Jump to content

  • Curse Sites
Help
* * * * - 4 votes

Store now too greedy for my taste.


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
40 replies to this topic

#1 Hybarf Tics

Hybarf Tics

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 1000 posts

Posted 25 June 2013 - 08:07 PM

Don't get me wrong I've been a strong supporter of Anet since day one with the collectors edition. I bought 3 armors some civilian clothing. Since the harvest tools at 10 dollars each, character bound no less it seems Anet is getting greedier and greedier. Even the armors used to be 500 gems each now starting with the new pirate armors they are now 800 gems. More and more it seems everything is coming out 10 bucks a pop when considering the whole game 59.50 and an expansion pack is usually around 30 dollars. So I'll pass on the armors both because of the looks and price. The next and very last thing I'll buy will be the logging axe then my support will fall to nothing. Too bad I really was a good supporter but I gotta draw the line somewhere.
Besides the way I figure it, my investment was all for the expansions which we have yet to see. I hope we see one before we hit 18 months, because I'll be the next thing to go. An MMO cannot survive on living stories alone.

Keep up the good work Anet and let's hope we don't get a real expansion only every 18 months because that spells doom for any MMO.

#2 Dahk

Dahk

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 798 posts
  • Server:Tarnished Coast

Posted 25 June 2013 - 09:03 PM

I think you may have some unrealistic expectations of what to expect for your dollar in an MMO.

ANet simply isn't going to be able to produce a WoW-like expansion with its current income.  Think about it: Do you really think that the income ANet gets from the gem shop is close to the $15/month that WoW gets from it's players (plus the extras from the fancy mounts/minis that it also sells)?  Even if it could get that much from each player, compare the player base of GW2 to that of WoW.  Even with it's decline in population, there are lot more active players with WoW than with GW2.

So, yes, it would be nice if we could all get more for less, but in reality, you can leave GW2 if it really suits you, but your alternatives are either new MMOs who also won't be able to produce WoW-like expansions or WoW itself.

p.s. if you think this cash shop is expensive, take a look at Neverwinter, lol.

#3 Mhenlo

Mhenlo

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 454 posts

Posted 25 June 2013 - 09:08 PM

Neverwinter is F2P. GW2 already has $180,000,000+ leg up on Neverwinter with just box sales. That is a lot of cash.

Don't forget, too, that increasing the price of everything in the cash shop is not necessarily the only way for a publisher to make money. Guild Wars 1 lasted years with a reasonable cash shop and selling expansions.

I would hate for someone to be foolish enough to argue that the way ANet is managing GW2's cash shop is the only way for them to be profitable - because that would be a little silly, eh?

#4 Kichwas

Kichwas

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 423 posts
  • Location:San Francisco
  • Guild Tag:[JAH]
  • Server:Tarnished Coast

Posted 25 June 2013 - 09:23 PM

You're welcome to start a petition asking them to charge you $14.95 / month so you can get one update every 6 to 11 months instead and pretend that is somehow 'less greedy'...

I won't support you in the least, but you can go ahead and start it...

#5 Desild

Desild

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 985 posts
  • Location:New Eden
  • Profession:Guardian
  • Guild Tag:[DKAL]
  • Server:Piken Square

Posted 25 June 2013 - 09:23 PM

View PostDahk, on 25 June 2013 - 09:03 PM, said:

So, yes, it would be nice if we could all get more for less, but in reality, you can leave GW2 if it really suits you, but your alternatives are either new MMOs who also won't be able to produce WoW-like expansions or WoW itself.

If you keep encouraging people to people to leave each time they come to the realization that the game is indeed turning up for the worse (which is undauntly true, you just don't realise it yet) you may find yourself in a post-Cataclysm WoW with people quitting left and right, with guilds and communities outright dissolving.

Or worse, playing by yourself, as the better and smarter people took they money elsewhere. Because it is no right attitude to treat fellow gamers as "expendable". We are not expendable, and each one of us that walks away will eventually affect you.

And yes, ArenaNet is getting greedy. Hopefully they have a back up plan with the Korean player-base that seems to relish on this sort of stragems. Pity us westerners right?

