Simple, if you target the mass market, identify the exact features that appeal to that market, and sell 6 million+ copies because people find it cheap with B2P, you make a huge profit regardless of the development cost. (They also make money from cash shop etc...)
So, why don't all developers do this? Because it requires a huge investment, both in development and of course marketing, since HYPE is what drives your sales. NCSoft is the world's largest publisher and are one of the few that can undertake this kind of project, with the risks it may have.
Companies that are small and/or create niche games don't have the luxury of having a $100M+ dollar investor with a probably equal amount of marketing budget, to create their games. They aim for loyal fans who subs counted in the tens-or hundreds of thousands and are willing to pay for their niche product.
This is pretty accurate.
It's so easy to chalk sub fees up to greed, but that's got little to do with it in reality. The market started off with a standard $15 a month fee and enough people have always been willing to pay it. It's still a bargain compared to console gaming, so people will continue to pay for such games.
Anet is actually taking a pretty big risk with GW2, considering the size of their investment - and it relies on a certain number of people buying cash shop items/services and a certain number of expansion boxes being sold. They are going to try making up the difference with volume, so if for some reason the game isn't the best thing since sliced bread - they could run into issues.
Maybe, but this still doesn't make me see the reason.
Aion, Aoc, Wow, etc are all games with huge investments, targetting the mass market and also depending on hype. Still they need subs. How many copies did AOC sell? How many did WOW sell? Crap, how many did Aion sell?
All though you give some good background it still doesn't really explain why GW2 can do without (even if it's a bigger risk and they'll fail).
I liked the first one. I haven't read much about the second one at this point. But if it was anything like the first, there is no way in hell I'd pay a monthly fee for the game tbh. I mean it's not really an mmo in the sense that I can encounter someone anywhere I go. That was limited to cities, which really makes them nothing more than visual chat rooms to me. To me guild wars was an average co-op rpg and an above average fantasy based shooter. Like I said, I did like the game. it's just not a mmo or anything resembling one to me. Maybe this new one is different?
This is probably the first "realistic" post on the subject I have read so far. GW (1) was not an MMO. I do not expect GW2 to be an MMO. NCsoft Arenanet have made people THINK this is an MMO by doing several things.
First, they create social hubs (cities) where most (not all) people that are in the game will see other players. The fact that they see many other players makes them THINK this is an MMO in the traditional sense. However, these social hubs are nothing more then match making interfaces much like you would find in games like Call of Duty or Battlefield or Quake. They are not places of combat and quests and so on.
Secondly, when you go "out into the real world" of GW you do so in a very limited way. How many actual players are with you? One, two, three...maybe five. Do you see other players out going about their business? No. This is because the outside world in GW is instanced. Wether you are going solo or going out with a FEW others, you are doing something like you do it in (again) Call of Duty or Battlefield or Quake. In other words, you are playing a much SMALL game then you might think.
Thirdly, in GW, if you were out in the world you game was not played on someone's else's master server. Exception, PvP match making. The only time that you ever played on a one of Arenanet's "servers" was when you were in their social hub cities OR playing pvp matches. That is it. Again, much like Call of Duty, Battlefield or Quake, Arenanet only provided limited servers for limited things. They did not have to maintain large server clusters. They do not have "special network code". They just use the systems that are out there and dress them up differently.
And lastly, marketing. NCsoft have marketed GW and GW2 as "MMO's". Regardless if they are or are not, people glum-on to that and believe it even if not true. They then market expansions. This is still traditional in the way others have done things. Again, Call of Duty, Battlefield, and Quake have all thrived and been "f2p" but have done so based on box sales and expansions.
Bottom line, don't let the hype hit you in face. GW and GW 2 may be good games....they just aren't or won't be MMO's and as such should not be compared in any way to MM0's.
Cyphers explained allready a few times in this thread how GW2 will handle all this differently.
If GW2 can deliver a topnotch experience without the sub ... what the hell are the other games doing with our subs?
Or will GW2 be a subpar experience afterall compared to p2p since they have less funding?
Lets not jump the gun here. Lets let GW2 release and see what we actually get in terms of game quality. Im not trying to be a troll but this is a discussion to have after the game releases IMO.
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore) Now Playing: N/A Worst MMO: FFXIV Favorite MMO: FFXI
If GW2 can deliver a topnotch experience without the sub ... what the hell are the other games doing with our subs?
Or will GW2 be a subpar experience afterall compared to p2p since they have less funding?
Lets not jump the gun here. Lets let GW2 release and see what we actually get in terms of game quality. Im not trying to be a troll but this is a discussion to have after the game releases IMO.
Knowing a little bit about GW1 and about business in general. I can say these things:
- Guild Wars 2 will generate revenue purely through cash shop and box purchases. (No duh right?)
- Guild Wars 2 will likely use the same "Server" model as GW1, which in my opinion was one of the largest pros to the original game as it saved a lot of money on Server costs. That is something a game like WoW REALLY has to take in to account - hence requiring addtional revenue from subs. In fact, if you look at pretty much every BtP MMORPG, you will see that ones with servers have Pay to Play models. EVE online is an exception, as they gain their revenue purely from a low box price cost (essentially a monthly fees worth of cost) and monthly fees. The reason this model is such a pro to GW1 + 2 is that it cuts down on costs, and also allows for you to play with your friends regardless of region or "server choice". The only disadvantage is that to make adjustments to the server, everyone gets booted off the game =p
- A big con for GW2, and the reason PvP is such a central attraction for the game - along with branching story lines... (And making alts to experience them) is that GW2 will release very little in the way of content after launch. Expect a few freebies here and there as "Thank yous" and "Balancing acts", but for the most part expect to buy a new client version "Guild Wars 2, the Legacy of Shiro - lulz" every year at least. The only reason I list this as a con is that the community will see spikes (not me, I expect to play a LOT of PvP) because people want "long lasting raid content" and grinds... Guild Wars 2 will not have anything in the form of a grind, so expect their end game to be impressive - but repetitive/short. And please don't argue with me about that, because I nor you know. The only end game will be PvP and "Ecto Farming" which for all you non-savvy lurkers, is short for saying "Doing end game dungeons for cooler looking, but same stat armor". They HAVE already stated however that there will DEFINITELY be a finite number of times you will have to run a dungeon to get everything you want from it.
