 |
|
Mar 13, 2006, 04:50 PM // 16:50
|
#701 | |
|
Forge Runner
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Grind is subjective
Guild: learn this please
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2006, 04:51 PM // 16:51
|
#702 |
|
Jungle Guide
Join Date: Feb 2005
|
and once again
Isn't that an interesting turn-around, so they might take more money in the future now eh
 Ah but what of their blessed model? Money talks. So they've found a way to give those coming into it as a standalone more to get them hooked, and meanwhile those continuing on/expanding their current game LESS and pay the same, and if you want to get back what they shorted you, pay even MORE. Too much flip-flopping. It's so obvious they still haven't really got a clue. We'll see what the future brings and how much they try to milk the installed base. Just give us a way to get the 1-2-3 slots we're missing already, get your extra $ and be done with it, sheesh. I just think it's funny ANet/Gaile will have to invent more funny math to explain why our 'returning player, linking' $50 only cover 2 character slot costs, while those staying 'unlinked, standalone' for $50 are covering their 4 slot costs just fine. Yeah OK. They're playing all sides of the fence now - it's their gaming model, it's the virtual content you're getting across the slots, and oh yeah, somehow linked slots cost that much more than regular slots too, pay up! Quote:
Last edited by CKaz; Mar 13, 2006 at 04:56 PM // 16:56.. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2006, 04:51 PM // 16:51
|
#703 |
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2006, 04:52 PM // 16:52
|
#704 | |
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2005
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2006, 04:54 PM // 16:54
|
#705 | |
|
Forge Runner
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Grind is subjective
Guild: learn this please
|
Quote:
You might want to tone down on that hostility a tad though if you actually want people to take you seriously. |
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2006, 04:57 PM // 16:57
|
#706 | |
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2005
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2006, 04:58 PM // 16:58
|
#707 |
|
Jungle Guide
Join Date: Feb 2005
|
Yeah - frustration with the 'other side' to understand some simple concepts.
I think the latest from Gaile is priceless above and says what we've thought in a nutshell. So now they may come around yet, and somehow our $50 isn't enough to cover 4 characters slots, but it is enough for those not linking character slots. Because you know, associating character slots together... that's some heady stuff You know, pointers and keys and all.
Last edited by CKaz; Mar 13, 2006 at 05:01 PM // 17:01.. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2006, 07:22 PM // 19:22
|
#708 | ||
|
Wilds Pathfinder
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: US
Guild: Righteous Apathy [RA]
|
Quote:
Quote:
Consider: If (big IF) ANet sells add-on slots in the future (which I support), who thinks it would be worth it to have a tiered price structure? Example: Add-On Slot for Prophecies: $5 Add-On Merged Slot for Prophecies and Factions: $10 Add-On Merged Slot for Chapter A + Chapter B + Chapter C: 15$ (I just made those prices up. It could be $5, $8, $11, whatever.) Because in my mind, a merged slot is worth twice as much as a unmerged slot. You are able to access twice as much content with a merged slot as opposed to an unmerged. Therefore, a merged slot is more valuable than an unmerged. Simple, logical, elegant. This is why I'm on the 'fanboy' side of this issue. Merged accounts are logically more valuable. In no way do I feel like ANet is ripping me off. I'm getting a better deal with 6 merged slots than 8 unmerged. That's the root of this issue. People don't realize or want to realize that a merged slot is worth more than an unmerged. Will I buy add-on slots if they become available? Yes. Disclaimer: I'm not on the ANet payroll. I don't get any benefits from ANet for expressing my views. I don't drink the Kool-Aid. And if ANet does something I'm unhappy with, you'll be the first to know. [This post is courtesy of the Loviator School of Excessive Carriage Return Usage] <- I kid, Loviator, I kid... Last edited by Eugaet; Mar 13, 2006 at 07:34 PM // 19:34.. |
||
|
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2006, 08:14 PM // 20:14
|
#709 | |
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2005
|
Quote:
Ideally, Anet would expand the current number of slots in the prophecies game to 7. One for each primary profession and one for PVP characters. The problem with GW is that the game is already short three character slots, so adding two more when you also add two more professions still leaves you short three character slots. |
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2006, 08:20 PM // 20:20
|
#710 | |
|
Wilds Pathfinder
Join Date: Jan 2005
|
Quote:
