I saw this game and thought it looked great but I was sad since I really didn't want to move all of my spending from WoW to this and lose all of my progress. However, I learned it was free. Was I sad about this? Hell no! Now I can test the game out and if I enjoy it I can either play both GW2 and WoW or save myself $15 a month and just play this...I really don't see the down side.
HERE HERE!!!!!! Actually even in the beginning when EQ and UO and DAoC did put these fees in they were not really needed. Trust me Sony made billions from EQ from the sub fee as well back then which is what payed for them to make fail games like Star Wars Galaxies and many more. They payed Lucas arts huge money for the rights and then failed in the end. Who payed to run SW for the years it was open easy EQ players. Sub fees are just greed.. Always has been.
Honestly, I don't mind the 15$ a month because I get a lot of enjoyment out of the 15$. However, if there IS a sub fee AND a micro transaction shop, thats where I draw the line... WoW I'm looking at you, I don't care if they're just stupid pets or mounts its greedy, and disgusting to think they'd abuse their fan's like that. It's too bad most people are sheep, and people in power take advantage of that.
@Lethath Because of cause all the people who thumbed down belong to WoW. I understand what you say however :). This game looks brilliant and it is just a shame that some people with take an automatic dislike without giving it a chance.
I don't mine no sub, only issue I have with no sub games is generally there's a damn cash shop in game and if you want to be the best of the best you have to spend your cash to buy that gear/items, and I flat out hate that type of game, if this guild wars 2 game has no cash shop in it I may give it a try and see how it plays, then again i'm already playing two MMO's might hold off for a third
@3Phill3 as long as it's not equipment I may try the game but soon as they add gear to buff your toon up at max level then i'm out lol I hate games like that =*.*=
@WildMage03 If you're talking about the game store, no worries. Arena-Net has made it very clear the items they will sell will not give any advantage. They will be vanity items.
As for whether it will be successful or not...Guild Wars has had millions of players for 6+ years with very good server performance and minimal downtime, plus an expansion around every 18 months or so..all while developing GW2. They are both profitable and ethical.
@WildMage03 i dont really understand what u said (sry) but as far as i know the cash shop is NEVER going to contain gameplay items only stuff that makes u look cool or stones which can change a armors apperance like the another peice of armor
lol n00b question but do you actually need to buy a box copy of Guild wars 2?
if so then i probbaly cnt play it :( cause in netherland we dont get the newest and greatest games when they come out lol for example we got Star wars knights ofthe old republic this year in the store :( i know it sucks :D
great vid! the only game I would pay a sub fee for is Eve. And that's only if I knew there were no other games I wanted to play, substantial funds and at least 40 hours of lay time a week. So probably never. The fact is, it would make me want to play a game out of guilt which would be horrible. I bought GW1 and stopped playing it for months at a time without feeling bad, that's why it's a great game
I'll try GW2 regardless of what subscription-based MMO I currently play, and I'll be as unbiased as I can manage.
However, people *will* buy a lot of stuff from the in-game store for real money, and ArenaNet knows that very well, they'll make sure of it. That's all profits that have been taken into account from the moment the game was first conceived. So don't kid yourself, GW2 may not have a subscription, but that same money will be cashed in on under a different name. It's always about money.
@Keadin84 Sure, but a lot of people also buy a sparkling pony, a sun dragon, some little pets, a server transfer, a name change, race change, faction change or guild server tansfer in WoW, a game that already costs 15 dollars a month !
And . . . why exactely can't server transfers or name changes be free and on a long "cooldown", instead of having to be paid for on top of your monthly 15 dollars a month ? Something that is running on an automatic system ?
@Nr4747 I'm not going to argue Blizzard's policies, though I agree of course they charge a lot of money. However, my point was that subscriptions are just one way to make money, and every company wants money. GW2 just goes about it differently is all.
Alright but answer me this.. Why would a company continuously develop a game that generates no revenue? (An mmo is a continuously developing game btw.. which is what keeps people playing and keeps them fresh)
I really like the idea that any future money that we shell-out towards ArenaNet after the initial purchase is expansion packs, because it means that the players can decide if they're worth buying or not. And if the players have that decision, it means the developers are strongly encouraged to make something the consumers find worth buying.
These guys are geniuses. It's something I really look for in my games, just how win-win the situation is. And this game looks like it's gonna be worth it.
WoW was great for a long time but the content being released is imo not worth $15 per month. One major patch was mainly 2 existing dungeons just 'updated' (ZA & ZG). Additional services (realm change/race change) are about $25...mounts from the store cost that much as well. That is a lot of profit that does not match the quality of content
I want to show this Video to all of the WoW Players out there that say that guild wars 2 can`t be as good as WoW(well of course not, because it`s better) and make them see that Blizzard is just rapeing their wallets.
Heres the thing , ArenaNet makes their cash on expansions and in game cosmetics or holiday items and such or services. So in reality the game is amazing for not having a sub fee , guild wars had plenty of players and it had plenty of expansions , the only thing that killed it was it was more or less clunky and more of a single player game. GW2 is more community based and looks like it flows even easier then WoW
@jcoonie2 Only problem is that gw didn't die, there is just a point where players did all they could because anet focused on gw2, and in fact currently gw is still doing pretty well thanks to some new content being added that ties it to gw2's story and the hall of monument system.
@iulius16 You'll buy the original box and also all major expansions that would come out just like the original GW Prophecies and the Faction and Nightfall campaigns, and the Eye of the North expansion.
@P47ThunderboltJug Why? They enjoyed the game. If they liked what they were paying for then what's the problem? It's not like their going to play it forever.
@ThePwnMobile It just seems like all the money went to making your character really good, then the character you worked so hard on is obsolete. Its not like crafting a beautiful piece of furniture or anything where you can enjoy it for the rest of your life. I guess people can make the excuse that the money went for the fun of it, but I know that there's allot of stress that goes into playing a game like WOW.
@P47ThunderboltJug Oh, don't. I had a great time in WoW and RuneScape, and it was a much cheaper hobby than almost anything else. If I could play golf, hockey or a TCG paying such a small fee... I might do that. Not the case though. But now it's time to move on. :) In this day and age the model of GW2 makes more sense. And the philosophies of ANet is what will make GW2 the best MMO to date. :)
I don't agree with subscription fees for MMOs provided you already paid for the actual box/disc/whatever... when I go into Game and buy, say, World of Warcraft, take it home and install it, what have I actually bought? I can't play the game unless I subscribe anyway, so it's the subscription that's paying for the game. What did I just buy in the shop? I paid 40 quid for a cardboard box and a cheap disc? XD
@Galdethriel In someways I agree, however it is not £40. For World of Warcraft you pay the £8 for the game and an expasion with a free month. Then £8 on subscription each month. So, in other words, you never buy the game in the first place. The expansion are a different story, but who said you needed to buy them? Swtor is a different story however.
@ThePwnMobile Maybe now that they've stuck the usual offers on and cut the price, but that wasn't always the case and it wasn't the case when I bought it. The retail price of WoW and its expansions stands at around £35-40 each - cheaper now due to age. I bought my WoW with all the expansions up to Cataclysm for just over £60. The bundle got me a nice discount, but no free month until I got a friend to recruit me. Wish I'd gotten in on the kind of deal you're on about. :P
@Galdethriel You payed 40 quid for the game in the state it was in at the point of release. You then pay a subscription each month to pay for the servers, so you can keep playing with your friends, the continuing of development, so you can get some new raids, and also fixing of bugs that will occur now and then.
If there is no subscription fee, the developers can just say, HAHA screw you, and stop developing on the game, or shut down the servers entirely. With sub, they WANT to develop.
@lynixai In starcraft 2, you only have to pay for the box. no sub fee, no microtransactions, not even DLC. the devs still do bug fixes, UI improvements, and balance changes. they also maintain the battle.net servers so play with others.
@thedartheric1 Because there is at least 5 times more content in an MMO then there is in Starcraft 2. And that's at minimum.
You've got 3 races in Starcraft, You've got at LEAST 30 different Class / Spec combinations. And if you're gonna count races in as well then it becomes an obscure number.
While Starcraft is more competitive, WoW has WAY more things that needs balancing. True, they maintain the Battle.net servers, but where do you think the money comes from? WoW's subscription ofc.
@lynixai in response to balance, while yes their are only three races, they all have has at least 10 units, some of which have 3+spells, and they have to balance all the various stats of those units, instead of simply the DPS/CC options. that doesn't even take into account how buildings are built, where buildings can be built, and even how they macro. And it makes no fiscal sense to run the servers if the money from starcraft 2 doesn't cover it, as that would mean they lose money
@lynixai So you're cool with paying several times what it actually costs per subscriber to upkeep those servers? You're actually cool with paying $15 a month for a service that should only reasonably cost you $2 a month sans purchase price at most? You're cool with the fact that the purchase of each individual copy is more than enough for any modern MMO developer to maintain the servers for the game's entire lifetime, making your monthly payments basically free money in their pockets?
