Curse

Karate Jesus · Nov 23, 2009, 11:48 PM // 23:48

lolNo.

Guild Wars having no monthly fee was a great idea, and one that I hope they always stick with. It set them apart, and tbh was the only reason I ever started playing MMO's.

Their business model was a sustainable one, but over time....shit just happens and they lost control of it. Which is regrettable, but that doesn't mean that they should scrap the idea entirely. They just need to learn from their mistakes in GW2. Grassroots business models can really appeal to players and if they had stuck with that model (and remained inclusive with players), then they probably wouldn't be in the situation they are now.

But, like I said, shit happens.

maxxfury · Nov 24, 2009, 12:29 AM // 00:29

4.5 - 5 years is a pretty epic lifetime for a game! tbh.

The game will get boring after that amount of time, be it ft2 or p2p.

unless your seriously addicted...or havent played from zerohour.

I wouldnt have payed for nearly 5 years with monthly fees. And that is what first cought my eye about it. And that it was my replacement for my d2 addiction :P

now would gw have been better with a monthly fee? if it was then as it is now..then a slight maybe..

BUT if they kept their original idea or vision of GW (vision of the game NOT the business model of chapters). then NO! It would have failed..

It was built ground up ORIGINALLY to be how it was, not to compete with the wow's and other p2p's. but to be the mirror opposite.

If they had built it differently, to be p2p ( ala wow style) it would have been lost in the shuffle.

GW only had the success it had due to how it was delivered originally! as a "dark side" to the wow's "light side" *or vise versa how ever you see it :P

Im free! im not grind! come this way if you want to play with skill over equipment! Man that WAS the hook!

But yes Gw lost its way, from what originally was, could have been, should still be!

/sadtimes

Been what it was wouldnt have lasted if it was p2p

my 2p :P

i REALLY loved what GW used to be!...

Legion Magnus · Nov 24, 2009, 12:45 AM // 00:45

My post would be a paradox then, because it would not exist if GW had ever been P2P. Same song, same verse for me if GW2 is ever P2P.

I DID PAY for GW! GW2 is yet to be determined.

Now if you want to take the retail cost of GW, amortize it over say 5 years, and collect that cost on a monthly basis (at full transaction cost to the manufacturer/distributor) then maybe we can talk about a monthly subscription.

Chasing Squirrels · Nov 24, 2009, 01:04 AM // 01:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zahr Dalsk

Actually Guild Wars is free to play. You play it without paying a fee. You do need to pay for an account, but not to play. It's free to play.

Umm no guild wars is buy to play last time i checked

Shayne Hawke · Nov 24, 2009, 01:05 AM // 01:05

Thank goodness GW wasn't pay-to-play. Otherwise, I might still be subscribed to Runescape.

Bluefeather · Nov 24, 2009, 01:45 AM // 01:45

I have 3 guildwars accounts. All campaigns. If they made GW p2p, I wouldn't buy more than one account and probably won't be able to play for more than four years.

I didnt buy aion because it is p2p.

I wouldnt buy gw2 if it will be p2p.

trialist · Nov 24, 2009, 03:32 AM // 03:32

The "you are still paying a monthly fee argument" is only valid if anet was actually still cranking out expansions. Which they aren't and so that argument is null and void. For everyday that an expansion doesn't exist, the cost of GW gets cheaper and you get more value for money.

As opposed to pay to play, everyday that passes, the game gets more expensive and your value for money becomes questionable. If an expansion is released for pay to play, the game becomes even more expensive and less value for money since you pay for the box sale as well as the monthly fees.

GW isn't even anything like pay to play. Arguing that it is, especially now that expansions have stopped is just silly.

ValaOfTheFens · Nov 24, 2009, 03:33 AM // 03:33

I wouldn't pay to play GW. ANet is a relatively new developer and it has only produced one game. If it had Blizzard's track record of making relatively balanced and fun games I might have considered paying to play it. Its like ANet's higher ups are satisfied with their one sorta good idea. Why hasn't ANet developed games outside of the GW series? Anyway, the way ANet has handled GW1 has been degrading over the years and I wouldn't be surprised if sometime soon they stopped updating it altogether. *sigh* I wish GW had more dlc than the Bonus Mission Pack and skill packs. I'd pay $10 or so to gain access to well done, well balanced dungeons or even realms of the gods. Despite the fact that the chapter model was probably the wrong way to go it has provided the GW universe with a metric ton of lore that could fuel any number of downloadable adventures.

byteme! · Nov 24, 2009, 03:53 AM // 03:53

Hind sight is 20/20. Had GW been P2P from the outset I never would've purchased it at the store nor would I or many of you people be sitting here talking about it.

DreamWind · Nov 24, 2009, 04:58 AM // 04:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by trialist

The "you are still paying a monthly fee argument" is only valid if anet was actually still cranking out expansions. Which they aren't and so that argument is null and void. For everyday that an expansion doesn't exist, the cost of GW gets cheaper and you get more value for money.

