Curse

Test Me · Dec 18, 2009, 09:32 PM // 21:32

If you have been around for some time you might have noticed a change in the GW1 business model from free to play to a micro-transaction system. Originally and with the first update the live team worked on, most thought micro-transactions were a one off thing. With the latest costumes update it becomes pretty clear that the live team is not actually working on free updates and do maintenance but they focus on different ways to get more money for GW1.

I for one don't like the direction GW1 business model is taking. Many would say that the micro-transactions available at the moment are just for cosmetic items and therefore optional, "they don't affect gameplay". There are two points to consider though.

First of all, not all micro-transactions are cosmetic. A noticeable exception is storage panels. They don't give a player an advantage in terms of item stats but they obviously give players that have the money for them an in game advantage. No way around it, that update pointed that even gameplay affecting features worked on by live team won't be free.

Second, cosmetics like costumes are just as bad micro-transaction items as those that would offer gameplay stats advantages. Cosmetics offer only a "looks"/skins advantage. But this is a game. People play games not as much for the stats (they could do pure maths on paper if stats were all about it). If you think about it, costumes are almost like a new elite armor skin that are is available via cash in the in game store. I can see kids begging their parents to buy them the costumes because their friends have those "looks" already. ANet's strategy for the current holiday season I guess.

And last and perhaps the most important, it shows that ANet prefers to stop the "6 months content update expansion/campaign" but move to a new "shinny cosmetics" micro-transaction business model. They don't want to invest in adding real new content to the game (too difficult), however they spend the time of one engineer or so for a couple of weeks to release two costumes that together are as expensive as one full campaign (today).

So they are obviously looking for easy gains and probably think that spending the time of their entire team for a campaign that would be priced around the same as 4 costumes: a waste of time and resources. Doing 4 costumes is probably not even a week's work but just as pricey.

Conclusions:
- I would much rather they worked on real content updates and I would gladly pay for those; but I am afraid real content updates may seem not worth for ANet given the effort/price
- there seems to be enough proof that the updates live team is working mostly on new ways to make easy money rather than really fix issues, perform maintenance and keep the game going.

I just wish things hadn't taken this direction...

EDIT: I'm just expressing my wish that they would go back to real content updates even if I had pay for them instead of ... armor skins. I have nothing against them trying to implement skins and charge for them, or against people that buy them and enjoy them. I just wish that wasn't all the updates they do. Is this what we should expect from now on? No new content at all but some new skins for $6 each? Things seem to point that way. And it makes me sad.

Braxton619 · Dec 18, 2009, 10:16 PM // 22:16

Conclusion:
-If you want the upgrade, you buy it. If you do not want it, do not buy it. ANET does not make us buy them. Shut up.
-Running the game with no monthly fees is hard work. ANET is successful for that. Let them add micro-transactions. Pays for their bills and server costs.

These threads are getting very tiring. Please refer to the other threads about micro transactions. Thank you.

Gennadios · Dec 18, 2009, 10:23 PM // 22:23

ANet abandonned the "6 months content update expansion/campaign" system before even EotN was released. They said themselves that that kind of system was too rushed and didn't give them time to do much work on existing content after release.

I don't think 4 ppl can create adequate "real" content, paid for or otherwise.

Grj · Dec 18, 2009, 10:42 PM // 22:42

Why is it a common theme on guru anyone who doesn't share the same view point as me is a troll...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leet Tankur

These threads are getting very tiring. Please refer to the other threads about micro transactions. Thank you.

Fair enough if you don't like don't purchase it and they won't... take your own advice if viewing these threads are getting "tiring" don't click on them.

Lishy · Dec 18, 2009, 10:42 PM // 22:42

Lol...

I think it's safe to say that if we just leave this post at that, it would still be an appropriate response.

Clobimon · Dec 18, 2009, 10:46 PM // 22:46

hmmm
Again, why are so many people expecting GW at this stage to be run like it was or like any other 'top' "live" game out there currently? And again, it was stated some time ago by an employee that GW is on it's final leg of it's life cycle. The game is not going to receive major additions in content nor major changes to existing. Basically what they've done is begun to add bits and pieces here and there since so many are still playing the game and they realize that the gap between EotN and GW2 release is pretty long. Some players are complaining endlessly about ANet's management of GW using comparisons to games that are THE game of other companies which are still being expanded on and such. I'm certainly not going to assume that any method of attaining monetary compensation for the work they do towards GW is necessarily going to become their business model and carried over to their new "MAIN" game once GW2 is released. I do however see it as a way to get paid for extra work done on a game they had initially planned on not putting much more into over two years ago. I definately don't have a problem with that.