Blizzard is a company, and while it may seem odd to take 15$ a month for keeping WoW up to date and bug free + new content every now and again, remember this.
Blizzard also has other games, with no subscription fee, relying on Server up-keep, Balance Changes and further development.
With Starcraft as well as Diablo, its a 1 time buy, then no more money comes in from that specific player. So eventually those money will run out.
@lynixai then the way they make money from the franchise is by realeasing quality expansions that people want to buy, instead of just milking it for money. GW 1 sold around 7 million copies. And it's been successful enough to fund a sequel. that does not sound bad to me
@lynixai What you're paying for isn't new content, though. You're paying $40 for an expansion, then waiting for Blizz to unlock a bit of content from it every now and then, making your $15/mo to them free money in their pockets. That money doesn't go to "new content"; you already paid for that in the expansion. Name one dungeon or raid released in the last two years that isn't expansion content that was waiting to be unlocked. Just one.
@lynixai But at the end of the day, no sub = no game, so you haven't actually got the game to play even if you didn't WANT to play online etc. And continued development you pay for when you buy expansions for yet another hefty sum... and shouldn't the bug fixes be expected anyway? If you're selling your game for the price of a completed product it should actually be a completed product.
@Galdethriel, You are right that you do own the box and a cheap disk. Also all games you are just buying the license to use the product. One does not own the IP on the disk.
@sakuradl Yeah, I'm very aware of that, but all you're doing is switching words out - 'game' for 'license'. End of the day, I've bought something, and I shouldn't have to pay repeatedly for something I already own.
@Galdethriel, you should read the EULA on the games you buy. It states that you do not own the software but the right to use it, yes there is a difference. I hate it too but that is how software IP work.
Ofc it's supposed to be developed over years, unlike most games which have somewhat limitted support for a year or two. Like for MMO's, lots of new content and stuff. Other games give what... bug patches, limitted content (nowadays you have to pay for that anyway). It works out as a new game every few months, which is normal.
@billybobjoeftw Okay, firstly as I've said new deals and lowering prices doesn't change the fact that it originally sold for full price. It's old. Old things cheapen. And sure you get tons of new content... all you have to do is shell out another 30-40 quid for the expansion. If content was just released and your subscription meant it was just given to you, that'd be fine, but that's not the case.
It's been available to download (free from Blizz, the makers of the content) for years. Wotlk was available to download free from release and so has Cata. Xpacs are released every 2 years or so (and the last few have been free, so that point is moot).
@billybobjoeftw Am I missing something? A quick visit to the Blizzard store clearly shows that they're still charging money for both Cata and WotLK and also for the basic WoW+BC bundle.
Google 'wowinstall'. There's a link to battle.net (Blizzard). Free, just put your region in (so if you're eu, eu.battle, us is us.battle for example).
@billybobjoeftw Now I'm really confused. XD Why charge for it in the Blizzard online store if they're letting you download it anyway? *boggle brained* Can someone explain this to me?
Very well put together, though there is a minority out there that still don't get it, they really believe paying subs gives them a better game, that must be the 50 people that hit the dislike button.
If you're paying a sub fee for SWTOR right now like I am, you are basically paying to be a beta tester. It's sad, because I don't see SWTOR keeping my interest longer than 6 months, and by then, I'm not sure they'll be able to solve all the terrible coding problems that should have been sorted before release.
@VegetoStevieD 6 months? didnt keep me interested for 6 weeks, I cancelled a week after after paying my first subs, I dont even know why I bothered to give them more money.
Trionworlds (Rift) has not yet released a new expansion but during the year it's been out they have released bug fixes at least every other week. Ontop of that they have released alot of new content such as a ton of new raids, new areas and more. In rift moving servers is free (even tough there is a slight cool down which is understandable) and with that comes freedom to rename your character. So before you start comparing it to the money grubbing slow patching greedy blizzard, do your research.
@Vermilion409 Money grubbing slow patching greedy blizzard? Do you play the game yourself?. Do your research and you will find that Rift should've just been free to play. It failed. It does not matter if there is regular bug fixes, it's too late to fix them now in order to give a better first impression.
@ThePwnMobile i have played wow from vanilla up to cataclysm, with a few breaks during wotlk. I'm not the only one who noticed that blizzard are slow in their patching and keeps re hatching old content, cough naxx, zul'aman, zul'gurub. Rift has by no defenition failed, have you even played it? Most of mmos loses alot of subs the first months, do your research. Rift is still popular and if it wasn't run by subs then they would have to sell items etc which is way worse.
@ThePwnMobile the time inbetween firelands and release of cata was around 6 months, think about how much money that is. Let's say that they had 12m subs at all times instead of counting that their 14m declined to 10 during those months. That is 12.000 000 x 11$. That is 792 000 000$ and that gave 2 old dungeons with no new content and one new raid with recoloured skins. I ask you, is that good value?
@Vermilion409 It is loads of money, but people still pay for it. I'd pay for it because I enjoy it. We will see what happens, but don't expect people to move over to GW2, when it is released even if it is good. Oh no pandas! Half the people who said that still play WoW. People say things, does not mean anything changes. I do agree however that the subscription fee should be cheaper, but it is not 8.99/14.99 for every country when paying a sub fee to WoW.
@ThePwnMobile WoW will burn, and not just simply because pandas. WoW cares about money, not the players themselves. My brother was banned recently from WoW because he was "exploiting a game bug" that he didn't even know about. The game showed he still had play time but blizzard claimed his time had run out. Was this his fault? I think not, its blizzards fault for not fixing it and then blaming the players who don't know about it.
@ThePwnMobile WoW treats its customers like crap and basically tells them; "This is how it is, don't like it? fuck off". As for content, my brother who is a raider can tell you all about the decrease in quality of end-game content over the expansions, and he has beat all end-game content with his guild since Burning Crusade so he knows what he is talking about.
Lets talk pvp, only needs one word, GEAR. You don't need skill to beat people down in tier gear.
@Zarkyun PvP is not a strong point to WoW. But raids is about PvE and a large amount of WoW's player base is PvE. The problem is that blizzard saw that many players were crying about the difficulty of the new content so blizz just nerfed it. That was the problem. They tried to listen to the customers to make the game better but made it worse. Yes the quality, I will say is not as good as it ever was. WoW will die out soon. But take a look at everquest. That will give you a good idea about this.
@ThePwnMobile Not to mention in lower level pvp its a matter of twinks and people who are higher level than you thus having skills you haven't aquired yet.
The ship that is WoW is sinking, most people with half a brain can clearly see what GW2 is going to do to the MMO industry, and its hard to put it all up to just "over-hyping" when all this demo content clearly shows us its not just "empty promises". Just listening to the devs talk you can tell they actually care
@Zarkyun You can say that WoW is sinking, yes. But you cannot say 'see what GW2 is going to do to the MMO industry'. This game, is trying to be different, is trying to be new. If you look at it. Guild wars. Instance areas. You can play the game by yourself. Ok?. The quests are less 'traditional MMO'. WoW, is not this. WoW is only multiplayer. This function has its good and bad points. But you cannot really compare the two on the same level. They both have good and bad points.
@Zarkyun "Just listening to the devs talk you can tell they actually care." That is probably the most awesome thing about GW2. I have never seen a team so excited when they talk about their game. Some of them can't even sit/stand still when they talk about it. And all you have to do to is watch the trailers that have the devs talking about wow, swtor, rift, etc and compare them to gw2 to see the difference. It's really amazing.
If a game is good enough, I find myself justified in paying a sub fee for the priviledge of playing it. However, as someone who considers video games art, and who intends to work on their creation once I grow up, I don't think I could justify it to myself to ask for a sub fee from people so that they can enjoy my work. As an analogy, we're all willing to pay $30 to enter the Louvre to see the Mona Lisa or Nike of Samothrace, but wouldn't those artists frown on that if they were alive today?
@cvrc11 A more accurate analogy for subscription-based MMOs would be paying your $30 to enter the Louvre, then having to pay another dollar, every five minutes you spend there, whether you're taking in the exhibits or just browsing at the gift shop. A fee to see such impressive works of art is reasonable, but the constant siphoning of money after that is not. Nor is it necessary.
I won't speak for the artists, however, everyone needs to eat. I don't think they would protest too much.
Just a question Will guild wars to be buy to play meaning u buy the game and nothing else no monthly fee or buying separate Expantion. PLZ ANSWER THIS!!!!thumbs up so he can see.
If they are, indeed, more than "set" with the box fee alone, then why do they need to sell *anything* in a cash shop? Seems to me that, if what you say is true, the answer is: They don't. It's bonus cash in their pocket that could have been just as well added to the game as part of the box fee.