View PostKichwas, on 25 June 2013 - 09:23 PM, said:

You're welcome to start a petition asking them to charge you $14.95 / month so you can get one update every 6 to 11 months instead and pretend that is somehow 'less greedy'...

I won't support you in the least, but you can go ahead and start it...

I get more than my money's worth in WoW than I have gotten so far in Guild Wars 2 and their "Living Story". So you may be on to something.

I'd rather get a good expansion every few months than this bloody travesty they have been passing up for content.

Edited by Desild, 25 June 2013 - 09:32 PM.


#6 Sandpit

Sandpit

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 159 posts

Posted 25 June 2013 - 09:25 PM

I would be very happy to spend regularly in the Gem store, but I haven;t yet, simply because you get so little for your money. Gem store items cost so little to develop and so free to distribute, but cost so much that I have never been tempted by any thing there.

ANet could easily have £10 a month off me but have yet to offer anything even remotely close to that value. I won't spend the equivalent of a budget price game on a few dyes, some lucky-dip keys or a crummy outfit that is no better than the standard free ones (just different). I would by any of those items, and regularly, if the price was right.

#7 Mhenlo

Mhenlo

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 454 posts

Posted 25 June 2013 - 09:27 PM

View PostKichwas, on 25 June 2013 - 09:23 PM, said:

You're welcome to start a petition asking them to charge you $14.95 / month so you can get one update every 6 to 11 months instead and pretend that is somehow 'less greedy'...

I won't support you in the least, but you can go ahead and start it...

So the only way you think ANet can make money to fund their game is a sub fee or continuing to charge more and more for the same things in their cash shop?

Don't you think that there might be other ways to make money as well or are you positive those are the only two options as your post suggests?

#8 FoxBat

FoxBat

    Vigil Crusader

  • Members
  • 3975 posts

Posted 25 June 2013 - 09:27 PM

View PostMhenlo, on 25 June 2013 - 09:08 PM, said:

Don't forget, too, that increasing the price of everything in the cash shop is not necessarily the only way for a publisher to make money. Guild Wars 1 lasted years with a reasonable cash shop and selling expansions.

With "reasonable" prices like $10 per costume?

And one major content update per year vs. several?

The current approach isn't necessarily the best, but one thing that certainly won't work is copying an approach that could only support a live team 1/20th the size of what they are using now.

Edited by FoxBat, 25 June 2013 - 09:28 PM.


#9 Mhenlo

Mhenlo

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 454 posts

Posted 25 June 2013 - 09:29 PM

View PostSandpit, on 25 June 2013 - 09:25 PM, said:

I would be very happy to spend regularly in the Gem store, but I haven;t yet, simply because you get so little for your money. Gem store items cost so little to develop and so free to distribute, but cost so much that I have never been tempted by any thing there.

ANet could easily have £10 a month off me but have yet to offer anything even remotely close to that value. I won't spend the equivalent of a budget price game on a few dyes, some lucky-dip keys or a crummy outfit that is no better than the standard free ones (just different). I would by any of those items, and regularly, if the price was right.

Indeed. It is a wonder that Walmart can make so much damn money charging so little. I mean, they must have less money than Saks Fifth Avenue right?

Sarcasm aside, this is dead on. ANet has lost my business on many many occasions because of the price of the items in the store. I wonder how many people are like me and you and how much more money they could have made?

#10 dss_live

dss_live

    Golem Rider

  • Members
  • 3325 posts
  • Location:Belgium
  • Server:Aurora Glade

Posted 25 June 2013 - 09:30 PM

View PostKichwas, on 25 June 2013 - 09:23 PM, said:

You're welcome to start a petition asking them to charge you $14.95 / month so you can get one update every 6 to 11 months instead and pretend that is somehow 'less greedy'...

I won't support you in the least, but you can go ahead and start it...

