Curse

Yawgmoth · Apr 16, 2009, 12:10 AM // 00:10

1 pane is most likely around 1 kilobyte of data, and maybe less. Real cost is not in this size but in the need of sending the data between servers, data stations, and to you. Right now when you open your Xunlai, data from all 5 tabs is sent to you.
The server upgrade they have performed to make increases possible may include some changes in the network code regarding the data transfers, so that for example only data from your active tab will be sent to you (pure speculation, but that kind of update would make sense).

Still, if you think logically. all the additional data from new panes to be sent and processed is a VERY SMALL % of resources needed to

Quote:

Originally Posted by OP

The price will be lowered with time. As with the prices for campaigns, character slots etc.-added april 15

lolwut? Prices for character slots were never lowered, only prices that went down are the old campagins. Extra stuff may never see any decrease. Those overpriced xunlai panes already look hopeless.
I know I won't be getting overpriced 20 slots for $10 - I'm all AGAINST this kind of extreme pricing - so very little value for a sum of money that can get me MUCH MORE - so even though I can afford them, and could really use them - I'm boycotting them as a form of PROTEST and my money will go elsewhere - I made the decision, I'm getting myself a whole new account, and will move the less used items there... New account, a lot of freee open space... feeling so awesome :]

...and will abuse some more XTH on it for a few months till zkeys drop below 2k

Coverticus · Apr 16, 2009, 01:11 AM // 01:11

31 pages in and this thread really isn't going anywhere tbh.

Most people here are either just regurgitating points made earlier in the thread (may not have realised due to not reading the entire thread) or just having a slapping session with someone else in the thread.

One thing I would like to ask/request - remove this from the OP - "They are selling virtual space, so Ill pay with my virtual gold". We are NOT paying for virtual space as many people have now picked up on - we are paying for the actual space AND maintenance of it from ANet's perspective. Yes, even I admit it is overpriced at $10 a slot but still, its payment they need (in their opinion) to move forward. So can this be altered to reflect correctly.

I'll elaborate a bit more. When ANet originally will have "sized" their database, they would have done it based upon the number of accounts expected to sell in a period of time and what would equate to maximum amount of room required for a maxed account (4 character slots each with max bags/pouch and storage). Factor in a percentage on top and voila, original size of the database created. Oversimplified yes (data types and lengths not mentioned) but in principle, there you go.

In time they would have increased this space (Factions/Nightfall either brand new four slots or 2 slots for a linked account). The point being extra revenue that these games generated paid for upgrading the disks and storage space accordingly.

Now they are giving us what we have asked them for and people are complaining because its not free and/or overpriced. People, nothing in this world is really for free - nievety to think this was always going to be free to us. If it had been just one tabe for everyone, yes free could have been warranted. But we are getting that slot free (as I read it) and you have the OPTION to buy more. They have sat down and thought through, at length, what we really could need. And, by the sound of it, they have done a good job too. Of course, this remains to be seen once it has been implemented.

Quote:

Originally Posted by enter_the_zone

If it's actually costing them that much, I could sell them an entirely new hardware solution and a couple of very well trained monkeys that could write code more efficiently than 8MB per slot.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yawgmoth

1 pane is most likely around 1 kilobyte of data

Indeed this sounds a little far fetched to expect that high level of storage but you also have to remember the database they are using is MORE than 4 years old. Still doesn't warrant 8MB yes but, in conjunction with my points above, this maybe a rough ball park figure they have arrived at using existing data and future projections. After all, no one here knows how their data is structured, how many indexes they have on their tables (and the types of indexes too). Plus you have the extra logging the database has to do to keep track of any changes made to each of these new pane. For those of you interested look up "Transaction Logs/Logging" in Google.

All of this adds to this ballpark figure (and will certainly be a lot more than 1kb of data in total per pane).

Slapping in a couple of code monkeys won't work when they would be prohibited to code to the underlying data structure and coding of the database itself. Not trying to flame/insult, merely point out here.

AreaNet have given us a product that, for 4 years, has kept a lot of people happy for this period of time. For an outlay of the 4 games price (e.g. £29.99 when they first came out), for an online game, that is staggeringly good value for 4 years worth of enjoyment (if played from 2005). But, in order for them to survive, they cannot keep dishing stuff out for free. Things change, business plans/priorities do as well. Like it or not, its a sign of the times and a reflection of the world we live in today.

