics. Just feels people want something for nothing or don't understand that things like servers, and support, and fixes and updated content cost money.
According to Jad Raddoff author of anatomy of an MMO, the average cost for a AAA MMO is $10 million to develop. This does not include the cost to market or for upkeep. Unlike a AAA console game title, which costs between 3 to 6 million dollars and has no future upkeep and maintainance costs, says Erik Bethke in his book Game development and production.
Arenanet has been working on this game since 2007, when it was announced, and it is safe to presume that they have not been paid for this game since its development.
A Lexus/Nexus search of Arenanet finds that they have 270 employees. This would mean that for 5 years, these 270 employees have not been paid from the earnings of Guild Wars 2. According to the US Census, the average american makes 50,000 a year.
So lets observe the debt that Arenanet is already in to provide us this great game. That would mean that, just for salaries, they are in the hole 67 million just to feed the people who work for their company who must put food on their tables. Let's say they sell 1 million units. They would still not recoup their salary costs. This does not include equipment or marketing.
I firmly believe that no one wants peopel to not eat or support their families. So, off of this presumption one of two things we would have to agree with.
Guild Wars 2 would need to generate income to support servers, and future endeavors of their staff. The two popular models are through a cash shop or through subscription fees.
The Cash shop, is popular by many successful MMOs because it allows the user to dictate the amount of money they want to spend a month on the game. It allows people who do not wish to pay a monthly fee to still play, most times at full capacity. This maintains a steady user base for the people who do pay, and keeps them continuing to pay. In many ways, this is the best function of the Cashshop or free2play model. Some games misuse the cash shop and include items that players must buy in order to compete at a high level. This is referred to as pay to win. pay to win refers to players who must pay money to "win" or to have access to beating high level content. This is usually achieved with items that improve stats or that are needed to improve stats. For instance, in Runes of Magic, in order to get the back stat, you must buy a cape from the item shop. Without the cape, you can loose a quarter of your statistical bonuses. In order to playtowin, items in the shop must either prevent content or prevent you from doing content without it. Most successful cash shops, and by successful I mean games that are earning profit and have low player complaints about the cash shop, do so by allowing bonuses to non competitive statistics. XP, Ingame gold, crafting time and travel time.
The subscription module is losing popularity because it requires all users to pay, and those who do not pay can not play. This drops the population, thus making it more difficult for paying customers who need more players to do specific content.
The subscription module is losing popularity because it requires all users to pay, and those who do not pay can not play. This drops the population, thus making it more difficult for paying customers who need more players to do specific content.
It has nothing to do with players having to pay monthly. Publishers choose the P2W model right away to save costs. It doesn't make any sense to release a game with the subscription model, and one year later redesign it with the cash shop after it fails.
I think publishers that choose the P2W route from start have accepted that their game will be a failure, and are just trying to get back their losses.
It has nothing to do with players having to pay monthly. Publishers choose the P2W model right away to save costs. It doesn't make any sense to release a game with the subscription model, and one year later redesign it with the cash shop after it fails.
I think publishers that choose the P2W route from start have accepted that their game will be a failure, and are just trying to get back their losses.
Because the world must adhear to what YOU believe everything is.
No really. Everything falls into your world view and no one can think differently.
Deal with it, dont buy GW2 and stick to your old outdated highly abused view of MMORPGs and enjoy your cup of MEH as you pay to play it...we dont have enough oversized studios making a ton of cash off of your types with their mediocre games. Better yet, go back to playing the P2P games that are now Pay trap F2P games and get suckered into paying a monthly fee for their P2P game that is fail.
Because as we all know, having to pay to keep playing a game you already paid for = win, just look at those win games like Age of Conan, DCU online, Anarchy Online...so much win, such high quality gaming and the monthly amount of money you pay makes it so.
Sleep
Sleep
Leave the thinking to us
Sleep
Give us your money
Sleep
I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson
The subscription module is losing popularity because it requires all users to pay, and those who do not pay can not play. This drops the population, thus making it more difficult for paying customers who need more players to do specific content.
It has nothing to do with players having to pay monthly. Publishers choose the P2W model right away to save costs. It doesn't make any sense to release a game with the subscription model, and one year later redesign it with the cash shop after it fails.
I think publishers that choose the P2W route from start have accepted that their game will be a failure, and are just trying to get back their losses.