So whenever someone complains about prices in the gemstore going up and being quite pricey they automatically want a subscription based mmo? ASking for a subscription based model really has nothing to do with this thread. And the argument of "well those guys are being even more greedy" doesn't really mean anything. Because something else does something worse, we should be glad with what we got , even if that might still be quite bad?

note: i'm in no way agaisnt the current prices in the cashshop, i honestly couldn't care less as my cash is staying safely in my wallet :) just commenting coze your argument made zero sense

Edited by dss_live, 25 June 2013 - 09:31 PM.


#11 Mhenlo

Mhenlo

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 454 posts

Posted 25 June 2013 - 09:30 PM

View PostFoxBat, on 25 June 2013 - 09:27 PM, said:

With "reasonable" prices like $10 per costume?

And one major content update per year vs. several?

The current approach isn't necessarily the best, but one thing that certainly won't work is copying an approach that could only support a live team 1/20th the size of what they are using now.

How do you know? Did you do a study? Can you link to it for me?

#12 Arewn

Arewn

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1068 posts
  • Location:Ontario, Canada
  • Server:Blackgate

Posted 25 June 2013 - 09:31 PM

View PostDahk, on 25 June 2013 - 09:03 PM, said:

I think you may have some unrealistic expectations of what to expect for your dollar in an MMO.

ANet simply isn't going to be able to produce a WoW-like expansion with its current income.  Think about it: Do you really think that the income ANet gets from the gem shop is close to the $15/month that WoW gets from it's players (plus the extras from the fancy mounts/minis that it also sells)?  Even if it could get that much from each player, compare the player base of GW2 to that of WoW.  Even with it's decline in population, there are lot more active players with WoW than with GW2.

So, yes, it would be nice if we could all get more for less, but in reality, you can leave GW2 if it really suits you, but your alternatives are either new MMOs who also won't be able to produce WoW-like expansions or WoW itself.

p.s. if you think this cash shop is expensive, take a look at Neverwinter, lol.
First, there's a point of saturation where throwing more money at it won't improve an MMOs development. Second, the idea that your subscription money is going to better the game is unfortunately naive, more of that money goes to padding Activisions pockets and to development of Blizzard's other titles then it does to WoW. There's a reason people point the finger at WoW as being the biggest cash cow on the market, that's because it literally is a cash cow.
You'll also notice most subscription fees failing and switching to the more profitable F2p model. This idea that you can only put out quality content, updates, or expansion if you have subscription fee is false.

Now unfortunately for all I've said just now, GW2 isn't in that great of a position. The gem store, figuratively speaking, is NCsoft's face plastered on top of GW2, and most money from the gem store goes to NCsoft (who then either pocket it or spend it where they want, which means on other games) . Painful as it may be, using the gem store doesn't necessarily support GW2 or Arena Net.
And as an extra kick in the nuts to those looking forward to Wildstar... that's under NCsoft as well.

Edit: as an extra note, the so called "cox boxes", or rng loot from gem store chests, are incredibly popular and profitable in korea, which is why NCsoft doesn't care if it's hurting the NA or EU player base if they include them.

Edited by Arewn, 25 June 2013 - 09:34 PM.


#13 MazingerZ

MazingerZ

    Golem Rider

  • Curse Premium
  • Curse Premium
  • 2274 posts
  • Profession:Guardian
  • Guild Tag:[CYRL]
  • Server:Tarnished Coast

Posted 25 June 2013 - 09:42 PM

View PostArewn, on 25 June 2013 - 09:31 PM, said:

You'll also notice most subscription fees failing and switching to the more profitable F2p model. This idea that you can only put out quality content, updates, or expansion if you have subscription fee is false.

Evidence?  Give me an example of a F2P MMO that is putting out content that surpasses WoW in terms of quality and quantity.

I've made the argument against this numerous times.  I'm willing to do so again.

Edited by MazingerZ, 25 June 2013 - 09:43 PM.

It's okay to enjoy crap if you're willing to admit it's crap.
Every patch is like ArenaNet walking out onto the stage of the International Don't Kitten Up Championship, and then proceeding to shiv itself in the stomach 30 times while screaming "IT'S FOR YOUR OWN GOOD! IT'S FOR YOUR OWN GOOD!"