The balance is really a grind balance thing: how much should we be required to grind in order to be competitive in PvP. Again, read the thread for full arguments, but it is all out there and hasn't been refuted. Quick outline: PvE characters are largely better equipped than pvp characters (multiple armors, runes, helms and weapons to adjust to the battle situation)-> more pve character access means a more options for a given pvper-> more grind to be fully competitive. If I'm expected by my guild to have 4 slots fully pvp ready in the six months between expansions while gvging--not going to happen. Character slots is a nice limitation to run away "elitiness" in pvp. "Cheating" can be used to describe a number of legal offenses and ethical violations. Accusing A-net of cheating is something that extends beyond you and your opinion. Anet is very clear about the fact that it is selling 2 different products which allow the game to be played either independently or linked. The game is designed to be accessable and enjoyable in both forms. Obviously your pvp community will all be linking and your PvE community can do either depending on whether they wish to use old characters or not. As in the past, a certain level of access requires deleting or a second account. The fact that you don't like the choice doesn't mean that you are being cheated. Your inflammatory language isn't changing the reality of the situation. I'm not "playing devil's advocate" I'm actually advocating a position; you'd do well to listen. Edit: The whole idea that Anet intentionally gave you fewer then 7 slots means that there may be some sort of balance/equality issue here. Really, go reread some earlier posts and give responses to the fuller arguments. The fact that the game doesn't fit what you want, doesn't mean you are being cheated. Stuff like storage was discussed in detail before release in the tester forums and there is cause for the decisions made. Last edited by Thom; Mar 13, 2006 at 08:28 PM // 20:28.. |
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2006, 08:26 PM // 20:26
|
#711 | ||
|
Grotto Attendant
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Kyhlo
Profession: W/
|
Quote:
Normally I would say, "hey, that's your choice." But since you are being such a rude prick, I gotta say: Guild Wars is more than just Character Slots to me. That's why I'm buying Factions. And I could care less what you think. Why don't you take your own advice and just quit posting. You're not playing GW anymore anyway.... Quote:
And my argument is that someday in the future, giving 4 slots per linked account will begin to cost Anet money. They're simply nipping it in the bud... Last edited by Mordakai; Mar 13, 2006 at 08:32 PM // 20:32.. |
||
|
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2006, 08:38 PM // 20:38
|
#712 | |
|
Jungle Guide
Join Date: Feb 2005
|
Quote:
So 6 slots are more valuable than 8 slots unlinked. It's design, it's the way it goes, it's 6x100% - blah blah blah - good job you saved $ at the expense of those of us who like to play all the classes and aspects of the game. And supposedly we'd have an unfair advantage  playing the game the way we want.So no more slots.. ah but wait ANet/Gaile and co see even more dollar signs. We got them to take less slots, now lets re-sell'em! Heck a lot of us have been suggesting more linked all along... duh. But to justify selling us slots they'll suggest they need money for it (per recent Gaile posting). Huh. Well that only helps the initial argument of why did you gimp us with less in the first place. Now it's not a content issue or an 'unfair advantage' issue, its pay us more for what we denied you for storage. Hey if it's bad karma to call the kettle black so be it but they currently are- charging full price for current GW players to EXPAND their game thru linking taking away two characters slots in doing so per fuzzy math justification suggesting we may now be able to buy them back in $ for storage space But wait, aren't we going to pay the full factions price like we did for propechy? I dunno about you but it smacks of a company drillin all they can out of it. And you can still do /cheer good for them, more power to you. I just wish they'd figure it out first rather than getting egg all over themselves and backpedaling after forcing fans into corners and tough decisions with their characters and plans for the future chapters. There's just little/no wiggle room, so the pve monk you made to play through the game with your wife for example (another $50 ANet) knocking out your pvp slot (3 chars to cover the unlocks, thanks for forcing my hand a bit there) can get in the way for example. So all this talk falls pretty flat. And its funny in a way because I think the true colors are about to come out, we'll get resold the slots we were denied. Which they should have done in the beginning and might have kept these types of threads cut in half or less. And I'd still probably do that if offered. But to suggest content reasons as a way to deny us and then storage costs as a way to re-charge us... whatever. Just let us pay to play how we want and stop with this justification nonsense. Not fuzzy math or how our linked slots must cost ANet that much more 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2006, 08:47 PM // 20:47
|
#713 | |
|
Jungle Guide
Join Date: Feb 2005
|
Quote:
See that's where all this falls down now - see the latest from Gaile chat? They saw the $ savings if they forced fuzzy math down our throats to reduce the number of slots we get linked. But lo and behold it's not content % or balance or unfair advantage here, but a chance to sell back what they took back. And certainly one can feel cheated paying standalone price to link/expand their GW game, get less, and be charged what was removed, back. But even this beats this 'vision' of how we should play and restricting slots in the first place. If there is a game play balance to leverage fine. But a lot of us just want to play the games primaries, with IRL friends/family through the game, and play a little pvp. The whole 'balance' thing was clearly a fabricated smokescreen (which many of us said from the start) if now you may be able to buy them. And I'm in support of being able to do so if they're going to throttle it like this, just to alleviate the shortage I've been dealing with. But what a time wasting dance in the middle. In the words of immortal Monty Python 'Get on with it!' |
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2006, 08:50 PM // 20:50
|
#714 |
|
Grotto Attendant
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Kyhlo
Profession: W/
|
Ckaz - they have to make money, bottom line.