My statement is based off research and statistics, yours is based of emotions. Prooved by your need to dispariage the non-monthly subscription model by slandering it as pay to win.
MMORPGs have 2 resources they need, players to play with other players and revenue that must be generated to maintain content and pay for the game. With the subscription model, players are directly tied to money, meaning if you loose one, then you loose the other. With the free model you sever that connection.
Free 2 Play games are based around the cash shop. Some games have items that are required to play teh game (and get the nickname pay to win) and some games simply have items of convinence and aethstics. There are numerous examples of both.
As others have said, GW2 has shown no signs of items that are "needed" or hamper gameplay without it.
The subscription module is losing popularity because it requires all users to pay, and those who do not pay can not play. This drops the population, thus making it more difficult for paying customers who need more players to do specific content.
It has nothing to do with players having to pay monthly. Publishers choose the P2W model right away to save costs. It doesn't make any sense to release a game with the subscription model, and one year later redesign it with the cash shop after it fails.
I think publishers that choose the P2W route from start have accepted that their game will be a failure, and are just trying to get back their losses.
My statement is based off research and statistics, yours is based of emotions. Prooved by your need to dispariage the non-monthly subscription model by slandering it as pay to win.
MMORPGs have 2 resources they need, players to play with other players and revenue that must be generated to maintain content and pay for the game. With the subscription model, players are directly tied to money, meaning if you loose one, then you loose the other. With the free model you sever that connection.
Free 2 Play games are based around the cash shop. Some games have items that are required to play teh game (and get the nickname pay to win) and some games simply have items of convinence and aethstics. There are numerous examples of both.
As others have said, GW2 has shown no signs of items that are "needed" or hamper gameplay without it.
All advantage items can be considered P2W. But there is no common recognized definition. So its pointless and will lead to a endless discussion if people with different opinions try to debate if someting is P2W or not.
Someone that dont like advantage cash shops will not want to play games like that anyway. It makes no difference if you call it P2W or whatever.
Its not OK if someone can buy a potion in the CS and level faster. Or travel faster. Or run faster. Or improve tradeskills faster. Or get more hp. Or do more dmg. Or anything that helps them do things faster or better than other players. Competition or no competition makes no difference.
Normally there is a conflicting interest between buyers and sellers. Between someone that is selling a product or a service and the customer. If a business model is better for the seller it will be worse for the buyer. Meaning buyers in general will pay more and sellers(the company) will get higher profits. Of course this could also be true if a minority was paying much more and the majority was paying less. But its true anyway. Companies would not prefer the business model if people payed them less. They want profit.
There is no way you can know what other players think they "need" or not. Its subjectiv and depends on what they are doing and on whatever goals the indivual players have.
Comments
It is not part of "the problem", it is your problem with the direction that many game developers are taking. If it was really part of "the problem" as you suggest, companies that adopted this approach would be going bankrupt. As it stands now many cash shop games are more profitable than their subscription brethen.
The part in orange seens to be the problem..As many have said before, GW and GW2 r very different games. GW 2 have things in CS that affect gameplay, unlike GW. Loot bag slots, for instance. You can't carry the same number of item bags as someone who paid for it. More space in banh. A improved salvager to use in your items. I mean, it's there already
Slippery slope, paranoia based fear mongering about a benevolent Cash Shop? Really?
If the game ever goes down the route you describe, you can always just unsubscribe! Oh, wait, there is no subscription!
Seriously. The game packs in hundreds of hours of content for $60. You'll get more than your money's worth even if your paranoia becomes reality and Arenanet decides to throw away the concept of continually building presense through ongoing box sales in order to cash in on a temporary cash shop boost that would just cause the game to implode as a result.
Arenanet's strategy is to continually build a playerbase over the months and years that follow launch, with the business model based on box sales of the original game and future expansions, supplemented by some completely optional cash shop action for those who want to further support the game.
So, why would they ever pull a cash shop "bait and switch"?
Logic is your friend...
Want to know more about GW2 and why there is so much buzz? Start here: Guild Wars 2 Mass Info for the Uninitiated
Even though you can get that stuff without using rl money, I must ask though what, well how does for example loot bags and etc affect someone else who doesn't have it?
Is it a need because that stuff can be obtained in game as well
There is a difference between needs and wants, maybe it's bad to sell wants that are good wants, some may want em instantly.
