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!

Poll: How much $ have you spent on gems?

1235

Comments

  • HomituHomitu Hometown, HIPosts: 2,030Member

    To anyone who actually paid $251+:  You're crazy!  BUT, thanks for helping fund the game I'm enjoying!

    As for me, I've found the gold > gem conversion to be very reasonable.  I've been able to buy everything I've wanted so far, which has only amounted to 1 extra character slot and 2 bank slots.  2000 gems total that cost me about 6-7 gold at their respective times of purchase.  Bank slots cost about 2 gold, which, for the current GW2 economy, is about the same in game price bank slots tend to go for in other MMOs.  As such, the game doesn't even feel like it has a cash shop.  

  • kaiser3282kaiser3282 Phoenix, AZPosts: 2,661Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by JoeyMMO
    Originally posted by Eir_S
    Originally posted by SnarlingWolf

     The main money makers in F2P games are more storage/more character slots so I wouldn't call GW2's B2P store "fluff items".

    But the question is, how many of those F2P games allow you to get the same bonuses (bag space, character slots) through in game gold?  Not any that I can recall.

     Allods Online lets you buy shards with in-game gold. It has a similar system as the one GW2 is using. There's an NPC that buys/sells shards. The more players sell shards the cheaper they become, buying shards drives prices up.

    Of course that cash shop is pay2win and you'd need to grind gold till your eyes bleed dollars to become competitive on in-game gold alone.

    Rohan Online, which has been around several years, also had their Exchange Market which was a mix of Auction House and Cash Shop. You could post in-game gold and equipment, even entire characters, for sale for cash shop credits. Though that game was pretty pay 2 win too. Kind of worked in my favor though since a weapon I crafted within the 1st 2 weeks of launch wound up being the strongest version of it in existence on my server and I was able to sell it off for around $200 worth of credits.

  • jmcdermottukjmcdermottuk LiverpoolPosts: 976Member Uncommon
    Still haven't bought any gems yet. I will be buying some soon, but only because I want to support Anet and future expansions. I feel no real need to buy gems for anything. I'll probably just buy bank/bag slots with them, when I eventually get around to buying some.
  • niceguy3978niceguy3978 Gainesville, FLPosts: 2,000Member
    It is interesting because the median amount spent is 0$ but a rough estimate of the average at this point (with 553 people) is about 16$.  So on average the mmorpg.com community is spending slightly more than what it would cost per month, but the vast majority (65%) aren't spending anything.  The true amount being spent is likely higher than the 16$ I came up with because aside from the 1-20$ option I used the lowest possible amount spent for a grouping.  Example: for the 21-40$ option I used 21$ X 31 people (5.3 percent of 559 people) and got 630$.  This is a conservative number because I used the lowest amount possible for each group, so the overall number is going to be higher if I had to guess, I would say that doing the math this way will come up too low by about 20%, and that is just a guess.
  • garbonzogarbonzo Lancaster, PAPosts: 260Member
    I got enough character slots to have all classes and increased bank space. These costs won't repeat and I'm enjoying the game enough to know I'll play off and on for quite a while, so I'm certain over the long haul I'll spend way less that $15/mo. (Unless they add some new basic utilities like this to buy that I "can't live without"...of course by then I'll actually have some gold.)
  • just1opinionjust1opinion Kansas City, MOPosts: 4,844Member

     

    Only 10 bucks so far, but that was last month, so I'm sure I'll find something else I want this month. :)  Last month I got extra bank space and sold the other 200 gems for some in game moolah.

    President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club

  • RefMinorRefMinor MyTownPosts: 3,452Member
    Originally posted by GrayGhost79

    The reality is they intentionally make these f2p's in a fashion that actually forces you or at the very least punishes you for not using the cash shop. Not to mention that many items on the cash shop in these f2p's is game breaking. Community is another issue.

     

    Unlike Anet who honestly and unintentionally miscalculated how much bank space people would need to comfortably play the game they spent $60 on?

  • ReizlaReizla AlkmaarPosts: 3,301Member Uncommon
    3 gold so far...