#14 Dahk

Dahk

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 798 posts
  • Server:Tarnished Coast

Posted 25 June 2013 - 09:46 PM

View PostDesild, on 25 June 2013 - 09:23 PM, said:

If you keep encouraging people to people to leave each time they come to the realization that the game is indeed turning up for the worse (which is undauntly true, you just don't realise it yet) you may find yourself in a post-Cataclysm WoW with people quitting left and right, with guilds and communities outright dissolving.

Or worse, playing by yourself, as the better and smarter people took they money elsewhere. Because it is no right attitude to treat fellow gamers as "expendable". We are not expendable, and each one of us that walks away will eventually affect you.

While it's flattering that you think my opinion has that much influence, I'm not asking the OP to leave.  I'm only telling the reality outside of GW2.

MMOs are expensive to keep running.  I know we all wish we could get it all for free, but we can't.  The truth is, until an MMO gets the volume of players like WoW has with a payment model that makes as much as they do, you will never see another game release content like WoW.  Even if GW2 went to a subscription model, you still wouldn't get a WoW-like expansion because there simply aren't enough people playing the game.

View PostArewn, on 25 June 2013 - 09:31 PM, said:

First, there's a point of saturation where throwing more money at it won't improve an MMOs development. Second, the idea that your subscription money is going to better the game is unfortunately naive, more of that money goes to padding Activisions pockets and to development of Blizzard's other titles then it does to WoW. There's a reason people point the finger at WoW as being the biggest cash cow on the market, that's because it literally is a cash cow.
You'll also notice most subscription fees failing and switching to the more profitable F2p model. This idea that you can only put out quality content, updates, or expansion if you have subscription fee is false.
That's some very optimistic speculation, but there isn't much to back it up, particularly when you look at the MMOs available.  You either have a cheap game with low quality mechanics/graphics that can pump out cheap extra content or high quality games with more complex mechanics/graphics that don't have nearly as much content.

#15 Desild

Desild

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 985 posts
  • Location:New Eden
  • Profession:Guardian
  • Guild Tag:[DKAL]
  • Server:Piken Square

Posted 25 June 2013 - 09:50 PM

View PostDahk, on 25 June 2013 - 09:42 PM, said:

While it's flattering that you think my opinion has that much influence, I'm not asking the OP to leave.  I'm only telling the reality outside of GW2.

MMOs are expensive to keep running.  I know we all wish we could get it all for free, but we can't.  The truth is, until an MMO gets the volume of players like WoW has with a payment model that makes as much as they do, you will never see another game release content like WoW.  Even if GW2 went to a subscription model, you still wouldn't get a WoW-like expansion because there simply aren't enough people playing the game.

I don't find it all that flattering, to be quite honest. But when you have multitude of people, just like you, keep showing the door to people in distress over some detail in the game, you can bet it will all add up. Then we can rejoice in the choir of complains. Pity we haven't reached that state or else ArenaNet might have regained their senses.

And wasn't ArenaNet that claimed that the reason against running a subscription model was that it wasn't all that expensive to run a MMO server maintenance? Multitude of essays debating that have been used on Blizzard's finance statements. And wasn't ArenaNet that said, and hear this, that the best way to keep customers was to engage them in compelling content and their customers support financially the game to keep enjoying that content?

Well, I'm not engaged, and the only thing that compels me to do anything is their Arceus forsaken Cox Boxes.

#16 Dahk

Dahk

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 798 posts
  • Server:Tarnished Coast

Posted 25 June 2013 - 09:52 PM

View PostArewn, on 25 June 2013 - 09:31 PM, said:

You'll also notice most subscription fees failing and switching to the more profitable F2p model. This idea that you can only put out quality content, updates, or expansion if you have subscription fee is false.
Other MMOs are moving to the F2P model to survive.  This doesn't mean they are providing expansion content anywhere near like WoW.

#17 MazingerZ

MazingerZ

    Golem Rider

  • Curse Premium
  • Curse Premium
  • 2274 posts
  • Profession:Guardian
  • Guild Tag:[CYRL]
  • Server:Tarnished Coast

Posted 25 June 2013 - 09:52 PM

View PostSandpit, on 25 June 2013 - 09:25 PM, said:

I would be very happy to spend regularly in the Gem store, but I haven;t yet, simply because you get so little for your money. Gem store items cost so little to develop and so free to distribute, but cost so much that I have never been tempted by any thing there.

