People are getting way too, gushy over GW2. It s a great game, in my top 5 I ve played, as far as MMOs go. That said, theres no way in hell I would pay a sub for it. It s just not worth it IMO. The only draw for me is to log in and casually play here and there. As fun as the game is, I can see it getting stale fairly quickly, if you blow through everything so fast. As good as a game it is, a sub would not be worth it for this game.
I m looking forward to PS2 even more then GW2, and I wouldn t pay a sub for it.
I still dont think a lot of MMOer get what GW2 is. If you care please watch this video.
I have been MMOing forever and this vdeo talks to something that has been bothering me forever about MMOs. Why play 1 game leveling and then a different game when you get to top level. You have so much fun leveling and then the end game starts to get slow unless you have just the right mix of people. I will always look for horazontal designed game when looking for a new MMO because of GW2. GW2 has more playable content then most MMOs. For me this was the biggest let down with SWToR. I wanted to explore every corner of every planet but I was out leveling the content before I could see it all, unless I rolled 10 alts. Thats a design flaw. I would still be playing my Jedi if I could have done what GW2 does. Any level content is a calange and you get rewarded for your level, not the level of the content.
I know exactly how it is, and I like it. I, unlike alot of people that are so, OMG anything GW2 can ee it has shortcomings like any game made. It doesn t matter if you go back to any zone, and do the content leveled down to it s areas level, seeing it once or twice is all you need, then it becomes stale. I know you can do alot at level 2 etc etc. I agree with swtor and outleveling zones. It was one of my biggest beefs with the game, but, GW2 is a casual players dream, and as I ve said in other threads, there will be countless "I m bored" threads, shortly after release, because the game is not hardcore in the least.
I ve played enough of it, to base my opinion, and sorry, thank you for trying, but no video will change that. It isn t the best thing since sliced bread. It s good, and I would even say really good, but it has it s shortcoming that alot of people can t see, because they re way too into GW2, like it s they re life.
I'm curious:
What game in the same genre is considered Hardcore?
What game offers better questing that doesn't get stale after 2-3 revisits?
What game offers a better questing system PERIOD? within the same genre of course.
Since you don't consider GW2 to be the next best thing since sliced bread, what would I consider better? and why?
I have a list of things that I feel need to be fixed or changed within Guild Wars 2. I've also compared it to any other game on the market thus far.... Absolutely nothing competes unless there is a game I haven't heard of which is why I'm asking where is this better game that provides a better way of questing and also a more hardcore possible experience within the same game? I'm sure all of us would like to find such an amazing game because I've personally not seen or even heard of this game.
Am I a huge fanboi of Guild Wars 2? Yes I am because I've proven and researched the game for myself and have a realistic expectation of the game. From the read it seems to me like someone is burnt out of this genre of MMORPG and has a jaded outlook or a bias opinion based on an enjoyment found within a different game. Either way I'm curious though I don't expect a reasonable answer.
Planetside 2. Sorry GW2 is great. but not amazing. See, it s opinions, I ve stated mine, you ve stated yours, we re both right in our own minds. That said, we ll see by october or november how many " I m bored posts" crop up. I really do like the game, but it s a little much, how over the top some people are for a game.
Strangely, I have a mixed feeling about imagining GW2 being sub based. It has everything a sub can justify, for sure, but there seems to lack this "continuity" feeling that I want a sub to be tied with.
GW2 doesn't give that emotional link to your character yet (because it's young), and I've yet to see a real commitment (raids, guild, etc), so it is still a casual game in my mind for now. Therefore a sub would feel misplaced.
I guess ANet understood that necessary feeling, they're clever enough. But we'll see in some monthes, when our main toon's history will settle, might be a different story.
edit : by reading all reactions in this thread, I guess I pinpointed what justifies a sub in gamers' mind : commitment. So as I wrote, game is still too young for that.
***** Before hitting that reply button, please READ the WHOLE thread you're about to post in *****
If Arenanet decided to go with a sub model, would you still play GW2 when it comes out? Do you think the game is good enough to warrant a subscription? Or would the sub have you running away from the game, lickity-split?
Would the sub be the only basis for you to play or not, or would you look deeply into the game and have a few different factors help you decide.
I wouldn't have pre-ordered GW2 if it had a subscription.
This is because I have lots of free options out there. My view of games is probably a little different than the average hardcore gamer. I'm in a stage of life that I view games as a (fun) distraction/break from everyday tasks. I would've probably continued playing GW1, Civ5, or even Aion because any one of them is enough for me. Fortunately, GW2 doesn't require a sub and I'm rejoicing and counting down the days to launch!
Sub won't be the only factor, but I wouldn't pre-order the game without having the ability to demo it first, even with all the extensive research. There's no substitute for actually playing the game.
