| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (209)

Posted: Mar 21st 2012 6:43PM Primal Zed said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Irem "Anything that devalues gameplay in favor of putting real money down does not sit well with me." - how is your gameplay devalued by someone else putting real money down for in-gold, when the conversion factor is driven entirely by the in game market?

"If they're worth spending real money on, they'll have to be powerful." - There's plenty of evidence that this is just plain wrong, and in fact plenty of people will spend money even on things that have no change to the game mechanics whatsoever.

The main thing that gets me about the "people should not be able spend more money than I'm willing to in order to get something sooner than me" is that I'm not sure just how it's worse than people being able to spend more time per day in the game to get something sooner.
Reply

Posted: Mar 21st 2012 7:04PM Irem said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Primal Zed
Gameplay in general is devalued by the developer treating it as though it's a chore that people should reasonably want to skip. Charging money to skip it is "fix is in the cash shop!" design.

If the items aren't so powerful that they're worth having, I'll concede the point. I'll also believe it when I see it, especially since ArenaNet can always fall back on the fact that they're technically available through gameplay.

"The main thing that gets me about the "people should not be able spend more money than I'm willing to in order to get something sooner than me" is that I'm not sure just how it's worse than people being able to spend more time per day in the game to get something sooner."

It's false balance, and implies that the game is by default already so grindy and time-consuming that being able to spend money evens the playing field. If a person who can spend huge amounts of time in the game is actually able to get so far ahead that someone else needs to spend RL money to catch up, the game itself is designed terribly. Guild Wars 2 already prides itself on accessibility, and if they're telling the truth then no one can really get that far "ahead" by either spending time OR money. The danger is that items available through gems could actually introduce that grind if gems become prohibitively expensive to buy with gold. That's fine (even if it would render the supposed fairness of trading a moot point) as long as no content is designed with the assumption that everyone has access to those items and as long as they're not so powerful that they make any kind of difference in ease of content completion.
Reply

Posted: Mar 21st 2012 7:20PM Primal Zed said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Irem Are we talking about actually doing game content or grinding? If it's game content that becomes a 'chore', then that's simply a game not worth playing. If it's grinding for currency, then the dollar value of that grind is going to be determined by the player market exchanging gems and gold.

You seem to be under the impression that there has to be some threshold of grinding for there to be people willing to spend money to forgo that grind. There isn't one, unless that threshold is simply the existence of any form of grind. The moment there is something in the game that a player would have to grind to get, there will be players who would rather spend some dollar amount instead of grinding to get that thing. There's no need to push that grind to extreme levels when there are already people all too willing to spend money to skip even an hour's worth of grinding.

It's easy to play "what if" games to invent worst case scenarios before we have all the facts. I don't see the point in that. All we can do is work with what we know. If you don't think you know enough to be comfortable purchasing the game, by all means delay your purchase to be able to collect more facts from the game's release.
Reply

Posted: Mar 21st 2012 6:29PM Yoh said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
What a farce.

It was a false comparison that you based your argument on Jeremy.
ROM and GW2 a very different beasts, with several factors that have to at least be taken into consideration, that you blatantly ignored.


1. GW2 has a box price where as ROM does not.
This means farmers have at least a start up cost for each and every account they wish to use, where as ROM can have potentially unlimited free accounts/characters.

2. The flat level/gear progressions and skill centric gameplay makes players much less gear dependent for progression then atypical MMO's like ROM, which honestly extorts you sometimes with their cash shop at times. So cash shop items are something would want, not need.

3. GW2's combat system is skill based to the point that you would need a live player at the keyboard in order to realistically fight at higher, more profitable levels. ROM on the other hand can be easily botted, as it is atypical tab targeting, kick each others shins until one of you fall down combat. Fantastic for botting.


What all this means is not only is it going to cost farmer as great deal more to set up shop in GW2 vs ROM, bots will be at least more difficult to build if not impossible (at higher levels), all thou that does not preclude farmers who play directly from farming.

So it's much more of a direct comparison of how much expense it is for farmers to operate vs Arenanets ability to undercut/out maneuver them.
It doesn't mean they can't or won't have these problems, but it's no where near as dire as you made it out to be.

Treating them as equal is basically dishonest.

Posted: Mar 21st 2012 6:34PM real65rcncom said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
@Yoh
Denial. Something something about a river in Egypt.

Cash shop=win in EVERY F2P game. Simply claiming that buying the box ONCE somehow makes that different for a major AAA mmo is nutty.

