I would , like in any MMO , pay a sub for a dedicated RP server with actualy GMs doing events like they did in early-mid EQ1. Albeit not a server ruled by the RPolice who go in to seizures at a minor lore infraction...
It is too late in the development cycle for them to require a monthly fee. I personally would prefer it because it would mean some extra content for me and it might make the community a little better as it would weed out some of the younger kids. Plus it may minimize the cash shop.
A subscription would do none of those things.
Did you want me to explain why it would do those things... or are you going to try to explain why it is not.... or did you just want to contradict me? Because you are making zero sense.
Why not its only $15 a month , if I am having fun thats pretty cheap
I mean I am a bit hardcore , in one month I could play 100 hours pretty easy.....$15 /100 hours = 15 cents an hour, pretty cheap enetertainment.
Without a good MMO at hand I easily spend an extra $400 a month just going out to cure my boredom, means i buy more movies, games , drinks, food , hookers, blow ect...
It is too late in the development cycle for them to require a monthly fee. I personally would prefer it because it would mean some extra content for me and it might make the community a little better as it would weed out some of the younger kids. Plus it may minimize the cash shop.
A subscription would do none of those things.
Did you want me to explain why it would do those things... or are you going to try to explain why it is not.... or did you just want to contradict me? Because you are making zero sense.
A sub wouldn't get you "extra content". GW2 is going to get free updates anyway and F2P games like Lotro and DDO seem to be getting a rather large amount of updates.
As proven by WoW and just about every other sub-based game, younger gamers wouldn't be deterred by a subscription.
A subscription has no correlation with the cash shop. If ArenaNet were going to make the cash shop in GW2 pay-to-win they would do so wether or not there was a sub. What goes into the cash shop is determined by what they players purchase, if people buy costumes then there will be more of those. If they buy things like bank or character slots then there will be more of those. If they buy things like gear or enhancements then there will be more of those.
Without even thinking about it, YES! I'm a GW fan and I'm still playing GW when I have the time so kinda can't say no to the new GW which looks far better and makes me think about how much fun I'll have playing that game
"Happiness is not a destination. It is a method of life." -------------------------------
It is too late in the development cycle for them to require a monthly fee. I personally would prefer it because it would mean some extra content for me and it might make the community a little better as it would weed out some of the younger kids. Plus it may minimize the cash shop.
A subscription would do none of those things.
Did you want me to explain why it would do those things... or are you going to try to explain why it is not.... or did you just want to contradict me? Because you are making zero sense.
There are more than enough games out there that provide examples that contradict your statements, so I'd tend to agree with the roman.
id play free to play more often if the item malls wernt pay to win so much. dont get me wrong there are a few out there that are not pay to win. cosmetics for uniqueness is the way to go and exp buffs and maybe money buffs. other then that it is just pay to win with. my opinion.
Guild Wars 1 NEVER got the same amount of content updates as any subscription MMO I have played has, even in its first year. If it was a subscription game it may not be getting many updates now since it is older but it would have gotten more then.
Games with subs tend to not have pay to win cashshops or very large cashshops if at all.
Most children do not have access to a credit card... I said 'some', obviously some do. More could get their parents to buy them a $50 game once than a $15 sub.
I have no idea. I'd need to play beta and read reviews to decide. All I know is I'm buying the game no matter what when it releases. that wouldn't necessarilly be the case if they had a subscription.
No, i wouldn't, but it would be the first game to tempt me. It's by far the best game coming out (played it, makes swtor look like a decade old game) but still not worth a sub. No game is. I've no issue with expansions ect. that cost money as i can get them as and when i want them. But paying a mandatory £10 every month? no.
Sorry, but i have a life, i can't be spending £10 a month for a game which then imbues me with a constant nagging feeling of 'you must play!'. If i have time to play ten barrels of shite out of GW2, i sure will, but if i don't, i wont.
I'll play the game on my own terms, thanks.
Originally posted by wormywyrm
Guild Wars 1 NEVER got the same amount of content updates as any subscription MMO I have played has, even in its first year. If it was a subscription game it may not be getting many updates now since it is older but it would have gotten more then.
Games with subs tend to not have pay to win cashshops or very large cashshops if at all.
Most children do not have access to a credit card... I said 'some', obviously some do. More could get their parents to buy them a $50 game once than a $15 sub.
lolwut?