Fine. But that isn't the point. The point is IF Anet was following their model (and probably plans to continue to follow it in GW2) then we are essentially paying a monthly fee to be updated in the game. The other point is even though GW is getting cheaper now due to the model not currently being followed, it is also getting worse now.

trialist · Nov 24, 2009, 05:20 AM // 05:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Fine. But that isn't the point. The point is IF Anet was following their model (and probably plans to continue to follow it in GW2) then we are essentially paying a monthly fee to be updated in the game. The other point is even though GW is getting cheaper now due to the model not currently being followed, it is also getting worse now.

I don't deny that the game has gotten worse, but is that really a financial consequence or a managerial consequence? My thoughts are that its more of the latter. Anet simply didn't know what they wanted to do with their game. They tried to cater to everyone and everything and ended up falling short in all departments. If its a failure to manage their game and make the right decisions, how will throwing more money at them suddenly make their decisions right?

Razon · Nov 24, 2009, 06:09 AM // 06:09

I don't pay to play. Anet said: "Part of our bussiness succes is because our players don't have to pay monthy fee." And that is propably the reason why they sold millions of copies.

Guild Wars should have been pay to play? This is the best mmo I have played, but I wouldn't had ever bought this game if it had monthy fee. You sir, are mad.

Calaval · Nov 24, 2009, 10:30 AM // 10:30

No subscription fees was a major attraction to many gamers back in '05, if it had a monthly fee I highly doubt I'd of played GW for as long as I have or bought any of the campaigns.

I'm so glad GW and GW2 have no subscription fees, it gives gamers a quality alternative from the heavy influx of subscription based mmorpgs.

dr love · Nov 24, 2009, 10:47 AM // 10:47

i think guild wars got such a huge fanbase because it is a great game and WASN'T pay to play

QueenofDeath · Nov 24, 2009, 10:55 AM // 10:55

Actually Dreamwind is wrong as you don't buy the game at all you buy a license to play the game. You don't own anything as like when you buy a retail game that you keep in your library forever as long as you own the cd and the OS will run it. GW's on the other hand is a licensed product and thus if Anet or NCsoft decide to pull the plug you will have no game to play as your license will be void and null.

The majority of people (outside of Dreamwind) know that when the statement "pay to play" is stated it means a "monthly fee" always has always will mean that. So don't let him derail the thread with his semantics and apples and oranges comparisons. Just ignore him as I do.

)

At any rate it really needs a monthly pay to play feature oh say $20-$25 and that'll get rid of em nickely split. Dreamwind probably couldn't even afford that. hahaha

Shanaeri Rynale · Nov 24, 2009, 11:13 AM // 11:13

My orignal thoughts were the fact that by the time GW2 is launched there will have been no major updates to GW for nearly as long as the game has actually been out.

I also still don't adhere to the 'management don't care' theory. They can have the appearance not to care because of other factors, but when it comes down to it all those other factors are down to money.

A buisness should not be out to create customers, but fans. Look at Apple for example, that's a prime case where it has created a fan base from it's customers and so enjoys tremendous brand loyalty.

Anet created fans, because of thier buy/free to play strategy, compelling game play, great art work and a wonderful community. We see the fruit of some of that good work here and on other fan forums where people react strongly against thoughts other than the established fanbase norm.

BUT Anet have and are gambling away all the fans they created by effectivley letting GW1 go at strategic level. Can you imagine what things will be like after another year or more of this? How many still feel positive towards Anet now as opposed to say when eotn was released? Now add nearly that time on again to see what that 'fan base' could feel like when GW2 is released.

I really do feel for lindsey and her little team as they work so hard, trying to keep GW fresh but can only do so much.

It's all very well saying well I would'nt have bought it, or no way would I pay for XYZ, but the brutal truth is someone has to in some shape or form. Does'nt matter on the model f2p,b2p, p2p etc we the customer will always end up paying for it.

Some people think we can have the content and changes we need for free, that we can somehow pay just the once 4 years ago and that will be enough to keep us in content and updates forever. As wonderful as though that idea is, it is not the brutal reality of business in 2009. I wonder if Anet would still be in buisness without the shelter of NCsoft behind them?

MMO's take tens of millions(if not hundreds) to develop I very much doubt if they got enough money from the sales of GW to pay off the initial GW1 development costs, the ongoing expenses of keeping the game running AND the development costs of GW2.

It's obvious something had to give, no I cant quote chapter on verse on it, but it's obvious what that was.

What I am saying is that with a different charging model perhaps we would not have to had to sacrifice GW1 quite as much.

The only thing that would have maybe helped GW1 along is user made content, but apparently reading between the lines there is no easy SDK for GW1 and each mod would need to be validated before being allowed to be played.

Someone said that the future is micropayments, downloadable content etc etc and I agree and thats why I worry about GW2.

My concern is that unless Anet keeps with the 6 monthly expansion cycle, and finds a way around the complexity trap 4-5 years from now we'll be exactly where we are now. I strongly suspect we will be seeing more and more micro payments in GW2 to suppliment the buy/free to play model GW1 had.