You expect them to float a major mmo simply on fluffies and bunnies that people will readily shell money out for? No.

Anet has to MAKE SURE people buy from the shop or this game will die and that means an average amount of money to be spent MONTHLY by many people, say $10 to cover costs at least.

There isn't any way this game exists simply by selling the box once and 'hoping' people buy silly pets. Anet has to make sure ppl spend; the way you do that is by selling advantages no matter what they say now.
Reply

Posted: Mar 21st 2012 6:40PM jeremys said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Yoh There are differences. Many. Yes. But, then so are many differences between GW2 and any other MMO. GW2 is marketed as a different beast from everyone else.

The auction houses, though, are identical between RoM and GW2; not between GW2 and any other MMO. Only RoM's previous incarnation of its auction house and how they allowed the seamless transfer, set by the players, between diamonds and gold are identical to GW2. Second place would be EVE's similarity with its PLEX system.
Reply

Posted: Mar 21st 2012 6:41PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@real65rcncom
Guild Wars 1 says hi.
Reply

Posted: Mar 21st 2012 6:43PM Irem said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@real65rcncom
They managed it just fine with GW1, which really didn't have a whole lot in the cash shop. I dislike this, but I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that they'll "have" to add advantages. They just have to have more items and options than GW1.

The real reason advantage items are a threat is because they're so easy to implement compared with cosmetic stuff. It costs money and resources to create a new armor skin or hairstyle, but slapping some stats on an icon and selling it is pure profit. It comes down to laziness, and I hope they're going to stand by their philosophy of wanting to make things that people want to buy, and not just start dangling shortcuts out there because it's easier to do.
Reply

Posted: Mar 21st 2012 6:49PM Primal Zed said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@real65rcncom What makes you so sure that selling solely cosmetic items is not a viable business model? WoW has made millions of dollars on single items in their cash shop. League of Legends is free to play and you can't buy anything to give you an in game advantage.

Why do they need to make money beyond box sales in order to be a financial success anyway? Shooters, fighting games, RTS, and so on also need servers to run, but plenty get by with no cash shop or subscription. Plus, ArenaNet will be developing additional content to sell.
Reply

Posted: Mar 21st 2012 6:56PM Yoh said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@real65rcncom
First, I'm not in denial you prick.
I was merely pointing out that there are FACTORS that were being omitted when Jeremy based his argument on. And their not irreverent.

I said nothing about Arenanet capacity to generate revenue from this system because it was irreverent to my point.
I don't see them having any difficulty making money under this system, but that doesn't necessarily mean gold farmers are going to have as easy a time in GW2 as they do with ROM, even if they auction system is the same. (which I'm not yet convinced of)

Pay to win is very different to pay to have a good time.
I advocate a position of waiting until we have a better idea of what we a dealing with rather then fly off the handle at the first sigh of controversy.
Reply

Posted: Mar 21st 2012 7:38PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Yoh
But Yoh, isn't it just as wrong of Anet to do the same things with a cash shop as a B2P game as a game that is F2P?

No, they may not be selling gold directly, but they are selling a gem that you can take into the game and sell for gold. No, they aren't selling gear directly, but they are going to sell boosts to Karma that enable to gear up faster.
Reply

Posted: Mar 21st 2012 7:52PM Yoh said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified)
I'm not really going to get into the moral aspects of it, they need to turn a profit, so the question really comes down to how it impacts player gameplay.

Since we still know very little about the actual items to be sold, speculating on the issue is rather unproductive.


The difference I see with implementing a system like this on a B2P model rather then a F2P model, is that F2P is solely dependent on their cash shop for revenue, so there is a much stronger incentive to water down gameplay and indirectly force players to buy on the cash shop to compete or to enjoy the game.
B2P can at least ease up on that front, and only offer non-gameplay effecting items.

That, and they are in a stronger position to combat gold farmers.

And since Arenanet has specifically stated that they will not be giving players an unfair advantage via the cash shop, nor are they watering their game down, it's is rather unlikely they are going to have anything gamebreaking in the shop.
I don't think gems are gamebreaking, but we should wait and see until after the next round of beta testing to make a verdict one way or the other.
Reply

Posted: Mar 21st 2012 7:59PM Graill440 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Yoh

Some valid points, some not quite right, still why you were voted down is a bit stupid as reading your post it was not warranted, stupid kids that like to see their own typeing and no one elses ideas are most likely at fault.