I hope that at least in theory clears a few things up, but to summarize...
Guild Wars 2 doesn't charge a sub fee because after launch support for the game will come in the form of expansions, and their "Server Model" doesn't have an ongoing cost attached to it in order to expand.
Guild Wars 2 will be a financial success if:
They sell a lot of boxes
They launch a lot of cool stuff that a lot of dorks will want from the cash shop
They keep on track with expansion releases
Aside from that, they have the framework to succeed and I have complete faith they will.
People think it's fun to pretend your a monster. Me I spend my life pretending I'm not. - Dexter Morgan
Knowing a little bit about GW1 and about business in general. I can say these things:
- Guild Wars 2 will generate revenue purely through cash shop and box purchases. (No duh right?)
- Guild Wars 2 will likely use the same "Server" model as GW1, which in my opinion was one of the largest pros to the original game as it saved a lot of money on Server costs. That is something a game like WoW REALLY has to take in to account - hence requiring addtional revenue from subs. In fact, if you look at pretty much every BtP MMORPG, you will see that ones with servers have Pay to Play models. EVE online is an exception, as they gain their revenue purely from a low box price cost (essentially a monthly fees worth of cost) and monthly fees. The reason this model is such a pro to GW1 + 2 is that it cuts down on costs, and also allows for you to play with your friends regardless of region or "server choice". The only disadvantage is that to make adjustments to the server, everyone gets booted off the game =p
- A big con for GW2, and the reason PvP is such a central attraction for the game - along with branching story lines... (And making alts to experience them) is that GW2 will release very little in the way of content after launch. Expect a few freebies here and there as "Thank yous" and "Balancing acts", but for the most part expect to buy a new client version "Guild Wars 2, the Legacy of Shiro - lulz" every year at least. The only reason I list this as a con is that the community will see spikes (not me, I expect to play a LOT of PvP) because people want "long lasting raid content" and grinds... Guild Wars 2 will not have anything in the form of a grind, so expect their end game to be impressive - but repetitive/short. And please don't argue with me about that, because I nor you know. The only end game will be PvP and "Ecto Farming" which for all you non-savvy lurkers, is short for saying "Doing end game dungeons for cooler looking, but same stat armor". They HAVE already stated however that there will DEFINITELY be a finite number of times you will have to run a dungeon to get everything you want from it.
I hope that at least in theory clears a few things up, but to summarize...
Guild Wars 2 doesn't charge a sub fee because after launch support for the game will come in the form of expansions, and their "Server Model" doesn't have an ongoing cost attached to it in order to expand.
Guild Wars 2 will be a financial success if:
They sell a lot of boxes
They launch a lot of cool stuff that a lot of dorks will want from the cash shop
They keep on track with expansion releases
Aside from that, they have the framework to succeed and I have complete faith they will.
I agree with your points, the business model they have adopted, the market conditions and of course the quality (combat mechanics and content) and design (de-emphasis on grind) of the game back this up. I did not know about the server options to costs, that was interesting.
Knowing a little bit about GW1 and about business in general. I can say these things:
- Guild Wars 2 will generate revenue purely through cash shop and box purchases. (No duh right?)
- Guild Wars 2 will likely use the same "Server" model as GW1, which in my opinion was one of the largest pros to the original game as it saved a lot of money on Server costs. That is something a game like WoW REALLY has to take in to account - hence requiring addtional revenue from subs. In fact, if you look at pretty much every BtP MMORPG, you will see that ones with servers have Pay to Play models. EVE online is an exception, as they gain their revenue purely from a low box price cost (essentially a monthly fees worth of cost) and monthly fees. The reason this model is such a pro to GW1 + 2 is that it cuts down on costs, and also allows for you to play with your friends regardless of region or "server choice". The only disadvantage is that to make adjustments to the server, everyone gets booted off the game =p
- A big con for GW2, and the reason PvP is such a central attraction for the game - along with branching story lines... (And making alts to experience them) is that GW2 will release very little in the way of content after launch. Expect a few freebies here and there as "Thank yous" and "Balancing acts", but for the most part expect to buy a new client version "Guild Wars 2, the Legacy of Shiro - lulz" every year at least. The only reason I list this as a con is that the community will see spikes (not me, I expect to play a LOT of PvP) because people want "long lasting raid content" and grinds... Guild Wars 2 will not have anything in the form of a grind, so expect their end game to be impressive - but repetitive/short. And please don't argue with me about that, because I nor you know. The only end game will be PvP and "Ecto Farming" which for all you non-savvy lurkers, is short for saying "Doing end game dungeons for cooler looking, but same stat armor". They HAVE already stated however that there will DEFINITELY be a finite number of times you will have to run a dungeon to get everything you want from it.
I hope that at least in theory clears a few things up, but to summarize...
Guild Wars 2 doesn't charge a sub fee because after launch support for the game will come in the form of expansions, and their "Server Model" doesn't have an ongoing cost attached to it in order to expand.
Guild Wars 2 will be a financial success if:
They sell a lot of boxes
They launch a lot of cool stuff that a lot of dorks will want from the cash shop
They keep on track with expansion releases
Aside from that, they have the framework to succeed and I have complete faith they will.
This seems like a good summary of all the (valid) points made in this thread.
The above post just seems so.. condescending, but I know it isn't lol.
I actually didn't read through the entire thread but it seemed like there were people that were ignoring the big picture. I added the WoW and EVE reference to answer your question as to why other games can't.
Afterall, it wouldn't be prudent or easy for Blizzard to suddenly switch WoW over to GW2s model and stop forcing subs. Actually, it almost isn't possible because of all the data loss.
GW2 was build from the ground up to be first and foremost cost efficient.
Edit: Also, if all the servers merged, you might see a large faction imbalance. That is something else GW2 doesn't have to worry about.
People think it's fun to pretend your a monster. Me I spend my life pretending I'm not. - Dexter Morgan
Knowing a little bit about GW1 and about business in general. I can say these things:
- Guild Wars 2 will generate revenue purely through cash shop and box purchases. (No duh right?)