Test Me · Dec 18, 2009, 10:48 PM // 22:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kain Fz

Lol...

I think it's safe to say that if we just leave this post at that, it would still be an appropriate response.

Therefore it is understood you agree with the "no real updates" but "armor skins for $6 each" direction. Or? You don't want more for your money? You don't think GW1 could get awesome content updates? You're just happy with what you have been offered so far. Right?

cognophile · Dec 18, 2009, 10:51 PM // 22:51

I don't see a problem with ANet charging extra money for perks like the collector's edition, storage upgrades, or costumes. In my opinion, these don't affect competitive gameplay balance, and they offer a nice way for players to show support for the game.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Test Me

First of all, not all micro-transactions are cosmetic. A noticeable exception is storage panels. They don't give a player an advantage in terms of item stats but they obviously give players that have the money to spend on them an in game advantage. No way around it, that update pointed that even gameplay affecting features worked on by live team will not be free.

I'd say extra storage panels are a convenience, not a real advantage. If my storage were overflowing with ecto I might think otherwise, but it's not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Test Me

Second, cosmetics like costumes are just as bad micro-transaction items as those that would offer gameplay stats advantages. Cosmetics do offer only a "looks" advantage but this is a game. People play games not as much for the stats (they could do pure maths on paper if stats was all about it); not as much as for the "looks/cosmetics". If you think about it, costumes are almost like a new elite armor skin that are is available via cash in the in game store.

Costumes seem like a great idea to me. If done right, they might even help undercut the pressure for cosmetic-oriented players to violate the EULA and purchase GW gold or ecto from real-money traders.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Test Me

Conclusions:
- I would much rather they worked on real content updates and I would gladly pay for those; but I am afraid real content updates may seem not worth for ANet given the effort/price
- there seems to be enough proof that the updates live team is working mostly on new ways to make easy money rather than really fix issues, perform maintenance and keep the game going.

Looks like we disagree. If ANet has found a nice way to enrich the game and also keep a few artists busy, I think that's great.

Test Me · Dec 18, 2009, 10:57 PM // 22:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clobimon

Basically what they've done is begun to add bits and pieces here and there since so many are still playing the game and they realize that the gap between EotN and GW2 release is pretty long.

My question is: since they realized that the said gap is pretty long why aren't they working on something like a mini expansion and dedicate more resources to it instead of coming up with marketing ideas like costume skins.

And I can't help but think: GW is an awesome game and I'd happily get money out of my pocket to show my support ... but I started getting the feeling recently that by doing that I am encouraging them to pursue this micro-transactions folly where they think they can sell me an armor skin for $6.

On one hand they fail to deliver even basic skill updates even after they changed the schedule to every other month (=free therefore not interesting) but they *didn't* fail to deliver costumes before Christmas. Because costumes are no real effort updates that bring money and therefore are important updates to release?

Is really this the transformation we are witnessing in how GW is to be maintained?

english storm · Dec 18, 2009, 11:00 PM // 23:00

Micro transaction business models usually sell items that give the user an advantage other other players, ie more weapon damage or higher armour. Guild Wars will never do that imo and as you get no in game play advantage from buying what they sell, plus the fact you are not forced to buy, Guild Wars is still a free to play business model.

Clobimon · Dec 18, 2009, 11:03 PM // 23:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Test Me

My question is: since they realized that the said gap is pretty long why aren't they working on something like a mini expansion and dedicate more resources to it instead of coming up with marketing ideas like costume skins.

And I can't help but think: GW is an awesome game and I'd happily get money out of my pocket to show my support ... but I started getting the feeling recently that by doing that I am encouraging them to pursue this micro-transactions folly where they think they can sell me an armor skin for $6.

I guess my simple answer would be to compare it to buying brand new $500 dollar rims for a car that you're going to take to the junk yard in two weeks when you're going to be buying a new car. Instead of buying new rims while you wait, you just buy some good wheel polish and make your existing look as nice as possible until then.

Meridon · Dec 18, 2009, 11:06 PM // 23:06

OP is telling the sad, but hard truth. And in fact, while I don't like them for doing it, I can't blame the devs for it. It's all straightforward business. Have a look at this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth-share_matrix

The BCG-Matrix or "Growth-share matrix" is often used by managers in order to assess their product. Guild Wars, being a game that's nearing the end of it's life, with a decreasing number of people actively playing it, would be classified as a "Dog". While it's not creating profit for the company (heck, I can imagine GW1 is not even breaking even), it will be kept alive for as long as necessary (in this case, until the release of GW2 or shortly after it's release), after which it will be put to sleep for good. From a business perspective, the best thing to do with a Dog is to still get as much money out of it as possible, while making the least amount of costs, and while slowly decreasing the assets involved. An example of the latter is the creation of the Test Crew (instead of hiring professional game testers) and the transfer of servers from GW1 to Aion.