    AsRock 990FX Extreme3
    AMD Phenom II 1090T ~3.2Ghz
    GEiL 16Gb DDR3 1600Mhz
    ASUS GTX970 3x HD monitor 1920x1080

  • SarykSaryk Tallulah, LAPosts: 476Member
    i sold gold for gems. thats it.
  • SnarlingWolfSnarlingWolf Thereiam, ARPosts: 2,697Member
    Originally posted by GrayGhost79
    Originally posted by SnarlingWolf

     

    In the end, you will have paid more with the GW2 model because you had to pay $60 up front.

    Yeah, it's pretty apparent you don't know how this stuff works. Thats ok, my advice is to take the advice from those that have been around and actually know whats going on. 

    F2P's are certainly not in the best interest for gamers. Name a f2p thats on par in quality or quantity of a AAA title like GW2. Figure out how much you are paying for each NEEDED item in that f2p of yours. Figure out how much you are spending to unlock classes, more than 1 inventory slot, additional bank space, Extra zones, Extra quests, items to reduce the grind, items to put you on par with all the others that have purchased "elite" gear, items that allow you to use global chat, items that allow you to create a guild.

    I mean sure, free sounds like a sweet deal. If only it were my friend, if only it were. The reality is they intentionally make these f2p's in a fashion that actually forces you or at the very least punishes you for not using the cash shop. Not to mention that many items on the cash shop in these f2p's is game breaking. Community is another issue.

     

    I'm not saying all f2p's are awful, but I'm saying they simply do not and can not stack up to GW2 with its buy to play model.

     

    I get it, you like f2p and think you are saving money and you think everyone should agree with you. At the end of the day we've been around long enough to know the reality of the situation.

     

    FYI - They are actually looking into ways to offer free to play games with commercials built into them now.

    Champion f2p all you want, but the fact remains it's simply not what you think it is. If that portion of players that spends a ton in the cash shop in those games quit paying... your game goes away. GW2 isn't in the same boat.

     

    I'll take my $60 up front game that doesn't require me to spend another dime to enjoy ALL of the content. You stick with your f2p's that will require $100's of dollars down the road to unlock a fraction of the content I just paid $60 for....

    This is what happens when the internet makes everyone think they're smart. You are flat out wrong in pretty much every sentence of that response.

     

    I don't champion F2P, which is turthfully silly to even say as other people in this thread know I support sub based. That shows you're not even reading, you are simply spewing forth meaningless and empty statements.

     

    I don't like F2P, and don't play any F2P games because I don't like the model. GW2 took F2P and then stuck a $60 up front cost on it. THERE IS NO DENYING THAT. So it took something that is already bad and made it worse.

     

    F2P has a wide variety of companies trying it out, some are better than others. Typically the more respectable companies allow a player to grind out what they need or allow players to trade some form of bought things to one another. GW2, outside of many cosmetic items, allows the same thing. That is what makes it a F2P game with a $60 up front cost. Defend it all you want but it is bad for customers to get charged more for the same thing, end of story.

     

    I will also guarantee, without a shadow of a doubt, I know how all of this works better than you do. Feel free to keep trying that as your main argument "You don't know what you're talking about" with zero facts to try and back up the childish insult.

  • SnarlingWolfSnarlingWolf Thereiam, ARPosts: 2,697Member
    Originally posted by jacklo
    Originally posted by SnarlingWolf
    Originally posted by Eir_S
    Originally posted by SnarlingWolf

    The fact of the matter is average player spending, regardless of individual spending, is higher compared to a subscription model with no store. That is not a good thing for gamers. End of story.

    And?  It's their money to spend.  I bought the game and haven't been able to play the past month.  I didn't spend an extra $15 for that time.  Gamers can make up their own minds.  End of story.

    If a game has 1 million players and an average cost of $15 per gamer (aka sub model) it is a cost to all gamers of $15 million for a month of that game.

     

    If the same game has 1 million players and an average cost of $21 per gamer it is a cost to all gamers of $21 million for a month of that game.

     

    That means the company just got to profit more on the same amount of work and that is spread down to the gamers themselves. Some will pay more directly out of pocket, others will have to grind more to compete with those who paid more and in the end everyone does/pays more to be exactly how they would have been in the other model.