- Guild Wars 2 will likely use the same "Server" model as GW1, which in my opinion was one of the largest pros to the original game as it saved a lot of money on Server costs. That is something a game like WoW REALLY has to take in to account - hence requiring addtional revenue from subs. In fact, if you look at pretty much every BtP MMORPG, you will see that ones with servers have Pay to Play models. EVE online is an exception, as they gain their revenue purely from a low box price cost (essentially a monthly fees worth of cost) and monthly fees. The reason this model is such a pro to GW1 + 2 is that it cuts down on costs, and also allows for you to play with your friends regardless of region or "server choice". The only disadvantage is that to make adjustments to the server, everyone gets booted off the game =p
- A big con for GW2, and the reason PvP is such a central attraction for the game - along with branching story lines... (And making alts to experience them) is that GW2 will release very little in the way of content after launch. Expect a few freebies here and there as "Thank yous" and "Balancing acts", but for the most part expect to buy a new client version "Guild Wars 2, the Legacy of Shiro - lulz" every year at least. The only reason I list this as a con is that the community will see spikes (not me, I expect to play a LOT of PvP) because people want "long lasting raid content" and grinds... Guild Wars 2 will not have anything in the form of a grind, so expect their end game to be impressive - but repetitive/short. And please don't argue with me about that, because I nor you know. The only end game will be PvP and "Ecto Farming" which for all you non-savvy lurkers, is short for saying "Doing end game dungeons for cooler looking, but same stat armor". They HAVE already stated however that there will DEFINITELY be a finite number of times you will have to run a dungeon to get everything you want from it.
I hope that at least in theory clears a few things up, but to summarize...
Guild Wars 2 doesn't charge a sub fee because after launch support for the game will come in the form of expansions, and their "Server Model" doesn't have an ongoing cost attached to it in order to expand.
Guild Wars 2 will be a financial success if:
They sell a lot of boxes
They launch a lot of cool stuff that a lot of dorks will want from the cash shop
They keep on track with expansion releases
Aside from that, they have the framework to succeed and I have complete faith they will.
TBF to the end game pvp there is a greater breadth of things to do in comparison to gw1, 30 mini games, incentives to explore the world multiple times (something that was not there in gw1) Technically hundreds of different variations of the personal stories and also a greater breadth of achievement system that is just grind this however thosands of time. Not to mention whatever new features the guilds bring plus whatever depth the crafting system has. You are being very harsh on the endgame of gw2 that is fair more geared to PvE than gw1 was. GW2 is more geared towards variety so as long as you do ALL of endgame content it should last for a fairly long time. If you just stick to one it will get boring relatively quickly.
The above post just seems so.. condescending, but I know it isn't lol.
I actually didn't read through the entire thread but it seemed like there were people that were ignoring the big picture. I added the WoW and EVE reference to answer your question as to why other games can't.
Afterall, it wouldn't be prudent or easy for Blizzard to suddenly switch WoW over to GW2s model and stop forcing subs. Actually, it almost isn't possible because of all the data loss.
GW2 was build from the ground up to be first and foremost cost efficient.
Edit: Also, if all the servers merged, you might see a large faction imbalance. That is something else GW2 doesn't have to worry about.
Ha ha, no not at all
It IS a good summary of all the valid points made in this thread.
I just posted this since alot of people come in at the end of a thread, and this 'll give em a good summary.
If the game is successful as it's supposed to be i think they can live with selling vanity pets and items and character re-customization options like names and gender.
Even with all the things you listed, you have to admit that it has a less time consuming end game than something like EQ or WoW which was the main draw to a lot of players in order to keep them playing(11.5 million right?)
I am a huge fan of GW2, which is hopefully evident by my posts. However, the thing is that you will see most players complete the end game at a much faster pace than most other "high subscriber MMORPGs".
I have said it before and I will say it again, GW2 is my favorite MMO prospect currently... and really ever - and I hope for the best for the game itself.
HOWEVER, I am also a realist. Please do not dilute this conversation by saying "UGHGHGHUGHGGG WOW SUCKS" - I mention it because it is stupid to enter into a debate about longevity and finances without having a basis.
That being said, I do not think I am being harsh. I think I am being absolutely fair, comparing GW2s end game with Ecto Farming is generous because Ecto farming takes a LONG time. I also strategically mentioned that there will indeed be end game content to sink your teeth in to, which requires a limited number of runs to complete and get all the items you want.
Again, I did not say GW2s end game was going to be bad, I said it was going to be limited. Limited because you don't have "client patches" like WoW where you go from: Naxx (AND grind gear) - Ulduar - Tournament - Ice Crown.
I view these things as positives, there is no "Grinding gear to get better gear for the sake of completing instances to get better gear". There is no "mandatory raiding". However, by taking away these grinds - you will see more players completing the game as a whole. A lot of players upon "completing the content" will move on to another game, regardless of how amazing the game is. If you believe this to be different, you are living in a fairy world - no offense.
I will likely try to expand my character to his fullest, complete all the achievements and then dive head first into hardcore competitive PvP. At least until the next expansion comes out...
But again, not all players will play the game that way, which was my original point. Thanks for reading.
People think it's fun to pretend your a monster. Me I spend my life pretending I'm not. - Dexter Morgan
Knowing a little bit about GW1 and about business in general. I can say these things:
- Guild Wars 2 will generate revenue purely through cash shop and box purchases. (No duh right?)
- Guild Wars 2 will likely use the same "Server" model as GW1, which in my opinion was one of the largest pros to the original game as it saved a lot of money on Server costs. That is something a game like WoW REALLY has to take in to account - hence requiring addtional revenue from subs. In fact, if you look at pretty much every BtP MMORPG, you will see that ones with servers have Pay to Play models. EVE online is an exception, as they gain their revenue purely from a low box price cost (essentially a monthly fees worth of cost) and monthly fees. The reason this model is such a pro to GW1 + 2 is that it cuts down on costs, and also allows for you to play with your friends regardless of region or "server choice". The only disadvantage is that to make adjustments to the server, everyone gets booted off the game =p
- A big con for GW2, and the reason PvP is such a central attraction for the game - along with branching story lines... (And making alts to experience them) is that GW2 will release very little in the way of content after launch. Expect a few freebies here and there as "Thank yous" and "Balancing acts", but for the most part expect to buy a new client version "Guild Wars 2, the Legacy of Shiro - lulz" every year at least. The only reason I list this as a con is that the community will see spikes (not me, I expect to play a LOT of PvP) because people want "long lasting raid content" and grinds... Guild Wars 2 will not have anything in the form of a grind, so expect their end game to be impressive - but repetitive/short. And please don't argue with me about that, because I nor you know. The only end game will be PvP and "Ecto Farming" which for all you non-savvy lurkers, is short for saying "Doing end game dungeons for cooler looking, but same stat armor". They HAVE already stated however that there will DEFINITELY be a finite number of times you will have to run a dungeon to get everything you want from it.