Anyway,

People, the ones with little common sense do not understand what the misbranding of F2P does to MMO's, or you people that think F2P is a correct descriptor wear some very funny glasses and believe in Santa Claus. Or you simply do not care and would rather let the publishers and developers do your thinking for you.

GW2 will not be F2P, it wont be PTW, it will be the same thing it has always been, profitable and with a very average cash shop, i have never seen a pay to win catagory in their cash shop.

Other games, some mentioned are PTW or microtransaction based, not following the model of GW1 which is pay for the box, and the updates. Which in my eyes is fine.
Reply

Posted: Mar 21st 2012 8:13PM Yoh said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Graill440
Thanks.
Yeah, the downvote thing is silly, but it's kind of a AOL problem.

I just thought it important to point out flaws in the article, as not to pour more fuel on this internet fire.
People are getting bent out of shape over this, and it's mostly misperception and knee-jerk reactions.

I'm just trying to put out the fire until we actually have some specific cash shop item details to look at.
Reply

Posted: Mar 21st 2012 8:18PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Yoh
"I'm not really going to get into the moral aspects of it, they need to turn a profit, so the question really comes down to how it impacts player gameplay."

I'm not talking wrong as in immoral, illegal or unethical, I'm referring to wrong in what we as customers of games expect. When Blizzard first announced Real ID grouping but only for an additional fee, it wasn't illegal or immoral, but it was the wrong approach to gamers to have a subscription based game to let one person's game client do something another's can't because person 1 paid extra money. That is why I mean by wrong.

"The difference I see with implementing a system like this on a B2P model rather then a F2P model, is that F2P is solely dependent on their cash shop for revenue, so there is a much stronger incentive to water down gameplay and indirectly force players to buy on the cash shop to compete or to enjoy the game.
B2P can at least ease up on that front, and only offer non-gameplay effecting items."

Except that being B2P doesn't mean NCSoft won't say "Hey, we want to get better revenue, so tweak the game so the players will want to spend more on our cash shop". That's why I think that Anet shouldn't be offering the same type of items being a B2P title that F2P titles offer. If they want to sell the same type if items, then become F2P and get rid of the controversy.

"And since Arenanet has specifically stated that they will not be giving players an unfair advantage via the cash shop, nor are they watering their game down, it's is rather unlikely they are going to have anything gamebreaking in the shop."

They also originally said that the GW2 cash shop would be no different than the GW1 cash shop. Did the GW1 cash shop indirectly sell gold the way gems are set up to be for GW2? No, so I think it's fair to take what Anet says now with a grain of salt.

Not to mention if they are going to be selling Karma boosts, XP boosts and Damage/Defense modifiers, the purchasers of this will see it as an advanatge so in fact they are selling an advantage. I for one think in a B2P game, that is a bit unfair and presents a conflict of interest for Anet.
Reply

Posted: Mar 21st 2012 8:33PM Yoh said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified)
"They also originally said that the GW2 cash shop would be no different than the GW1 cash shop. Did the GW1 cash shop indirectly sell gold the way gems are set up to be for GW2? No, so I think it's fair to take what Anet says now with a grain of salt.:"

Actually no, they didn't say that, they said it would be similar, not identical.
And gems are just a currency, on their own they do nothing.
The question is what items on the cash shop will be for sale?


"Not to mention if they are going to be selling Karma boosts, XP boosts and Damage/Defense modifiers, the purchasers of this will see it as an advanatge so in fact they are selling an advantage. I for one think in a B2P game, that is a bit unfair and presents a conflict of interest for Anet. "
Bullshit.
They never said that, no have I seen anything to so much as hint at that.
Find me a quote of Arenanet stating that they will be sell xP/Karma/Damage Boosts.

And even if they did sell them, what's stopping someone from gaining gold normally, then buying gems to buy these boosts?
And does that even make that game unfair?

Just because someone can buy a taxi ride, doesn't mean my bus ride isn't going to get me to where I want to go, so what does it matter if someone else is willing to pay for that cab ride?
It's doesn't get them anything more then time.


Until they cross a line of where players can directly buy power over other players, that you can't reasonable get with spending time, then I don't see an issue here.
So until we have specific details of items that are going to be sold, this is all baseless speculation.
Reply

Posted: Mar 21st 2012 8:56PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Yoh
"Actually no, they didn't say that, they said it would be similar, not identical.
And gems are just a currency, on their own they do nothing.
The question is what items on the cash shop will be for sale?"