I must admit to being surprised at some of the reactions on this thread. It's like I turned up at Nvidia HQ wearing and ATI T-shirt, or wearing one saying 'I'm a PC' in an apple store

Sometimes whats needed is to take a step back and ask the question. Was there a better way?

Test Me · Nov 24, 2009, 11:22 AM // 11:22

@OP

IMO there would've been no significant difference had it been pay to play or not. It's not the lack of money that made them take the maintenance decisions they took and I am pretty sure they would have taken the same decisions even if it were a pay to play.

So for us players, it would have been an extra cost with no benefit. I am convinced they would have still dumped GW1 to go work on shinny GW2 charging us monthly in the mean time and offering the same quality of updates they do today. Because let's face it, they don't face a money problem there at the ANet studio. It's ... just a studio unable to properly maintain their game, unexcited about the orphan GW1 and all focused on the next big thing GW2.

Riot Narita · Nov 24, 2009, 12:12 PM // 12:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shanaeri Rynale

A load of bollocks

GW was (and still is) a great success. ANet's business model worked. A-Net far exceeded my expectations for updating GW1 and keeping me playing.

But no game lasts forever. Everyone who has exhausted what GW1 has to offer should simply move on. Come back when GW2 is out, see if it looks good enough to spend your time and money on, and whether you think it will be as successful as GW1. It's that simple.

If they get it wrong with GW2, why does anyone care, really? Don't buy it, continue playing other things. The industry is full of failures that nobody cares about.

Seems to me, too many people just don't know when a game is over. Instead of moving on, they bitch and moan about how A-Net's support sucks, how they should put more time/money into returning the game to its former glory (as they see it) - pointless cos it aint gonna happen. It's water under the bridge.

Some people become so bitter and twisted about it that they go on an anti-Anet crusade, like some kind of vendetta. They put large amounts of effort into pointing out ANet's mistakes (as they see it)... how much Anet sucks... how GW2 will surely suck too so don't even think about buying it... how they should change their business model (even though it has already been successful) or whatever, presumably so that GW2 can last FOREVER instead of "only" 4-5 years like GW1. Even how people that still enjoy GW1 are in fact, idiots and they are NOT enjoying GW1. Etc etc.

They torture themselves by refusing to "let go", and they torture others preaching their doom, gloom, and misery.

Sword Hammer Axe · Nov 24, 2009, 01:14 PM // 13:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Sure you can play it, but you are severely gimped. For most people there is simply no point in playing PvP if you don't have all the expansions, especially when other people are hammering you with things you don't have access to that are likely more powerful than what you have (think power creep for sales and Nightfall).

In the same way, for many people theres no point in playing PvE if you don't buy the expansions. If your guild members and friends buy it, you will feel like you have no choice but buy to continue.

Uh...of course it is pay to play. Let us analyze that...you have to pay for the game to play the game. If you don't pay for the game you can't play the game. Very simple. And not every computer game is pay to play...there are tons of free downloadable games.

You actually proved your own point wrong as soon as you said "sure you can play it". That means that you get no monthly fees. Besides here's a definition of a monthly fee: It's monthly. Not 6 months broken down, but monthly.

I'm not gonna make this a build thread, but if people hammer you around in PvP you have 3 options: 1) Learn to make a good build with what you have. It's possible and don't say otherwise because there's been builds since the very first GW came out. 2) Buy another game. Notice that this is "optional" meaning that no matter what you say you still can play GW even without paying more. 3) Don't play PvP. Which speaks for itself.

No point in playing PvE: I can tell you that the amount of people who only have one or 2 of the games, which is more than you might think, proves you wrong already there. You are limited to playing with your mates in that area, but you can still play with your friends in that area. Saying that you feel compelled to buy another game is extremely subjective. It's how you feel about it. Not everyone. And since you can still play your game without paying monthly fees. Wooptidoo there you go! You don't have monthly fees at all.

Seriously stop with that logic! You are getting abstract over something very simple! Yes you can define p2p as just paying to play, but everyone in this thread knows that the p2p refers to the monthly fees. Besides with your logic downloadable games are not free either since you have to pay for an internet connection, pay for a computer, pay for electricity and so on. You said very simple, but you are making it more abstract than needed at all. This is not a philosophical thread.

Shadowspawn X · Nov 24, 2009, 02:56 PM // 14:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shanaeri Rynale

They can have the appearance not to care because of other factors, but when it comes down to it all those other factors are down to money.

You have yet to show , why the state of the game is related to lack of money on Anets part which is why your argument is just completely fail.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shanaeri Rynale

I must admit to being surprised at some of the reactions on this thread. It's like I turned up at Nvidia HQ wearing and ATI T-shirt, or wearing one saying 'I'm a PC' in an apple store

That is because you just are making no sense and continue to post "feelings" and "assumptions" based more from your imagination than anything factual.