I hope that at least in theory clears a few things up, but to summarize...
Guild Wars 2 doesn't charge a sub fee because after launch support for the game will come in the form of expansions, and their "Server Model" doesn't have an ongoing cost attached to it in order to expand.
Guild Wars 2 will be a financial success if:
They sell a lot of boxes
They launch a lot of cool stuff that a lot of dorks will want from the cash shop
They keep on track with expansion releases
Aside from that, they have the framework to succeed and I have complete faith they will.
TBF to the end game pvp there is a greater breadth of things to do in comparison to gw1, 30 mini games, incentives to explore the world multiple times (something that was not there in gw1) Technically hundreds of different variations of the personal stories and also a greater breadth of achievement system that is just grind this however thosands of time. Not to mention whatever new features the guilds bring plus whatever depth the crafting system has. You are being very harsh on the endgame of gw2 that is fair more geared to PvE than gw1 was. GW2 is more geared towards variety so as long as you do ALL of endgame content it should last for a fairly long time. If you just stick to one it will get boring relatively quickly.
I think Reizlanzer's reasoning (big picture) is likely to hold true. The addition of details you include, such as achievements, alts (because story branching, playstyle etc), high-end dungeons, are true, but by comparison to completing the game, these end-game features will only go so far to staving off boredom for some people (how many remains to be seen). The business model and game design back up the reasoning. Still, it could subjecively become a very different out come, for example if ppl fall head-over-heels in love with the game, that will go a long way to buffering ppl's satisfaction thresholds!
Personally, I see PvP in various guises as the natural route of mmos for longevity/end-game (if you do not have the crazy grind features that most mmos have insisted on in the PvE up to now), as it's tending towards player run content (cyclical) as opposed to PvE content (linear: Beg-End).
I hope that at least in theory clears a few things up, but to summarize...
Guild Wars 2 doesn't charge a sub fee because after launch support for the game will come in the form of expansions, and their "Server Model" doesn't have an ongoing cost attached to it in order to expand.
Guild Wars 2 will be a financial success if:
They sell a lot of boxes
They launch a lot of cool stuff that a lot of dorks will want from the cash shop
They keep on track with expansion releases
Yeah, that's basically the problem of the whole B2P business principle - they won't be giving out stuff for free like subscription based games do, with patches and what not. But there's a good side to this too, and that is that ANet needs to make sure that theird expansions are top quality and that they will sell well because that's their main source of income. I personally hope for one expansion every 6-8 months.
Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing.
Yeah, that's basically the problem of the whole B2P business principle - they won't be giving out stuff for free like subscription based games do, with patches and what not. But there's a good side to this too, and that is that ANet needs to make sure that theird expansions are top quality and that they will sell well because that's their main source of income. I personally hope for one expansion every 6-8 months.
logic failure. if you are subbed and paying how anything they add is free?
Yeah, that's basically the problem of the whole B2P business principle - they won't be giving out stuff for free like subscription based games do, with patches and what not. But there's a good side to this too, and that is that ANet needs to make sure that theird expansions are top quality and that they will sell well because that's their main source of income. I personally hope for one expansion every 6-8 months.
logic failure. if you are subbed and paying how anything they add is free?
Bingo.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
Yeah, that's basically the problem of the whole B2P business principle - they won't be giving out stuff for free like subscription based games do, with patches and what not. But there's a good side to this too, and that is that ANet needs to make sure that theird expansions are top quality and that they will sell well because that's their main source of income. I personally hope for one expansion every 6-8 months.
logic failure. if you are subbed and paying how anything they add is free?
Because you're not paying for patches, but you're right, I said it wrong. I meant in comparison to B2P approach.
Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing.
The top notch experience part is certainly debatable, after hearing everyone say that about GW1 for so long I decided to try it one day only to discover it was one of the worst games I had ever stepped foot in, ever.
GW1 also was far from an MMO, which means it's costs of operation were significantly different. I doubt GW2 is going to suddenly become a real MMO and still be free, they are most likely going to base most of the inner workings off of GW1 which means it would still not be an MMO.
Have you considered researching the topics you offer an opinion on, or do you just plug into the Psychic Friends Network and hope for the best?
There's a load of information out there about GW2, and you pretty much need to squeeze your eyes shut stick your fingers in your ears to avoid it. So there's really no excuse for claiming that GW2's "inner workings" will be based off it's predecessor. They really have little in common beyond the lore, which you would know if you actually did play the original and taken a minute to read a little about the sequel.
But whatever. Give Dionne Warwick my best. Oh, and while you're at it, do you think she can give us a release date?
Because you're not paying for patches, but you're right, I said it wrong. I meant in comparison to B2P approach.
no worries
i agree with this part of your post, with everything i bought from this company i had the feeling "money well spent". I'm pretty sure i'll say the same thing after gw2. Thats a trust they've earned.
Originally posted by Methos12
But there's a good side to this too, and that is that ANet needs to make sure that theird expansions are top quality and that they will sell well because that's their main source of income. I personally hope for one expansion every 6-8 months.
Knowing a little bit about GW1 and about business in general. I can say these things:
- Guild Wars 2 will generate revenue purely through cash shop and box purchases. (No duh right?)