Guild wars 1 <- original release
Guild wars factions, nightfall and eye of the north <- content updates
That's far more than any sub mmo i've seen, except WoW. The updates to gw more than tripled, if not quadrupled the PvE content. It can easily take 500 hours to nail most of the major content. All without a grind time sink.
Guild Wars 1 NEVER got the same amount of content updates as any subscription MMO I have played has, even in its first year. If it was a subscription game it may not be getting many updates now since it is older but it would have gotten more then.
Games with subs tend to not have pay to win cashshops or very large cashshops if at all.
Most children do not have access to a credit card... I said 'some', obviously some do. More could get their parents to buy them a $50 game once than a $15 sub.
Most children don't have access to a credit card? I agree but they do have debit cards which you can use to pay your subs! And you also have gametime cards! You also have parents who do have a debit/credit card. Hell, some of the games allow you to pay through your mobile. So no a sub does none of the things you say.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
If I am willing to pay for games I was not even excited for, like AION or RIFT, then why wouldn't I pay it for a game I am excited for. So, yes. But of course that is only under the assumption it was always going to be released as a P2P game.
I agree with the reasons that Anet makes too not make it a P2P game but a B2P game. In hindsight, it is strange that you tend to pay for content upfront without even being able to influence the content being made. I don't know of any other payment model in the world where you would pay upfront for well anything without knowing what you are paying for. I'd like to stay to the model of paying for something when I know what it is. And releasing content through a cash shop is the right way to go.
Are you kidding me? You really think that children all have access to their parents debit cards? And their parents would just let them charge $15 a month to those cards? lol.... Like I said before: Some, not most.
Are you kidding me? You really think that children all have access to their parents debit cards? And their parents would just let them charge $15 a month to those cards? lol.... Like I said before: Some, not most.
Pretty sure its the parents doing it for them, after all, it's only 15 cents a day or what-have-you. Not like it's that expensive.
IF it was orginally gonna be P2P i would want alot more info than they are already giving us... then I'll do the same what i did for TOR i made my mind up in beta (the end result being TOR wasnt for me) but I'm looking forward alot more ot GW2 then i was TOR so I'd probably pay full sub for sure
Guild Wars 1 NEVER got the same amount of content updates as any subscription MMO I have played has, even in its first year. If it was a subscription game it may not be getting many updates now since it is older but it would have gotten more then.
Games with subs tend to not have pay to win cashshops or very large cashshops if at all.
Most children do not have access to a credit card... I said 'some', obviously some do. More could get their parents to buy them a $50 game once than a $15 sub.
lolwut?
Guild wars 1 <- original release
Guild wars factions, nightfall and eye of the north <- content updates
That's far more than any sub mmo i've seen, except WoW. The updates to gw more than tripled, if not quadrupled the PvE content. It can easily take 500 hours to nail most of the major content. All without a grind time sink.
If GW1 had a monthly fee it still would have had expansions; probably similar to the ones it did. Obviously not exactly the same.
And no, expansions arent 'content updates' as I was describing.
And no, WoW is not the only MMO to have expansions... All successful MMOs have had them. GW1 definitely would have, it was a good game. Everquest has 18 expansions and many many many more updates. Guild Wars 2 would see more updates if it had a monthly fee.
Are you kidding me? You really think that children all have access to their parents debit cards? And their parents would just let them charge $15 a month to those cards? lol.... Like I said before: Some, not most.
Pretty sure its the parents doing it for them, after all, it's only 15 cents a day or what-have-you. Not like it's that expensive.
Quite honestly, if it wasn't for the prospect of playing GW2, I wouldn't be playing MMOs at all. The reason I played LOTRO, Runes of Magic and currently Rift, is to see how these generic MMOs do things and what can I say... it was a learning experience. The quest grind, ninja-looting, e-peen (DPS) meters, gear treadmill, terrible PvP, raiding schedules (lock outs). I've learnt a lot about MMOs in the past year and will have a greater appreciation for GW2, when it comes out and I wouldn't have even thought of playing it, if it had a monthly fee.
If GW1 had a monthly fee it still would have had expansions; probably similar to the ones it did. Obviously not exactly the same.
And no, expansions arent 'content updates' as I was describing.
And no, WoW is not the only MMO to have expansions... All successful MMOs have had them. GW1 definitely would have, it was a good game. Everquest has 18 expansions and many many many more updates. Guild Wars 2 would see more updates if it had a monthly fee.
On the contrary.
