Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Guild Wars 2: Micro-Awesomeness

13

Comments

  • evilastroevilastro EdinburghPosts: 4,270Member

    Originally posted by Zeroxin

    Skill unlock packs won't be needed because all skills will be available to the player in Competitive PvP. I'm guessing what we will mostly see is mission packs.




     

    This wasnt really ArenaNets style in GW1, and I doubt they will start for GW2. They did a few bonus missions which were solo quests and expanded on the lore of the game. But nothing that would segregate players further than the expansion zones already did.

    I think GW2 will do what GW1 did, and have large areas of new content in expansions, which they pumped out pretty regularly up until Eye of the North.

    Only one of the Elder Dragons is going to be killable at the launch of GW1, they still have a lot of areas / opponents from the original to work with in the future, which will probably come in expansions (Cantha, Elona, the North, Battle Isles).

    For cash shop items, I think you will see cosmetic / convenience items, but nothing that gives an unfair advantage to players. ArenaNet is pretty switched on to what players find acceptable.

  • ZeroxinZeroxin LondonPosts: 2,521Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by itgrowls

    Originally posted by Zeroxin

    Skill unlock packs won't be needed because all skills will be available to the player in Competitive PvP. I'm guessing what we will mostly see is mission packs.

    The microtransactions for the game will have cosmetics, mounts, pets only. They described this in the beginning of their first interviews for the game.

    Skills that are beyond what one learns as a player via weapon usage alone in game, superskills, will be only available end game and through a feat of strength using a specific set of skills or doing something challenging in order to learn the special skill.

    All other skills come from using weapons and weapon types to do normal fighting.

    Expansions will be available in the store tho they have already stated that they will be adding more content just after launch as fast as Rift has launched their content to keep people interested and keep the game fun which will consist of adding to the world dynamic events lines, dungeons, and pvp zones.


     

    Preaching to the choir here dude. I know all this stuff. I was only declaring to all that could read that skill unlock packs WON'T be needed because of all the skills will be unlocked for everyone when you enter COMPETITIVE PVP arenas. I'm not sure my post needed a reply unless someone decided to challenge what I was saying.

    This is not a game.

  • evolver1972evolver1972 Port Orchard, WAPosts: 1,118Member

    I am fine with cosmetic items in a cash shop and even optional content (content not required to play/finish the game and nothing that gives an advantage over others) in MTs.  I would have a problem with anything that gives an advantage being for sale in a cash shop.  But, from everything I've seen or heard about Anet, I don't think that would be a worry for anyone.

     

    However, even though I'm opposed to subscription fees on principle, I think any game that offers a subscription should not further charge their subscription holders for anything, except, say, a new expansion.  Even then, it would depend on how big that expansion is.  It really should be tantamount to a whole new game if you have to pay for it and still pay the subscription.

    image

    You want me to pay to play a game I already paid for???

    Be afraid.....The dragons are HERE!

  • ZeroxinZeroxin LondonPosts: 2,521Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by evilastro



    Originally posted by Zeroxin



    Skill unlock packs won't be needed because all skills will be available to the player in Competitive PvP. I'm guessing what we will mostly see is mission packs.










     

    This wasnt really ArenaNets style in GW1, and I doubt they will start for GW2. They did a few bonus missions which were solo quests and expanded on the lore of the game. But nothing that would segregate players further than the expansion zones already did.

    I think GW2 will do what GW1 did, and have large areas of new content in expansions, which they pumped out pretty regularly up until Eye of the North.

    Only one of the Elder Dragons is going to be killable at the launch of GW1, they still have a lot of areas / opponents from the original to work with in the future, which will probably come in expansions (Cantha, Elona, the North, Battle Isles).

    For cash shop items, I think you will see cosmetic / convenience items, but nothing that gives an unfair advantage to players. ArenaNet is pretty switched on to what players find acceptable.




     

    Like I said to the other poster, preaching to the choir. I know all this stuff. My post was mainly aimed at the question that the writer seemed to have left unanswered.

    This is not a game.

  • ZeroxinZeroxin LondonPosts: 2,521Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by Shroom_Mage

    I suspect mission packs will be added, but with the way they focus on "Your Story" you would use your own character. The rewards wouldn't have to be any different from the mission pack rewards in GW1.

     

    The fact that they focus on the slogan "Your Story" doesn't mean anything. If it's fun, they'll put it in. I am actually expecting them to put in some playable missions from the books, that'll definitely be something to behold.

    This is not a game.