Also, I'd like to say thankyou to those of you who gave me very postivite feeback to some of the points I raised very early on in this thread - shows some can read

AKB48 · Apr 16, 2009, 02:33 AM // 02:33

Get over it, Anet is gonna do whatever it is gonna do, everyone is short on money these days. If you need more storage, pay the $10, it wouldn't bankrupt you, if you don't need more storage, well, that's $10 saved.

Trinity Fire Angel · Apr 16, 2009, 02:52 AM // 02:52

/notsigned

Quote:

In determining the price point for the storage panes, we discussed what people in various departments thought would be a balance between making enough to cover our costs, keeping the price low enough that it doesn't alienate a large number of players, and setting a price that was commensurate with the amount of work and resources we put into developing this feature. We have to charge a minimum of $5 USD in order to recoup the base costs of a transaction. We understand that not everyone will be happy with the $9.99 price tag, and we're aware that people are advocating for simply purchasing additional accounts to achieve similar results as an alternative to purchasing storage panes. There was a consensus on the $9.99 figure as balancing out all of the considerations I mentioned above, so this is why it was chosen. Again, I know that knowing why we chose the figure may not necessarily make anyone happier about it. --Regina Buenaobra 20:04, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

oh.... your poll is BIASED. you have 3 questions stating negative views and only 2 for positive views one of which is biased towards having a lower price. a YES or NO poll is more decisive.

Targren · Apr 16, 2009, 03:24 AM // 03:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trinity Fire Angel

/notsigned

oh.... your poll is BIASED. you have 3 questions stating negative views and only 2 for positive views one of which is biased towards having a lower price. a YES or NO poll is more decisive.

Having a different number of negative/positive answers doesn't introduce Bias.

The "$5 or $10 I don't care" option seems to be rather pointless, since if they consider $10 fair, then why wouldn't they consider $5 fair? Those two should be combined into a basic "I will buy" option.

And the negative options ARE valid because they break up reasons that people won't buy them. They refuse to pay *anything*, They refuse to pay $10, or they simply don't want it. A Yes/No poll is not more decisive and would actually supply less information. As it is, it separates the "Everything must be free" group from the "That's too expensive" group. This is a good thing.

Yawgmoth · Apr 16, 2009, 03:48 AM // 03:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Terra Jim

Indeed this sounds a little far fetched to expect that high level of storage but you also have to remember the database they are using is MORE than 4 years old. Still doesn't warrant 8MB yes but, in conjunction with my points above, this maybe a rough ball park figure they have arrived at using existing data and future projections. After all, no one here knows how their data is structured, how many indexes they have on their tables (and the types of indexes too). Plus you have the extra logging the database has to do to keep track of any changes made to each of these new pane. For those of you interested look up "Transaction Logs/Logging" in Google.

All of this adds to this ballpark figure (and will certainly be a lot more than 1kb of data in total per pane).

I bet a stack of ectos that the raw data of 20 universal slots is LESS than 3 kilobytes. (almost sure it's less than 2 and close to 1kB but not betting on that)

If you don't know that, they aren't using ANY database to store our items - both characters' and accounts inventories are stored in blobs (binary large objects). No indexing or advanced structures. It doesn't matter it's 4 years old, it's their trademark extreme cheap technology that allows running this game at very minimal costs.

Skyy High · Apr 16, 2009, 04:12 AM // 04:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

That should be free.

Wrong. They're a business, we want something, we even said we'd pay for it. They have no reason not to sell it to us. Furthermore, we are getting 20x(number of characters you have) slots for free with this coming update from equipment packs, plus possibly another 20 for a free tab (depending on the nature of this promotion they're going to be offering).

They are not a charity, your friend, or indebted to you in any way. Get over yourself.

Schmerdro · Apr 16, 2009, 04:41 AM // 04:41

Oh my gawd.

The last time this game had new content added was about 1 year and 7 months. In that time, all the Guild Wars players managed to play GW just fine with our current storage capacity. Now A-net is giving us free new storage and a new method of buying extra storage.

So a few whiny bitches decided to ignore that we are getting free new storage and that people seemed to have managed for the past year without any storage upgrade.

I really think that all the people who are disagreeing with A-Net are doing it for the lolz and to stir up some heated conversation because they're bored and have nothing else to do.