P2W shouldleast mean that if you don't buy it you won't be able to beat someone who does have it or that you can't enjoy the game without it.
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.
GW2 cash shop is very different and this is the reason that threads are not the best source of information. We should wait to see what is in it and what to see what it will take to get stuff out of it before we start alot of speculation. I am not saying that anything in the cash shop goes but your missing the biggest point to the cash shop in GW2. If the extra space loot bag is in the cash shop, you will have two ways to get. 1) real money for the convience. 2) In game gold. Everything in the cash shop sells for gems. When you use real money, you are buying gems. You can also use in game gold to buy gems. Therefore you don't have to spend real money to get the extra slot bag. Everyone can get it. This is awesome as long as Arenanet doesnt make it incredibly hard to purchase gems with gold. We will have to wait and see before we complain about it. At least we should.
The reason I have not prepurchased this game is because of the cash shop. I wont do this until we have full disclosure on what items are going to be in the cash shop.
I think its very clever of ANet to get everyones preorder money before announcing whats going to be in their cash shop, but I'm not going to fall for that!!
Cluck Cluck, Gibber Gibber, My Old Mans A Mushroom
I agree. Even with doubts about the CS, i'm pretty sure i'll have fun playing it. I don't believe they'll put P2W items, but one things is worth mentioning: Some months ago, ppl who support GW 2 with their souls would say:
-It's only cosmetic, no gameplay involved in CS.
Now they say something like
-It's not P2W, and what matters if they have something powerful because of money? That doesn't make you weaker.
I dunno, sometimes i have the impression that even if they went full P2W (which i don't believe they will), ppl would still defend the game/devs/whatever and say: -If you're poor or don't like it, get out. It's their game.
Then, it's all about threshold. When does it reach the limit for you guys? For me, the moment they put more gameplay changes than loot bag slots and bank slots, it's enough.
Alright... a number of points to clear up here:
Yes, they are different games. However, a lot of people are using that as an excuse to treat Anet like a completely different developer. They are using the same design philosophy that created the first game, they are just expanding on it in the second. So while, yes, that does mean individual mechanics are quite different, it's still being approached in the same way.
The loot bags people are freaking out about, function very much like keys do in GW1. The bag space is a little bit different, but again you can get extra bags ingame. Furthermore extra bank space exists in GW1 as well. If you want to expand your storage passed a certain point, you need to pay for it. The salvager is the same way as well. You can pay it or get it in game. Most of the stuff people are freaking out about in the shop are convenience items.
What SteelJanz says is also absolutely right. You aren't forced to buy them if you don't want to. The game doesn't require you to get anything in the cash shop. Is there an incentive? Of course there is, it's a store. They aren't going to sell things they don't think people will buy. However, they aren't imblanancing the game to tilt people in the direction of the CS, like silkroad or Allods does. It's not the same.
- Furthermore, and here is a huge part, you aren't subscribing to this game! So, you can either ignore the CS completely, or you can use some of the money you would normally use to pay for a subscription on convenience items. Hell, for the price of a 1 month subscription you can get extra storage easily. You could also get extra character slots, or the loot bag if you really want it (though, honestly, they are a complete waste of money. It's not that hard to get good weapons in game).
First, this is a AAA game release, not your Korean import or a game downgraded to free after failing at an initial loss. So give me an example of a AAA game that is released for free? A AAA MMORPG game? I don't think you'll find one.
I save this statement specifically for these threads, hoping to enlighten folk on the finer concepts of economics. Just feels people want something for nothing or don't understand that things like servers, and support, and fixes and updated content cost money.
According to Jad Raddoff author of anatomy of an MMO, the average cost for a AAA MMO is $10 million to develop. This does not include the cost to market or for upkeep. Unlike a AAA console game title, which costs between 3 to 6 million dollars and has no future upkeep and maintainance costs, says Erik Bethke in his book Game development and production.
Arenanet has been working on this game since 2007, when it was announced, and it is safe to presume that they have not been paid for this game since its development.
A Lexus/Nexus search of Arenanet finds that they have 270 employees. This would mean that for 5 years, these 270 employees have not been paid from the earnings of Guild Wars 2. According to the US Census, the average american makes 50,000 a year.
So lets observe the debt that Arenanet is already in to provide us this great game. That would mean that, just for salaries, they are in the hole 67 million just to feed the people who work for their company who must put food on their tables. Let's say they sell 1 million units. They would still not recoup their salary costs. This does not include equipment or marketing.