That is because all those items are carrying with the cumulative costs of maintaining the support, the development and so forth of all the 'free' content you are using.  Other people are subsidizing your gaming.  You are not buying just the cost and labor of making the items in the gem store, you are also paying for all the 'free' stuff and since not everyone has skin in the game under a F2P model, they have to make extra money off the people who are willing to pay.
It's okay to enjoy crap if you're willing to admit it's crap.
Every patch is like ArenaNet walking out onto the stage of the International Don't Kitten Up Championship, and then proceeding to shiv itself in the stomach 30 times while screaming "IT'S FOR YOUR OWN GOOD! IT'S FOR YOUR OWN GOOD!"

#18 Dahk

Dahk

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 798 posts
  • Server:Tarnished Coast

Posted 25 June 2013 - 10:04 PM

View PostDesild, on 25 June 2013 - 09:50 PM, said:

I don't find it all that flattering, to be quite honest. But when you have multitude of people, just like you, keep showing the door to people in distress over some detail in the game, you can bet it will all add up. Then we can rejoice in the choir of complains. Pity we haven't reached that state or else ArenaNet might have regained their senses.

And wasn't ArenaNet that claimed that the reason against running a subscription model was that it wasn't all that expensive to run a MMO server maintenance? Multitude of essays debating that have been used on Blizzard's finance statements. And wasn't ArenaNet that said, and hear this, that the best way to keep customers was to engage them in compelling content and their customers support financially the game to keep enjoying that content?

Well, I'm not engaged, and the only thing that compels me to do anything is their Arceus forsaken Cox Boxes.
You can keep an MMO running just fine without a subscription model. ANet is right about that.  However, you're not going to keep it running up to the same standards as WoW.

#19 Baldur The Bold

Baldur The Bold

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 443 posts
  • Guild Tag:[ARM]
  • Server:Blackgate

Posted 25 June 2013 - 10:07 PM

If you make a F2P game then that is fine, put stuff in  your TP for gems/gold whatever..the big problem that I have is the RNG for stuff. That is just ridiculous and I would rather pay a monthly fee than gamble 2-3x more than that for a "chance"(god knows how low it is) for an item.
I HATE white knight people saying that you don't have to pay for this and that well guess what...your right...I don't and I won't. White Knights defending this company no matter what bad decisions is blind fanboism,hell I am a fanboy but not blind. Pissing off  your playerbase with RNG bullshit is just a poor business decision and makes me sad.....how far the mighty have fallen.
In GW1 I bought every costume and item from their store. If I had a random chance at in item would I have bought it...hell no. GW2 is standing very unethical ground and hopefully the masses understand that.

#20 Dahk

Dahk

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 798 posts
  • Server:Tarnished Coast

Posted 25 June 2013 - 10:14 PM

View PostMazingerZ, on 25 June 2013 - 09:52 PM, said:

That is because all those items are carrying with the cumulative costs of maintaining the support, the development and so forth of all the 'free' content you are using.  Other people are subsidizing your gaming.  You are not buying just the cost and labor of making the items in the gem store, you are also paying for all the 'free' stuff and since not everyone has skin in the game under a F2P model, they have to make extra money off the people who are willing to pay.
QFT.

But really, arguing about the price of items in the gem store is kinda silly since you can just buy gems with in-game gold.

Arguing the cost of items in the gem store is really pretty silly:
- You can get it all for free if you just grind out the gold in game.
- You don't need anything in the gem store to perform well in game.

