Curse

lyra_song · Jul 19, 2006, 04:17 PM // 16:17

Anyone who plays The Sims or The Sims 2, will be very familiar with a new expansion coming out every 6 months or so.

Timeline of The Sims expansion packs according to Wikipedia:

1. The Sims: Livin' Large or The Sims: Livin' It Up in Europe (released August 2000):
2. The Sims: House Party (released March 2001):
3. The Sims: Hot Date (released November 2001):
4. The Sims: Vacation or The Sims: On Holiday in Europe (released March 2002):
5. The Sims: Unleashed (released September 2002):
6. The Sims: Superstar (released May 2003):
7. The Sims: Makin' Magic (released October 2003):

As you can see, theres a steady amount of 2 expansions per year after the initial first expansion.

TS expansions always add new content and ways to play game, as well as new items, with each expansion.

To me, it seems that Guild Wars is following this style of expansions quite heavily for its Chapters.

Guild Wars and its future Chapters are following the same basic timeline of every 6 months. Like TS, the new addons are NOT MANDATORY for enjoying the game. Each new chapter brings something new, and new features that the original doesnt have.

But heres the kicker, and im sure we all will agree.

GW's chapters are standalone, TS's expansions are not. This is both the strength and flaw of GW.

The TS user will be categorized by which expansion he/she has and these expansions limit what he/she can download in new objects because each expansion adds new features to the game and not everyone will have those features.

Which means, if i were to create an object for download for the community, i would probably make it as compatible as possible for ALL users because i want to have the biggest amount of people using my item as possible. However some content requires certain expansions to be usable. For example, pets weren't added until Unleashed, so all pet content can only be accessed by those users. However, Unleashed users still have the BASE game, which they can still download items for.

Because GW chapters are standalone, it would seem that any core changes to features should be accessible to ALL players, because commonly shared features already exist. But instead, Anet is opting to treat the userbase as if it were expansion packs. Prophecies users arent getting the material storage because its considered Factions only content. This would be the same as saying that Factions is an expansion pack and indeed, not standalone, because standalone would mean that that material expansion upgrade is NOT a problem of compability between users, so it should be available for all.

So...im starting to rant.

Point of topic: GW is using the same philosophy of TS in its Chapters. However since the chapters are standalone, it doesnt work so well.

What they should do? Stop releasing standalones and make PURE expansions that work with ANY of the standalones.

*goes back to typing up this report* >.>

Jetdoc · Jul 19, 2006, 04:24 PM // 16:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

What they should do? Stop releasing standalones and make PURE expansions that work with ANY of the standalones.

The problem with this is that PURE expansions generally run about half the cost of the original standalone game. With some tweaking, GW is able to charge the full amount by labeling it as a standalone game.

I don't think GW is willing to sacrifice that extra revenue...but in the end, I would expect that the potential problems that using a standalone approach will start to outweigh the benefit of the additional revenue (especially if those problems start to disappoint their current customer base).

IAmAI · Jul 19, 2006, 04:46 PM // 16:46

To be honest, I think you post was a long winded way of saying storage upgrades should be available to all chapters and I don't think the comparison is necessary to justify that. Note that this isn't a critisism of your post - it's a good viewpoint nonetheless. I would just like to put my accross viewpoint that the storage upgrades should be available to all players regardless of whether ANet's products are expansions or stand alone products.

TheUndertaker · Jul 19, 2006, 04:53 PM // 16:53

I think the original poster used the storage accounts as an example to prove a point. That expansions would work better than stand alone games. The storage was not the point of the post.

milias · Jul 19, 2006, 04:54 PM // 16:54

Here's my personal view on it:

1. Prophecies took 2 years to develop, which in my opinion, warrants the name "full game" and deserves the full price.

2. Factions took 1 year to develop, which in my opinion, is a mix between "standalone" and "expansion".

3. ANet/NCSoft needs the additional revenue to sustain their no-monthly-fee business model.

4. Factions is being marketed and priced as a "standalone" game.

In the end, ANet/NCSoft is dictated, well, by business. Hence, I think it's a matter of necessity for them.

TheMosesPHD · Jul 19, 2006, 05:12 PM // 17:12

I'd hadn't thought of the storage upgrade like that before. I thought of it as being compensation for having more than 4 char slots, but a stand-alone Factions game still has the upgrade right? Good point. Also I myself wouldn't call the post longwinded, even though it's long, because I actually ended up reading it all the way through without skipping to main points. :P

Anyway, I do agree that GW should start changing something or the other about their methods of releasing and creating new content. They've only released one add-on from the original and already I'm seeming to feel a general let-down about the game and more discussion about whether or not to stay dedicated to the game or move on to something else; and I don't just mean all the griefers that have always been present.