     

    It has absolutely nothing to do with 1 gamer spending $200 of his/her own money. In the end when a game cost a collective group more for the same amount of stuff it is bad for that group. Of course the people who don't understand that are the ones who are repeatedly helping that same company rip off customers more.

    I won't bother trying to explain it beyond that. I'll come back in 5 years and try to point it out when people wonder why it feels so expensive to play games in the future as the trend continues.

     

    Same ones who are cutting out basic things in their lives to pay the higher and higher cell phone bills as the companies figure out how to exploit people more and more and yet those people never stop paying/downgrade to minimums to send a message. Best part is those phone companies don't even try to hide what they're doing and flat out say they think they can make people pay more for the same service. Pretty some certain game companies will realize they can be upfront about what they're doing because people will just pay anyways.

     

    You're argument about "bad for gamers" is ridiculous and revolves around the part in green.

    You DON'T NEED TO GO THAT ROUTE.

    Cell phone companies only "exploit" those who can't do without the next new toy and have the money to buy them.

    I've paid the same £10 per month contract for the last 3 years because my phone still does what I want it to and I have no desire to polish my ego with an iPhone or whatever the next thing will be.

    GW2 only "exploits"  those who are willing and able to pay more for vanity items.

    If you really must "keep up with the Joneses" and have the best of everything all the time, you'd better have a large wallet because it's everywhere in life. Even then, someone else always has more.

    With regards the data, look at the way you do maths lol.

    You're seriously counting the highest figure as $300 even when more than have of those options only had a range of $20 and the rest $50 ?

    In fact, the poll is so skewed in the higher ranges that it's impossible to gain anything worthwhile from it.

    All of the higher ranges, which actually have the lowest percentages, have a range of $50, compared to $20 for the lower and more popular choices. Yet you go half way... well that's obliging of you, NOT.

    Your maths is poor, same as your argument.

    I simply can't beleive the audacity.

     

    Flat out your statement shows a complete lack of mathematical understanding. Truthfully.

  • SnarlingWolfSnarlingWolf Thereiam, ARPosts: 2,697Member
    Originally posted by Eir_S
    Originally posted by Warband
    Originally posted by Eir_S
    Originally posted by SnarlingWolf

     The main money makers in F2P games are more storage/more character slots so I wouldn't call GW2's B2P store "fluff items".

    But the question is, how many of those F2P games allow you to get the same bonuses (bag space, character slots) through in game gold?  Not any that I can recall.

     Actually Vindictus is pretty good in that regard. Most important cash items (as in gameplay affecting) are tradeable via market place (meaning if the item is unwanted regardless of the money spent to acquire it the price wlll go doown....), those that aren't it's perfectly legal to "gift" items, so you can acquire the rest through that means. Also none of the content is gated, and new profs/chars are free on updates come with an extra account slot. Really you have to take it by a game by game basis rather than by payment models.

     

    The elephant in room in this thread is that many p2p mmo's also have cash shops, some with cosmetics, and some with boosts. So the argument is pointless. Look at individual games not payment models, in these sorts of comparisons. All games of a certain payment model don't do the same things...

    Ah, I did not know that about Vindictus.  

    As for the part in yellow... maybe someone in this thread (not going to say who) should be more concerned about that than GW2's payment plan.  I mean, if this mystery poster believes ANet spells DOOM for the future of MMOs, what about the sub model devs who will go (read: are already going) one step further.  Everyone wants to believe that if they pay a sub, it makes the bad things go away.

    It's not even because I love ANet as a company, I just find it weird that people are worried about the payment future of MMOs and citing GW2 as an example of why things will be horrible.  There are more important things to worry about than what is 5 years down the road anyway.

    I'm the Candyman now, if you say my name three times.....

     

    If a P2P game has a store, especially one that has items such as character slots, bank/bag slots, etc. then you shouldn't be playing it.

     

    At no point in time did I say every MMO company working off of subscriptions is doing it right.

     

    Taking F2P and charging $60 up front is a horrible thing. The type of thing people should try to stop the moment it pops up so it doesn't become a trend.

     

    Ang what more important things are there in gaming than players getting ripped off? If your logic is that there are things more important in life than gaming, you are correct. However, if because there are more important things in gaming we should never discuss gaming matters then these forums shouldn't even exist.