The coolest thing about Guild Wars is... you never have to buy an expansion. Ever. You never have to pay monthly. You can play this game (as long as it stays commercially viable) for a one time charge of $50. That's why all these "protest" posts, full of rightous indignation, sound false to my ears. Do any of you really doubt you've gotten your money's worth? Everyone here knows what you're getting with Guild Wars: Factions. So, make your choice. It's either worth it to you or not... |
|
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2006, 08:55 PM // 20:55
|
#715 | ||||||
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2005
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||||
|
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2006, 09:06 PM // 21:06
|
#716 |
|
Wilds Pathfinder
Join Date: Jan 2005
|
My guess is that you won't see additional slots until game sales drop off dramatically. At the moment they are doing just fine without slot sales to high end users. There could be considerable backlash to handing leverage to high usage players, which will come back to bite profits in the long run.
Gaile doesn't carry all that much weight around Anet, so her comments may be strategically testing the water or meaningless jabber. Obviously some of this is smooth talk to maximize profit, but if they would make substancially more revenue from openning the game up storage costs aren't that high. Mordakai is right in the sense that the quality of the product compensates for the some shortcomings in game openness. It is ironic that the people who want to play the most hours are those who are the most unhappy with the value of the game. Edit: Buoyancy, I am advocating A-net's position here and the postion of semi-casual pvp oriented players. I am not trying to be a contrarian, but I'm providing perspective by conveying my actual view on things. I am not arguing for the sake of arguing, I'm trying to help people understand a misunderstood position. The balance issue comes down to the connection between pvp and pve. Anet has always wanted to keep them integrated and balanced giving the game some sort of continuity. It would be fair to argue for a greater disconnect and more slots, but you must admit that there is some pvp balance issue involved. I would say that it is unlikely that Anet will move in that direction, altough they will be resolving some of those issues with guild hall crafters (this will still involve having large amounts of gold on hand, but won't require the character slots). Cost could be a legitimate reason, since twice the slots means twice as may people hogging server space they don't use. While have twice as much storage could be an issue, storage space is cheap enough that Anet could easily cover those costs if the expected revenue in return was significant. There isn't much to discuss if discount all alternative explanations. If your mind is made, up say so and move on. Nothing you read here will change it. That, in my mind, is "ignorant"; not squables about shaded differences of meaning of the term "devil's advocate". Last edited by Thom; Mar 13, 2006 at 09:26 PM // 21:26.. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2006, 09:10 PM // 21:10
|
#717 | ||||
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2005
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||
|
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2006, 09:17 PM // 21:17
|
#718 |
|
Krytan Explorer
Join Date: Feb 2006
|
Nobody makes you have to have x pve chars to be fully decked out for pvp use. Most of the pvp items are just as good as the ones you can get in pve without even the need of 1 second of 'grinding' as you like to call it. You might not be able to do some armourswapping, but hey that can be fixed by a simple inability to swap equipment during instances. (It is quite redicolous to get out of your armor in mid battle anyway...). Weapon or offhand-swapping ain't really a problem since you can always pick up hte necessary weapons by adding them to your storage so that your pvp chars can use them, not to mention that it doesn't even really needs something special (simple +12 energy one is sufficient which can be gotten in a random drop in less then 15mins"and I exagerate..."). And on top of it, switching weapons is already balanced by the 1 second pause between usages of different weapons.