Generally, it's also a depiction of a product's life-cycle, starting off as a Question Mark (first six months of GW let's say), before turning into a Star (Factions era), then a Cash Cow (NF and EotN), and finally a Dog (since the start of 2009).

Whilst this situation being bad for the community, I can't blame Anet/NCSoft for doing healthy business. That doesn't mean however, that information supply to the community about the business has to be this bad. Being the customers, we definitely are a factor they need to take into account. ANet is playing a risky game by not being pro-actively open about their current and future state of business. By leaving us relatively ignorant, they're hoping we don't ask questions, and will all just play along for as long as we can, until they pull the plug. This costs them little money and in return enables them to squeeze out any last revenues. The risk in this is that we do ask questions, and that if we don't get the right answers we will be dissatisfied with their business and therefore not buy GW2, which would be catastrophic for them if it happened on a large scale, but it probably won't. Then again, with them trying to squeeze out of us as much revenue possible, there's no reason why we shouldn't be trying to squeeze out of them as much service and extra game-play value at the same time.

So yeah, it sucks that GW1 is treated like this, for us at least. Then again, it's only natural.

*Darcy* · Dec 18, 2009, 11:06 PM // 23:06

Thank you, english storm, for hitting the nail on the head. I might buy the costumes and I might not, but that decision will not affect my game play. The free part of the new build, the hat slot, does affect my game play, as I can now wear my festival hats without worrying about head shots.

Clobimon · Dec 18, 2009, 11:06 PM // 23:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Test Me

Is really this the transformation we are witnessing in how GW is to be maintained?

My answer is NO if you're speaking in reference to how they'll maintain GW2. If you're referring to GW only and you're carrying it through GW2 release and beyond... well then, probably pretty close. When their answer to "will GW still be playable after GW2 release?" is, "we'll keep the servers up as long as people are playing it," I'm fairly certain that updates to the 'old' game are going to be pretty sparse.

own age myname · Dec 18, 2009, 11:10 PM // 23:10

The only thing I care about, is keeping stuff like this out of GW2. Micro-Transactions cheapen the gaming experience for me. I guess I could care less for GW1, not like I play as actively as I used to.

belladonna shylock · Dec 18, 2009, 11:10 PM // 23:10

Here is where i pick and choose what i want to quote then say QFT:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leet Tankur

Conclusion:
-ANET does not make us buy them. Shut up. Thank you.

Targren · Dec 18, 2009, 11:11 PM // 23:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clobimon

My answer is NO if you're speaking in reference to how they'll maintain GW2. If you're referring to GW only and you're carrying it through GW2 release and beyond... well then, probably pretty close. When their answer to "will GW still be playable after GW2 release?" is, "we'll keep the servers up as long as people are playing it," I'm fairly certain that updates to the 'old' game are going to be pretty sparse.

They already are sparse. But I'm curious as to why you think it will stop with GW2? You think they're going to abandon something profitable just because they have a new source? GW isn't profitable on its own anymore (the dwinding population shows us that), so your logic holds there. But if it does work out for them, you think they'll launch GW2 and say "well, we have enough money from GW2, we don't need to sell other stuff" when they know they can get $10 for 4 armor models?

Jerrodh · Dec 18, 2009, 11:14 PM // 23:14

I'd much rather have no montly fees and a bunch of random purchasable packs, etc. through the store that people buy. Especially considering 90% of it is either pointless or in the game already, and nothing as of yet really justifies the purchase price, or give you any advantages.

So don't buy, and let them put these packs up for those who do want to spend/waste their money on the cosmetic items, this just helps our game be cheaper for us who don't want to purchase.

I do appreciate those who do buy the random stuff through the store however because like I said without these we could be very well paying for a subscription right now. Just not for me.

Sure in the perfect world it be nice if Anet could give us free upgrades like that all the time and timely game updates/skill updates, etc. But given the situwation of FREE subscriptions i don't think you should be half as picky as you are being.

Test Me · Dec 18, 2009, 11:15 PM // 23:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Targren

But if it does work out for them, you think they'll launch GW2 and say "well, we have enough money from GW2, we don't need to sell other stuff" when they know they can get $10 for 4 armor models?

Obviously they're testing the waters. I also expect we'll see more of these micro-transactions with GW2 even from day one.

agrios · Dec 18, 2009, 11:15 PM // 23:15

I agree with micro-transactions the way they are now: not disturbing the balance. Costumes are a great idea. Just think, its a one-time deal, why not? Im thinking Im getting both costumes the next time I log in.