From my experience Corporations tend to get lazy because of the subscription fee itself.
On the side note GW1 never was an mmorpg in the first place and I had no problem with
the community ingame. Was very mature as long as I played.
The money itself isn't an issue. The way it affects both player experience and game design is the core of the problem.
1) Playing subscription games, I feel obligued to get my 15$ worth of game, whether I feel like playing this month or not. It doesn't make me happy.
2) In return, developers have to guarantee that every player will get his 15$ of worth of game. Problem is, none of them so far has managed to do it with pure fun and content - they resort to providing very little actual content and shackling players to grind with progression. I think it's inseparable part of subscription model, and I don't want that to happen to GW2.
As a result, I most likely wouldn't buy GW2 if it had subscription fee. B2P is superior to subscription from customer perspective, Anet dropping it would prove that they care about money more than about their players and lose a lot in my eyes.
Honestly? If the game is really as good as it seems to be..i would gladly pay a subscription fee..considering the money i spent on MMO's that turned out to be second-hand stuff.
Comments
I would , like in any MMO , pay a sub for a dedicated RP server with actualy GMs doing events like they did in early-mid EQ1. Albeit not a server ruled by the RPolice who go in to seizures at a minor lore infraction...
Did you want me to explain why it would do those things... or are you going to try to explain why it is not.... or did you just want to contradict me? Because you are making zero sense.
Play as your fav retro characters: cnd-online.net. My site: www.lysle.net. Blog: creatingaworld.blogspot.com.
Ya I would pay a sub for sure.
Why not its only $15 a month , if I am having fun thats pretty cheap
I mean I am a bit hardcore , in one month I could play 100 hours pretty easy.....$15 /100 hours = 15 cents an hour, pretty cheap enetertainment.
Without a good MMO at hand I easily spend an extra $400 a month just going out to cure my boredom, means i buy more movies, games , drinks, food , hookers, blow ect...
A sub wouldn't get you "extra content". GW2 is going to get free updates anyway and F2P games like Lotro and DDO seem to be getting a rather large amount of updates.
As proven by WoW and just about every other sub-based game, younger gamers wouldn't be deterred by a subscription.
A subscription has no correlation with the cash shop. If ArenaNet were going to make the cash shop in GW2 pay-to-win they would do so wether or not there was a sub. What goes into the cash shop is determined by what they players purchase, if people buy costumes then there will be more of those. If they buy things like bank or character slots then there will be more of those. If they buy things like gear or enhancements then there will be more of those.
Without even thinking about it, YES! I'm a GW fan and I'm still playing GW when I have the time so kinda can't say no to the new GW which looks far better and makes me think about how much fun I'll have playing that game
"Happiness is not a destination. It is a method of life."
-------------------------------
There are more than enough games out there that provide examples that contradict your statements, so I'd tend to agree with the roman.
id play free to play more often if the item malls wernt pay to win so much. dont get me wrong there are a few out there that are not pay to win. cosmetics for uniqueness is the way to go and exp buffs and maybe money buffs. other then that it is just pay to win with. my opinion.
just my 2cents worth.
Guild Wars 1 NEVER got the same amount of content updates as any subscription MMO I have played has, even in its first year. If it was a subscription game it may not be getting many updates now since it is older but it would have gotten more then.
Games with subs tend to not have pay to win cashshops or very large cashshops if at all.
Most children do not have access to a credit card... I said 'some', obviously some do. More could get their parents to buy them a $50 game once than a $15 sub.
Play as your fav retro characters: cnd-online.net. My site: www.lysle.net. Blog: creatingaworld.blogspot.com.
I have no idea. I'd need to play beta and read reviews to decide. All I know is I'm buying the game no matter what when it releases. that wouldn't necessarilly be the case if they had a subscription.
No, i wouldn't, but it would be the first game to tempt me. It's by far the best game coming out (played it, makes swtor look like a decade old game) but still not worth a sub. No game is. I've no issue with expansions ect. that cost money as i can get them as and when i want them. But paying a mandatory £10 every month? no.
Sorry, but i have a life, i can't be spending £10 a month for a game which then imbues me with a constant nagging feeling of 'you must play!'. If i have time to play ten barrels of shite out of GW2, i sure will, but if i don't, i wont.
I'll play the game on my own terms, thanks.
lolwut?