  • sudosudo Tel-AvivPosts: 697Member Uncommon

    0$

    Bought around 2000 gems for gold, though. I do plan to start buying some gems later on. For cometic items only, for now. It seems like none of those items give you some incredible boosts you can't live without. I just want to support anet :)

    "Only in quiet waters do things mirror themselves undistorted.
    Only in a quiet mind is adequate perception of the world."
    Hans Margolius

  • jacklojacklo BlackpoolPosts: 570Member

    Some maths:

    With some wild figures flying around, I decided to make something of the data that is available in this post.

    Straight away I'll tell you that I have discounted the highest range ($251+) mainly because there is no upper limit, but also because a handful of votes from haters could easily skew the figures. I also feel this price range is not really representative of what would normally be spent on a monthly basis by your average gamer.

    Rather than guess at figures or use the "half way" approach, I worked out the number of players in each bracket and used a random number generator (random.org) to give me the spend for each player in that range.

    Here are the results:

    Of 550 votes considered:

    • 67.8% (373) paid nothing
    • 78.5% (432) paid less than $15
    • 21.5% (118) paid more than $15

    Of 177 players who purchased gems:

    • 33.5% (59) spent less than $15
    • 66.5% (118) spent more than $15

    The total revenue from gem sales was $7771 which equates to an average spend of:

    • $43.90 per gem buyer
    • $14.12 per player overall

     

    Considering that the vast majority of posts state that they bought gems to increase bank/bag slots (a one-off purchase), you would reasonably expect the average monthly spend to decrease substantially over time.

    In summary, 78% of players were financially better off with GW2's B2P model, 67.8% substantially so.

  • GrayGhost79GrayGhost79 Webster, MAPosts: 4,813Member
    Originally posted by SnarlingWolf
    Originally posted by GrayGhost79
    Originally posted by SnarlingWolf

     

    In the end, you will have paid more with the GW2 model because you had to pay $60 up front.

    Yeah, it's pretty apparent you don't know how this stuff works. Thats ok, my advice is to take the advice from those that have been around and actually know whats going on. 

    F2P's are certainly not in the best interest for gamers. Name a f2p thats on par in quality or quantity of a AAA title like GW2. Figure out how much you are paying for each NEEDED item in that f2p of yours. Figure out how much you are spending to unlock classes, more than 1 inventory slot, additional bank space, Extra zones, Extra quests, items to reduce the grind, items to put you on par with all the others that have purchased "elite" gear, items that allow you to use global chat, items that allow you to create a guild.

    I mean sure, free sounds like a sweet deal. If only it were my friend, if only it were. The reality is they intentionally make these f2p's in a fashion that actually forces you or at the very least punishes you for not using the cash shop. Not to mention that many items on the cash shop in these f2p's is game breaking. Community is another issue.

     

    I'm not saying all f2p's are awful, but I'm saying they simply do not and can not stack up to GW2 with its buy to play model.

     

    I get it, you like f2p and think you are saving money and you think everyone should agree with you. At the end of the day we've been around long enough to know the reality of the situation.

     

    FYI - They are actually looking into ways to offer free to play games with commercials built into them now.

    Champion f2p all you want, but the fact remains it's simply not what you think it is. If that portion of players that spends a ton in the cash shop in those games quit paying... your game goes away. GW2 isn't in the same boat.

     

    I'll take my $60 up front game that doesn't require me to spend another dime to enjoy ALL of the content. You stick with your f2p's that will require $100's of dollars down the road to unlock a fraction of the content I just paid $60 for....

    This is what happens when the internet makes everyone think they're smart. You are flat out wrong in pretty much every sentence of that response.

     

    I don't champion F2P, which is turthfully silly to even say as other people in this thread know I support sub based. That shows you're not even reading, you are simply spewing forth meaningless and empty statements.

     

    I don't like F2P, and don't play any F2P games because I don't like the model. GW2 took F2P and then stuck a $60 up front cost on it. THERE IS NO DENYING THAT. So it took something that is already bad and made it worse.

     

    F2P has a wide variety of companies trying it out, some are better than others. Typically the more respectable companies allow a player to grind out what they need or allow players to trade some form of bought things to one another. GW2, outside of many cosmetic items, allows the same thing. That is what makes it a F2P game with a $60 up front cost. Defend it all you want but it is bad for customers to get charged more for the same thing, end of story.