They sell extra character slots. Why? If they are able to support more characters per account than they give by default, then why not just open them all up for the box fee? Why charge extra?
If they have their expenses covered by the box fee alone, then why do they have to sell even purely cosmetic items? There are people who value cosmetic items in their gameplay experience. Seems unfair that they have to pay more to enjoy the game as they wish, especially if the box sale "covers everything".
You can log in to GW1 and check out their cash shop and see right away that the items they sell go well beyond mere "cosmetic" or "additional character slots". There are some compelling and rather game-affecting items for sale in GW1's shop.
I have no problem imagining similar items will be on offer in GW2's.
So I ask again... if everything is, in fact, covered by the box purchase, then why do they charge extra for *anything*?...
@lupine73 and exciting horizons. Surely you can understand this business. It's not rocket science, nor is it an unfair and cruel way to steal money from the consumers. People in the real world always desire things that others may not be able to get. This is a strategy, or should I say logical approach, to that notion. It's a brilliant idea once you understand that there will always be people who want pretty little cosmetics in order too look better than the person next to them.
@lupine73 Well, "Their not Saints". They are a big company with people just like you and me. My best answer would be they like money, just as the rest of us "like" money. They only make you pay for the accessories because their items that not every one gets or needs but, every one wants so why not charge the people that want does accessories and make some kind of a profit ,right?
Your answer is much closer to the truth, I suspect, than the what the author of the video puts forth. Thing is, I know this is also the line being put out by folks at ANet, trying to demonize and marginalize sub-fees, claiming their system is better.
The thing is - and what my previous replies were intended to point out, even if indirectly - is that their claim of some "high road", "no sub-fee" stance is hollow and hypocritical.
And, in fact it's undermined by the very idea that they're selling items in a cash shop. This is what my previous questions (and others I didn't post) point at.
Point is, ANet tries to claim that subs are unjustifiable and that players are paying more than they should have to. Yet, ANet turns around and sells cash shop items - content that players in-game could well find desirable - while claiming their game is supported on box fees alone.
And what's more, their approach to making extra money off the players has been proven to yield far more money than a standard sub fee. That's the main reason more developers are moving to the Cash Shop model.
15 bucks a month is always going to be 15 bucks a month. Cash Shops, however, enable players to spend as much as they want, as often as they want. So even at that, ANet's stand on the issue is shady at best.
As for why shouldn't they make a profit off people..
It's with how they're distorting the situation about subs, while tooting their own horn about how they "get by on box purchases alone", meanwhile selling additional items in a cash shop; some as much as 10 or 15 bucks as I recall.
When they get rid of the cash shop and include everything in the box fee, they'll have room to talk. 'til then, ANet and the people parroting what this video is putting out there should put a sock in it.
@lupine73 I understand where you are coming from, if the box fee covers everything then why charge for in game shop items? doesnt make sense right? Well it kinda does when you realize that ANet is, and will always be, a business. Businesses do what? Make money, in what every way they can. The in game shops are a lot like Ipod covers, you dont NEED one, but chances are ppl are going to get them, they arnt included with the ipod purchase, but im very certain Apple made a fortune cont.
I have nothing against ANet making a profit. That's why they're in business.
My beef is that a spokesperson from ANet talked about sub-based MMO devs can't justify a subscription fee, since ANet is able to cover all their expenses with just the box sales. They're trying to marginalize subs by making it look as though they're purely for profit and not at all necessary to maintain the game.
ANet has a cash shop in GW1, and will in GW2 as well.
If what they say is true, and the box sale is really all they need to keep the game running, then their cash shop sales are not necessary, either. Everything they have in the cash shop is for pure profit.
If it's true ANet's box fee cover everything, then so long as they have a cash shop in GW1 and 2, they have no ground to question sub-based MMOs, either.
@lupine73 You understand the fundamental issue here, which is that sub-based games, such as WoW force players to think that they need to player every single day, otherwise they are wasting their money. This is ArenaNet's goal, to have people buy their game and feel the freedom to play whenever and however they want, so that they won't have the necessity to choose between MMORPGs, or two sub-based games rather. Of course they want to make a profit off cash shops. They're not idiots.
"You understand the fundamental issue here, which is that sub-based games, such as WoW force players to think that they need to player every single day, otherwise they are wasting their money"
I see this a lot. It's nonsense, for more reasons than the comment limit makes practical to explain.
One obvious flaw is that not everyone feels that way. Plenty don't. It strikes me as disingenuous anti-subscription spin to make CS's look better.
Do *some* people feel that way about a sub-based game? Sure. I can imagine that. So perhaps for *those* people,it's an issue.
However, when you look back over the past 10+ years of sub-based MMOs being the norm and retaining players anyway, it falls kinda short.
Further, *plenty* people don't feel obligated to play every day to get their money's worth. Many feel a game is enjoyable enough that it's worth a sub, even if they only play a few days a week, or weekends.
So to make the assertion you've echoed, NocteusLucium, is perhaps representative of some gamers. It is certainly not representative of all.
If nothing else, that MMOs not only persisted, but grew in popularity starting about 8 years ago when WoW launched - every one of them sub-based - seems to show that most people are not concerned about "getting their money's worth".
After all, 15 bucks per month is a great deal. That's barely *one* movie ticket, a soda and popcorn.
@lupine73 Obviously not all players have that mentality towards sub-based games, but an enormous portion of them do. Your argument tends to curve my point as if there weren't actually that many players out there who hate monthly subscriptions. That's not the case at all. Look at League of Legends and how successful it has become through cash shop. If LoL was sub-based, it wouldn't have 1/5th of its player-base that it has now. Same with Guild Wars. Same with Perfect World. The list
@lupine73 goes on and on. 15 bucks per month is a great deal, once again, to an enormous portion of the world. Yeah, sure, that's "barely" one movie ticket, a soda and popcorn, but a lot of people just don't go to the movies all the time either. Having no monthly fee means having the freedom to play whenever and however you want. If you've got WoW or SWTOR on the side, you can still play Guild Wars 2. And also, I'm not being a hypocrite at all, because I'm not the one who made this
@lupine73 video. I'm just supporting my argument, which seems to be the correct one here. WoW has lost over 2 million subscribers already. Yeah, it was an immensely popular game for a while, and a lot of people were addicted to it, but the hassle of paying to play every single month has caught up to a lot of people. I'm very surprised they haven't made the game F2P passed level 20. SWTOR is probably going to be forced to do the same, as they've also lost over 400 thousand players
@lupine73 in just the first month. Now, that may be the result of other reasons, such as "good" the game actually is, but it still draws a correlation to what I'm referring to. There are other reasons, as I've stated, like giving people cosmetics, but that's not an issue. You also understand that many players can go on to play this game completely free after their first purchase if they so desire, correct? If you still don't believe this is a more convenient and smarter alternative to
@lupine73 The two options you presented above your replies to RankedUpGamePlay are not the actual reasons they're doing this... To be a bit clearer, ArenaNet has created a cash shop for Guild Wars 2 in order to accumulate extra money in which they can use to make expansions and other brilliant goodies that we all desire in any MMORPGs. Their 60 dollar fee is quite enough to sustain their game for a long time, but they still need that extra profit in order to expand the game into new
The video attempts to dismiss the idea that sub fees go toward developing and improving the game, and that it's simply the developers charging extra money for no real reason, because they don't really "need" to.
But yet, ANet sells cash shop items, gets to say "we only have cash shop items to help develop future content!" and that's perfectly okay.
What a wonderful slice of hypocrisy that only helps to prove my point.
@lupine73 no i agree with you Lupine, i was just making sure that you realized that what their doing is the same as, lets say WoW or Rift (ect) doing what they do out of greed.
Well, according to another poster here, the *real* reason for the cash shop is to allow them to make future content and expansion packs.
You know, the thing which, according to the video, sub-based MMO devs don't get to say because, apparently it's "bogus".
For ANet, though, cash shop sales - even though they openly claim to need only box sales to support the game in perpetuity - it's a perfectly valid reason.
epic video...im happy for this because i cant go to the store every month and pay for that im 14 years old and i really want to play this game in the summer i get a part time job so i have lots of money to spare but i still wouldnt want to spend 15 dollars a month...and i live in the middle of nowhere so i really cant i got kinda mad at LoL cause they practically force you to buy rp i would be happy to support them...on my own will...anyways i dont know where im going with this xD
The video in itself is based on artificial facts, that are baseless considering how the user in effect has no realization of internal working of such big projects, hence, the video is misleading.
The concept of no subscription is only feasible when you force the player to pay for extras ranging from additional campaign to cosmetic only features, or to put it simply separate out the content most likely to be paid for players from the initial product and provide it as extra: pure profit.
hm, you dont seem understand Anet business plan or MMO's in general, the reason for the Sub fee was to pay for servers costs, these costs over the years have been reduced to a point that they are almost nothing comparatively speaking and the only real reason to keep the subscription fee is pure greed on the companies part. the price of the box set is always enough to cover development costs.