So, with a subscription, I wouldn't have pre-ordered GW2, but would wait for a free trial, if any, and even after the free trial, I would've done an ROI analysis that will depend on the price of subscription. I would likely subscribe for 2 months and experience content as much as I can in those 2 months (about $30 with the going rate of subscription).
(LOL In this case, Arena Net called it right for a B2P of $60 'cause I'd pay more than subscription. :P)
With all the buzz about SW:TOR going F2P and them saying the #1 reason (according to their exit poll) was because it was a subscription model, people are making all kinds of assumptions about the P2P business model. For me, SW:TOR just was not a deep enough, or good enough a game to warrant a sub. With all the excitement going on about GW2, I am curious how good a game it is and how deep it runs.
Let's play make believe for a moment. If Arenanet decided to go with a sub model, would you still play GW2 when it comes out? Do you think the game is good enough to warrant a subscription? Or would the sub have you running away from the game, lickity-split?
Would the sub be the only basis for you to play or not, or would you look deeply into the game and have a few different factors help you decide.
Remember, this is just make believe here, so don't go too overboard with your reactions
1. No, and i'll answer for my guildmates to, No.
2.Maybe i like the game but I don't think it's worth a sub by my high standards, but I'm not sure if they would have enough subs to keep the game live
3. Yes and then i would be siding with the trolls saying "I'll wait till it goes f2p"
4. yes, subs are a turn off for me, I have yet to find any game that is worth spending $15 a month on.
With all the buzz about SW:TOR going F2P and them saying the #1 reason (according to their exit poll) was because it was a subscription model, people are making all kinds of assumptions about the P2P business model. For me, SW:TOR just was not a deep enough, or good enough a game to warrant a sub. With all the excitement going on about GW2, I am curious how good a game it is and how deep it runs.
Let's play make believe for a moment. If Arenanet decided to go with a sub model, would you still play GW2 when it comes out? Do you think the game is good enough to warrant a subscription? Or would the sub have you running away from the game, lickity-split?
Would the sub be the only basis for you to play or not, or would you look deeply into the game and have a few different factors help you decide.
Remember, this is just make believe here, so don't go too overboard with your reactions
It's a make believe but IF Arenanet dediced to go with a sub model they will change many things in game since GW2 is built around a b2p model.
All those time-saving features: gone
All that antigrind philosophy: gone
etc.
If you assure me 100% the game won't change design then yes i would pay subs
I believe that people will pay whatever they need to in order to play an engaging MMORPG with long-term appeal. If that means a subscription, they will pay it. If there is a cash shop that confers ANY type of advantage or individuality, people will spend money in it. If there is a subscription AND a cash shop, people will pay the sub and spend money in the cash shop.
However, the most important part of any of the above situations is that the game is GOOD. The better the game, the more people will spend over longer periods of time. A game does not fail because of the payment model (unless it's ridiculous, like a $100 monthly sub), it fails because it is poorly designed, poorly balanced and not fun to play.
I agree with this to a point, but it's not 100% accurate. People have different willingness to pay or price sensitivity. In your case, you wouldn't pay $100 per month, but some people may be willing to pay more, and some people will only pay up to $5 per month.
Originally posted by deamian
I would be elated to sub 5$ to 3 of my beloved MMO's and help them more that way.
Exactly my point. I would be willing to pay $5, but not $15 for a GW2 subscription.
And then, people will have to see whether a game is worth spending, as you said, "the better the game, the more people will spend", up to this willingness to pay. Some game will be so poorly designed that no one will want to even spend a dime on it and it fails, as you said "not because of the payment model". So, I agree with you there.
Would the sub be the only basis for you to play or not, or would you look deeply into the game and have a few different factors help you decide.
Of course it wouldn't, though I imagine that it would rank high in exit polling. (Easier to summate)
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
With all the buzz about SW:TOR going F2P and them saying the #1 reason (according to their exit poll) was because it was a subscription model, people are making all kinds of assumptions about the P2P business model. For me, SW:TOR just was not a deep enough, or good enough a game to warrant a sub. With all the excitement going on about GW2, I am curious how good a game it is and how deep it runs.
Let's play make believe for a moment. If Arenanet decided to go with a sub model, would you still play GW2 when it comes out? Do you think the game is good enough to warrant a subscription? Or would the sub have you running away from the game, lickity-split?
Would the sub be the only basis for you to play or not, or would you look deeply into the game and have a few different factors help you decide.
Remember, this is just make believe here, so don't go too overboard with your reactions
They misinterpreted the results. We didn't quit because it cost $15 to play (affordability issue). We knew that coming in. We'd pay $60 and get a game plus one-month and that we'd have to keep paying. There was no surprise in that model.
We quit because the game sucked and wasn't worth $15 a month to play (quality issue). I wouldn't pay $5 a month to play it. I wish I hadn't dropped the $60 I did, because it was a waste. In their new, highly-restrictive F2P model that doesn't seem to be giving original purchasers any benefit while taking away what they did pay for, I won't play it F2P. The game sucks and if they fixed the F2P model enough that I would go back, it'd be extremely casual to finish the stories then never play again.