I myself have reduced myself from obsessive to casual gamer and reduced my playtime, and am having trouble with the ammount of character slots growing and growing. I want to try new classes but I have all of my old characters that seem to become obsolete if I don't take time to bring them up to speed and cap/buy all the new skills.

That prolly isn't your main point, but those are just a few little thoughts of mine on the state of the game.

Red · Jul 19, 2006, 06:05 PM // 18:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

What they should do? Stop releasing standalones and make PURE expansions that work with ANY of the standalones.

OR

Release standalones, at the same price as the original Prophecies, that are actually the same quality as the original Prophecies.

Honestly, I think that if people were less ZOMG RAGE about the "Factions disappointment", people wouldn't care so much... but the fact is, people do see Factions as inferior to the original Guild Wars, for whatever reason. Come into the #guildwarsguru channel in IRC sometime and ask "guys I am thinking about buying GW. Which version should I get?". I DARE you to find someone in chat, whether noob or moderator, who will answer: "omg Factions is better get that lawl!"

And so, as we pay the same price for (what is considered to be an inferior game with) less content, it is natural that players should feel... held hostage? I think that if the gaming experiences were more equal, we wouldn't feel "cheated" by the addition of storage to the Factions campaign. As it is, we feel like we're being coerced into buying it.

Final word: either publish as expansion OR make better standalones plzkthx

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Jetdoc & Milias:

What you say may or may not be true. I'd bet on the It Is True side.

But, a company can not function on the basis of "what must we charge to survive". It's fine to say that they need/want the money for whatever reason... but it does no good if they alienate customers. The price must be justified before (many/enough) customers will pay it. I can already think of several guildmates and ingame friends who, having been turned off by Chapter 2, are now either going to wait to buy Chapter 3 or simply not buy it at all.

Please see first section of this post. ^_^

Grammar · Jul 19, 2006, 06:21 PM // 18:21

Just think of the expansions as upkeep.

In WoW, for example, upkeep comes in the form of $15 a month payments, or $180 a year.
In Guild Wars, you buy 2 expansions a year for a total of $100 a year.

So not only is upkeep $80 a year less than games like WoW, but you get MUCH more new content for your upkeep money (new continents, classes, etc.). In fact, each expantion is large enough to function as a stand-alone game, and we get 2 a year. That's an ass-load of new content for our upkeep money.

The way I see it, it's pretty much impossible to complain about Guild Wars' expansion system when you compare it to how other games work.
We get much more new content, for much less money.

TheMosesPHD · Jul 19, 2006, 06:32 PM // 18:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grammar

Just think of the expansions as upkeep.

In WoW, for example, upkeep comes in the form of $15 a month payments, or $180 a year.
In Guild Wars, you buy 2 expansions a year for a total of $100 a year.

So not only is upkeep $80 a year less than games like WoW, but you get MUCH more new content for your upkeep money (new continents, classes, etc.). In fact, each expantion is large enough to function as a stand-alone game, and we get 2 a year. That's an ass-load of new content for our upkeep money.

The way I see it, it's pretty much impossible to complain about Guild Wars' expansion system when you compare it to how other games work.
We get much more new content, for much less money.

But we're not paying for electricity or punching in our taxes every few months. The game is not a need, it is an option to buy it and it's extensions. So if people feel like they're simply paying "upkeep" for a game they've already played out, they're not going to feel inspired to continue the upkeep; they'll just move on to another game.

The problem is that we have all seen what the company is capable of with Ch. 1. Despite all the cheesy cinematics, the original Guild Wars game was full of diversity, intrigue, and had a general aura of high quality work. Many feel that Factions, though it presented many new ideas, did not fulfill the same level or quantity of quality that they saw in the first, and are concerned that a game they truly fell in love with at first will do nothing but dwindle in stature over the years.

Well then, that's my last post for now. I've gotta fly back home now so I can play GW! Cya'll later.

eternal pho · Jul 19, 2006, 06:40 PM // 18:40

To be honest, I really don't want a new expansion every 6 months a new gw every half year might be kinda rushed. I'd rather buy expansions than stand-alones.

Red · Jul 19, 2006, 07:02 PM // 19:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grammar

Just think of the expansions as upkeep.