Amnel Ithtirsol · Apr 16, 2009, 04:47 AM // 04:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schmerdro

Oh my gawd.

The last time this game had new content added was about 1 year and 7 months. In that time, all the Guild Wars players managed to play GW just fine with our current storage capacity. Now A-net is giving us free new storage and a new method of buying extra storage.

So a few whiny bitches decided to ignore that we are getting free new storage and that people seemed to have managed for the past year without any storage upgrade.

I really think that all the people who are disagreeing with A-Net are doing it for the lolz and to stir up some heated conversation because they're bored and have nothing else to do.

^ This.

lolguru

Anyway, no need for anyone to whine about it. If you dont want it or cannot afford it (financially or out of principle) then dont buy it. Prices will eventually come down. I'll wait a few months...

wu is me · Apr 16, 2009, 04:54 AM // 04:54

I don't see why you need to boycott this lol.

Every1 gets to vote for or against this by either purchasing it or refusing to...

I really don't think that the introduction of people who have more storage into the game is gonna have a huge effect.

You can't just keep demanding free storage... I mean if they give up and give out some, ppl will just manage their storage more loosely, and it becomes a problem again.

Where do you draw the line?

DreamWind · Apr 16, 2009, 05:55 AM // 05:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skyy High

Wrong. They're a business, we want something, we even said we'd pay for it.

I didn't. Furthermore I'd like to see an old thread with a good amount of people saying they would.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skyy High

They are not a charity, your friend, or indebted to you in any way. Get over yourself.

So your excuse is they should sell everything because they can? I bet you are one of the people who thinks selling UAX is good too (instead of giving it to us like it should have always been and it is absolutely CLEAR it should have always been free). How about they take away the promise of UAX in GW2 and sell it to us in skill packs instead? Would that be ok too?!

The problem here is where do we draw the line of what is fine to sell and what isn't? Personally I have no problem with them selling character slots for example. But in GW2 they could easily sell the game itself as a minimal content experience and then a series of microtransactions unlocks the "full potential" of the game. That is not a series I want to be a part of, and it is clear they are moving in that direction.

Kamatsu · Apr 16, 2009, 06:51 AM // 06:51

Please desist on the personal insults, attacks, commentary, etc. Keep to the topic please.

zwei2stein · Apr 16, 2009, 07:03 AM // 07:03

I shall repeat:

"You can get storage Cheaper and with additional benefits by buying something else. Stop Whining, and take advantage of that."

"You are getting Free storage, in actually more useful form, too. Stop Whining, and take advantage of that."

Only reason to buy 10$ storage is "i gotta get all upgrades to pimp account" or "i dont want to switch mules". In either case: boo, freaking, hoo, shell out money.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yawgmoth

I bet a stack of ectos that the raw data of 20 universal slots is LESS than 3 kilobytes. (almost sure it's less than 2 and close to 1kB but not betting on that)

I shall be rich tonight! Doing stuff cheap does not mean cutting corners everywhere. Nightmarish mess of "super effective storage" should cure that idea of every developer who touched that. Especially with people just waiting to whine about anything that would loose them items. "Expensive stuff" as far as performance goes are queries, transactions and updates, having everything in blob minimizes their amount.

20 slots huh,

Well, stored 'naked' GW character weighted 10kb in 2007 (30kb with chapters and related stuff - like maps and quest statuses). 45 slots on that character, that ends up some gorgeous 4kb for 20 slots.

And it actually ads up, just customization data is 0.65 kb (charname + 64 character uid + 64 bit account uid + customization/dedication flag).

Feel free to pm me anytime

Bryant Again · Apr 16, 2009, 07:24 AM // 07:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

The problem here is where do we draw the line of what is fine to sell and what isn't?

Things that are fine to sell: Appearances and vanity. Not fine: Pretty much anything else. You should have all the best functionality right out of the box.

Lourens · Apr 16, 2009, 10:32 AM // 10:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKB48

Get over it, Anet is gonna do whatever it is gonna do, everyone is short on money these days. If you need more storage, pay the $10, it wouldn't bankrupt you, if you don't need more storage, well, that's $10 saved.

I agree on this , the $10 isn't realy worth it to boycott it.
And if they do make it $5 I can get a big mac menu.

