Curse

Hockster · Mar 16, 2006, 05:30 AM // 05:30

I wouldn't mind a monthly fee at all. It would kick a lot of trash in the game to the curbside.

Studio Ghibli · Mar 16, 2006, 05:32 AM // 05:32

1) The "level 20" issue is retarded in that it's still even being addressed. If it were really -that- big of an issue, Anet would've just raised cap to 60 and adjusted the xp to balance that out.

Big fuggin' woop.

It's simply a balancing issues.

Skills are set to X difficulty, that difficulty is set to ranks, ranks require this many points, and you get this many points in Y levels.

It works.

In any case, every level treadmill is "meaningless."

2) " ArenaNet introduced instant level 20 characters only after most preorders were placed last year."

Don't see what the big deal is.

3) ArenaNet silenced players in private Alpha testing who protested the change.

Don't see what the big deal is either. Companies don't like people openly discussing changes made in alphas and betas for certain reasons--like people are stupid and say things like HOMG THIS GAME SUCKS even though the game's still in alpha or beta.

When I beta'd DDO, there was the same issue.

Damn, did that game suck.

4) The Competitive Online Role-Playing Game (CRPG) that isn’t a MMORPG, or is it?

It's a CRPG. He cites advertisements as some kind of argument.

“Online roleplaying with no monthly fees. <-- Amazing. Somehow, this means Anet is saying Guild Wars is a MMO.

“The revolution is coming.” <-- This, too, somehow implies MMO. As opposed to say, maybe, online games don't need online fees anymore. We're showing you how it's done.

5) The (player vs environment) PvE content in Guild Wars was really developed as an adventure game with tacked on (Role Playing Game) RPG elements.

I didn't think this was a mystery. Anyone familiar with writing probably realize how awful the PvE content is from a literary standpoint.

It's crap.

And it's no mystery it's crap.

But I still enjoyed it.

6) ArenaNet’s End User License Agreement (EULA) gives them the freedom to implement a monthly fee for their product if the ever desire to in the future.

No idea. Never actually read the EULA. And the critic doesn't bother citing the specific passage.

His whole argument seems based more on imagination than anything else though.

--

In whole?

Load o' crap.

- EDIT -

Asians pay-to-play?

Lawnmower · Mar 16, 2006, 05:35 AM // 05:35

Is it true that they have monthly fees for guild wars in asia?

I thought that was just a myth?

cuevas · Mar 16, 2006, 05:37 AM // 05:37

I cant see it :\ cant anyone post waht it said?

Vermilion Okeanos · Mar 16, 2006, 05:48 AM // 05:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lawnmower

Is it true that they have monthly fees for guild wars in asia?

I thought that was just a myth?

It is true.

Korea, Japan, Taiwan are all P2P initially. Only Taiwan that I am aware of that they just released the "no monthly fee version". I am unaware if Korea is going to change or not (can't read korean), while Japan don't seem to be having it (I am not completely fluent in Japanese).

I am under the impression that NCsoft wanted the P2P for Asia, as they allow Anet to test whatever they want in the west, while they wish to stay safe in Asia first. OR, this is a well planned out strategy, if one side of business plan would fail, the other side will still be making money; this way, you can simply test which plan is better, and make a more effective change for the weaker one.

Studio Ghibli · Mar 16, 2006, 05:53 AM // 05:53

So.. Korea and Japan P2P for the same game that Americans, Europeans, and (now) Taiwainese play for free?

Riceboi · Mar 16, 2006, 05:58 AM // 05:58

hmm...I didn't know Asia was Pay to play!

Vermilion Okeanos · Mar 16, 2006, 06:01 AM // 06:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Studio Ghibli

So.. Korea and Japan P2P for the same game that Americans, Europeans, and (now) Taiwainese play for free?

That is right, except they didn't need to pay $50 for their game. Taiwan still can do P2P if they want, it is up to the customer.

Mimi Miyagi · Mar 16, 2006, 06:05 AM // 06:05

Well, stating the Koreans "pay to play" isn't quite accurate. Technically, since you paid 50 bucks for GW, you're paying to play as well.