     

    I will also guarantee, without a shadow of a doubt, I know how all of this works better than you do. Feel free to keep trying that as your main argument "You don't know what you're talking about" with zero facts to try and back up the childish insult.

    This is what you aren't understanding....

    GW2 is not f2p quality

    GW2 does not have game breaking items or gated content in the store

    GW2 gives you all of the content right there up front for $60 unlike a f2p

    GW2 allows you to purchase gems in game with in game gold

    GW2 isn't a f2p with a $60 initial cost, it's a p2p minus the monthly fee.

    You have no clue what you are talking about my friend, thats pretty plain for anyone to see lol. Your "facts" simply show this.

     

    In the end, prople are getting a AAA MMO for less than what has become the norm. This is a fact. It offers the same kind of fluff and services you find in other p2p MMO's in it's store.

    I'm sorry, you're wrong. I will leave it at that though, you have your opinions and facts won't change that. So we will simply have to agree to disagree.

  • AkumawraithAkumawraith Fort wayne, INPosts: 335Member Common
    Considering I have been playing since the 80's Id say Ive spent well over $800 or more on them. From all the Warcrafts, to the Ultimas, the Diablos, Everquest, WoW, SWG, SWTOR, AOC, Warhammer, GW, GW2, Rifts.. the list goes on.. its an expensive as hell hobby and I will continue to spend the money because its something I love to do. 20+ years of gaming and im not ready to stop anytime soon!

    Played: UO, LotR, WoW, SWG, DDO, AoC, EVE, Warhammer, TF2, EQ2, SWTOR, TSW, CSS, KF, L4D, AoW, WoT

    Playing: The Secret World until Citadel of Sorcery goes into Alpha testing.

    Tired of: Linear quest games, dailies, and dumbed down games

    Anticipating:Citadel of Sorcery

  • aesperusaesperus Hamshire, NVPosts: 5,128Member Uncommon

    None, I've been buying gems with ingame currency. They're pretty cheap tbh.

  • garbonzogarbonzo Lancaster, PAPosts: 260Member
    Originally posted by Akumawraith
    Considering I have been playing since the 80's Id say Ive spent well over $800 or more on them. From all the Warcrafts, to the Ultimas, the Diablos, Everquest, WoW, SWG, SWTOR, AOC, Warhammer, GW, GW2, Rifts.. the list goes on.. its an expensive as hell hobby and I will continue to spend the money because its something I love to do. 20+ years of gaming and im not ready to stop anytime soon!

    Word.

    And, comparing to other hobbies, $800 over 20+ years is incredibly cheap for many hours of fun. I don't even want to estimate the thousands I've spent on music gear in that time.   

  • UkiahUkiah Austin, TXPosts: 273Member
    Originally posted by Loke666

    Nothing so far. If the game still feels as fun the next month as it have the first I will buy some gems though to support it, something like 20-25 euro or so.

    But that wont be until they actually fixed up the higher level zones. A good game deserves a reward but not until I really consider it to be ready and the higher content do need some work still.

    Comforting to know I'm not the only one who feels this way.

  • jacklojacklo BlackpoolPosts: 570Member
    Originally posted by cahenderson
    Originally posted by Loke666

    Nothing so far. If the game still feels as fun the next month as it have the first I will buy some gems though to support it, something like 20-25 euro or so.

    But that wont be until they actually fixed up the higher level zones. A good game deserves a reward but not until I really consider it to be ready and the higher content do need some work still.

    Comforting to know I'm not the only one who feels this way.

    It's good that you have the choice to do that, rather than wait for false promises to transpire whilst you pay $15 a month for soon™.

  • TuchakaTuchaka san diego, CAPosts: 468Member
    first couple of days i spent a lot since then none, mostly for bag space etc.
  • rygard49rygard49 Huntington Beach, CAPosts: 975Member Common
    Originally posted by jacklo

    Some maths:

    With some wild figures flying around, I decided to make something of the data that is available in this post.