In WoW, for example, upkeep comes in the form of $15 a month payments, or $180 a year.
In Guild Wars, you buy 2 expansions a year for a total of $100 a year.

Guild Wars required upkeep = $0

* Note: Unless you buy new slots, or you purchase [insert thing here]. But that's neither here nor there... and to be honest, I'm anxious to buy new slots.

BTW That Other Game = ($25 for two months * 6 cards for a year) = $150. The price gap suddenly shrinks, and all but disappears for CE.

Goats17 · Jul 20, 2006, 02:23 AM // 02:23

I think that the char slots(when they come out) will be a great moneymaker fr them. pretty much no server space or programming for 10$. Pretty good.

sinican · Jul 20, 2006, 02:55 AM // 02:55

ok now the reality...

GW does not charge a monthly fee, we all play online for free... free for us means cost for them to maintain the servers we play on... without those servers we could not play... how do those servers get paid for...

now... games that charge monthly fees have cheaper off the shelf games but again charge monthly to continue playing those games... they come out with expansions that require the origional to play or already include the full version and the newest addition... either way these companies charge you for core game a ($30) then charge you monthly ($15/mo) then charge you again for the expansion ($30) and continue charging monthly...
for a 6 month period they made $150 off of you... they make enough money to maintain the servers pay staff etc etc...

in order for GW to do this in a similar fasion they came up with the brilliant appeal of the free online play game for $50 and every six months you get another $50 addition you still saving if gw was pay per month you wouldnt be paying for complete games you would be paying for expansions that require you to buy the others to play the most recent... when they sell stand alone chapter 2 and those ppl get hooked they go buy the chapter they missed out on... by only making non standalone additions they push new players out of the market... they cant play the latest without buying the origional.. which deters some from buying...

make this all short... if things werent the way they are it wouldnt be GW and wed be paying monthly to play to get cheap expansions

remember as well that technically these arent expantions or additions they are seperate chapters that ingeniousely intertwine together into the same game by means of sea travel... they are seperate games..

Shyft the Pyro · Jul 20, 2006, 03:40 AM // 03:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMosesPHD

The problem is that we have all seen what the company is capable of with Ch. 1. Despite all the cheesy cinematics, the original Guild Wars game was full of diversity, intrigue, and had a general aura of high quality work. Many feel that Factions, though it presented many new ideas, did not fulfill the same level or quantity of quality that they saw in the first, and are concerned that a game they truly fell in love with at first will do nothing but dwindle in stature over the years.

Precisely. So unless ANet needs two chapters a year to maintain GW as a commercial success, I would rather have one chapter a year.

Thing is, we don't actually know how well the new business model is working out for ANet. We know the venture is profitable, but we'll never know by how much. So even if we think ANet is just rushing chapters to milk us, they could be rolling them out this fast just to keep the game afloat - or vice versa.

tomcruisejr · Jul 20, 2006, 03:54 AM // 03:54

releasing standalones is a good business strat coz it gives prospects freedom of choice and each release is a working product while expansions coerce you to buy the original release to play new content.

Thallandor · Jul 20, 2006, 04:02 AM // 04:02

The direction Anet adopts is a simple one:

We will continue to rip you off until we are forced to discontinue our services.

Free online game play? at least until they cant sell you any more products that are worth buying and are forced to close down their servers while laughing their way to the bank.

Need prove? buy and play Factions.

felinette · Jul 20, 2006, 04:14 AM // 04:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by sinican

now... games that charge monthly fees have cheaper off the shelf games but again charge monthly to continue playing those games... they come out with expansions that require the origional to play or already include the full version and the newest addition... either way these companies charge you for core game a ($30) then charge you monthly ($15/mo) then charge you again for the expansion ($30) and continue charging monthly...
for a 6 month period they made $150 off of you... they make enough money to maintain the servers pay staff etc etc...

GW is my first online game, so I have to ask this. When a new expansion comes out for games like WoW, does it spread the player population too thin and make it more difficult to play the area you paid the first $50 for? Or do these expansions enhance the existing areas and keep the player population together? Also, do these other games have content added to them each month to justify the monthly fee?

Also, materials storage only being available to Factions owners makes me nervous about what Anet will do in the future.

unholy guardian · Jul 20, 2006, 04:15 AM // 04:15

Even if guild wars never has a monthly charge, who knows maybe one day they could rename it guild wars 2 Then charge us lol.

They seem to hype chapter 3 as a huge great thing, i hope it holds up or most of my friends will go to the evil WoW...