I firmly believe that no one wants peopel to not eat or support their families. So, off of this presumption one of two things we would have to agree with.
Guild Wars 2 would need to generate income to support servers, and future endeavors of their staff. The two popular models are through a cash shop or through subscription fees.
The Cash shop, is popular by many successful MMOs because it allows the user to dictate the amount of money they want to spend a month on the game. It allows people who do not wish to pay a monthly fee to still play, most times at full capacity. This maintains a steady user base for the people who do pay, and keeps them continuing to pay. In many ways, this is the best function of the Cashshop or free2play model. Some games misuse the cash shop and include items that players must buy in order to compete at a high level. This is referred to as pay to win. pay to win refers to players who must pay money to "win" or to have access to beating high level content. This is usually achieved with items that improve stats or that are needed to improve stats. For instance, in Runes of Magic, in order to get the back stat, you must buy a cape from the item shop. Without the cape, you can loose a quarter of your statistical bonuses. In order to playtowin, items in the shop must either prevent content or prevent you from doing content without it. Most successful cash shops, and by successful I mean games that are earning profit and have low player complaints about the cash shop, do so by allowing bonuses to non competitive statistics. XP, Ingame gold, crafting time and travel time.
The subscription module is losing popularity because it requires all users to pay, and those who do not pay can not play. This drops the population, thus making it more difficult for paying customers who need more players to do specific content.
Omgosh! if I see another one of these CS threads I'm going to throw something at my monitor and sue the OP for a replacement!
Please stop! Shut up!
Yeah I know my post don't make much of a point but neither does this one! Sheesh!
It has nothing to do with players having to pay monthly. Publishers choose the P2W model right away to save costs. It doesn't make any sense to release a game with the subscription model, and one year later redesign it with the cash shop after it fails.
I think publishers that choose the P2W route from start have accepted that their game will be a failure, and are just trying to get back their losses.
Because the world must adhear to what YOU believe everything is.
No really. Everything falls into your world view and no one can think differently.
Deal with it, dont buy GW2 and stick to your old outdated highly abused view of MMORPGs and enjoy your cup of MEH as you pay to play it...we dont have enough oversized studios making a ton of cash off of your types with their mediocre games. Better yet, go back to playing the P2P games that are now Pay trap F2P games and get suckered into paying a monthly fee for their P2P game that is fail.
Because as we all know, having to pay to keep playing a game you already paid for = win, just look at those win games like Age of Conan, DCU online, Anarchy Online...so much win, such high quality gaming and the monthly amount of money you pay makes it so.
Sleep
Sleep
Leave the thinking to us
Sleep
Give us your money
Sleep
I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson
U c what i did there.
Hype train -> Reality
My statement is based off research and statistics, yours is based of emotions. Prooved by your need to dispariage the non-monthly subscription model by slandering it as pay to win.
MMORPGs have 2 resources they need, players to play with other players and revenue that must be generated to maintain content and pay for the game. With the subscription model, players are directly tied to money, meaning if you loose one, then you loose the other. With the free model you sever that connection.
Free 2 Play games are based around the cash shop. Some games have items that are required to play teh game (and get the nickname pay to win) and some games simply have items of convinence and aethstics. There are numerous examples of both.
As others have said, GW2 has shown no signs of items that are "needed" or hamper gameplay without it.
All advantage items can be considered P2W. But there is no common recognized definition. So its pointless and will lead to a endless discussion if people with different opinions try to debate if someting is P2W or not.
Someone that dont like advantage cash shops will not want to play games like that anyway. It makes no difference if you call it P2W or whatever.
Its not OK if someone can buy a potion in the CS and level faster. Or travel faster. Or run faster. Or improve tradeskills faster. Or get more hp. Or do more dmg. Or anything that helps them do things faster or better than other players. Competition or no competition makes no difference.
Normally there is a conflicting interest between buyers and sellers. Between someone that is selling a product or a service and the customer. If a business model is better for the seller it will be worse for the buyer. Meaning buyers in general will pay more and sellers(the company) will get higher profits. Of course this could also be true if a minority was paying much more and the majority was paying less. But its true anyway. Companies would not prefer the business model if people payed them less. They want profit.
There is no way you can know what other players think they "need" or not. Its subjectiv and depends on what they are doing and on whatever goals the indivual players have.