- Guild Wars 2 will likely use the same "Server" model as GW1, which in my opinion was one of the largest pros to the original game as it saved a lot of money on Server costs. That is something a game like WoW REALLY has to take in to account - hence requiring addtional revenue from subs. In fact, if you look at pretty much every BtP MMORPG, you will see that ones with servers have Pay to Play models. EVE online is an exception, as they gain their revenue purely from a low box price cost (essentially a monthly fees worth of cost) and monthly fees. The reason this model is such a pro to GW1 + 2 is that it cuts down on costs, and also allows for you to play with your friends regardless of region or "server choice". The only disadvantage is that to make adjustments to the server, everyone gets booted off the game =p
- A big con for GW2, and the reason PvP is such a central attraction for the game - along with branching story lines... (And making alts to experience them) is that GW2 will release very little in the way of content after launch. Expect a few freebies here and there as "Thank yous" and "Balancing acts", but for the most part expect to buy a new client version "Guild Wars 2, the Legacy of Shiro - lulz" every year at least. The only reason I list this as a con is that the community will see spikes (not me, I expect to play a LOT of PvP) because people want "long lasting raid content" and grinds... Guild Wars 2 will not have anything in the form of a grind, so expect their end game to be impressive - but repetitive/short. And please don't argue with me about that, because I nor you know. The only end game will be PvP and "Ecto Farming" which for all you non-savvy lurkers, is short for saying "Doing end game dungeons for cooler looking, but same stat armor". They HAVE already stated however that there will DEFINITELY be a finite number of times you will have to run a dungeon to get everything you want from it.
I hope that at least in theory clears a few things up, but to summarize...
Guild Wars 2 doesn't charge a sub fee because after launch support for the game will come in the form of expansions, and their "Server Model" doesn't have an ongoing cost attached to it in order to expand.
Guild Wars 2 will be a financial success if:
They sell a lot of boxes
They launch a lot of cool stuff that a lot of dorks will want from the cash shop
They keep on track with expansion releases
Aside from that, they have the framework to succeed and I have complete faith they will.
TBF to the end game pvp there is a greater breadth of things to do in comparison to gw1, 30 mini games, incentives to explore the world multiple times (something that was not there in gw1) Technically hundreds of different variations of the personal stories and also a greater breadth of achievement system that is just grind this however thosands of time. Not to mention whatever new features the guilds bring plus whatever depth the crafting system has. You are being very harsh on the endgame of gw2 that is fair more geared to PvE than gw1 was. GW2 is more geared towards variety so as long as you do ALL of endgame content it should last for a fairly long time. If you just stick to one it will get boring relatively quickly.
I think Reizlanzer's reasoning (big picture) is likely to hold true. The addition of details you include, such as achievements, alts (because story branching, playstyle etc), high-end dungeons, are true, but by comparison to completing the game, these end-game features will only go so far to staving off boredom for some people (how many remains to be seen). The business model and game design back up the reasoning. Still, it could subjecively become a very different out come, for example if ppl fall head-over-heels in love with the game, that will go a long way to buffering ppl's satisfaction thresholds!
Personally, I see PvP in various guises as the natural route of mmos for longevity/end-game (if you do not have the crazy grind features that most mmos have insisted on in the PvE up to now), as it's tending towards player run content (cyclical) as opposed to PvE content (linear: Beg-End).
Those things aren't likely what will keep the majority playing. The majority will likely play because of the social features of the game, the mini games browser based guild chats and what other features guilds bring as as the general group orientated nature of the game. A large amount of WoW players don't raid, they play because there are friends on the game, ties they don't want to loose.
For casuals (which make up a large amount of the player base) the endgame is just activities to be done with those friends. As long as gw2 has a very large social orientated side which seems highly likely then that is likely why people will continue to play the game.
GW2 is not P2P yet it seems like we are getting better quality then we would from any other P2P game. I can pretty much guarrantee you that in the longterm we will be playing GW2. SWTOR and RIFT lasts as long as ppl finish the game and have all the fun they could. GW2 you could always come back to.
"Some people feel the rain. Others just get wet." -Bob Marley
I'm probably one of those people who just get wet.
First of all, some people in this thread have been spewing utter bullshit.
Guild Wars does have some very special network code, and you play on ArenaNet's servers at all time (no "master server" running on player's computers). Over the years, there have been extremely few exploits in Guild Wars. If you compare this to other MMOs, where things like "speed hacks" are still possible, you will understand that your subscription fees don't go into making those games better.
The complicated network code is also the reason why there are no private servers for Guild Wars.
This is to whoever said that Guild Wars 2 is not a MMO: (right click -> view image)
First, they create social hubs (cities) where most (not all) people that are in the game will see other players. ...
Secondly, when you go "out into the real world" of GW you do so in a very limited way. ...
Thirdly, in GW, if you were out in the world you game was not played on someone's else's master server. Exception, PvP match making. The only time that you ever played on a one of Arenanet's "servers" was when you were in their social hub cities OR playing pvp matches. That is it. Again, much like Call of Duty, Battlefield or Quake, Arenanet only provided limited servers for limited things. They did not have to maintain large server clusters. They do not have "special network code". They just use the systems that are out there and dress them up differently.
And lastly, marketing. NCsoft have marketed GW and GW2 as "MMO's". Regardless if they are or are not, people glum-on to that and believe it even if not true. They then market expansions. This is still traditional in the way others have done things. Again, Call of Duty, Battlefield, and Quake have all thrived and been "f2p" but have done so based on box sales and expansions.
Bottom line, don't let the hype hit you in face. GW and GW 2 may be good games....they just aren't or won't be MMO's and as such should not be compared in any way to MM0's.
Your first and second point about GW1 are absolutely correct. GW1 is a fully instanced game. That is not a big secret or something that many have misunderstood. Arenanet have always labelled the first GW as a CORPG and not as a MMORPG.
This fact more or less invalidates your point about marketing. The first GW was marketed as a CORPG!
Your third point is just wrong. Please dont try to explain GW's client/server model if you have no idea how it is actually built.
To avoid further confusion this description is the PvE-instances only: EVERY private instance (a private instance is created when you go "out in the world") is running on a physical cluster, located in the region you are currently connected to when you enter (create) the instance. (North America, Europe, Asia etc.) Of course this run on central serverclusters and not on the client peer to peer model you seem to imply.
All character/item data is stored on a central SQL cluster. This is why you can change regions as you please!
Basically the original GW's technical structure is a lot closer to EVE's than to the more traditional "realm" based MMO's. I guess you could argue that a traditional MMO with 200 "realms" (or servers) is not more "massive" than GW because the realms are just 200 independant macro-instances of the same game.