Anet will ofcourse sell cosmetic items and do have an ingame store for this however its hardly forced and as for additional content, they're called expansion packs and most if not all MMO's have them on top of a subscription fee.
Anet have already said they will be making free content patches and balancing patches and so on, they do this to keep people playing, the more people playing the more people buy their expansion packs
and the more likely people are to buy cosmetic items aswell.
all MMO's, wow especially, separate out their content exactly as you've just said and still have the gall to charge a subscription, Anet are simply removing the subscription fee.
@ourorboros2 You actually need to provide me with proper data. In the end, be it Trion, Bioware, Blizzard or ArenaNet, they are in the end all in this for business.
Now as a comparison at least in terms of a cumulative total, you need to compare GW and WoW(Content-wise), to make a healthy comparison, as however, anyone preaches how GW 2 is awesome, it is meaningless to provide speculation as facts.
@ourorboros2 In addition, the first GW with its episodes and EoN exp were distributed over a course of 2 years in total, even though they were cheaper, it seems that the game in itself behind Vanilla WoW in terms of content it provided in the end.
After GW 2 gets released and A.Net proves that their model is feasible per content they offer, then I'll accept that there's no need for a sub, but as of now it is better to wait rather choosing others as greedy scapegoats.
I remeber being introduced to subs when I played my first online games, namely Fighter Ace (off MSN gaming zone at the time) and my first MMO Asheron's Call (SO overlooked). I was playing plenty of age of empires multiplayer and there was no fee, but I didn't even question why the others had a sub, and even last year I was playing WoW and didn't even question the sub, it was just accepted as normal. Great vid, great points! Let's not pay more than these games deserve!
I agree with you a 110% WoodenPotatoes. One thing that annoys me about subscription fees is when they explicitly demand you give them bank account details. At least if you can go in store and buy a code for a few months of access that's more in your control than in them taking money even if you've stopped playing but forget to disconnect your bank account.
Very well said! Without the subscription, the pressure of 'needing' to play the game is lowered, so you can play the game much more casually, in my opinion.
GW2 will not be delayed until next year that's a bogus rumor, closed beta is coming to an end in January last i read, and soon open betas will be released with the ability to signup. since Anet has a very good handle on the polish on this game these last betas are only a minor function to make sure everything is working as intended, the game IS functionally complete already.
This was an extremely well put together video. You obviously did plenty of research and know what you are talking about. and I agree. I recently purchased SWTOR and I can't justify paying a monthly fee for it, especially considering GW2 will most likely be released this year. I love GW1 and I love everything I have seen and read so far on GW2, so if I buy the game and it doesn't live up to the hype. Im still going to play because no monthly fee. I wont have to justify $15 a month
I saw this game and thought it looked great but I was sad since I really didn't want to move all of my spending from WoW to this and lose all of my progress. However, I learned it was free. Was I sad about this? Hell no! Now I can test the game out and if I enjoy it I can either play both GW2 and WoW or save myself $15 a month and just play this...I really don't see the down side.
Somethinsexy327 8 hours ago
Why are people crying about spending money... i swear...
jordanbulldog 9 hours ago
for me personally I didn't mind paying subscription for WoW-Vanilla & TBC, but WotLK and Cata wasn't worth paying for.
Clouds23x 9 hours ago
FOR THE LOVE OF YOUR WALLET, SPREAD THIS VIDEO!
HuxRift 17 hours ago 2
55 dislikes from Bobby Kotick
Kurtortonta 1 day ago
HERE HERE!!!!!! Actually even in the beginning when EQ and UO and DAoC did put these fees in they were not really needed. Trust me Sony made billions from EQ from the sub fee as well back then which is what payed for them to make fail games like Star Wars Galaxies and many more. They payed Lucas arts huge money for the rights and then failed in the end. Who payed to run SW for the years it was open easy EQ players. Sub fees are just greed.. Always has been.
69Alpha69Wolfe69 1 day ago
Basically WOW rips people off when they buy Expansions. The sub already pays for new content.
NoCombustion 2 days ago in playlist Guild Wars 2
i will NEVER playing anything thats pay 2 play
Chauvinist948 2 days ago
55 people play WoW.
achilles332000 2 days ago
Honestly, I don't mind the 15$ a month because I get a lot of enjoyment out of the 15$. However, if there IS a sub fee AND a micro transaction shop, thats where I draw the line... WoW I'm looking at you, I don't care if they're just stupid pets or mounts its greedy, and disgusting to think they'd abuse their fan's like that. It's too bad most people are sheep, and people in power take advantage of that.
joguSD 3 days ago
I think that a $15 a month is absurd. I wouldn't have a problem with a $5 sub fee, though.
theflamingmonkeyking 3 days ago
To all the Dislike voters: Stay in WoW please and enjoy your future Ghost Town.
That is all. LOL
Lethath 3 days ago 13
@Lethath Because of cause all the people who thumbed down belong to WoW. I understand what you say however :). This game looks brilliant and it is just a shame that some people with take an automatic dislike without giving it a chance.
ThePwnMobile 1 day ago
Comment removed
Washiolka664 3 days ago
i will not be ashamed i screamed with joy when i saw this.
nachobear5100 4 days ago
I don't mine no sub, only issue I have with no sub games is generally there's a damn cash shop in game and if you want to be the best of the best you have to spend your cash to buy that gear/items, and I flat out hate that type of game, if this guild wars 2 game has no cash shop in it I may give it a try and see how it plays, then again i'm already playing two MMO's might hold off for a third
WildMage03 4 days ago
@WildMage03 it has a cash shop but EVERYTHING is cosmetic nothing will give u even equipment
3Phill3 2 days ago
@3Phill3 as long as it's not equipment I may try the game but soon as they add gear to buff your toon up at max level then i'm out lol I hate games like that =*.*=
WildMage03 2 days ago
@WildMage03 If you're talking about the game store, no worries. Arena-Net has made it very clear the items they will sell will not give any advantage. They will be vanity items.
As for whether it will be successful or not...Guild Wars has had millions of players for 6+ years with very good server performance and minimal downtime, plus an expansion around every 18 months or so..all while developing GW2. They are both profitable and ethical.
maddogfarg0 2 days ago
@maddogfarg0 Now that is something greate!
MrGrakkus 1 hour ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@WildMage03 i dont really understand what u said (sry) but as far as i know the cash shop is NEVER going to contain gameplay items only stuff that makes u look cool or stones which can change a armors apperance like the another peice of armor
3Phill3 1 day ago
2 things....You say there can be good mmo's without a sub fee...but outside of Guild Wars 1 What good MMO has there been without no sub fee?
And Whether you like the game or not Rift, Trion Worlds has put out a ton of content in a years time, and im not talking about fixes.
onasi321 4 days ago
lol n00b question but do you actually need to buy a box copy of Guild wars 2?
if so then i probbaly cnt play it :( cause in netherland we dont get the newest and greatest games when they come out lol for example we got Star wars knights ofthe old republic this year in the store :( i know it sucks :D
artspret1 4 days ago
@artspret1 I would of thought that you could buy a digital copy of the game
Ibankik 4 days ago
no Subscription Fees is was i love Guild Wars i can get bored of the game and come bk to it when ever i feel like it
crimson6666 5 days ago
great vid! the only game I would pay a sub fee for is Eve. And that's only if I knew there were no other games I wanted to play, substantial funds and at least 40 hours of lay time a week. So probably never. The fact is, it would make me want to play a game out of guilt which would be horrible. I bought GW1 and stopped playing it for months at a time without feeling bad, that's why it's a great game
tenniscrazy 6 days ago in playlist Guild Wars 2
"...terrible game... crash an burn...." - WoodenPotatoes on Guild Wars 2
TobyJay2k 6 days ago in playlist Guild Wars 2
@TobyJay2k *as seen on kotaku
TwistedComplex 5 days ago
i agree with u i play atlantica online and its free to play and i enjoy it more than wow or swtor
ronerickramos 1 week ago
Sounds a little like James McAvoy from X-Men :D
TheskIsMyName 1 week ago
I'll try GW2 regardless of what subscription-based MMO I currently play, and I'll be as unbiased as I can manage.
However, people *will* buy a lot of stuff from the in-game store for real money, and ArenaNet knows that very well, they'll make sure of it. That's all profits that have been taken into account from the moment the game was first conceived. So don't kid yourself, GW2 may not have a subscription, but that same money will be cashed in on under a different name. It's always about money.
Keadin84 1 week ago
@Keadin84 Sure, but a lot of people also buy a sparkling pony, a sun dragon, some little pets, a server transfer, a name change, race change, faction change or guild server tansfer in WoW, a game that already costs 15 dollars a month !