  • SiveriaSiveria Saint John, New BrunswickPosts: 1,200Member Uncommon

    I don't mind cash shops/rmt if the pricing is right. For example Gpotato.com games are known to have some of the most expensive cash shops in the f2p indistry for the us/canada. SO I rarely if ever spend anything in them since its a piss poor money to cash shop item conversion. Sad thing is they are too stupid to relize that if they sold at lower prices for the items, more people would be inclined to buy which=more profit. Some fo their games are also heavily pay to win which is another reason I don't like em. Thankfully if you farm alot you can buy the stuff, like in Allods it'd costs a fair bit to prepare for endgame but u can fatk for like a week and not have to pay a dime and just buy the stuff off other players.

    Bascally the key thing is for Arenanet to price the items wisely. I'd be more inclined to say, buy a complete fashion set with no stats (has something for head, torso, legs, hands feet at least) for say 5 bucks, opposed to say 10-15. I'm a sucker for fashion items but usually they want too much for them so I don't bother. They also should allow them to be tradable, alot of people will buy cash shop items to sell in game, for ingame funds.

    Being a pessimist is a win-win pattern of thinking. If you're a pessimist (I'll admit that I am!) you're either:

    A. Proven right (if something bad happens)

    or

    B. Pleasantly surprised (if something good happens)

    Either way, you can't lose! Try it out sometime!

  • TotTWriterTotTWriter MaidstonePosts: 55Member

    Originally posted by Vesavius

    Originally posted by Leucent


    Originally posted by Vesavius


    Originally posted by liva98989

    This :3

    I will agree in that it should not be things that will make the game a buytowin game, I do hope that they will follow their *vision* and only sell cosmetisc things.

    And I will also be fine if they sell expansions, just aslong as you aren't "forced" to buy it. :3

     

    The trouble is in PvE, where the 'winning' is scoring gear and developing your character in all ways, even cosmetic items are 'pay to win'.

    IMO, anything that allows a player to develop his character without actually playing the game is a bad thing to be selling. This includes cosmetics and anything else.

    Everything that has value in the game world should be played for, otherwise these games are just virtual shopping malls with chat rooms... Just IMVU with a fanasy skin.

    Playable DLC is more then fine by me though, I love exploring, learning,and hopefully beating new parts of a game I love.

    I just hate this new culture that has been brain washed in to a lot of folks by the industry that it's ok to buy cosmetics and not to buy playable content. As gamers, for us it should be the other way around.

    I understand your logic, but really. What makes a bunny that shoots rainbows out it s ass value to me. It s not paying to win, in any way shape or form.

    I didn't say it wa spay to win in the sense you mean it, I said it was buying your way to the prize instead of playing for it.

    Which is a bad thing for games.

    It changes the very foundation of what these products are, and how they are designed.


     

    I can see the point you are making, but I think your fears are unfounded in this case. Since GW2 hasn't launched yet, I'll make my case with its predecessor, and arguably its template in terms of DLC armour etc.

    In GW1, max armour is easy to get. It is the skins that are unique, and the ones that are hard to get are prized, partly because of e-peen, and partly for the prowess of the wearer that they imply. By this you might think that adding DLC costumes to the mix would ruin this balance, but I don't think it does.

    It's simply this: There are a heck of a lot of armour that is obtainable in-game, and it's not all ugly. Anything that you find ugly, someone else will probably love. It's down to taste, not ANet saving the good stuff for the shop. The costumes that they sell are only available in the shop, and are an overlay to your armour, offering no stats at all. They aren't armour at all, really. You couldn't start the game and buy a costume and go on to win. You'd be flattened, coz you'd be wearing no armour. 

    Additionally, since everyone knows that you got the armour from the shop, it's not like you can pretend to be a big gun. It's not like games where you can slog away for hours grinding in-game gold and/or items, or you can pay X amount and have the set today. If I see someone in GW1 walking around in a tux, they bought it in the shop. Eh, good for them. Doesn't mean they can play the game, or that they're to be envied. It means they have a few extra pennies to spend. 

    That distinction might seem a small one, but I think it is important. ANet don't make their real money by selling these costumes. They make it in the expansions, which all come with new areas to explore, new quests (for GW1) or events (GW2), and new armour and weapon skins. Most of the costumes so far have been associated with holidays and events too, meaning they are theme outfits more than your run-of-the-mill armour sets. They're gimmicks, albeit gimmicks which some people go nuts for. But I don't think they detract from the gameplay element, precisely because of this fact. The costumes are designed to fit the flavour of the world, but to be easily distinguishable. They don't ruin immersion, but no one will look at you and think "Wow, that's cool, they must have worked really hard to earn something that epic." In a game where that's the only distinction armour has - how hard it is to get - I think that's enough of a deterrent to prevent DLC armour ruining the game.