Now GW2 on the other hand... It will still have instances but it will also have a partial "realm" structure like more traditional MMO's.
If the B2P model is going to work, NCSoft will have to sell a large number of games. The 100.000 copies that would be fine for most P2P games will be far too few for a B2P game carrying GW2 development cost.
Of course GW2 will also have (just like GW1) a lower level of ingame service. People who would expect to be able to call upon GM's ingame to have them explain how to play the game will definately be very disappointed
On the other hand: Arenanet have a lot of talent and if they can manage to keep the same level of stability and polish as they have done in GW then the lack of ingame GM's will not be a problem to most players.
Personally I am not buying GW2 because of the hype or marketing - I am buying it because of what Arenanet managed to do with GW. You could say that B2P done right is important for customer loyalty. Loyalty is important for the B2P model to work: If everyone is dissapointed with the original game, they wont sell any expansions and the story will end right there.
I hope we will get to see a GW3 eventually == B2P worked (again).
We dont need casuals in our games!!! Errm... Well we DO need casuals to fund and populate our games - But the games should be all about "hardcore" because: We dont need casuals in our games!!! (repeat ad infinitum)
I liked the first one. I haven't read much about the second one at this point. But if it was anything like the first, there is no way in hell I'd pay a monthly fee for the game tbh. I mean it's not really an mmo in the sense that I can encounter someone anywhere I go. That was limited to cities, which really makes them nothing more than visual chat rooms to me. To me guild wars was an average co-op rpg and an above average fantasy based shooter. Like I said, I did like the game. it's just not a mmo or anything resembling one to me. Maybe this new one is different?
This is probably the first "realistic" post on the subject I have read so far. GW (1) was not an MMO. I do not expect GW2 to be an MMO. NCsoft Arenanet have made people THINK this is an MMO by doing several things.
First, they create social hubs (cities) where most (not all) people that are in the game will see other players. The fact that they see many other players makes them THINK this is an MMO in the traditional sense. However, these social hubs are nothing more then match making interfaces much like you would find in games like Call of Duty or Battlefield or Quake. They are not places of combat and quests and so on.
Secondly, when you go "out into the real world" of GW you do so in a very limited way. How many actual players are with you? One, two, three...maybe five. Do you see other players out going about their business? No. This is because the outside world in GW is instanced. Wether you are going solo or going out with a FEW others, you are doing something like you do it in (again) Call of Duty or Battlefield or Quake. In other words, you are playing a much SMALL game then you might think.
Thirdly, in GW, if you were out in the world you game was not played on someone's else's master server. Exception, PvP match making. The only time that you ever played on a one of Arenanet's "servers" was when you were in their social hub cities OR playing pvp matches. That is it. Again, much like Call of Duty, Battlefield or Quake, Arenanet only provided limited servers for limited things. They did not have to maintain large server clusters. They do not have "special network code". They just use the systems that are out there and dress them up differently.
And lastly, marketing. NCsoft have marketed GW and GW2 as "MMO's". Regardless if they are or are not, people glum-on to that and believe it even if not true. They then market expansions. This is still traditional in the way others have done things. Again, Call of Duty, Battlefield, and Quake have all thrived and been "f2p" but have done so based on box sales and expansions.
Bottom line, don't let the hype hit you in face. GW and GW 2 may be good games....they just aren't or won't be MMO's and as such should not be compared in any way to MM0's.
You are simply ignorant. First read up on the game and then come back here.
As to the OP... Subscriptions made sense back in the UO days when the internetz run on dial-ups. The paying model stuck but the networking/server costs plumeted to nothingness since then. Back in those days subs were justified by pretty heavy overhead costs but nowadays they all but melted away. IMO Blizzard greedy pigs are more worried about GW2's B2P model than anything else because the "masses" might wake up and ask "WTF were we paying those 15$ a month for all those years and got nothing but paid expansions and 20$ flying disco horseys in return". I strongly suspect that this money is not going into the dev's pockets, you know the guys actually making the game you love, but somewhere else entirely.
IMO Anet is touching some mighty weighty financial interests there. There's literaly BILLIONS at stake. They've got some balls, I must admit, for yelling "the king is naked" so loudly.
Simple, if you target the mass market, identify the exact features that appeal to that market, and sell 6 million+ copies because people find it cheap with B2P, you make a huge profit regardless of the development cost. (They also make money from cash shop etc...)
So, why don't all developers do this? Because it requires a huge investment, both in development and of course marketing, since HYPE is what drives your sales. NCSoft is the world's largest publisher and are one of the few that can undertake this kind of project, with the risks it may have.
Companies that are small and/or create niche games don't have the luxury of having a $100M+ dollar investor with a probably equal amount of marketing budget, to create their games. They aim for loyal fans who subs counted in the tens-or hundreds of thousands and are willing to pay for their niche product.
$100M+??? I'm sorry to laugh but that's just ridiculous and over-exaggerated. Even with AneraNet's aggressive marketing scheme and ambititious game design will not sum up to that much.
But let's say it did cost them $100M, that's what? 2M copies?
In 5 years of GW1, they sold 5mil copies in 2008, that's roughly $250M - enough to fund GW2 and if they did so, every revenue from GW2 are 100% profit since GW1 already covered all their expenses.
Comments
Maybe, but this still doesn't make me see the reason.
Aion, Aoc, Wow, etc are all games with huge investments, targetting the mass market and also depending on hype. Still they need subs. How many copies did AOC sell? How many did WOW sell? Crap, how many did Aion sell?
All though you give some good background it still doesn't really explain why GW2 can do without (even if it's a bigger risk and they'll fail).
Cyphers explained allready a few times in this thread how GW2 will handle all this differently.
Please read before you post.
Lets not jump the gun here. Lets let GW2 release and see what we actually get in terms of game quality. Im not trying to be a troll but this is a discussion to have after the game releases IMO.
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore)
Now Playing: N/A
Worst MMO: FFXIV
Favorite MMO: FFXI
Thanks for your enlightening post.
We will surely take it into account.
Knowing a little bit about GW1 and about business in general. I can say these things:
- Guild Wars 2 will generate revenue purely through cash shop and box purchases. (No duh right?)