And . . . why exactely can't server transfers or name changes be free and on a long "cooldown", instead of having to be paid for on top of your monthly 15 dollars a month ? Something that is running on an automatic system ?
And mounts for 25 dollars ?
Nr4747 1 week ago
@Nr4747 Because then blizzard wouldn't earn a shit ton of cash?
Bonkbonk100 1 week ago
@Nr4747 I'm not going to argue Blizzard's policies, though I agree of course they charge a lot of money. However, my point was that subscriptions are just one way to make money, and every company wants money. GW2 just goes about it differently is all.
Keadin84 1 week ago
@Keadin84 At least the choice is going to be yours to make. The game won't have something you HAVE to buy
Tyblck18 1 week ago
Alright but answer me this.. Why would a company continuously develop a game that generates no revenue? (An mmo is a continuously developing game btw.. which is what keeps people playing and keeps them fresh)
backwardsman9902 1 week ago
WHO THE FUCK WOULD WANT SUBSCRIPTION FEES OMGZ u braindead? no monthly fees = win
GrimReaperrz 1 week ago
Nice numbers of Activision.
20 millions per 5 million non-asian players per month as cost of sales.
This equals the revenue of an expansion pack per month.
So how would you fund the development?
Spend each dollar twice?
Third World game-development slaves?
Or just by depreciating the game after a few years (like Guild Wars)?
simakasp 1 week ago
I really like the idea that any future money that we shell-out towards ArenaNet after the initial purchase is expansion packs, because it means that the players can decide if they're worth buying or not. And if the players have that decision, it means the developers are strongly encouraged to make something the consumers find worth buying.
These guys are geniuses. It's something I really look for in my games, just how win-win the situation is. And this game looks like it's gonna be worth it.
Stammer6 1 week ago
WoW was great for a long time but the content being released is imo not worth $15 per month. One major patch was mainly 2 existing dungeons just 'updated' (ZA & ZG). Additional services (realm change/race change) are about $25...mounts from the store cost that much as well. That is a lot of profit that does not match the quality of content
Rosehelify 1 week ago
well said
DarkWords 1 week ago in playlist Guild Wars 2 In-Depth
I want to show this Video to all of the WoW Players out there that say that guild wars 2 can`t be as good as WoW(well of course not, because it`s better) and make them see that Blizzard is just rapeing their wallets.
InsaneSeishiro 1 week ago in playlist Guild Wars 2 In-Depth
50 people bury their head in the sand...
Gurukay 1 week ago
Heres the thing , ArenaNet makes their cash on expansions and in game cosmetics or holiday items and such or services. So in reality the game is amazing for not having a sub fee , guild wars had plenty of players and it had plenty of expansions , the only thing that killed it was it was more or less clunky and more of a single player game. GW2 is more community based and looks like it flows even easier then WoW
jcoonie2 1 week ago 9
@jcoonie2 Only problem is that gw didn't die, there is just a point where players did all they could because anet focused on gw2, and in fact currently gw is still doing pretty well thanks to some new content being added that ties it to gw2's story and the hall of monument system.
xynth101088 3 hours ago
DAMN enough vids for me.....im quitting gw2 vids till the game comes out.
sphinxofthenewage 1 week ago
You are like the preacher of MMO's, subscribing as soon as i'm done typing this.
TheFishRDrowning 1 week ago
100% correct
bigmatt2k71000 1 week ago
so you have to pay only when you buy the game and the updates/expansions will be free? or you have to pay for every update/expansion?
iulius16 2 weeks ago
@iulius16 You'll buy the original box and also all major expansions that would come out just like the original GW Prophecies and the Faction and Nightfall campaigns, and the Eye of the North expansion.
AirickGuitar3917 1 week ago in playlist Guild Wars 2
i agree arenanet has a win/win in mind
MetalFuryCharge 2 weeks ago
Guild Wars 2 wlll be groundbreaking
meb94 2 weeks ago
I'll justify them...Kotick
jrddk7 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
TheSacredFox 2 weeks ago
I feel bad for people who payed so much money on a game that is becoming obsolete.
P47ThunderboltJug 2 weeks ago 42
@P47ThunderboltJug Why? They enjoyed the game. If they liked what they were paying for then what's the problem? It's not like their going to play it forever.
ThePwnMobile 2 weeks ago
@ThePwnMobile It just seems like all the money went to making your character really good, then the character you worked so hard on is obsolete. Its not like crafting a beautiful piece of furniture or anything where you can enjoy it for the rest of your life. I guess people can make the excuse that the money went for the fun of it, but I know that there's allot of stress that goes into playing a game like WOW.
P47ThunderboltJug 2 weeks ago
@P47ThunderboltJug Oh, don't. I had a great time in WoW and RuneScape, and it was a much cheaper hobby than almost anything else. If I could play golf, hockey or a TCG paying such a small fee... I might do that. Not the case though. But now it's time to move on. :) In this day and age the model of GW2 makes more sense. And the philosophies of ANet is what will make GW2 the best MMO to date. :)
filiduttisen 4 days ago
@P47ThunderboltJug If they enjoyed it then what is the problem?
ThePwnMobile 2 days ago
I don't agree with subscription fees for MMOs provided you already paid for the actual box/disc/whatever... when I go into Game and buy, say, World of Warcraft, take it home and install it, what have I actually bought? I can't play the game unless I subscribe anyway, so it's the subscription that's paying for the game. What did I just buy in the shop? I paid 40 quid for a cardboard box and a cheap disc? XD
Galdethriel 2 weeks ago 38
@Galdethriel yep, and that is pretty sad.
mcz1945 2 weeks ago
@Galdethriel In someways I agree, however it is not £40. For World of Warcraft you pay the £8 for the game and an expasion with a free month. Then £8 on subscription each month. So, in other words, you never buy the game in the first place. The expansion are a different story, but who said you needed to buy them? Swtor is a different story however.
ThePwnMobile 2 weeks ago
@ThePwnMobile Maybe now that they've stuck the usual offers on and cut the price, but that wasn't always the case and it wasn't the case when I bought it. The retail price of WoW and its expansions stands at around £35-40 each - cheaper now due to age. I bought my WoW with all the expansions up to Cataclysm for just over £60. The bundle got me a nice discount, but no free month until I got a friend to recruit me. Wish I'd gotten in on the kind of deal you're on about. :P
Galdethriel 2 weeks ago
@Galdethriel You payed 40 quid for the game in the state it was in at the point of release. You then pay a subscription each month to pay for the servers, so you can keep playing with your friends, the continuing of development, so you can get some new raids, and also fixing of bugs that will occur now and then.
If there is no subscription fee, the developers can just say, HAHA screw you, and stop developing on the game, or shut down the servers entirely. With sub, they WANT to develop.
lynixai 1 week ago
@lynixai In starcraft 2, you only have to pay for the box. no sub fee, no microtransactions, not even DLC. the devs still do bug fixes, UI improvements, and balance changes. they also maintain the battle.net servers so play with others.
why should an MMO be different?
thedartheric1 6 days ago in playlist Guild Wars 2
@thedartheric1 Because there is at least 5 times more content in an MMO then there is in Starcraft 2. And that's at minimum.
You've got 3 races in Starcraft, You've got at LEAST 30 different Class / Spec combinations. And if you're gonna count races in as well then it becomes an obscure number.
While Starcraft is more competitive, WoW has WAY more things that needs balancing. True, they maintain the Battle.net servers, but where do you think the money comes from? WoW's subscription ofc.
lynixai 6 days ago
@lynixai in response to balance, while yes their are only three races, they all have has at least 10 units, some of which have 3+spells, and they have to balance all the various stats of those units, instead of simply the DPS/CC options. that doesn't even take into account how buildings are built, where buildings can be built, and even how they macro. And it makes no fiscal sense to run the servers if the money from starcraft 2 doesn't cover it, as that would mean they lose money
thedartheric1 6 days ago
Comment removed
ISADusK 6 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@lynixai So you're cool with paying several times what it actually costs per subscriber to upkeep those servers? You're actually cool with paying $15 a month for a service that should only reasonably cost you $2 a month sans purchase price at most? You're cool with the fact that the purchase of each individual copy is more than enough for any modern MMO developer to maintain the servers for the game's entire lifetime, making your monthly payments basically free money in their pockets?
ItStartsAtDusK 6 days ago
@ItStartsAtDusK Like i was explaining to the other guy.
Blizzard is a company, and while it may seem odd to take 15$ a month for keeping WoW up to date and bug free + new content every now and again, remember this.
Blizzard also has other games, with no subscription fee, relying on Server up-keep, Balance Changes and further development.