Actually they did say a while back GW2's cash shop would just be for vanity storage type items like GW1's. And you saying that gems are a currency is sort of backing up what I am saying. How would you feel if they started selling ecto's on GW1's cash shop tommorrow?

"Bullshit. They never said that, no have I seen anything to so much as hint at that.
Find me a quote of Arenanet stating that they will be sell xP/Karma/Damage Boosts.

And even if they did sell them, what's stopping someone from gaining gold normally, then buying gems to buy these boosts?
And does that even make that game unfair?"

I never said they have definately said it, I said "if". As for a hint, well let's see. We know they are making a Chalice of Glory for the DD and CE versions of the game. What is more reasonable to think, that this is a one time item strictly for use with those who buy those editions, or that it's a taste of what is in the shop? IMO, it's the latter.

As for hint, I linked you the article on GW Guru that you have already said you would read. Anet and GW Guru have a preety close relationship. If their speculation was way off base, I can't see Anet letting it stay out there for a month unanswered.

And what is earning gold "normally" mean? Do you consider killing thousands of mobs for hours on end normal? Some people do, I don't and don't know how you feel on the subject. But the point is, a game should be about gameplay, not gameplay AND ways to bypass gameplay. That's a conflict of interest.
Reply

Posted: Mar 21st 2012 9:08PM real65rcncom said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Graill440 Probably using the word 'prick' to refer to other posters like a child got him voted down? Not necessary.

In any event, his points are apples/oranges mostly. The bottom line is that GW2 is basically F2P now, unlike the earlier GW1. The cash shop is going to be a very important part of this game regardless of how fans poke themselves in the eyes to NOT see it.

Again, Anet isn't going to make a cash shop and ONLY offer things that don't mean anything... they wouldn't make it. They have to make things sold that people actually want and duckies and bunny pets aren't really it for a PvP centric game.

It's going to be more than just small stuff and a year from now, people will see it. Most might not care since F2P spending is a very lucrative thing players do in many other games but the joke will be on the people who've been assuming this was going to be some revolutionary game.

They just decided to do what 8 out of 10 mmos do already from the start.. run a nice cash shop to pay for everything, and that means NEED items.
Reply

Posted: Mar 21st 2012 9:14PM real65rcncom said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Primal Zed said: "What makes you so sure that selling solely cosmetic items is not a viable business model? WoW has made millions of dollars on single items in their cash shop."

The difference between this and WoW was that WoW DIDN'T sell need items because it didn't have to, so they only sold things people wanted and could make EXTRA money because they were still getting their $15/month from people even if they didnt buy the Sparkle Pony.

GW2 doesn't have that luxury. They will sell you the box for $50. After that, they have to HOPE you give them money for.. a duckie? A bunny? If you don't buy it, they dont get another red cent from you. So in order to make sure they don't have to depend on people's mercy or fancy, they are more than likely going to put those things in there regardless of what they say.

They can classify whatever they sell anyway they want. They can say now that things won't be "pay to win", but when they sell that healthpot or thing that makes the difference in a WZ, they can still claim that it isn't "pay to win" and only 'convienience'

After all what are you or anyone else going to do about it?

Cancel your sub? /snicker
Reply

Posted: Mar 21st 2012 9:16PM Yoh said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@(Unverified)
"Actually they did say a while back GW2's cash shop would just be for vanity storage type items like GW1's."

Still waiting for that quote.......

"What is more reasonable to think, that this is a one time item strictly for use with those who buy those editions, or that it's a taste of what is in the shop? IMO, it's the latter."

And yet still more baseless speculation.
Once we know for certain, from Arenanet themselves, that such items will indeed be on the cash shop, then and only then, can we make any reasonable conclusion on how this could effect the state of gameplay.

And I don't give a crap how close Anet and GW guru are, it's irrelevant.
Until it comes directly from them, it's not to be believed.


"And what is earning gold "normally" mean? "
Playing the freaken game without your credit card out, what they hell did you think I meant?

And don't go into the whole 'grindfest' rabbit hole, it's just a bloody mess down there. Until we know what the price points are, that's even more caked on speculation.

So do you have ANY valid concerns that are not based solely on baseless speculation and unconfirmed rumors?
If not, I recommend waiting until after the next round of beta weekends where Arenanet will be testing these very issues.
Reply

Breaking News

Breaking News

Massively-that-was


Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW