Curse

=HT=Ingram · Jan 07, 2008, 04:47 AM // 04:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevin

That would result in people paying $4 dollars for 1 month. Then just rushing through to get the armor and/or end game weapons. Not a good idea. Hardcore gamers can do in a month what it takes casual gamers a whole year.

exactly.. This would be too much a benefit to gold resellers and exploiters.

while I like the idea of having a more affordable game now and again, I say this to you... look at the game today. Most retail stores sell Prophecies and factions for 29.99 or less, and the expansion for around $20. just to get it off the shelf... so there are bargains out there... Beware of Amazon marketplace and Ebay however cause those are almost certainly scam artists selling illegal USED games! Which they can hijack back and loot at a whim...

But ultimately Its by far the cheapest top selling MMO out there today. When compared to any subscription model out there, GW even if you get Collector editions of everything, you would have still saved more the 1/2 the money you could have wasted on a subscription game paying every month, AND forced to buy $50 games and expansion on top of that for that matter...

Hyper.nl · Jan 07, 2008, 08:06 AM // 08:06

The current business model is my favourite; as I don't like to buy time but products. No need for change imo.

Rhedd · Jan 07, 2008, 09:21 AM // 09:21

I sure am glad people keep making posts like this one, because, as we all know, game publishers make all of their financial business decisions based on posts by random people on teh internetz.

How else would they manage?

Redfeather1975 · Jan 07, 2008, 10:30 AM // 10:30

I'm actually the one who calls the shots.
And I drop a pencil on a giant sheet of ideas in order to do it.
GW2 will use the jelly bean business model.
So stock up on jelly beans everyone.

Nevin · Jan 07, 2008, 11:36 AM // 11:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Terraban

OVER NINE THOUSAND!!!!!!!!!111

KAKAROOOOOOOOT!!!!!!!

HuntMaster Avatar · Jan 07, 2008, 11:38 AM // 11:38

two reasons i do not like this idea.
1. requirement of a credit card. those of us without some form of credit card would not be able to make payments.

2. i like going to the store and buying a game in a box, i like getting my game manual and installing the game using a cd. i like having the security of knowing if my pc blows up or my HD stops working i can always install the game on a new pc.

also being "poor" isn't the problem. and is quite offensive to say if i can't afford 50 bucks for a game i need to get a life. bills stack up, cost of rent, utilities, gas, food, child care and many other things leave my wallet sorely thin. its better to say if you can't afford 50 bucks then try budgeting alittle bit so you can. whats with people being so hostile and offensive?

lay-a-way gaming is a bad idea because you never know what next month will bring, you may lose your job, insue new bills or just be unable to make the payments. then you can no longer play the game.

Malice Black · Jan 07, 2008, 11:39 AM // 11:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rhedd

I sure am glad people keep making posts like this one, because, as we all know, game publishers make all of their financial business decisions based on posts by random people on teh internetz.

How else would they manage?

This says it all.

artay · Jan 07, 2008, 11:44 AM // 11:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zinger314

If you are too poor to purchase a $50 dollar product upfront, you might want to GET A LIFE.

Or a job ^_^

It's not your fault Russia!

Avai · Jan 07, 2008, 01:01 PM // 13:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zinger314

If you are too poor to purchase a $50 dollar product upfront, you might want to GET A LIFE.

I agree with you; I believe I make around 50 USD sitting in front of my PC reading GW Guru for about two hours? Getting a life isn't required...just get a job like mine.

captain_carter · Jan 07, 2008, 04:00 PM // 16:00

From my interpretation of this, you would like the merging of 2 purchasing systems.
The kind of deal where you pay a certain amount per month for 1 or 2 years at which point you would have paid off everything is well known and widely used. I have never heard of this system not involving interest (except for short periods of time). This kind of credit offer is usually available(and with good reason) on goods that have a high value. They would benefit the company by allowing them to sell their product to a market that would otherwise be unable to buy from them because they cannot afford the huge one-time cost. This is a succesful and useful deal when purchasing cars of sofas.

A monthly subscription to a game or other online service involves paying for the content each month, you pay for access that month and that month alone, if you stop paying you lose access. This appears to be a succesful model, many consider it the only option for MMOs(an asumption which GW proves wrong).

Merging these 2 models/things in the way you propose does not seem like I good idea for the company.
The "monthly fee" proposed is not sufficient to cover producing and delivering the service if the full value is not payed eventually. This would seem likely to occur with this system as many people would be able to get all they want from the expansion in 1-6 months, then they can stop paying and the company recieves only up to one half of the money they "need".
As for it's similarities with the first model I described, there is the option to stop paying. This never happens with this deal, you always have to keep paying even if the car breaks down, you still have to complete your payment, just as if you borrowed a book from your library and burnt it, you would have to pay for the replacement. You cannot simply say "I'm not going to sit on the sofa again so I won't continue to pay".

The model you propose is, IMO, a flawed and impracticle merging of 2 distinct systems. I would be very surprised if this idea was adopted by any online game.

Shadow Spirit · Jan 07, 2008, 04:17 PM // 16:17

There's nothing broken with the current system. Monthly fees FTL...

