Curse

Amnel Ithtirsol · Feb 04, 2009, 12:32 PM // 12:32

If a monthly fee gets rid of (at least halve) the immature and rude players I'd be more than happy to pay to play GW2. Not sure if just a monthly fee will do that though.

Yang Whirlwind · Feb 04, 2009, 01:09 PM // 13:09

The monthly fee issue is a holy principle to Anet. For this reason they have been able to attract a lot of players (me included), who are against paying more than one time for a game.
If they abandoned this principle it would mean losing a lot of these players.
It might attract others, but I seriously doubt it. We all know GW is a game that will (hopefully) be replaced by a improved sequel within the next one-two years.
Attempting to change the whole economic premises for the game this late would most likely cause more harm than good.

Phineas · Feb 04, 2009, 03:37 PM // 15:37

/notsigned

I too would avoid GW2 if it were pay-to-play and this late in its life is not a good time or idea for attracting prospective new players to GW.

Painbringer · Feb 04, 2009, 04:15 PM // 16:15

I'd Rather see Coke/pepsi/bud ads on the walls of Lions Arch then pay for a monthly fee

Tullzinski · Feb 04, 2009, 04:30 PM // 16:30

No-one should have to pay a fee to access a game you have already purchased. If a monthly fee happens on GW1 or 2 then….CYA! Have to agree with Painbringer.

14.95 a month = $180ish a year (you have to buy the game too) $220ish

If you had to pay $220 up front for the game would you buy it? Any time you are not playing you are giving away free money. 2 cents a hour adds up after a while. The game should at least give you a nightly Big O and wipe you off afterwards for the money.

Keep up the good work ANET.

BTW What has blizzard done with the 2 billion a year??? D3/SC LOL

Time for a new game/storyline, how many times do I have to Kill Diablo for him to stay dead anyways?

R.Shayne · Feb 04, 2009, 04:55 PM // 16:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amnel Ithtirsol

If a monthly fee gets rid of (at least halve) the immature and rude players I'd be more than happy to pay to play GW2. Not sure if just a monthly fee will do that though.

No guarantee this will get ride of any immature players (not even 10% of them). Most of the pay to play have free trials so you can see how the community behaves and from what I have seen Guild War's community is not even close to the worse.

I agree with some of the no fee thing, you buy a game once you should not have to keep paying for it just to play. I also believe that if the company offers a service you should have the option to pay for it if you want it.

I would support a pay to play for Guild Wars if it offered an alternative, such as the ability to host your own server for free and you have to pay to play on ANET's servers.

As for in-game advertisement, unless they are advertising swords or shields it would kill the game setting.

Apollo Smile · Feb 04, 2009, 05:46 PM // 17:46

I would pay a monthly fee for Guild Wars 2 as long as the amount of content reflected that business model. I would prefer for it to stay as it is now, though. Its nice being able to take a break, play something else, then come back for some Guild Wars without messing with account crap.

bsoltan · Feb 05, 2009, 01:37 PM // 13:37

Any money that you spend on GW be it a fantasy subscription or the purchase of new games, slots, upgrades is all going towards GW2 and other future projects.

GW is old, they're not going to invest money into it when they can bring out something new that will convert most of the player base plus bring in new people.

Arkantos · Feb 05, 2009, 01:57 PM // 13:57

There simply isn't enough content for GW to be a pay to play game. I don't know anyone who would be willing to pay a monthly fee to play this game.

Now, if Guild Wars started out as a traditional MMO with more content, sure, a monthly fee would have been likely. But that's not the case.

shoogi · Feb 05, 2009, 06:10 PM // 18:10

And the question has to be asked- How many of GW's players play it only because it doesn't have a monthly fee as opposed to some other online rpg? I would say something like 95%.

joemanstar · Feb 17, 2009, 01:39 AM // 01:39

any kind of fees will see the doom of guild wars

mrvrod · Feb 17, 2009, 06:45 AM // 06:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by shoogi

And the question has to be asked- How many of GW's players play it only because it doesn't have a monthly fee as opposed to some other online rpg? I would say something like 95%.

I don't think the percentage would be that high. The one and only reason I don't play WoW is because i don't like the cartoonish nature of the game. There are a lot of good aspects (mounts, trading post, different professions or jobs you can do, fishing, mining, etc.), if it looked and played more like GW I would be there. If the Star Trek MMO isn't as fail as most of the games in that franchise, I might be there.

I do believe the free is a strong secondary point, but I believe most people still pick first based on gameplay.

Ironballs · Feb 21, 2009, 06:17 PM // 18:17

No monthly fees—ever! --Source

I'm pretty sure that about answers the Monthly Fee question. Wouldn't one be able to press charges if suddenly this statement became false? I'm not sure but I bet you could.

belladonna shylock · Feb 21, 2009, 06:32 PM // 18:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Painbringer

I'd Rather see Coke/pepsi/bud ads on the walls of Lions Arch then pay for a monthly fee

I'd even go as far to say WoW ads....and that's saying a lot!