    Reality Bites. I'm only Barking

  • fenistilfenistil GliwicePosts: 3,005Member

    ONLY if game does not offer / require subscription AND only if game sells CONTENT  like missions , new regions ,etc [ but NO stats, buffs, gazzilions of cosmetics things (FEW cosmetics are ok, dozens of cosmetics are NOT ok), xp buffs, and even small advantage are NOT good ] - almost exclusively. 

    Item shop like in for example Lotro is NOT good and does not work for me.

     

    That basically mean - I am saving my judgement of B2P model in mmorpg's till I play and observe GW2 for at least 6 months (have not played GW1 besides imo that was not mmo).

     

    Microtransaction based model - like freemium / f2p models in current mmorpg's are not good.

     

    That is cause they base their sales on designing / altering game to drive shop sales ,and cause they base on selling gazzilions of cosmetic items / some advantage items / alot of convenience items ,etc - which IS BAD.

     

    Microtransactions are good for selling ACTUAL content like dungeons, zones, missions, etc

    but well companies want to sell buffs, mounts, lockboxes and other stuff cause it does not cost money to make them (like new skin for mount - few hours to few days of work for graphic artist depending on how unique it is VS days to weeks of work of MANY people to make new zone / dungeons / new systems / etc)

  • HurricanePipHurricanePip Sommerille, MAPosts: 167Member
    I've railed against microtransactions in the past and it was warranted. Developers and publishers just nickle and dimed people. At worst, microtransactions unbalance the game or fractured game communities.

    Currently, Activision's MW map packs and EA's KoA armor packs are some of the worst offenders of asking for money and providig value. I would love to see the margins on those. I image it's as high as texting for telecoms.

    However, I thought LoL has a moderately good model. I like Live! For things like Limbo. Some adventure packs like Alan Wake and ME have been decent for $5 - $10.

    In the end, microtransactions cause some problems, but when used correctly can work. Fb games, MMO items that unbalance the game or packs that fracture communities are bad. Charging small amounts of money for frivolous MMO items or new heroes/skins like in LoL aren't that bad.

    If you don't worry about it, it's not a problem.

  • heartlessheartless Brooklyn, NYPosts: 4,993Member

    Personally, I won't mind if Anet uses the same approach to MTs in GW2 as in GW1. It was completely fair, did not offer any advantages and was mostly cosmetic and bank expand items. The skills and pet packs were only useful in PvP and all of those skills and pets could be acquired just by playing the game.

    Besides the campaigns and the EotN expansion, I think that I spent around $20 in 5+ years of playing GW on and off. Compared to subscription costs in games like WoW, $20 is not bad at all.

    image

  • DistopiaDistopia Baltimore, MDPosts: 16,910Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by Leucent

     

    I completely understand, and shockingly I feel the same way, but I ignore it and could care less if people do it. It doesn t effect me in any way shape or form, I can do everything anyone who buys this shit, and didn t pay anymore. I know what you re saying, I really do, but it won t effect the games future, and won t effect it in the now either.


     

    It can effect you though, when they stop putting stuff in the game and only sell it in a cash shop. I think that's what Vesavius is eluding to here. If they take away the option to have a unique look by playing and earning it from game-play, that effects everyone.

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson

    It is a sign of a defeated man, to attack at ones character in the face of logic and reason- Me

  • LeucentLeucent Penticton, BCPosts: 2,371Member

    Originally posted by Distopia



    Originally posted by Leucent






     

    I completely understand, and shockingly I feel the same way, but I ignore it and could care less if people do it. It doesn t effect me in any way shape or form, I can do everything anyone who buys this shit, and didn t pay anymore. I know what you re saying, I really do, but it won t effect the games future, and won t effect it in the now either.






     

    It can effect you though, when they stop putting stuff in the game and only sell it in a cash shop. I think that's what Vesavius is eluding to here. If they take away the option to have a unique look by playing and earning it from game-play, that effects everyone.