- Guild Wars 2 will likely use the same "Server" model as GW1, which in my opinion was one of the largest pros to the original game as it saved a lot of money on Server costs. That is something a game like WoW REALLY has to take in to account - hence requiring addtional revenue from subs. In fact, if you look at pretty much every BtP MMORPG, you will see that ones with servers have Pay to Play models. EVE online is an exception, as they gain their revenue purely from a low box price cost (essentially a monthly fees worth of cost) and monthly fees. The reason this model is such a pro to GW1 + 2 is that it cuts down on costs, and also allows for you to play with your friends regardless of region or "server choice". The only disadvantage is that to make adjustments to the server, everyone gets booted off the game =p
- A big con for GW2, and the reason PvP is such a central attraction for the game - along with branching story lines... (And making alts to experience them) is that GW2 will release very little in the way of content after launch. Expect a few freebies here and there as "Thank yous" and "Balancing acts", but for the most part expect to buy a new client version "Guild Wars 2, the Legacy of Shiro - lulz" every year at least. The only reason I list this as a con is that the community will see spikes (not me, I expect to play a LOT of PvP) because people want "long lasting raid content" and grinds... Guild Wars 2 will not have anything in the form of a grind, so expect their end game to be impressive - but repetitive/short. And please don't argue with me about that, because I nor you know. The only end game will be PvP and "Ecto Farming" which for all you non-savvy lurkers, is short for saying "Doing end game dungeons for cooler looking, but same stat armor". They HAVE already stated however that there will DEFINITELY be a finite number of times you will have to run a dungeon to get everything you want from it.
I hope that at least in theory clears a few things up, but to summarize...
Guild Wars 2 doesn't charge a sub fee because after launch support for the game will come in the form of expansions, and their "Server Model" doesn't have an ongoing cost attached to it in order to expand.
Guild Wars 2 will be a financial success if:
They sell a lot of boxes
They launch a lot of cool stuff that a lot of dorks will want from the cash shop
They keep on track with expansion releases
Aside from that, they have the framework to succeed and I have complete faith they will.
People think it's fun to pretend your a monster. Me I spend my life pretending I'm not. - Dexter Morgan
I agree with your points, the business model they have adopted, the market conditions and of course the quality (combat mechanics and content) and design (de-emphasis on grind) of the game back this up. I did not know about the server options to costs, that was interesting.
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
This seems like a good summary of all the (valid) points made in this thread.
The above post just seems so.. condescending, but I know it isn't lol.
I actually didn't read through the entire thread but it seemed like there were people that were ignoring the big picture. I added the WoW and EVE reference to answer your question as to why other games can't.
Afterall, it wouldn't be prudent or easy for Blizzard to suddenly switch WoW over to GW2s model and stop forcing subs. Actually, it almost isn't possible because of all the data loss.
GW2 was build from the ground up to be first and foremost cost efficient.
Edit: Also, if all the servers merged, you might see a large faction imbalance. That is something else GW2 doesn't have to worry about.
People think it's fun to pretend your a monster. Me I spend my life pretending I'm not. - Dexter Morgan
TBF to the end game pvp there is a greater breadth of things to do in comparison to gw1, 30 mini games, incentives to explore the world multiple times (something that was not there in gw1) Technically hundreds of different variations of the personal stories and also a greater breadth of achievement system that is just grind this however thosands of time. Not to mention whatever new features the guilds bring plus whatever depth the crafting system has. You are being very harsh on the endgame of gw2 that is fair more geared to PvE than gw1 was. GW2 is more geared towards variety so as long as you do ALL of endgame content it should last for a fairly long time. If you just stick to one it will get boring relatively quickly.
Ha ha, no not at all
It IS a good summary of all the valid points made in this thread.
I just posted this since alot of people come in at the end of a thread, and this 'll give em a good summary.
Should've ended my post with ... Thanks.
If the game is successful as it's supposed to be i think they can live with selling vanity pets and items and character re-customization options like names and gender.
Even with all the things you listed, you have to admit that it has a less time consuming end game than something like EQ or WoW which was the main draw to a lot of players in order to keep them playing(11.5 million right?)
I am a huge fan of GW2, which is hopefully evident by my posts. However, the thing is that you will see most players complete the end game at a much faster pace than most other "high subscriber MMORPGs".
I have said it before and I will say it again, GW2 is my favorite MMO prospect currently... and really ever - and I hope for the best for the game itself.
HOWEVER, I am also a realist. Please do not dilute this conversation by saying "UGHGHGHUGHGGG WOW SUCKS" - I mention it because it is stupid to enter into a debate about longevity and finances without having a basis.
That being said, I do not think I am being harsh. I think I am being absolutely fair, comparing GW2s end game with Ecto Farming is generous because Ecto farming takes a LONG time. I also strategically mentioned that there will indeed be end game content to sink your teeth in to, which requires a limited number of runs to complete and get all the items you want.
Again, I did not say GW2s end game was going to be bad, I said it was going to be limited. Limited because you don't have "client patches" like WoW where you go from: Naxx (AND grind gear) - Ulduar - Tournament - Ice Crown.
I view these things as positives, there is no "Grinding gear to get better gear for the sake of completing instances to get better gear". There is no "mandatory raiding". However, by taking away these grinds - you will see more players completing the game as a whole. A lot of players upon "completing the content" will move on to another game, regardless of how amazing the game is. If you believe this to be different, you are living in a fairy world - no offense.
I will likely try to expand my character to his fullest, complete all the achievements and then dive head first into hardcore competitive PvP. At least until the next expansion comes out...
But again, not all players will play the game that way, which was my original point. Thanks for reading.
People think it's fun to pretend your a monster. Me I spend my life pretending I'm not. - Dexter Morgan
I think Reizlanzer's reasoning (big picture) is likely to hold true. The addition of details you include, such as achievements, alts (because story branching, playstyle etc), high-end dungeons, are true, but by comparison to completing the game, these end-game features will only go so far to staving off boredom for some people (how many remains to be seen). The business model and game design back up the reasoning. Still, it could subjecively become a very different out come, for example if ppl fall head-over-heels in love with the game, that will go a long way to buffering ppl's satisfaction thresholds!