Mordakai · Jan 07, 2008, 04:28 PM // 16:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avai

I agree with you; I believe I make around 50 USD sitting in front of my PC reading GW Guru for about two hours? Getting a life isn't required...just get a job like mine.

LOL, I want your job!

But on topic, micro-transactions (like $30 over time to get the Bonus Mission Pack), could be the way GW2 floats.

So I wouldn't denounce the idea too strongly.

quicksilv3r · Jan 07, 2008, 04:57 PM // 16:57

no1 going buy GUILDWARS 2, so y even talk about it, or try to promote it WITH MONTHLY FEE!

people goin on strike and going Protest GW2 to make the dev's come back to gw1 and edit/ make new expansion for it.. we dont need better graphics
death to gw2.

netniwk · Jan 07, 2008, 05:08 PM // 17:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by quicksilv3r

no1 going buy GUILDWARS 2, so y even talk about it, or try to promote it WITH MONTHLY FEE!

people goin on strike and going Protest GW2 to make the dev's come back to gw1 and edit/ make new expansion for it.. we dont need better graphics
death to gw2.

retard of the thread.
/applause

kingoffly · Jan 07, 2008, 05:30 PM // 17:30

really i don't like the idea at all!!!
i played Wow and quited because of the fees (didn't know GW back then

)
so if anet add a monthly fee then they are going to have alot of games who are turning to other games
there are plenty of fee-less games on the market!

Lonesamurai · Jan 07, 2008, 05:35 PM // 17:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by quicksilv3r

no1 going buy GUILDWARS 2, so y even talk about it, or try to promote it WITH MONTHLY FEE!

people goin on strike and going Protest GW2 to make the dev's come back to gw1 and edit/ make new expansion for it.. we dont need better graphics
death to gw2.

a, better spelling/english please

b, GW1 is dead, long live GW2

Aerian_Skybane · Jan 07, 2008, 05:51 PM // 17:51

Did you ever hear of this invention called a credit card? Its this plastic thing with numbers on it that you can use to buy things without "paying" for it right away. Instead, you can pay it off in a month, or you can pay the minimum payment, with an interest (APR) charge, over time. Its called financing, and ANet shouldn't be doing it for us.

If you are not old enough to have a credit card, then you are clearly not old enough to choose a financial business plan for a major software company...

Oh and to remove some of the venom from this thread, has anyone else been freaked out by the classmates.com ad up above where the two dreamboats pics are freaking the F out and shaking like they had serious vitamin deficiency?

tmr819 · Jan 07, 2008, 06:12 PM // 18:12

This may be a bit off-topic, but I have sometimes wondered if some sort of "a la carte" menu for expansions/campaigns might be workable.

As an example, WoW's monthly fee included a lot of updates that I, as a casual player, would never see and really did not want to pay for, e.g., the development 20- to 40-man raid instances (Naxxramas, Ahn Qiraj) back in the "old days" of lvl-60 cap WoW meant nothing to me, as a casual player.

I wonder how successful WoW would be if they offered "package deals" on expansions in the same way a cable TV company might do by offering "standard" (base expansion) and "deluxe" (base expansion plus raid/elite content) options.

Likewise, if GW had operated like that, and UW, FoW, and similar instances of that ilk had been optional and offered like a kind of "$5 to $10 Bonus Instance Pack," I would not have purchased them, not because they aren't good but because I know I would not be able to play them.

Say, The Burning Crusade had been offered as a tiered expansion:
(1) Tier 1: 2 new playable races plus Outland regions/all base instances
(2) Tier 2: Tier 1 plus high-end raid content.

I wonder how a model like that would have affected sales -- and, in turn, I wonder how such a model would affect future WoW expansions and development?

My theory is that the high-end raid content does not make money for WoW, though it might, and that the high-end content is being heavily subsidized by the basic content in much the same way all those "junk channels" you get from your TV cable company are being paid for by the channels you actually want and watch and are willing to pay for.

Personally, I would like to see high-end content (particularly anything that is not soloable) be made an optional add-on in any and all MMOs.

For example, you might pay $30 for the base expansion and an additional $10 for the high-end content associated with said expansion if you wanted it. Some MMOs are already dabbling in having players pay-for-specific features, and I do not like that idea much, but the idea of offering "tiers of game service" does appeal to me somewhat.

Mordakai · Jan 08, 2008, 03:29 PM // 15:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmr819

For example, you might pay $30 for the base expansion and an additional $10 for the high-end content associated with said expansion if you wanted it. Some MMOs are already dabbling in having players pay-for-specific features, and I do not like that idea much, but the idea of offering "tiers of game service" does appeal to me somewhat.

It's an interesting idea, and one that Hellgate: London is trying.

I've been thinking about Wrath of the Lich King for WoW, and if I don't have a level 70 by then, there's no reason to buy it.

But, I can't see Blizzard lowering their monthly bill just because I don't do high-end raids. It's not like they're starving for new players....

As for GW2, it depends on how many people play the elite areas: ie, would Anet make enough money by selling access to elite areas to justify the cost?

The Great Al · Jan 08, 2008, 03:45 PM // 15:45

I can't say I like this. You do realize that you can make $50 in less than a day, right?