With Starcraft as well as Diablo, its a 1 time buy, then no more money comes in from that specific player. So eventually those money will run out.
lynixai 6 days ago
@lynixai then the way they make money from the franchise is by realeasing quality expansions that people want to buy, instead of just milking it for money. GW 1 sold around 7 million copies. And it's been successful enough to fund a sequel. that does not sound bad to me
thedartheric1 6 days ago
@lynixai What you're paying for isn't new content, though. You're paying $40 for an expansion, then waiting for Blizz to unlock a bit of content from it every now and then, making your $15/mo to them free money in their pockets. That money doesn't go to "new content"; you already paid for that in the expansion. Name one dungeon or raid released in the last two years that isn't expansion content that was waiting to be unlocked. Just one.
That's right. There isn't one. You've been duped.
ItStartsAtDusK 6 days ago
@lynixai But at the end of the day, no sub = no game, so you haven't actually got the game to play even if you didn't WANT to play online etc. And continued development you pay for when you buy expansions for yet another hefty sum... and shouldn't the bug fixes be expected anyway? If you're selling your game for the price of a completed product it should actually be a completed product.
Galdethriel 6 days ago
@Galdethriel, You are right that you do own the box and a cheap disk. Also all games you are just buying the license to use the product. One does not own the IP on the disk.
sakuradl 4 days ago
@sakuradl Yeah, I'm very aware of that, but all you're doing is switching words out - 'game' for 'license'. End of the day, I've bought something, and I shouldn't have to pay repeatedly for something I already own.
Galdethriel 1 day ago
@Galdethriel, you should read the EULA on the games you buy. It states that you do not own the software but the right to use it, yes there is a difference. I hate it too but that is how software IP work.
sakuradl 1 day ago
@Galdethriel
Ofc it's supposed to be developed over years, unlike most games which have somewhat limitted support for a year or two. Like for MMO's, lots of new content and stuff. Other games give what... bug patches, limitted content (nowadays you have to pay for that anyway). It works out as a new game every few months, which is normal.
Also, you can download it for free from Blizz.
billybobjoeftw 3 days ago
@billybobjoeftw Okay, firstly as I've said new deals and lowering prices doesn't change the fact that it originally sold for full price. It's old. Old things cheapen. And sure you get tons of new content... all you have to do is shell out another 30-40 quid for the expansion. If content was just released and your subscription meant it was just given to you, that'd be fine, but that's not the case.
Galdethriel 1 day ago
@Galdethriel
It's been available to download (free from Blizz, the makers of the content) for years. Wotlk was available to download free from release and so has Cata. Xpacs are released every 2 years or so (and the last few have been free, so that point is moot).
billybobjoeftw 1 day ago
@billybobjoeftw Am I missing something? A quick visit to the Blizzard store clearly shows that they're still charging money for both Cata and WotLK and also for the basic WoW+BC bundle.
Galdethriel 1 day ago
@Galdethriel
Google 'wowinstall'. There's a link to battle.net (Blizzard). Free, just put your region in (so if you're eu, eu.battle, us is us.battle for example).
billybobjoeftw 1 day ago
@billybobjoeftw Now I'm really confused. XD Why charge for it in the Blizzard online store if they're letting you download it anyway? *boggle brained* Can someone explain this to me?
Galdethriel 1 day ago
@Galdethriel
I have no idea. They released one for vanilla, TBC and Wrath too (you can select which one you want to install). So yeah. I'm confuzzled too.
billybobjoeftw 1 day ago
in wow you payed a lot of money for basicaly nothing. That's why i hate blizzard ....they became money greedy fucks
Molhedim 2 weeks ago
Very well put together, though there is a minority out there that still don't get it, they really believe paying subs gives them a better game, that must be the 50 people that hit the dislike button.
mrxennon 2 weeks ago
If you're paying a sub fee for SWTOR right now like I am, you are basically paying to be a beta tester. It's sad, because I don't see SWTOR keeping my interest longer than 6 months, and by then, I'm not sure they'll be able to solve all the terrible coding problems that should have been sorted before release.
VegetoStevieD 2 weeks ago
@VegetoStevieD 6 months? didnt keep me interested for 6 weeks, I cancelled a week after after paying my first subs, I dont even know why I bothered to give them more money.
mrxennon 2 weeks ago
Trionworlds (Rift) has not yet released a new expansion but during the year it's been out they have released bug fixes at least every other week. Ontop of that they have released alot of new content such as a ton of new raids, new areas and more. In rift moving servers is free (even tough there is a slight cool down which is understandable) and with that comes freedom to rename your character. So before you start comparing it to the money grubbing slow patching greedy blizzard, do your research.
Vermilion409 2 weeks ago
@Vermilion409 Money grubbing slow patching greedy blizzard? Do you play the game yourself?. Do your research and you will find that Rift should've just been free to play. It failed. It does not matter if there is regular bug fixes, it's too late to fix them now in order to give a better first impression.
ThePwnMobile 2 weeks ago
@ThePwnMobile i have played wow from vanilla up to cataclysm, with a few breaks during wotlk. I'm not the only one who noticed that blizzard are slow in their patching and keeps re hatching old content, cough naxx, zul'aman, zul'gurub. Rift has by no defenition failed, have you even played it? Most of mmos loses alot of subs the first months, do your research. Rift is still popular and if it wasn't run by subs then they would have to sell items etc which is way worse.
Vermilion409 3 days ago
@Vermilion409 I have played Rift actually. And I found the graphics support terrible and a lack of people actually doing anything in various zones.
ThePwnMobile 2 days ago
@ThePwnMobile the time inbetween firelands and release of cata was around 6 months, think about how much money that is. Let's say that they had 12m subs at all times instead of counting that their 14m declined to 10 during those months. That is 12.000 000 x 11$. That is 792 000 000$ and that gave 2 old dungeons with no new content and one new raid with recoloured skins. I ask you, is that good value?
Vermilion409 3 days ago
@Vermilion409 It is loads of money, but people still pay for it. I'd pay for it because I enjoy it. We will see what happens, but don't expect people to move over to GW2, when it is released even if it is good. Oh no pandas! Half the people who said that still play WoW. People say things, does not mean anything changes. I do agree however that the subscription fee should be cheaper, but it is not 8.99/14.99 for every country when paying a sub fee to WoW.
ThePwnMobile 2 days ago
@ThePwnMobile WoW will burn, and not just simply because pandas. WoW cares about money, not the players themselves. My brother was banned recently from WoW because he was "exploiting a game bug" that he didn't even know about. The game showed he still had play time but blizzard claimed his time had run out. Was this his fault? I think not, its blizzards fault for not fixing it and then blaming the players who don't know about it.
Zarkyun 2 days ago
@Zarkyun Your brother should talk to blizzard customer support to find out why this has happened in that case.
ThePwnMobile 1 day ago
@ThePwnMobile WoW treats its customers like crap and basically tells them; "This is how it is, don't like it? fuck off". As for content, my brother who is a raider can tell you all about the decrease in quality of end-game content over the expansions, and he has beat all end-game content with his guild since Burning Crusade so he knows what he is talking about.
Lets talk pvp, only needs one word, GEAR. You don't need skill to beat people down in tier gear.
Zarkyun 2 days ago
@Zarkyun PvP is not a strong point to WoW. But raids is about PvE and a large amount of WoW's player base is PvE. The problem is that blizzard saw that many players were crying about the difficulty of the new content so blizz just nerfed it. That was the problem. They tried to listen to the customers to make the game better but made it worse. Yes the quality, I will say is not as good as it ever was. WoW will die out soon. But take a look at everquest. That will give you a good idea about this.
ThePwnMobile 1 day ago
@ThePwnMobile Not to mention in lower level pvp its a matter of twinks and people who are higher level than you thus having skills you haven't aquired yet.
The ship that is WoW is sinking, most people with half a brain can clearly see what GW2 is going to do to the MMO industry, and its hard to put it all up to just "over-hyping" when all this demo content clearly shows us its not just "empty promises". Just listening to the devs talk you can tell they actually care
Zarkyun 2 days ago
@Zarkyun You can say that WoW is sinking, yes. But you cannot say 'see what GW2 is going to do to the MMO industry'. This game, is trying to be different, is trying to be new. If you look at it. Guild wars. Instance areas. You can play the game by yourself. Ok?. The quests are less 'traditional MMO'. WoW, is not this. WoW is only multiplayer. This function has its good and bad points. But you cannot really compare the two on the same level. They both have good and bad points.