    "when they stop putting stuff in the game and only sell it in a cash shop." I would say if not when. but I still feel costumes for sale in a shop, and not available in game for looks, does not effect me in the least. If they stop adding stuff to the game and only sell it in a store I ll agree, but that will never happen. Anet isn t that stupid. What I m saying is people are taking the items only in a store way too seriously, when it s just some usually stupid outfit, no one really wants. It won t effect me in the least.

  • nobotttersnobottters Chicago, ILPosts: 88Member

    Microtransactions means nothing more than F2P, and in this case is will be complete rapage after you buy the $40 software. F2P games bring in 10 times the money subscription games do.. They fool so many with F2P, shows you where our education system is.

    As a person who has seen the corruption from companies inside in how they mold their work, its disgusting to even think this stuff is considered to be available...

    Its not supplemental income, its pure sugar on the icing, and you people have to quit thinking these companies are not making bucketloads of cash for the lazy work they are providing...

    Trust me if you knew how relaxed and spoiled these developers are, and how little they truly worked each day.. you would never even buy the software title, you would expect it delivered overnite to your door

    Regards,
    Nobotters - A better gaming experience

  • rojoArcueidrojoArcueid hell, NJPosts: 6,778Member Uncommon

    i will take microtransactions over subscription anytime, as long as the micros dont sell pay to win stuff. With micros i buy them whenever i want, use them whenever i want, and play the game whenever i want without feeling that my money is being wasted. On the other hand, with subscription fees i feel that im forced to have to play every single day of the month for many hours to get my money's worth..... I dont give my money away to people (game developers) that have a better living than myself, so if i buy 1 / 3 / 6 months of gametime and for any reason i only played couple weeks then im giving my money away to them, Which i wont.

    I think people should take the " $15 monthly = best mmo ever " idea off their heads. That idea was valid years ago when WoW didnt have competition from p2p and f2p games. B2P is here to stay and most likely to put an end to subscripions.

    Just my opinion to the topic.

    image
  • DawnstarDawnstar Pleasant Hill, CAPosts: 207Member Uncommon

    Not really worried about this.  Arenanet seems to pay attention to what players are looking for.

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Posts: 5,451Member Uncommon
    I would be happy with a fair monthly sub. 4-6 bucks a month. If you take everything gw1 made it works out to about 3 bucks a month over 7 years. Or make it MT just like gw1 and have no items or game breaking items. Stick to cosmetic and new content.


    =-D Only on a forum can optimism be called bad and pessimism the good thing =-D Welcome to the internet and forums. 


  • RelGnRelGn halalaPosts: 494Member

    micro transactions for mission packs is the worst scenario i have ever heard of.

    They should release expansions that will be required in order to continue to play the game.

    Imagine some people have bought and the 80% didn't.The 20 % will feel their money gone crap.

    Because believe it or not people will not spent money for missions.Content should be allowed to anyone.

    Cosmetics on the other side looks good.



     

    image
  • VesaviusVesavius BristolPosts: 7,645Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by reignjuste

    Because believe it or not people will not spent money for missions.Content should be allowed to anyone.

     

    Cosmetics on the other side looks good.

     

    Exactly the opposite of what any gamer should be saying... but then that's the result of the last few years of cash shop promoting by the industry (in the pursuit of as much 'pure profit' as possible).

    Play to Achieve over Pay to Achieve any day for me. I don't want these games to become virtual knitting machines, made super easy to appeal to the widest market possible, with shopping malls attached.

    I am a gamer, not a shopper, I want all DLC to be a substantial playable, challenging, and memorable experience. I don't want to buy new hats.

     

  • DodedrommerDodedrommer magna, UTPosts: 3Member

    Originally posted by fenistil

     

     (have not played GW1 besides imo that was not mmo).


    no GW1 was not an MMORPG by your opinion and Arenanets it was in fact a   CORPG

     

  • ZeGermanZeGerman Andover, MAPosts: 196Member Uncommon

    Im not a big fan of DLC because i feel that its too hard to see what your money is getting you before you spend it but that is generaly more an issue of it being done poorly than a flaw in the concept.

    While i would have perfered a cosmettic item mall, i recognize outside  of LoL those have not made nearly enough money.  I think there is too much stink among elitist gamers about micro transactions. 

    The general problem with micro transactions is most of the current MMO's require little to no mechanical skill and even less inteligent thought to play. Sure maybe at max level you can't be a moron to run the hardest instances but were not talking fps/Moba level of practice and skill.  As a result the only thing that determines your level of play is how many hours you have put into the game.  The more hours the better, and alot of people who put in that 200 hours to get a gear set feel cheated when someone puts in 20 hours and 200 dollars to get that gear set.