    Straight away I'll tell you that I have discounted the highest range ($251+) mainly because there is no upper limit, but also because a handful of votes from haters could easily skew the figures. I also feel this price range is not really representative of what would normally be spent on a monthly basis by your average gamer.

    Rather than guess at figures or use the "half way" approach, I worked out the number of players in each bracket and used a random number generator (random.org) to give me the spend for each player in that range.

    Here are the results:

    Of 550 votes considered:

    • 67.8% (373) paid nothing
    • 78.5% (432) paid less than $15
    • 21.5% (118) paid more than $15

    Of 177 players who purchased gems:

    • 33.5% (59) spent less than $15
    • 66.5% (118) spent more than $15

    The total revenue from gem sales was $7771 which equates to an average spend of:

    • $43.90 per gem buyer
    • $14.12 per player overall

     

    Considering that the vast majority of posts state that they bought gems to increase bank/bag slots (a one-off purchase), you would reasonably expect the average monthly spend to decrease substantially over time.

    In summary, 78% of players were financially better off with GW2's B2P model, 67.8% substantially so.

    This post is no better than OPs math. When you choose data selectively, it immediately invalidates any results you come up with.

    No one should be making any analytical posts based on these figures, especially not while trying to throw away portions of the 'data' based on an assumption that it's just 'haters' messing with the figures.

  • roo67roo67 londonPosts: 402Member
    Just grinded stuff and sold the gold on for gems for bank space . Havn't spent any real world money and wont ever
  • seafirexseafirex gatineau, QCPosts: 357Member Uncommon

    I dont spend real cash in the shop as per i get everything even the extra slot character for almost nothing in game cash.

    Like 60 silver gets you almost enought for a extra slot character so why spend real cash.

    You can get the 60 silver for no time at all spent in game, just use your profession from level 2 or 3 when you have enought cash to get the tools for it or use another toon to send 2 to 3 silver to your new toon and thats it. If you dont want a profession on that toon sell the mats in game to npc or in the trading post.

    I will be putting real cash soon to help them out and let them know i love the game but everything drops even the extra xp buff or extra magic find etc. ( one trick for you guys : get some extra magic find gear and use it on your toon even gem magic find on the gear ) trust me you will get way better drops ( you can sell them to the npc vendor or in the trading post for more cash way more ) 

  • jacklojacklo BlackpoolPosts: 570Member
    Originally posted by rygard49
    Originally posted by jacklo

    Some maths:

    With some wild figures flying around, I decided to make something of the data that is available in this post.

    Straight away I'll tell you that I have discounted the highest range ($251+) mainly because there is no upper limit, but also because a handful of votes from haters could easily skew the figures. I also feel this price range is not really representative of what would normally be spent on a monthly basis by your average gamer.

    Rather than guess at figures or use the "half way" approach, I worked out the number of players in each bracket and used a random number generator (random.org) to give me the spend for each player in that range.

    Here are the results:

    Of 550 votes considered:

    • 67.8% (373) paid nothing
    • 78.5% (432) paid less than $15
    • 21.5% (118) paid more than $15

    Of 177 players who purchased gems:

    • 33.5% (59) spent less than $15
    • 66.5% (118) spent more than $15

    The total revenue from gem sales was $7771 which equates to an average spend of:

    • $43.90 per gem buyer
    • $14.12 per player overall

     

    Considering that the vast majority of posts state that they bought gems to increase bank/bag slots (a one-off purchase), you would reasonably expect the average monthly spend to decrease substantially over time.

    In summary, 78% of players were financially better off with GW2's B2P model, 67.8% substantially so.

    This post is no better than OPs math. When you choose data selectively, it immediately invalidates any results you come up with.

    No one should be making any analytical posts based on these figures, especially not while trying to throw away portions of the 'data' based on an assumption that it's just 'haters' messing with the figures.

    I toyed with the idea of including that data, although the figures wouldn't have changed that much.

    If you've got a better solution to deal with a figure that is $251 up to infinite, run it by me... and do you really think that's even in the league of your average player? Hell some mortgages cost less!

    Pick it apart all you want, the data isn't good enough for analytical review. Other than to suggest that even with the early purchasing of a one-off item, an overwhelming percentage of players seem financialy better off, compared to your average subscription based mmo.

Sign In or Register to comment.