ThePwnMobile 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Zarkyun "Just listening to the devs talk you can tell they actually care." That is probably the most awesome thing about GW2. I have never seen a team so excited when they talk about their game. Some of them can't even sit/stand still when they talk about it. And all you have to do to is watch the trailers that have the devs talking about wow, swtor, rift, etc and compare them to gw2 to see the difference. It's really amazing.
xynth101088 3 hours ago
If a game is good enough, I find myself justified in paying a sub fee for the priviledge of playing it. However, as someone who considers video games art, and who intends to work on their creation once I grow up, I don't think I could justify it to myself to ask for a sub fee from people so that they can enjoy my work. As an analogy, we're all willing to pay $30 to enter the Louvre to see the Mona Lisa or Nike of Samothrace, but wouldn't those artists frown on that if they were alive today?
cvrc11 2 weeks ago
@cvrc11 A more accurate analogy for subscription-based MMOs would be paying your $30 to enter the Louvre, then having to pay another dollar, every five minutes you spend there, whether you're taking in the exhibits or just browsing at the gift shop. A fee to see such impressive works of art is reasonable, but the constant siphoning of money after that is not. Nor is it necessary.
I won't speak for the artists, however, everyone needs to eat. I don't think they would protest too much.
WOranos 2 weeks ago
@cvrc11 very well said.
RedSkye87 2 weeks ago
@RedSkye87 Thank you very much! I spent a lot of time thinking about it.
cvrc11 1 week ago
Just a question Will guild wars to be buy to play meaning u buy the game and nothing else no monthly fee or buying separate Expantion. PLZ ANSWER THIS!!!!thumbs up so he can see.
JustLo0kitup 2 weeks ago
@JustLo0kitup Did you even watch the video you moron.
Nebraskafootballsue 2 weeks ago
@JustLo0kitup it means that you just pay once, and once only , and thats for the boxset. NO monthly fee
Zemmyz 2 weeks ago
WAIT! there isn't going to be a subscription?!?! I was super pumped about this game, but wasn't going to play it if there was a subscription.
MOHtier1FTW 2 weeks ago
will cash shop unbalanced the game
or from cash shop you can buy costume or something
MrrCraazy 2 weeks ago
That was a Prefect ending Bravo 5:47
CorruptedSins 3 weeks ago
I'm calling BS on this.
If they are, indeed, more than "set" with the box fee alone, then why do they need to sell *anything* in a cash shop? Seems to me that, if what you say is true, the answer is: They don't. It's bonus cash in their pocket that could have been just as well added to the game as part of the box fee.
In other words: Pure, unmitigated greed.
You're not really helping ANet's case here.
But let's break this down further...
(continued...)
lupine73 3 weeks ago
They sell extra character slots. Why? If they are able to support more characters per account than they give by default, then why not just open them all up for the box fee? Why charge extra?
If they have their expenses covered by the box fee alone, then why do they have to sell even purely cosmetic items? There are people who value cosmetic items in their gameplay experience. Seems unfair that they have to pay more to enjoy the game as they wish, especially if the box sale "covers everything".
lupine73 3 weeks ago
I could go on and on with examples.
You can log in to GW1 and check out their cash shop and see right away that the items they sell go well beyond mere "cosmetic" or "additional character slots". There are some compelling and rather game-affecting items for sale in GW1's shop.
I have no problem imagining similar items will be on offer in GW2's.
So I ask again... if everything is, in fact, covered by the box purchase, then why do they charge extra for *anything*?...
lupine73 3 weeks ago
If it's not to cover ongoing expenses beyond what the intitial box fee covers, then it's one of two things:
1. It's a blatant, greed-powered cash-grab on their part.
2. The box fees only take them so far and your explanation doesn't tell the whole story.
lupine73 3 weeks ago 3
@lupine73 and exciting horizons. Surely you can understand this business. It's not rocket science, nor is it an unfair and cruel way to steal money from the consumers. People in the real world always desire things that others may not be able to get. This is a strategy, or should I say logical approach, to that notion. It's a brilliant idea once you understand that there will always be people who want pretty little cosmetics in order too look better than the person next to them.
NocteusLucium 2 weeks ago
@lupine73 Well, "Their not Saints". They are a big company with people just like you and me. My best answer would be they like money, just as the rest of us "like" money. They only make you pay for the accessories because their items that not every one gets or needs but, every one wants so why not charge the people that want does accessories and make some kind of a profit ,right?
Thinkmachi 3 weeks ago
@Thinkmachi
Your answer is much closer to the truth, I suspect, than the what the author of the video puts forth. Thing is, I know this is also the line being put out by folks at ANet, trying to demonize and marginalize sub-fees, claiming their system is better.
The thing is - and what my previous replies were intended to point out, even if indirectly - is that their claim of some "high road", "no sub-fee" stance is hollow and hypocritical.
Continued...
lupine73 3 weeks ago
cont..
And, in fact it's undermined by the very idea that they're selling items in a cash shop. This is what my previous questions (and others I didn't post) point at.
Point is, ANet tries to claim that subs are unjustifiable and that players are paying more than they should have to. Yet, ANet turns around and sells cash shop items - content that players in-game could well find desirable - while claiming their game is supported on box fees alone.
Cont..
lupine73 3 weeks ago
...cont
And what's more, their approach to making extra money off the players has been proven to yield far more money than a standard sub fee. That's the main reason more developers are moving to the Cash Shop model.
15 bucks a month is always going to be 15 bucks a month. Cash Shops, however, enable players to spend as much as they want, as often as they want. So even at that, ANet's stand on the issue is shady at best.
As for why shouldn't they make a profit off people..
Cont...
lupine73 3 weeks ago
...cont
My issue isn't with them making a profit.
It's with how they're distorting the situation about subs, while tooting their own horn about how they "get by on box purchases alone", meanwhile selling additional items in a cash shop; some as much as 10 or 15 bucks as I recall.
When they get rid of the cash shop and include everything in the box fee, they'll have room to talk. 'til then, ANet and the people parroting what this video is putting out there should put a sock in it.
lupine73 3 weeks ago
@lupine73 I have to say your choice of vocabulary, is "kick ass". hehe
Thinkmachi 3 weeks ago
@lupine73 I understand where you are coming from, if the box fee covers everything then why charge for in game shop items? doesnt make sense right? Well it kinda does when you realize that ANet is, and will always be, a business. Businesses do what? Make money, in what every way they can. The in game shops are a lot like Ipod covers, you dont NEED one, but chances are ppl are going to get them, they arnt included with the ipod purchase, but im very certain Apple made a fortune cont.
RankedUpGamePlay 3 weeks ago
@RankedUpGamePlay on ipods w/out the need for the cases, but they still make them because, people are willing to buy them.
RankedUpGamePlay 3 weeks ago
@RankedUpGamePlay
(pt 1)
I think you're missing my point.
I have nothing against ANet making a profit. That's why they're in business.
My beef is that a spokesperson from ANet talked about sub-based MMO devs can't justify a subscription fee, since ANet is able to cover all their expenses with just the box sales. They're trying to marginalize subs by making it look as though they're purely for profit and not at all necessary to maintain the game.
Cont in pt 2
lupine73 3 weeks ago
@RankedUpGamePlay
(pt 2)
My issue is the hypocrisy of them saying that.
ANet has a cash shop in GW1, and will in GW2 as well.
If what they say is true, and the box sale is really all they need to keep the game running, then their cash shop sales are not necessary, either. Everything they have in the cash shop is for pure profit.
If it's true ANet's box fee cover everything, then so long as they have a cash shop in GW1 and 2, they have no ground to question sub-based MMOs, either.
lupine73 3 weeks ago
@lupine73 You understand the fundamental issue here, which is that sub-based games, such as WoW force players to think that they need to player every single day, otherwise they are wasting their money. This is ArenaNet's goal, to have people buy their game and feel the freedom to play whenever and however they want, so that they won't have the necessity to choose between MMORPGs, or two sub-based games rather. Of course they want to make a profit off cash shops. They're not idiots.
NocteusLucium 2 weeks ago
@NocteusLucium
"You understand the fundamental issue here, which is that sub-based games, such as WoW force players to think that they need to player every single day, otherwise they are wasting their money"
I see this a lot. It's nonsense, for more reasons than the comment limit makes practical to explain.
One obvious flaw is that not everyone feels that way. Plenty don't. It strikes me as disingenuous anti-subscription spin to make CS's look better.
Cont...
lupine73 2 weeks ago
(pt2) Cont...
Do *some* people feel that way about a sub-based game? Sure. I can imagine that. So perhaps for *those* people,it's an issue.
However, when you look back over the past 10+ years of sub-based MMOs being the norm and retaining players anyway, it falls kinda short.
Further, *plenty* people don't feel obligated to play every day to get their money's worth. Many feel a game is enjoyable enough that it's worth a sub, even if they only play a few days a week, or weekends.
lupine73 2 weeks ago
(pt3)
Cont..
So to make the assertion you've echoed, NocteusLucium, is perhaps representative of some gamers. It is certainly not representative of all.
If nothing else, that MMOs not only persisted, but grew in popularity starting about 8 years ago when WoW launched - every one of them sub-based - seems to show that most people are not concerned about "getting their money's worth".