View PostBaldur The Bold, on 25 June 2013 - 10:07 PM, said:

If you make a F2P game then that is fine, put stuff in  your TP for gems/gold whatever..the big problem that I have is the RNG for stuff. That is just ridiculous and I would rather pay a monthly fee than gamble 2-3x more than that for a "chance"(god knows how low it is) for an item.
I HATE white knight people saying that you don't have to pay for this and that well guess what...your right...I don't and I won't. White Knights defending this company no matter what bad decisions is blind fanboism,hell I am a fanboy but not blind. Pissing off  your playerbase with RNG bullshit is just a poor business decision and makes me sad.....how far the mighty have fallen.
In GW1 I bought every costume and item from their store. If I had a random chance at in item would I have bought it...hell no. GW2 is standing very unethical ground and hopefully the masses understand that.
Let's please not start stereotyping and making personal attacks against people just because of their position on this one issue, eh?

I disagree with ANet on many an issue, so just because I agree with their pay model and understand their limitations on content release doesn't mean I think they pave gold when they walk.

#21 Arewn

Arewn

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1068 posts
  • Location:Ontario, Canada
  • Server:Blackgate

Posted 25 June 2013 - 10:30 PM

View PostMazingerZ, on 25 June 2013 - 09:42 PM, said:

Evidence?  Give me an example of a F2P MMO that is putting out content that surpasses WoW in terms of quality and quantity.

I've made the argument against this numerous times.  I'm willing to do so again.
Just as you've apparently had this argument plenty of times, so have I. I think we can both agree that this will simply turn into throwing quotes and patch notes at each other while (ultimately subjectively) arguing about which is consider 'more content'. So I'm going to pass.
Suffice to say, from my perspective, I've played WoW and I've played other MMOs, and my view is that the more recent triple A MMO releases have seen updates and content just as impressive as what WoW has ever given me, and have read/watched enough on the internet that agrees with this notion that my perspective on the matter has been solidly reinforced.

Unless the f2p MMOs you're using to compare it are things from gpotatoe or nexon... :P

I suppose this doubles as a response to Dahk as well.

#22 HawkofStorms

HawkofStorms

    Guru's Source of Witty Banter

  • Members
  • 3101 posts

Posted 25 June 2013 - 10:32 PM

View PostDesild, on 25 June 2013 - 09:23 PM, said:


I get more than my money's worth in WoW than I have gotten so far in Guild Wars 2 and their "Living Story". So you may be on to something.

I'd rather get a good expansion every few months than this bloody travesty they have been passing up for content.

I'm tired of people comparing ever MMO's content to WoW, the most successful MMO ever.

Lets compare GW2's content to the more typical, average subscription MMO.  Is the amount of content being added to GW2 more then what was added for your $15 a month in say... Aion?  Warhammer Online?  Age of Conan?  Star Wars The Old Republic?
I'd say yes.  Hell, many MMOs I've played and paid money to over the years offered pretty much NOTHING in terms of new content for 3+ month long stretches at a time.
Saying GW2 hasn't put in as much content as WoW is like saying a Toyota car sucks because it's not a Ferrari.   Compare it to a Ford.  Compare it to equivalent products.  if you want to argue the merits of the business model's impact on the improvements to the game, you can't compare it to a game that has literally made 20-30 times as much money.

#23 Miragee

Miragee

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 850 posts

Posted 25 June 2013 - 10:37 PM

View PostDahk, on 25 June 2013 - 10:04 PM, said:

You can keep an MMO running just fine without a subscription model. ANet is right about that.  However, you're not going to keep it running up to the same standards as WoW.

Blabla, WoW bla? bla?

You don't need 200 million dollar to create an expansion set like blizzard does with wow. Blizzards invests high amounts of money into product quality (fine tuning in the end), large team, advertisement, other projects, and support. You don't need that. GW1 has shown that pretty well. The only thing you didn't have was a real support 24/7. Anet has a giant team now. But do they need it? I'm sorry but the content they have shown until now nearly non existent. Even if you count in all that f-click stupid achievement grinding and dead story with no replayability the content does not mirror that they have 300 working members there. So they put all their money into a giant team with no outcome. "Too many cooks the broth" as you would say in germany. I think a smaller team would do much better. I think the modell is off as well. Fast Addons provided WAY more fun and replayable content that fits into the world than the pieces of crap that are thrown into the world becaused they force themselves to do short capped stuff.

