Curse

Navaros · May 10, 2007, 11:10 PM // 23:10

Looks to me like HGL is a glorified Diablo II - a 100% instanced game. Only with a monthly fee. LOL

In my view 100% instanced games would never ever be worth a monthly fee. Indeed HGL should be free-to-play since it is 100% instanced.

icymanipulator · May 10, 2007, 11:18 PM // 23:18

and apples > oranges....or is it oranges > apples...that whole free-will thing always messing things up.

Knightsaber Sith · May 10, 2007, 11:23 PM // 23:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Navaros

Looks to me like HGL is a glorified Diablo II - a 100% instanced game. Only with a monthly fee. LOL

In my view 100% instanced games would never ever be worth a monthly fee. Indeed HGL should be free-to-play since it is 100% instanced.

It doesn't require a monthly fee, it's optional for those that want the premium features. You can still play for free. The only reason GW doesn't have a fee is 'cause they instead decided to go with an extended form of micro-transactions where you select which content packs you want to buy. Instead of releasing content in massive spikes for a large fee like GW, HG:L is releasing content gradually for a reduced monthly fee (as compared to most subscription games). And the subscription works out to be about the same price as someone that bought every GW campaign had they continued to churn them out on the originally projected time-table.

Just saying "instanced=should be f2p" is rather childish.

And you say D2 like that's a bad thing

Etta · May 10, 2007, 11:24 PM // 23:24

That BrigAce aka Hitler Jr is a faking gobshit! There I said it.

Navaros · May 10, 2007, 11:44 PM // 23:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knightsaber Sith

Just saying "instanced=should be f2p" is rather childish.

How is it childish? A 100% instanced game like HGL is not a MMO and therefore cannot justify a monthly fee as real MMOs can.

Corporations are expecting the consumer to shell out cash every month just to play games they already paid full price for, that are not even MMOs. I would say the childish thing would be for consumers to swallow this crap instead of standing up for common sense and realizing that 100% instanced games are no more worthy of a monthly fee than Diablo II is (ie: they're not) just because big corporations slap a MMO label on their non-MMO games.

I don't say Diablo II like it's a bad thing. I say games that are no more MMOs than Diablo II is, trying to charge a monthly fee and pretend to be a MMO (ie: HGL, D&D Online) - that is the bad thing.

jzupko · May 10, 2007, 11:50 PM // 23:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knightsaber Sith

And the subscription works out to be about the same price as someone that bought every GW campaign had they continued to churn them out on the originally projected time-table.

Well, that's the rub, isn't it? The benefit of paying for the content (vs. a subscription) is just that - you pay when you actually get the content. If Flagship borks up and ends up falling behind with the content releases, players have effectively paid for nothing, right? (this is the first I've heard of the game, so I don't know what else you're getting for that monthly fee).

Mercury Angel · May 11, 2007, 12:09 AM // 00:09

What an individual thinks of Guild Wars has fairly little relevance to these forums, and these forums are not a platform with which to snipe other people for whatever the reason. If you want to provide your feedback on their statements, go ahead and head over there, but I do warn that these game vs game arguments are pretty pointless taking place on respective game boards. Not that they're too much more fruitful on neutral boards.

In the end, people will choose to believe what they want to believe, for the better or worse.