Koreans are big on Internet Cafes with gamers playing online games (Lineage, GW, etc). Internet Cafes are everywhere. The Cafes buy the games, then charge customers hourly rates to play.

The only part I am not quite sure about is how they handle the gamer accounts for GW. We buy a license key and assign it to a email address, I'm not sure if it's any different in Korea, but the players themselves play in the cafes which I believe handles the licensing. The accounts probably all belong to the cafes, the customers simply pay their hourly fees to the cafe and use the existing accounts on the PCs. I'm probably wrong, but it's probably something close.

While I don't know the specifics, I do know that it's different there, but follows a different cash flow model than a typical MMORPG monthly subscription fee.

Shrug.

Lawnmower · Mar 16, 2006, 06:17 AM // 06:17

OMG mates.

Thats so unfair. Why should the korean mates pay when we shouldnt? thats not fair at all.

Im not korean, but that's simply not fair. just because you live in another country I don't think you should get gimped or cheated like this.

I hope this "pay style" won't reach europe.

Why would Anet try to make it more equal among all? how many more players would they be able to get down in asia if they allowed it to be free?

and what are they going to do about singapore, china and thailand? It's simply... wow.
I thought I knew everything about the game but of course it makes sense. I always wondered why there were not so many koreans playing GW compared to lineage and wow. I would be very sad if it was my country that had to pay while others could stay free.

Alcazanar · Mar 16, 2006, 06:18 AM // 06:18

so Gaily Grey is white mantle?

i hope not
i cant afford paying a upkeep fee on the
game every year

Lawnmower · Mar 16, 2006, 06:19 AM // 06:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mimi Miyagi

Well, stating the Koreans "pay to play" isn't quite accurate. Technically, since you paid 50 bucks for GW, you're paying to play as well.

Koreans are big on Internet Cafes with gamers playing online games (Lineage, GW, etc). Internet Cafes are everywhere. The Cafes buy the games, then charge customers hourly rates to play.

The only part I am not quite sure about is how they handle the gamer accounts for GW. We buy a license key and assign it to a email address, I'm not sure if it's any different in Korea, but the players themselves play in the cafes which I believe handles the licensing. The accounts probably all belong to the cafes, the customers simply pay their hourly fees to the cafe and use the existing accounts on the PCs. I'm probably wrong, but it's probably something close.

While I don't know the specifics, I do know that it's different there, but follows a different cash flow model than a typical MMORPG monthly subscription fee.

Shrug.

But GW ain't a MMORPG... Right mate?

I mean... do they also pay 2 play starcraft and diablo?

JiggyFly · Mar 16, 2006, 06:20 AM // 06:20

That's not the case about the Pc Cafes, because most cafes don't buy 50 versions of a game, but will buy a few copies and simply install the game on all the PCs.

I've never considered Guild Wars a mmorpg because it isn't. It's a fun game and I enjoy playing it but I don't put it in the same category as FFXI, EQII, etc..

And every EULA, or TOS pretty much gives the company that made the game ultimate power. Hell, if Anet wanted too they could ban every player forever I mean we agree to their terms and agree to any changes made to those terms, but no company would do that because it would result in the death of their game and a loss of money.

Everything about Guild Wars in that article is pretty much true, it's really not an rpg, and it's PvE is quite shallow. But it's still fun to play, which is why I do play. Not because I like what category it's in.

Hell if you actually do that math, 2 accounts and 2 version of factions (what you would need to play all character classes) actually costs more than most P2P games. I mean FFXI is 12.95 a month I can play ever job and at this point I've actually spent 13 bucks less on it than I have on Guild Wars, in the same amount of time.

Okae · Mar 16, 2006, 06:31 AM // 06:31

Straight from the jack-ass' mouth:

"Guild Wars doesn’t have a monthly fee, and likely never will, but the fact that the game’s EULA allows ArenaNet to legally charge this fee peeks at ArenaNet’s true intentions."

So which is it? Likely will or won't? He's confused or just making ish up.. i think the latter.

"Why would they include such a clause in the EULA if they already promised Guild Wars would always be free to play? Perhaps this could allow them to maximize profits by charging a fee with a future expansion if the game became very popular?"

This is not a secret. Anet has always stated that future chapters (expansions) would be the driving source of income for keeping the game free.