The lieutenants helm is no longer a pve only item, most of the offhands, pve used pvp items are collectoritems which guess what can be found pretty easilly as well. Greens can be bought or quested for just as pve has to do to get them... so in hte end all this is pretty balanced. Not to mention that in the latest update pvp people get an item for which pve people have to frigging grind forever in the hopes of getting a lucky drop (talking about the shield with -5dmg (20%) ). But in the end all these items aren't really needed in 90% of the cases. And if you then come with the point, what about the remaining 10% then I will just state that these are the hardcore people, people that will try to do everything to get ahead, be this more skilled, more practiced, more teamoriented, or more diverse due to broader itemsusage. But in the end the game was never targetted at the hardcore people, although their latest competitions kinda contest that. (you can't make me belief that the people that won the WC play less then 1-2 hour(s) a day which were considered their main target). Or are you going to complain that the game isn't balanced because person y can play 10 hours while you can only play 1 hour... since with this difference in playtime he can build up more experience with different builds, therefore be more flexible and possibly a better player so why not limit ccesstime to the game to 1 hour... (would be similar reasoning) So really i don't see where the balancecard comes in in hte discussion of charslots. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2006, 09:26 PM // 21:26
|
#719 | |
|
Jungle Guide
Join Date: Feb 2005
|
Quote:
Mordakai, you haven't really understood the biggest bone of contention then. There was indignation because they wouldn't even let us pay for a couple more slots where a lot of us were forced into a wall. I'll be the first to agree I got my money's worth out of GW:P, and I'll even eat my wife's copy to boot in the discussion (she doesn't play it so much). I'm simply a bad deviant because I've now used my 4th slot to play with her through the game with a monk losing my pvp slot. Keeping in mind spending another $50 put me in this situation. And for some reason I, and others against the wall, saw 1 slot outrageous, and 2 still not really getting it done. Again I'm a bad man I know, I wanted to play both new classes. Or make that Ranger I never did. Or get my pvp slot back. Believe it or not, never did 'or I could nuke my long standing characters' really pop up as a great option. Isn't a big part of linking bringing them over to the new game? Sure you don't have to buy the expansion. But unless you don't play the game, you're just a little bored of Ascalon and even the high level game no? And oh hey, maybe out of character slots too So you got really revved when bits and pieces about it came out. Until CGW suggested one slot and the idea came crashing to a halt. Now it wasn't about the next chapter, omg how the heck can I fit into 1 slot?? Now they hint 2, but will 2 cut it?? Why the heck won't they even take money for it??NOW they're suggesting they might take money for what they took back. Which might give some of us a glimmer of hope. And it took a long time to find out what we're getting with Factions, with its CE thus there are a lot of long threads. And even now, you're wrong - we still don't KNOW the final details, as hey, ANet might still consider making money on slots, countering the original made-up reason of balance/content and all that. If they would have said up front they're going to milk us a bit all of this would have gone a lot smoother - make your choice. It didn't make sense for them to hamstring us and not take our money - as you said they're out there to make money. That's why it was so goshdarngoofy making absolutely no sense. It's not just this country or in forums, others now thought the CE would have a slot and are mad. Heck they may have gotten $20 extra bucks for a slot or two alone but I'd be surprised if many are buying it as it stands. To start a new chapter at full entry fee and know you're starting short, vs starting GW:P (when you didn't really know how it'd play out) or other games (where hey they usually allow you to make many characters) - no it didn't sound particularly thrilling. There are other games like D2 (really the closest model to this game) that lo and behold didnt charge monthly either. Others that do offer much bigger worlds and a much bigger sense of community, amongst other things - even built in voice chat. To suggest $ this, $ that, again they didn't even give us the option to throw money at the problem - we'll see if they change their tune now. I don't know why it's that hard to grasp, I really don't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2006, 09:40 PM // 21:40
|
#720 |
|
Frost Gate Guardian
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Frozen Lake
Guild: Illustrious Chromatic Enigmas (ICE)
Profession: Mo/
|
In other business models where there are "Expansion Packs", Continued "Chapters", etc... You get NO "extra" character slots. You either start a new character from scratch or you import your old character. This business model is totally different from any other I've ever seen. Does anyone have an example of a business model where you can both import all your old characters and create an equal number of new characters for any game sequal?
That stated...I would love to have had 6 character slots in Prophesies and 8 total linking Factions but I think the slots we have is fair. |
|
|
|
 |
|
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| snoopypup248 | Questions & Answers | 5 | Feb 10, 2006 02:48 AM // 02:48 | |
| Commander Ryker | The Riverside Inn | 11 | Jan 23, 2006 06:36 AM // 06:36 | |
| 4 + 1 Character Slots | Yamat | Sardelac Sanitarium | 4 | Aug 29, 2005 09:06 PM // 21:06 |
| Desferous | Sardelac Sanitarium | 10 | May 11, 2005 04:44 PM // 16:44 | |
| Rakuma Wulfe | Sardelac Sanitarium | 1 | May 10, 2005 05:29 PM // 17:29 | |
All times are GMT. The time now is 06:08 AM // 06:08.
jQuery(document).ready(checkAds()); function checkAds(){if (document.getElementById('adsense')!=undefined){document.write("_gaq.push(['_trackEvent', 'Adblock', 'Unblocked', 'false',,true]);");}else{document.write("