I believe that people will pay whatever they need to in order to play an engaging MMORPG with long-term appeal. If that means a subscription, they will pay it. If there is a cash shop that confers ANY type of advantage or individuality, people will spend money in it. If there is a subscription AND a cash shop, people will pay the sub and spend money in the cash shop.
However, the most important part of any of the above situations is that the game is GOOD. The better the game, the more people will spend over longer periods of time. A game does not fail because of the payment model (unless it's ridiculous, like a $100 monthly sub), it fails because it is poorly designed, poorly balanced and not fun to play.
Exactly this. This is the core, fundamental aspect of all businesses in a competitive environment with low entry and exit costs for e consumer.
Comments
Planetside 2. Sorry GW2 is great. but not amazing. See, it s opinions, I ve stated mine, you ve stated yours, we re both right in our own minds. That said, we ll see by october or november how many " I m bored posts" crop up. I really do like the game, but it s a little much, how over the top some people are for a game.
Strangely, I have a mixed feeling about imagining GW2 being sub based. It has everything a sub can justify, for sure, but there seems to lack this "continuity" feeling that I want a sub to be tied with.
GW2 doesn't give that emotional link to your character yet (because it's young), and I've yet to see a real commitment (raids, guild, etc), so it is still a casual game in my mind for now. Therefore a sub would feel misplaced.
I guess ANet understood that necessary feeling, they're clever enough. But we'll see in some monthes, when our main toon's history will settle, might be a different story.
edit : by reading all reactions in this thread, I guess I pinpointed what justifies a sub in gamers' mind : commitment. So as I wrote, game is still too young for that.
***** Before hitting that reply button, please READ the WHOLE thread you're about to post in *****
I wouldn't have pre-ordered GW2 if it had a subscription.
This is because I have lots of free options out there. My view of games is probably a little different than the average hardcore gamer. I'm in a stage of life that I view games as a (fun) distraction/break from everyday tasks. I would've probably continued playing GW1, Civ5, or even Aion because any one of them is enough for me. Fortunately, GW2 doesn't require a sub and I'm rejoicing and counting down the days to launch!
Sub won't be the only factor, but I wouldn't pre-order the game without having the ability to demo it first, even with all the extensive research. There's no substitute for actually playing the game.
So, with a subscription, I wouldn't have pre-ordered GW2, but would wait for a free trial, if any, and even after the free trial, I would've done an ROI analysis that will depend on the price of subscription. I would likely subscribe for 2 months and experience content as much as I can in those 2 months (about $30 with the going rate of subscription).
(LOL In this case, Arena Net called it right for a B2P of $60 'cause I'd pay more than subscription. :P)
1. No, and i'll answer for my guildmates to, No.
2.Maybe i like the game but I don't think it's worth a sub by my high standards, but I'm not sure if they would have enough subs to keep the game live
3. Yes and then i would be siding with the trolls saying "I'll wait till it goes f2p"
4. yes, subs are a turn off for me, I have yet to find any game that is worth spending $15 a month on.
It's a make believe but IF Arenanet dediced to go with a sub model they will change many things in game since GW2 is built around a b2p model.
All those time-saving features: gone
All that antigrind philosophy: gone
etc.
If you assure me 100% the game won't change design then yes i would pay subs
I wanted to kill time before gw2 got released, but I will probably never buy a sub based game again
I agree with this to a point, but it's not 100% accurate. People have different willingness to pay or price sensitivity. In your case, you wouldn't pay $100 per month, but some people may be willing to pay more, and some people will only pay up to $5 per month.
Exactly my point.
I would be willing to pay $5, but not $15 for a GW2 subscription.
And then, people will have to see whether a game is worth spending, as you said, "the better the game, the more people will spend", up to this willingness to pay. Some game will be so poorly designed that no one will want to even spend a dime on it and it fails, as you said "not because of the payment model". So, I agree with you there.
Of course it wouldn't, though I imagine that it would rank high in exit polling. (Easier to summate)
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
They misinterpreted the results. We didn't quit because it cost $15 to play (affordability issue). We knew that coming in. We'd pay $60 and get a game plus one-month and that we'd have to keep paying. There was no surprise in that model.
We quit because the game sucked and wasn't worth $15 a month to play (quality issue). I wouldn't pay $5 a month to play it. I wish I hadn't dropped the $60 I did, because it was a waste. In their new, highly-restrictive F2P model that doesn't seem to be giving original purchasers any benefit while taking away what they did pay for, I won't play it F2P. The game sucks and if they fixed the F2P model enough that I would go back, it'd be extremely casual to finish the stories then never play again.
Exactly this. This is the core, fundamental aspect of all businesses in a competitive environment with low entry and exit costs for e consumer.