    In a games that requires more skill and less time I don't think that micro transactions will be as much of an issue since even if they have the same gear as you from less time they wont have your experience or skill playing the game.

  • woodard2040woodard2040 marion, INPosts: 20Member
    Basically, ArenaNet is the ONLY company I have seen do MT right. That's a very opinionated statement, I know, but I'm playing STO right now and their MT are horrible.
  • CursedseiCursedsei Clarkston, MIPosts: 1,012Member

    Originally posted by Vesavius



    Originally posted by reignjuste



    Because believe it or not people will not spent money for missions.Content should be allowed to anyone.



     

    Cosmetics on the other side looks good.

     

    Exactly the opposite of what any gamer should be saying... but then that's the result of the last few years of cash shop promoting by the industry (in the pursuit of as much 'pure profit' as possible).

    Play to Achieve over Pay to Achieve any day for me. I don't want these games to become virtual knitting machines, made super easy to appeal to the widest market possible, with shopping malls attached.

    I am a gamer, not a shopper, I want all DLC to be a substantial playable, challenging, and memorable experience. I don't want to buy new hats.

     

     

    You aren't a gamer, you're just another person with an OPINION, hopefully you know what that means and understand it, because I even went through the trouble of capitalizing the whole word, as well as bolding and underlining it.

  • VesaviusVesavius BristolPosts: 7,645Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by Cursedsei

    Originally posted by Vesavius

     

    Exactly the opposite of what any gamer should be saying... but then that's the result of the last few years of cash shop promoting by the industry (in the pursuit of as much 'pure profit' as possible).

    Play to Achieve over Pay to Achieve any day for me. I don't want these games to become virtual knitting machines, made super easy to appeal to the widest market possible, with shopping malls attached.

    I am a gamer, not a shopper, I want all DLC to be a substantial playable, challenging, and memorable experience. I don't want to buy new hats.

     You aren't a gamer, you're just another person with an OPINION, hopefully you know what that means and understand it, because I even went through the trouble of capitalizing the whole word, as well as bolding and underlining it.

     

    None of which makes your point any more true.

    Yes, I am just another opinion in amongst many, where did I say I didn't consider myself that.

    My opinion is that, in this instance, that you have chosen to comment personally on me because you have no point to make about the contents of my opinion that proves it's anything else but right. 

    I suspect you have also chosen to attack me because you prefer buy your game rewards in cash shops rather then playing for for them and my suggesting that makes you less of a gamer struck a raw nerve.

     

  • dotdotdashdotdotdash Llandrindod WellsPosts: 364Member

    Originally posted by Vesavius

    Originally posted by Cursedsei


    Originally posted by Vesavius

     

    Exactly the opposite of what any gamer should be saying... but then that's the result of the last few years of cash shop promoting by the industry (in the pursuit of as much 'pure profit' as possible).

    Play to Achieve over Pay to Achieve any day for me. I don't want these games to become virtual knitting machines, made super easy to appeal to the widest market possible, with shopping malls attached.

    I am a gamer, not a shopper, I want all DLC to be a substantial playable, challenging, and memorable experience. I don't want to buy new hats.

     You aren't a gamer, you're just another person with an OPINION, hopefully you know what that means and understand it, because I even went through the trouble of capitalizing the whole word, as well as bolding and underlining it.

     

    None of which makes your point any more true.

    Yes, I am just another opinion in amongst many, where did I say I didn't consider myself that.

    My opinion is that, in this instance, that you have chosen to comment personally on me because you have no point to make about the contents of my opinion that proves it's anything else but right. 

    I suspect you have also chosen to attack me because you prefer buy your game rewards in cash shops rather then playing for for them and my suggesting that makes you less of a gamer struck a raw nerve.

     

    You may well have struck a nerve but that doesn't make your observation any more valid. Just because he choses to, or would like to, pay for certain aspects of the games he choses to play does not make him any less or more of a "gamer" than a person who choses to grind endlessly for the same benefits.

    In fact a willingness to spend more money on his games, regardless of what he's chosing to pay for, would suggest that he's more of a gamer than you. A willingness to part company with more cash and time is a far more real commitment than a willingness to part company with purely time.

  • XasapisXasapis VolosPosts: 5,561Member Uncommon

    This is funny. There is one thing every and each one of us has in a finite amount and none of us knows how much. Time. What you invest your time into is more important than anything else.

Sign In or Register to comment.