Curse

Malice Black · Dec 30, 2007, 08:20 PM // 20:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pyro maniac

only if they would support no-CC users ..

Most MMO's already do

Pre-paid cards
Debit cards
Direct debit

Tyla · Dec 30, 2007, 08:21 PM // 20:21

I would still pay, GW RULZ ALL

HayesA · Dec 30, 2007, 08:33 PM // 20:33

If Area Net switches to a fee-based system, I simply will not be playing. It's why i'm not playing World of Warcraft. I like to pay 40-50 dollars for a game, and have the option to play it as much as I bloody well want to play at no extra cost to me. (Internet is besides the point because it has more then 1 use. I don't just use the cable broadband access that I pay for just for gaming.) If they start charging even $5/month for access, I will stop playing.

I perfer the system to now. I honestly don't care about balencing because I don't really play PVP. It's simply not my bag, so to speak. I simply do not perfer player versus player. I perfer that PVP is kept 100% seperate from PVE. But this is my opinion, and I won't go on from here. I don't want to start a row about it.

I really enjoy Guild Wars as it is RIGHT NOW. I loved GWEN, and Nightfall, and even Factions just a little bit. I cant really see why folks don't enjoy either Nightfall, or GWEN. More story, more missions, lots of new locals, attractive player skins/models... etc etc etc. I am of the group that thought the inscription system was a rather fantastic add-on. Gaile: You may pass this statement on as you please: Anet, I think you're doing a top notch job. Keep it up!

I would really perfer that Anet did NOT switch to a monthly payment system.

cellardweller · Dec 30, 2007, 10:55 PM // 22:55

Guildwars 1 filled two niches: "the free mmo" and "the skill over time mmo". As the game has evolved anet have realised that there are more people in the first niche and catered to them at the expense of the second. If adding fees would seperate the two groups and allow for a pure grindless mmo to exist then I would be all for it.

Diddy bow · Dec 30, 2007, 11:00 PM // 23:00

If there was a fee, its another game on the shelf for me. No more reason to get it over any other game

.

I really doubt ill ever get a game thats designed to be addictive rather than fun.

arcanemacabre · Dec 30, 2007, 11:05 PM // 23:05

Hell no. I would say yes, if it were worth a monthly fee, but I have yet to see any online game worth a monthly fee, so I'm assuming it doesn't exist. Also, monthly fees have the undesirable effect of making people feel obligated to play as much as possible (to make it worth it); me included. I like feeling like there is a game for me to play whenever I feel like it, without feeling like I have to to get my money's worth.

Besides, Anet have said time and time again that there will be no monthly fees - ever. If that changed, talk about a breach of trust... they would lose so many players that GW2 would end up the way of Auto Assault. At least that is one surefire way to destroy the franchise.

Oofus · Dec 30, 2007, 11:22 PM // 23:22

Wouldn't matter to me one way or the other, have no intention of buying GW2.

But to answer the question in the spirit in which it was intended; no, I do not, and will not ever, pay monthly fees to play a game that I already paid for. Pay 50 bucks for a game, then pay every month for the "privilege" of being allowed to continue playing it? For what... server maintenance? No thanks. Server maintenance costs next to nothing, and it certainly does not cost millions upon millions of dollars a year, which is what these companies make off these monthly fees. Sell me your game and let me play it, don't sell me your game then extort more money from me every month so that I can play it.

WinterSnowblind · Dec 30, 2007, 11:33 PM // 23:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oofus

Wouldn't matter to me one way or the other, have no intention of buying GW2.

But to answer the question in the spirit in which it was intended; no, I do not, and will not ever, pay monthly fees to play a game that I already paid for. Pay 50 bucks for a game, then pay every month for the "privilege" of being allowed to continue playing it? For what... server maintenance? No thanks. Server maintenance costs next to nothing, and it certainly does not cost millions upon millions of dollars a year, which is what these companies make off these monthly fees. Sell me your game and let me play it, don't sell me your game then extort more money from me every month so that I can play it.

Actually, you pay for more than server maintenance. Unlike GW, in subscription based MMO's, you tend to get a lot more new content regularly. Remember how great Sorrows Furnace was? Games like WoW have new quests like that added all the time, where as with GW we have to pay for pretty much everything new they add.

But don't get me wrong, I much prefer the GW method, even if I end up paying just as much as I would for a subscription based MMO, at least I'm only paying for the content I'm actually playing, instead of paying for everything constantly, even when I'm not currently playing.

Fortunately, most developers are starting to realise that they can't charge monthly for games like this. Nobody is going to pay for multiple subscriptions to different games, and no one is ever going to be able to compete with WoW (the possible exception being Bioware with Knights of the Old Republic III.. if it's true).

GD Defender · Dec 30, 2007, 11:35 PM // 23:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shayne Hawke

What if GW2 went to a fee?

They would lose massive amounts of customers, which is why they've repeatedly stated that they're not changing their business model.

On the note of skill balance, IIRC Anet has already stated they're reducing skill count significantly for easier balancing.

Moral55 · Dec 30, 2007, 11:37 PM // 23:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malice Black

lol it's funny how everyone raves about GW, but won't back their comments with cash.

I'd pay if it was a decent game, fee's tend to keep away undesirables.

You back it with cash when you buy expansions and the game itself any thing else is highway robbery and people fall for it.

Hexum · Dec 30, 2007, 11:37 PM // 23:37

I don't pay to play any game online. My internet fee is already enough. So if they went to PTP I wouldn't play GW anymore.

Turtle222 · Dec 31, 2007, 12:23 AM // 00:23

No it won't, as there won't be enough people playing to recognise its flaws

DarkNecrid · Dec 31, 2007, 12:26 AM // 00:26

What if World of Warcraft wasn't the #1 most subscribed to MMORPG.....

Emik · Dec 31, 2007, 01:07 AM // 01:07

I already have a subscription for EVE Online.
Still the best MMO out there :P
I'll stick to that one should GW2 have a fee system.

You can't see me · Dec 31, 2007, 01:11 AM // 01:11

I'd pay the fee if the content was worth it. Nothing more to say.

toon-a-loon · Dec 31, 2007, 01:19 AM // 01:19

If Anet made GW2 a few of 5-1 dallors. I wouldn't complain at all. It would modivate them enough to add more content. 1 dollar per person a month is 1 million more than GW1. That is still really cheap. 5 dollars a month is still really cheap to. 5 dollars a month adds up to 60 dollars a year. That isn't much.

bart · Dec 31, 2007, 01:40 AM // 01:40

I think that Anet will do what HGL is doing whereby the game is free but you can pay for more content (eg high end dungeons, ability to open up a stall to sell items in-game, more options, updates etc). The question now is will you pay to access these "options"?

Legion Magnus · Dec 31, 2007, 01:49 AM // 01:49

I do not and will not pay a monthly fee, especially for something I've already paid for. ANet could simply have said here's what you paid for and walked away, but they know that if they want to continue selling units and remain viable they need to keep adding content/improving the product, otherwise the Prophecies towns would already be ghost towns (although nearly there as it is). They also want differentiation from competitors like WoW.

Companies charge a monthly fee because they can. They can because people accept it (of course, it also helps if Daddy is paying the monthly fee). Business models change based on what companies feel they can get away with. I remember years ago when cable TV was new. Its attractive selling points were that there were no commercials guaranteed, and you generally got a better signal and more channels for a small monthly fee. Times have changed. Better content for sure, but prices are spiraling out of control, and commercial breaks are getting longer and longer. Plus we now have 'bugs' to attempt to ignore DURING content. And they get more and more obnoxious all the time.

Let's keep it simple, pay a one-time fee, and not help companies drive us to such ends.

chowmein69 · Dec 31, 2007, 02:37 AM // 02:37

if it does i wont buy it.

Redfeather1975 · Dec 31, 2007, 02:50 AM // 02:50

Guild Wars wasn't supposed to be big enough and last long enough to warrant subscription fees.
Some people wouldn't stop playing and complained there was nothing left to do, so some optional grindage was added, but Guild Wars still is just the size of your average single player game, except you can play with others online.
If they added a fee, they'd have to draw out content to take much longer. If they did that, I wouldn't play it. I've played DAOC, EQ2 and WoW.
They aren't magical, they get broing too.
After I got bored with them, it felt like a huge waste of time when I think back on it.
No more of that for me. I had my fill.