Surely, in the end WoW can create more content with Addons and Content-Updates. But firstly they don't need THAT much money for it and secondly the subscription fee can't be compared with a cash shop, even there were the same amount of players in each game. That's the fun thing about cash shops. You don't know how many money they make with it. They see how many they make and can manipulate that by new items and prices and observe the outcome to get the best out of it. We won't see that outcome anyways. We cannot say but I would assume that - if the cash shop works well - the income would be higher than with a subscription fee.

#24 Serris

Serris

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 165 posts

Posted 25 June 2013 - 10:39 PM

i logged in specifically to answer on your thread.

you are absolutely right. this "content" is adding a few tiny little things to press "F" next to and a bunch of new achievement bars to fill up. the rest is stuff you get to buy on the gemstore.

they haven't broken that many promises they made before the game came out: they twisted them into a sick travesty of how i interpreted their promises.

up until now i had gotten every one of their holiday and living story achievements. i almost finished dragon bash.
but i won't be finishing it now. this is not guild wars. and i don't know who made gw2, but it's not the guys who made gw1

also this patch: AoE loot bugged, torment bugged, dungeon bugged. you had ONE job Anet.

#25 MazingerZ

MazingerZ

    Golem Rider

  • Curse Premium
  • Curse Premium
  • 2274 posts
  • Profession:Guardian
  • Guild Tag:[CYRL]
  • Server:Tarnished Coast

Posted 25 June 2013 - 10:40 PM

View PostHawkofStorms, on 25 June 2013 - 10:32 PM, said:

I'm tired of people comparing ever MMO's content to WoW, the most successful MMO ever.

Lets compare GW2's content to the more typical, average subscription MMO.  Is the amount of content being added to GW2 more then what was added for your $15 a month in say... Aion?  Warhammer Online?  Age of Conan?  Star Wars The Old Republic?
I'd say yes.  Hell, many MMOs I've played and paid money to over the years offered pretty much NOTHING in terms of new content for 3+ month long stretches at a time.
Saying GW2 hasn't put in as much content as WoW is like saying a Toyota car sucks because it's not a Ferrari.   Compare it to a Ford.  Compare it to equivalent products.  if you want to argue the merits of the business model's impact on the improvements to the game, you can't compare it to a game that has literally made 20-30 times as much money.

Aion was a Korean-based MMO that was adapted for the West.  Aion is still a big property out there, with maybe the exception of L2, I think.

Warhammer Online, AoC and SWTOR were all horribly mis-managed.

Warhammer Online had some of the best PvP around for its time, but fumbled hard with end-game.

AoC had performance issues right out of the gate and couldn't compete with WoW because everything was instanced.

SWTOR lagged so far behind WoW, it was laughable.  Their engine was and is still shit. (The biggest snafu the game had at launch was that textures could not be HQ because of the memory concerns) Their content releases were abysmal and they lacked the robust LFG tools that WoW had, despite being a dungeon-oriented game.  And EA cut their losses exceptionally early, laying off and cutting back on staff in a time when further investment in the game might have saved it.

You forget Rift, which managed very well on a sub for a long time in a post-WoW era.  Trion has several other projects going on, such as Defiance and End of Nations.  Rift going F2P was probably as much a business decision as anything, but a lot of people still consider it a great game.

Your last statement is telling, as  you wish to dismiss WoW entirely as a metric.  Second place is always first place if you ignore the guy finished ahead of you.

Edited by MazingerZ, 25 June 2013 - 10:42 PM.

It's okay to enjoy crap if you're willing to admit it's crap.
Every patch is like ArenaNet walking out onto the stage of the International Don't Kitten Up Championship, and then proceeding to shiv itself in the stomach 30 times while screaming "IT'S FOR YOUR OWN GOOD! IT'S FOR YOUR OWN GOOD!"

#26 Sandpit

Sandpit

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 159 posts

Posted 25 June 2013 - 10:46 PM

Actually, after today's patch I don't care what is in the gem store or how much they charge. I have completely lost faith in ANet.