After all, 15 bucks per month is a great deal. That's barely *one* movie ticket, a soda and popcorn.
lupine73 2 weeks ago
@lupine73 Obviously not all players have that mentality towards sub-based games, but an enormous portion of them do. Your argument tends to curve my point as if there weren't actually that many players out there who hate monthly subscriptions. That's not the case at all. Look at League of Legends and how successful it has become through cash shop. If LoL was sub-based, it wouldn't have 1/5th of its player-base that it has now. Same with Guild Wars. Same with Perfect World. The list
NocteusLucium 2 weeks ago
@lupine73 goes on and on. 15 bucks per month is a great deal, once again, to an enormous portion of the world. Yeah, sure, that's "barely" one movie ticket, a soda and popcorn, but a lot of people just don't go to the movies all the time either. Having no monthly fee means having the freedom to play whenever and however you want. If you've got WoW or SWTOR on the side, you can still play Guild Wars 2. And also, I'm not being a hypocrite at all, because I'm not the one who made this
NocteusLucium 2 weeks ago
@lupine73 video. I'm just supporting my argument, which seems to be the correct one here. WoW has lost over 2 million subscribers already. Yeah, it was an immensely popular game for a while, and a lot of people were addicted to it, but the hassle of paying to play every single month has caught up to a lot of people. I'm very surprised they haven't made the game F2P passed level 20. SWTOR is probably going to be forced to do the same, as they've also lost over 400 thousand players
NocteusLucium 2 weeks ago
@lupine73 in just the first month. Now, that may be the result of other reasons, such as "good" the game actually is, but it still draws a correlation to what I'm referring to. There are other reasons, as I've stated, like giving people cosmetics, but that's not an issue. You also understand that many players can go on to play this game completely free after their first purchase if they so desire, correct? If you still don't believe this is a more convenient and smarter alternative to
NocteusLucium 2 weeks ago
@lupine73 monthly-subs, then you should think about getting a reality check.
NocteusLucium 2 weeks ago
@lupine73 The two options you presented above your replies to RankedUpGamePlay are not the actual reasons they're doing this... To be a bit clearer, ArenaNet has created a cash shop for Guild Wars 2 in order to accumulate extra money in which they can use to make expansions and other brilliant goodies that we all desire in any MMORPGs. Their 60 dollar fee is quite enough to sustain their game for a long time, but they still need that extra profit in order to expand the game into new
NocteusLucium 2 weeks ago
@NocteusLucium
Well isn't that convenient.
The video attempts to dismiss the idea that sub fees go toward developing and improving the game, and that it's simply the developers charging extra money for no real reason, because they don't really "need" to.
But yet, ANet sells cash shop items, gets to say "we only have cash shop items to help develop future content!" and that's perfectly okay.
What a wonderful slice of hypocrisy that only helps to prove my point.
lupine73 2 weeks ago
@lupine73 no i agree with you Lupine, i was just making sure that you realized that what their doing is the same as, lets say WoW or Rift (ect) doing what they do out of greed.
RankedUpGamePlay 2 weeks ago
@RankedUpGamePlay
Ah okay, gotcha.
Well, according to another poster here, the *real* reason for the cash shop is to allow them to make future content and expansion packs.
You know, the thing which, according to the video, sub-based MMO devs don't get to say because, apparently it's "bogus".
For ANet, though, cash shop sales - even though they openly claim to need only box sales to support the game in perpetuity - it's a perfectly valid reason.
Bask in the double standard.
lupine73 2 weeks ago
epic video...im happy for this because i cant go to the store every month and pay for that im 14 years old and i really want to play this game in the summer i get a part time job so i have lots of money to spare but i still wouldnt want to spend 15 dollars a month...and i live in the middle of nowhere so i really cant i got kinda mad at LoL cause they practically force you to buy rp i would be happy to support them...on my own will...anyways i dont know where im going with this xD
suzake2 3 weeks ago
The video in itself is based on artificial facts, that are baseless considering how the user in effect has no realization of internal working of such big projects, hence, the video is misleading.
The concept of no subscription is only feasible when you force the player to pay for extras ranging from additional campaign to cosmetic only features, or to put it simply separate out the content most likely to be paid for players from the initial product and provide it as extra: pure profit.
grdnzen 3 weeks ago
@grdnzen
hm, you dont seem understand Anet business plan or MMO's in general, the reason for the Sub fee was to pay for servers costs, these costs over the years have been reduced to a point that they are almost nothing comparatively speaking and the only real reason to keep the subscription fee is pure greed on the companies part. the price of the box set is always enough to cover development costs.
ourorboros2 3 weeks ago
@grdnzen
Anet will ofcourse sell cosmetic items and do have an ingame store for this however its hardly forced and as for additional content, they're called expansion packs and most if not all MMO's have them on top of a subscription fee.
Anet have already said they will be making free content patches and balancing patches and so on, they do this to keep people playing, the more people playing the more people buy their expansion packs
ourorboros2 3 weeks ago
@grdnzen
and the more likely people are to buy cosmetic items aswell.
all MMO's, wow especially, separate out their content exactly as you've just said and still have the gall to charge a subscription, Anet are simply removing the subscription fee.
ourorboros2 3 weeks ago
@ourorboros2 You actually need to provide me with proper data. In the end, be it Trion, Bioware, Blizzard or ArenaNet, they are in the end all in this for business.
Now as a comparison at least in terms of a cumulative total, you need to compare GW and WoW(Content-wise), to make a healthy comparison, as however, anyone preaches how GW 2 is awesome, it is meaningless to provide speculation as facts.
grdnzen 3 weeks ago
@ourorboros2 In addition, the first GW with its episodes and EoN exp were distributed over a course of 2 years in total, even though they were cheaper, it seems that the game in itself behind Vanilla WoW in terms of content it provided in the end.
After GW 2 gets released and A.Net proves that their model is feasible per content they offer, then I'll accept that there's no need for a sub, but as of now it is better to wait rather choosing others as greedy scapegoats.
grdnzen 3 weeks ago
I remeber being introduced to subs when I played my first online games, namely Fighter Ace (off MSN gaming zone at the time) and my first MMO Asheron's Call (SO overlooked). I was playing plenty of age of empires multiplayer and there was no fee, but I didn't even question why the others had a sub, and even last year I was playing WoW and didn't even question the sub, it was just accepted as normal. Great vid, great points! Let's not pay more than these games deserve!
abatage0 3 weeks ago in playlist Guild Wars 2 In-Depth
Wait what... people WANT to pay?
denis505 3 weeks ago
I believe this as well as things such as Wow's new "Free to level 20" feature proves how mmos will finally stop using these ridiculous monthly fees.
Icanhaznolife 4 weeks ago
I agree with you a 110% WoodenPotatoes. One thing that annoys me about subscription fees is when they explicitly demand you give them bank account details. At least if you can go in store and buy a code for a few months of access that's more in your control than in them taking money even if you've stopped playing but forget to disconnect your bank account.
PhycoDreamer 4 weeks ago
so true!!
igofighter 1 month ago
Very well said! Without the subscription, the pressure of 'needing' to play the game is lowered, so you can play the game much more casually, in my opinion.
TheGreatDigitalism 1 month ago
@TheGreatDigitalism I second that.
Axroted 4 weeks ago
GW2 will fucking owns, i boguth GW1 back in the 2005-2006 (Not sure) Had a fawking lot of fun with it !
WampireDj 1 month ago
well said
hongkongchico168 1 month ago
Good video man.
Brokenreality1911 1 month ago
@kaaspowns I laughed xD
AirickGuitar3917 1 month ago
well played
SuperDouchebag12345 1 month ago
Couldn't have said it better !
lungdisc 1 month ago
GW2 will not be delayed until next year that's a bogus rumor, closed beta is coming to an end in January last i read, and soon open betas will be released with the ability to signup. since Anet has a very good handle on the polish on this game these last betas are only a minor function to make sure everything is working as intended, the game IS functionally complete already.
the1tigglet 1 month ago
GW2 will be delayed till march 2013 though
Birgeyful 1 month ago
@Birgeyful It seems a lot of guildwars2guru members seem to think more along the lines of either middle/end of 2Q 2012 or early 3Q. Not 2Q 2013
AirickGuitar3917 1 month ago
@AirickGuitar3917 Just them guessing anyhow
AirickGuitar3917 1 month ago
Well said. Good job!
devanrowland 1 month ago
This was an extremely well put together video. You obviously did plenty of research and know what you are talking about. and I agree. I recently purchased SWTOR and I can't justify paying a monthly fee for it, especially considering GW2 will most likely be released this year. I love GW1 and I love everything I have seen and read so far on GW2, so if I buy the game and it doesn't live up to the hype. Im still going to play because no monthly fee. I wont have to justify $15 a month
FanaticDamen 1 month ago 24