($5 saved)

Coverticus · Apr 16, 2009, 11:23 AM // 11:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yawgmoth

If you don't know that, they aren't using ANY database to store our items - both characters' and accounts inventories are stored in blobs (binary large objects). No indexing or advanced structures. It doesn't matter it's 4 years old, it's their trademark extreme cheap technology that allows running this game at very minimal costs.

Oh dear.... all I will say is they actually use Microsoft SQL Server as their database engine and DO have a database. Yes I know what BLOBs are and you HAVE to use a DBMS (database management system) to store these data types.

Took me a while to find the article to back up what I already know, but here you go: http://www.dbms2.com/2007/06/09/the-...of-guild-wars/.

So please, understand what you are talking about before posting. Thankyou

Ranger Jonah · Apr 16, 2009, 12:09 PM // 12:09

I'll pay if I need to. ANet is a business and needs to raise money to keep the servers up and the business. Anyway, we may be getting a free special storage pane anyway.

rabwatt · Apr 16, 2009, 12:10 PM // 12:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Technically true, but an amount of storage should be enough to meet the needs of most. Instead we have a large amount of people complaining for YEARS about Anet's "set storage amount".
Not an unlimited amount (which would be nearly impossible). But an amount that keeps most people happy instead of the alternative.

From your registration date I assume you have played GW from nearly the beginning, but you seem to have forgotten that Anet have added more storage over the years..... they added new tabs for every campaign you bought plus they added the crafting material tag (which saved a lot of storage space)
They have now addressed further calls for more storage space by giving us more... for FREE.... plus an option of getting even more for a few dollars.
The only people who I think this will not please... are the few people who are never pleased.

Im also confused about how passionate and vocal you are about this topic when it doesnt really concern you since you rarely play the game anymore... but your ramblings do bring a smile to my face :-)

RedNova88 · Apr 16, 2009, 12:37 PM // 12:37

I'm not buying it. I do not participate in micro-transactions in MMOs, because they generally just get worse and worse as time goes on. I did not buy the BMP, and I will not buy this. I did feel the BMP was worth 10 dollars after reading about it, but this is not worth my money, IMO, especially when MOX was completely free.

I understand Anet's need for the green stuff, and it's nothing personal, but I cannot say this without sounding mean so I'll just say it. If you are going to release minor content and charge us, you might as well make the game pay to play so that way you can at least add in tons more content while you are at it, or continue pumping out expansions as an alternative to that. On top of that, I'll say this, if Guild Wars 2 follows in the same direction I'll likely avoid buying it. I detest micro-transactions in video games with every ounce of my heart since it's usually a bad cost to content ratio. The BMP seemed to be acceptable, since it was like a mini expansion, and character slots I did not mind since it all added up to 8. This? Well this just isn't worth money in my opinion.

Just voicing my opinion JR, there was no real way I thought I could say it without seeming harsh. I'm a bit of an Anet and GW fanboi as most already know, but this just feels wrong.

JR · Apr 16, 2009, 12:39 PM // 12:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

So your excuse is they should sell everything because they can? I bet you are one of the people who thinks selling UAX is good too (instead of giving it to us like it should have always been and it is absolutely CLEAR it should have always been free). How about they take away the promise of UAX in GW2 and sell it to us in skill packs instead? Would that be ok too?!

The problem here is where do we draw the line of what is fine to sell and what isn't? Personally I have no problem with them selling character slots for example. But in GW2 they could easily sell the game itself as a minimal content experience and then a series of microtransactions unlocks the "full potential" of the game. That is not a series I want to be a part of, and it is clear they are moving in that direction.

Monthly subscription or Chapter based business model with microtransactions. Take your pick.

You don't want to pay a sub? Fine. Stop whining about the alternative.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedNova88

I understand Anet's need for the green stuff, and it's nothing personal, but I cannot say this without sounding mean so I'll just say it. If you are going to release minor content and charge us, you might as well make the game pay to play so that way you can at least add in tons more content while you are at it, or continue pumping out expansions as an alternative to that. On top of that, I'll say this, if Guild Wars 2 follows in the same direction I'll likely avoid buying it.

You aren't paying for the content. The content is completely free. You even get extra storage free too. They are simply giving you the option to get even more, if you so choose. Either they put it in and charge for it, or the option just isn't there at all.

Is $10 a little much? Maybe, but that's their call. As many have said: If you don't want it that much, then don't buy it.