Guild wars 1 <- original release
Guild wars factions, nightfall and eye of the north <- content updates
That's far more than any sub mmo i've seen, except WoW. The updates to gw more than tripled, if not quadrupled the PvE content. It can easily take 500 hours to nail most of the major content. All without a grind time sink.
100% would, A net deserves every penny I give them and will always deserve more.
No
but
Probably I'm going to spend my 'subscription fee' @ ingame shop
just to support them anyway.
SexuaLobster's Grease Portal
Most children don't have access to a credit card? I agree but they do have debit cards which you can use to pay your subs! And you also have gametime cards! You also have parents who do have a debit/credit card. Hell, some of the games allow you to pay through your mobile. So no a sub does none of the things you say.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
If I am willing to pay for games I was not even excited for, like AION or RIFT, then why wouldn't I pay it for a game I am excited for. So, yes. But of course that is only under the assumption it was always going to be released as a P2P game.
I agree with the reasons that Anet makes too not make it a P2P game but a B2P game. In hindsight, it is strange that you tend to pay for content upfront without even being able to influence the content being made. I don't know of any other payment model in the world where you would pay upfront for well anything without knowing what you are paying for. I'd like to stay to the model of paying for something when I know what it is. And releasing content through a cash shop is the right way to go.
Are you kidding me? You really think that children all have access to their parents debit cards? And their parents would just let them charge $15 a month to those cards? lol.... Like I said before: Some, not most.
Play as your fav retro characters: cnd-online.net. My site: www.lysle.net. Blog: creatingaworld.blogspot.com.
Pretty sure its the parents doing it for them, after all, it's only 15 cents a day or what-have-you. Not like it's that expensive.
IF it was orginally gonna be P2P i would want alot more info than they are already giving us... then I'll do the same what i did for TOR i made my mind up in beta (the end result being TOR wasnt for me) but I'm looking forward alot more ot GW2 then i was TOR so I'd probably pay full sub for sure
If GW1 had a monthly fee it still would have had expansions; probably similar to the ones it did. Obviously not exactly the same.
And no, expansions arent 'content updates' as I was describing.
And no, WoW is not the only MMO to have expansions... All successful MMOs have had them. GW1 definitely would have, it was a good game. Everquest has 18 expansions and many many many more updates. Guild Wars 2 would see more updates if it had a monthly fee.
Play as your fav retro characters: cnd-online.net. My site: www.lysle.net. Blog: creatingaworld.blogspot.com.
>_<
Play as your fav retro characters: cnd-online.net. My site: www.lysle.net. Blog: creatingaworld.blogspot.com.
Quite honestly, if it wasn't for the prospect of playing GW2, I wouldn't be playing MMOs at all. The reason I played LOTRO, Runes of Magic and currently Rift, is to see how these generic MMOs do things and what can I say... it was a learning experience. The quest grind, ninja-looting, e-peen (DPS) meters, gear treadmill, terrible PvP, raiding schedules (lock outs). I've learnt a lot about MMOs in the past year and will have a greater appreciation for GW2, when it comes out and I wouldn't have even thought of playing it, if it had a monthly fee.
On the contrary.
From my experience Corporations tend to get lazy because of the subscription fee itself.
On the side note GW1 never was an mmorpg in the first place and I had no problem with
the community ingame. Was very mature as long as I played.
SexuaLobster's Grease Portal
The money itself isn't an issue. The way it affects both player experience and game design is the core of the problem.
1) Playing subscription games, I feel obligued to get my 15$ worth of game, whether I feel like playing this month or not. It doesn't make me happy.
2) In return, developers have to guarantee that every player will get his 15$ of worth of game. Problem is, none of them so far has managed to do it with pure fun and content - they resort to providing very little actual content and shackling players to grind with progression. I think it's inseparable part of subscription model, and I don't want that to happen to GW2.
As a result, I most likely wouldn't buy GW2 if it had subscription fee. B2P is superior to subscription from customer perspective, Anet dropping it would prove that they care about money more than about their players and lose a lot in my eyes.
Honestly? If the game is really as good as it seems to be..i would gladly pay a subscription fee..considering the money i spent on MMO's that turned out to be second-hand stuff.
*cough*AION*cough*
*coguh*Warhammer*cough*
...damn this cold is getting to me
Yes i would pay a sub.
How can Blizzard still cash in on subs while their patches take longer and longer each year.
GW2 seem to be so much more then blizzards wow and bioware's SWTOR.
hell, i'd have paid sub for gw1.