#27 Mhenlo

Mhenlo

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 454 posts

Posted 25 June 2013 - 10:51 PM

I agree that we don't need WoW-like updates. I don't even think we need over half the updates we get. I mean, don't a lot of us agree that the living world stuff is kind of crap?

Hell, I thought the expansions for GW1 came too soon - and apparently - so did the developers.

So, why are we all assuming that we need to keep all this rather poor content flowing. It reminds me of the chicken or the egg question: What came first, the need for more content or the need for money to make more content?

Why can't we just have reasonable prices and reasonable content?

#28 HawkofStorms

HawkofStorms

    Guru's Source of Witty Banter

  • Members
  • 3101 posts

Posted 25 June 2013 - 10:52 PM

View PostMazingerZ, on 25 June 2013 - 10:40 PM, said:

Aion was a Korean-based MMO that was adapted for the West.  Aion is still a big property out there, with maybe the exception of L2, I think.

Warhammer Online, AoC and SWTOR were all horribly mis-managed.

Warhammer Online had some of the best PvP around for its time, but fumbled hard with end-game.

AoC had performance issues right out of the gate and couldn't compete with WoW because everything was instanced.

SWTOR lagged so far behind WoW, it was laughable.  Their engine was and is still shit. (The biggest snafu the game had at launch was that textures could not be HQ because of the memory concerns) Their content releases were abysmal and they lacked the robust LFG tools that WoW had, despite being a dungeon-oriented game.  And EA cut their losses exceptionally early, laying off and cutting back on staff in a time when further investment in the game might have saved it.

You forget Rift, which managed very well on a sub for a long time in a post-WoW era.  Trion has several other projects going on, such as Defiance and End of Nations.  Rift going F2P was probably as much a business decision as anything, but a lot of people still consider it a great game.

Your last statement is telling, as  you wish to dismiss WoW entirely as a metric.  Second place is always first place if you ignore the guy finished ahead of you.

The point is of course WoW puts in more content then GW2 because they have WAY more money to put into the game.

That doesn't prove GW2 would put out more content if it had a monthly subscription.

You need to compare GW2 to other games that have made similar amounts of money to see if the subscription has any impact on the amount of content.  Your break down of those games has actually proven my point.

#29 Mhenlo

Mhenlo

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 454 posts

Posted 25 June 2013 - 10:54 PM

View PostMazingerZ, on 25 June 2013 - 10:40 PM, said:

Second place is always first place if you ignore the guy finished ahead of you.

It isn't a race to the top. That is what gets these MMO's in so much trouble to begin with? Everyone needs to stop thinking they can compete with WoW. It was the right product at the right time. They got lucky. It happens.

It's time to stop trying to be like WoW or trying to be the WoW killer and just make a good game, develop it so it stays good, and have reasonable ways to profit from said game.

#30 Cube

Cube

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 564 posts
  • Location:A Web of Lies
  • Profession:Mesmer
  • Server:Ring of Fire

Posted 25 June 2013 - 11:00 PM

They said they where doing so well with these living stories, that they aren't looking at making a expansion right now. Who knows when? I don't think I can care to be here for it. If it doesn't come within the next 3-4 months. Mostly cause I'm tired of these stupid temporary content packs. You know what they SHOULD HAVE DONE? Made explorable versions, make tokens to you could get the armour and weps by doing the dungeon. They show us this amazing stuff they CAN do but they aren't driven by the want to make great content they are driven by short time content so players are rushed to buy their crap boxes and items. bahh, sorry. I  guess I've had enough. I am not positive, I wont be playing anymore.  I have this bad feeling the expansion is a year or more from now... ._.

"In regards to your recent post on a Guild Wars 2 expansion, there is a slight misunderstanding when interpreting the answer from the NCsoft earnings call. We are considering an expansion, but we are taking a wait-and-see stance. We are evaluating the performance of the game and deciding on when would be the best time to launch an expansion. But right now, our living story approach is very successful in keeping players engaged with new and exciting content. Launching boxed expansions are a great way to package content, but if we can do this on a more regular basis, something we've been doing since launch, it provides players with new content to explore and experience every time they log into the game."
http://massively.joy...rs-2-expansion/




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users