Gaile Gray · Jul 20, 2006, 04:32 AM // 04:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by milias

Here's my personal view on it:

1. Prophecies took 2 years to develop, which in my opinion, warrants the name "full game" and deserves the full price.

The founders and another programmer started working on the engine for Prophecies and subsequent games in 2000. Prophecies was released in April, 2005. I'm not sure where the "two years" comes from, but the game was in development for well over two years.

Quote:

2. Factions took 1 year to develop, which in my opinion, is a mix between "standalone" and "expansion".

Not quite accurate. Factions was in the works for more than a year. Remember, not all team members work on the same title.

Quote:

3. ANet/NCSoft needs the additional revenue to sustain their no-monthly-fee business model.

Accurate (and fair). We are not charging a monthly fee, and we're supporting a full development team to produce quality games on a twice-yearly basis. They're optional, but the revenue they generate allows us to continue to develop games.

Quote:

4. Factions is being marketed and priced as a "standalone" game.

By every definition I know, Factions is a standalone game, so all is well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sinican

GW does not charge a monthly fee, we all play online for free... free for us means cost for them to maintain the servers we play on... without those servers we could not play... how do those servers get paid for...

now... games that charge monthly fees have cheaper off the shelf games but again charge monthly to continue playing those games... they come out with expansions that require the origional to play or already include the full version and the newest addition... either way these companies charge you for core game a ($30) then charge you monthly ($15/mo) then charge you again for the expansion ($30) and continue charging monthly...
for a 6 month period they made $150 off of you... they make enough money to maintain the servers pay staff etc etc...

in order for GW to do this in a similar fasion they came up with the brilliant appeal of the free online play game for $50 and every six months you get another $50 addition you still saving if gw was pay per month you wouldnt be paying for complete games you would be paying for expansions that require you to buy the others to play the most recent... when they sell stand alone chapter 2 and those ppl get hooked they go buy the chapter they missed out on... by only making non standalone additions they push new players out of the market... they cant play the latest without buying the origional.. which deters some from buying...

make this all short... if things werent the way they are it wouldnt be GW and wed be paying monthly to play to get cheap expansions

remember as well that technically these arent expantions or additions they are seperate chapters that ingeniousely intertwine together into the same game by means of sea travel... they are seperate games..

Thank you for pointing out something that folks so often miss: Monthly-fee games cost, in two ways: They cost at the store (in my experience it's usually the price of a standard game, therefore $50) and they cost every month (often $15). So people comparing $180.00 versus $100.00 are forgetting the cost of the game itself! Then, when the monthly-fee game comes out with an expansion pack, are they giving out that new box for free? Not as far as I know. The difference in cost is a lot more than $100 to $180. Not to mention, nothing about that monthly fee is optional -- you don't pay, you don't play.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomcruisejr

releasing standalones is a good business strat coz it gives prospects freedom of choice and each release is a working product while expansions coerce you to buy the original release to play new content.

Bingo! The burden is on us to make a compelling game. The choice is purely yours.

lyra_song · Jul 20, 2006, 04:39 AM // 04:39

This isnt a thread about how much money anet is making.

-------------------------

My point in comparing The Sims with Guild Wars is that both TS and GW treats its users in their access to content the same basic way. I used materials tab because its a very direct comparison.

The Sims: Basic core of the game. Can download and use any content for the original base only.

The Sims: Living Large: Adds new content and features like letting you hold more floor/wall tiles in game. Can download content for the original and the expansion.

Guild Wars Prophecies: Basic core of the game. Can download and use any content for the original.

Guld Wars Factions (used as linked account): Adds new content and features like you have a material tab. Can download content for Factions and also content for the prophecies chapter.

Ive said that being "standalone" is both a strength and a weakness.

Strength: It allows newer players to just grab the latest expansion without worrying about buying older versions and such.

Weakness: It fragments and divides the fanbase. RIght now we have 3 kinds of players. Prophecies, Factions or Linked accounts. Where is it most populated, which game gets updated, etc.

The more standalone chapters we get, the further it fragments the fanbase. We get more kinds of players and the other kinds of players who dont get content (arguably the ones with older versions) will no doubt get annoyed.

This leads me back to my end point: We need to stop getting standalones after a certain point and get expansions only that will work with the standalones.

We need to stop increasing the number of kinds of players in the game, because we're gonna end up with this:

Prophecies only
Factions Only
Nightfall Only
Pro/Fac Linked
Fac/Night Linked
Pro/Night Linked
Pro/Fac/Night Linked