Personally, I see PvP in various guises as the natural route of mmos for longevity/end-game (if you do not have the crazy grind features that most mmos have insisted on in the PvE up to now), as it's tending towards player run content (cyclical) as opposed to PvE content (linear: Beg-End).
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
Yeah, that's basically the problem of the whole B2P business principle - they won't be giving out stuff for free like subscription based games do, with patches and what not. But there's a good side to this too, and that is that ANet needs to make sure that theird expansions are top quality and that they will sell well because that's their main source of income. I personally hope for one expansion every 6-8 months.
logic failure. if you are subbed and paying how anything they add is free?
I need more vespene gas.
Bingo.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
Because you're not paying for patches, but you're right, I said it wrong. I meant in comparison to B2P approach.
Have you considered researching the topics you offer an opinion on, or do you just plug into the Psychic Friends Network and hope for the best?
There's a load of information out there about GW2, and you pretty much need to squeeze your eyes shut stick your fingers in your ears to avoid it. So there's really no excuse for claiming that GW2's "inner workings" will be based off it's predecessor. They really have little in common beyond the lore, which you would know if you actually did play the original and taken a minute to read a little about the sequel.
But whatever. Give Dionne Warwick my best. Oh, and while you're at it, do you think she can give us a release date?
Thanksomuch!
no worries
i agree with this part of your post, with everything i bought from this company i had the feeling "money well spent". I'm pretty sure i'll say the same thing after gw2. Thats a trust they've earned.
I need more vespene gas.
Those things aren't likely what will keep the majority playing. The majority will likely play because of the social features of the game, the mini games browser based guild chats and what other features guilds bring as as the general group orientated nature of the game. A large amount of WoW players don't raid, they play because there are friends on the game, ties they don't want to loose.
For casuals (which make up a large amount of the player base) the endgame is just activities to be done with those friends. As long as gw2 has a very large social orientated side which seems highly likely then that is likely why people will continue to play the game.
You know what the ironic things is..
GW2 is not P2P yet it seems like we are getting better quality then we would from any other P2P game. I can pretty much guarrantee you that in the longterm we will be playing GW2. SWTOR and RIFT lasts as long as ppl finish the game and have all the fun they could. GW2 you could always come back to.
"Some people feel the rain. Others just get wet." -Bob Marley
I'm probably one of those people who just get wet.
First of all, some people in this thread have been spewing utter bullshit.
Guild Wars does have some very special network code, and you play on ArenaNet's servers at all time (no "master server" running on player's computers). Over the years, there have been extremely few exploits in Guild Wars. If you compare this to other MMOs, where things like "speed hacks" are still possible, you will understand that your subscription fees don't go into making those games better.
The complicated network code is also the reason why there are no private servers for Guild Wars.
This is to whoever said that Guild Wars 2 is not a MMO: (right click -> view image)
Your first and second point about GW1 are absolutely correct. GW1 is a fully instanced game. That is not a big secret or something that many have misunderstood. Arenanet have always labelled the first GW as a CORPG and not as a MMORPG.
This fact more or less invalidates your point about marketing. The first GW was marketed as a CORPG!
Your third point is just wrong. Please dont try to explain GW's client/server model if you have no idea how it is actually built.
To avoid further confusion this description is the PvE-instances only: EVERY private instance (a private instance is created when you go "out in the world") is running on a physical cluster, located in the region you are currently connected to when you enter (create) the instance. (North America, Europe, Asia etc.) Of course this run on central serverclusters and not on the client peer to peer model you seem to imply.
All character/item data is stored on a central SQL cluster. This is why you can change regions as you please!
Basically the original GW's technical structure is a lot closer to EVE's than to the more traditional "realm" based MMO's. I guess you could argue that a traditional MMO with 200 "realms" (or servers) is not more "massive" than GW because the realms are just 200 independant macro-instances of the same game.
Now GW2 on the other hand... It will still have instances but it will also have a partial "realm" structure like more traditional MMO's.
If the B2P model is going to work, NCSoft will have to sell a large number of games. The 100.000 copies that would be fine for most P2P games will be far too few for a B2P game carrying GW2 development cost.
Of course GW2 will also have (just like GW1) a lower level of ingame service. People who would expect to be able to call upon GM's ingame to have them explain how to play the game will definately be very disappointed
On the other hand: Arenanet have a lot of talent and if they can manage to keep the same level of stability and polish as they have done in GW then the lack of ingame GM's will not be a problem to most players.
Personally I am not buying GW2 because of the hype or marketing - I am buying it because of what Arenanet managed to do with GW. You could say that B2P done right is important for customer loyalty. Loyalty is important for the B2P model to work: If everyone is dissapointed with the original game, they wont sell any expansions and the story will end right there.
I hope we will get to see a GW3 eventually == B2P worked (again).
We dont need casuals in our games!!! Errm... Well we DO need casuals to fund and populate our games - But the games should be all about "hardcore" because: We dont need casuals in our games!!!
(repeat ad infinitum)
You are simply ignorant. First read up on the game and then come back here.
As to the OP... Subscriptions made sense back in the UO days when the internetz run on dial-ups. The paying model stuck but the networking/server costs plumeted to nothingness since then. Back in those days subs were justified by pretty heavy overhead costs but nowadays they all but melted away. IMO Blizzard greedy pigs are more worried about GW2's B2P model than anything else because the "masses" might wake up and ask "WTF were we paying those 15$ a month for all those years and got nothing but paid expansions and 20$ flying disco horseys in return". I strongly suspect that this money is not going into the dev's pockets, you know the guys actually making the game you love, but somewhere else entirely.
IMO Anet is touching some mighty weighty financial interests there. There's literaly BILLIONS at stake. They've got some balls, I must admit, for yelling "the king is naked" so loudly.
$100M+??? I'm sorry to laugh but that's just ridiculous and over-exaggerated. Even with AneraNet's aggressive marketing scheme and ambititious game design will not sum up to that much.
But let's say it did cost them $100M, that's what? 2M copies?
In 5 years of GW1, they sold 5mil copies in 2008, that's roughly $250M - enough to fund GW2 and if they did so, every revenue from GW2 are 100% profit since GW1 already covered all their expenses.
Ready for GW2!!!