Anet broke the mold of what is expected from a usual MMORPG and the usual fees that accompany the status quo... this guy is trying his hardest to read between the lines with no other intention but to stir up some sort of conspiracy theory. It's rather pathetic. Heck, NWN was free to play and is as traditional of a RPG as you can get.. dice rolling the whole nine ala D&D style. No monthly fees is probably GW's biggest selling point but this guy does not address at all why Anet would commit suicide by changing that.

All marketing involves pitches, slogans, call to actions.. etc..it's called selling. Mentos is not really "the freshmaker" despite the advertisements. This guy seems more annoyed that it isn't a typical MMORPG despite being advertised as one.

Omega X · Mar 16, 2006, 06:31 AM // 06:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by JiggyFly

And every EULA, or TOS pretty much gives the company that made the game ultimate power. Hell, if Anet wanted too they could ban every player forever I mean we agree to their terms and agree to any changes made to those terms, but no company would do that because it would result in the death of their game and a loss of money.

They do that already.

Every company I've known that has an online game revises its EULA/TOS. And if you don't agree to the new terms then you can't play. Blizzard revised its TOS not too long ago for WoW, and if you didn't agree then it kicked you back to the login screen.

Which means that if you don't agree then your account is temporarily suspended or BANNED until you do agree.

HOWEVER, if enough "customers" create enough noise about issues with the EULA/TOS then it will change to favor the customers' best interest.

Silvite · Mar 16, 2006, 06:32 AM // 06:32

Quote:

Hell if you actually do that math, 2 accounts and 2 version of factions (what you would need to play all character classes) actually costs more than most P2P games. I mean FFXI is 12.95 a month I can play ever job and at this point I've actually spent 13 bucks less on it than I have on Guild Wars, in the same amount of time.

But it is over time that you actually save money

I have been playing this since its release, and WoW, for about the same amount of time. I guarantee WoW put a much bigger dent in my income than GW

Which do I enjoy more? Well, they each have their pluses, and this isnt the thread to discuss it in. I will only say that I don't think I was wise to spend so much cash ona game (WoW's montly fees)

Mysterial · Mar 16, 2006, 06:36 AM // 06:36

The premise of the whole thing appears to be based around:

a) the PvE content was tacked on to capture the MMORPG market. If you've played Guild Wars PvE, you know this already.

b) Arenanet's advertising was misleading. While perhaps questionable ethically, if you think this is anything abnormal you need to go to your local video game store and read the text on the back of the boxes.

c) They might charge a monthly fee later. Well, sure. They also might just shut down the servers later, too. Does anybody really think it's going to be the first immortal game ever? It's going to end eventually, one way or another. I'm not exactly going to cry about it. It's a game. When it's done, you remember the fun you had and move on to a new one.

Red Locust · Mar 16, 2006, 06:45 AM // 06:45

Quite the funny article. Other than this guy sounding a lot like a disgruntled MMORPGer, he seems to have little grasp of marketing. Trying to appeal to a broader audience? Advertising their product as a great new thing? God forbid ArenaNet actually tried to make some kind of profit.

Wind of Horus · Mar 16, 2006, 06:47 AM // 06:47

Gaile doesnt care about the gw community.... hehehehe

Thats why she puts up with the massive mobs in LA int asking her billions of questions.

Come on d00d....

GG with your SLANDEROUS LIES

Lawnmower · Mar 16, 2006, 06:53 AM // 06:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silvite

But it is over time that you actually save money

I have been playing this since its release, and WoW, for about the same amount of time. I guarantee WoW put a much bigger dent in my income than GW

Which do I enjoy more? Well, they each have their pluses, and this isnt the thread to discuss it in. I will only say that I don't think I was wise to spend so much cash ona game (WoW's montly fees)

Oh yeah mate, do you remember not long ago about that homosexual scandal?

A lesbian guild recruiter was banned because her guild was open to all kinds of sexuality. It created a hugh fuss and there was allot of talk in the ToA if it was reasonable to ban players based on sexual preference when for example it was okay to make christian or muslim guild or guilds for certain nationalities only.
I think it ended with that Blizzard officialy apologised.

Could be wrong though