Idea for making more money: gem store subscription — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Idea for making more money: gem store subscription

Here's an idea that might have merit: Allow a gem store subscription that grants discounted prices all the time, rather than only when "someone" decides to have a sale.

Make the discount smaller than the usual discount (10% vs. 20% or more), so regular sales stay an option. But, allow it on more items in the list. The consistency of pricing would probably increase overall sales AND ANet would already be making something from the subscription itself.

It might need to be capped, though. For example, $10 per month might buy you 10% off 16,000 gems worth of stuff. This example would be about the same as typical 20% discounts (if the player spent it all), but they could be had whenever the player wanted.

Comments

  • Trise.2865Trise.2865 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 10, 2019

    Those only work in retail space because the subscription/membership provides market research data, heavily cutting marketing and advertising costs as a direct result. But you already know that...

    Reductio ad absurdum

  • Griever.8150Griever.8150 Member ✭✭✭

    Honestly i'm getting pretty fond of the Season Pass system as it generate continuous revenue for the devs while still allowing people to earn their stuff by playing the game, i could see it work very well for GW2.

    Its also an optional opt-in, so wouldn't lock people who don't want to pay a sub fee. Its a really good middle ground.

    I know i'd buy it, as long as the rewards are cosmetic only.

    If it gain enough traction, could even allow them to rehire some of the artists they let go to keep on the demand it would generate for skins and such.

  • IndigoSundown.5419IndigoSundown.5419 Member ✭✭✭✭

    This idea does not address the real issue with the gem store. That issue is providing enough new items to whet the appetites of players. Let's face it, after 6.5 years, a lot of players have already purchased as many convenience items (e.g., bag/bank/character/shared inventory slots) as they need. This puts more of a burden on cosmetics, which are going to be hit or miss with different people. With the relatively slow rate of cosmetic offerings lately, there just has not been all that many things that I -- for one -- have wanted to buy.

    That said, I'm not against the idea of a gems tore deal. However, it might be better if it were implemented a bit differently. Sign up, get the opportunity to buy a fixed amount of gems at a small discount. Over the course of several months of participation, the discount increases until it reaches a cap, which can then be maintained by not missing a month. If you were to miss a month, you'd have to start over. The advantage with this version of such a plan would be that money spent is buying gems at a discount, rather than buying access to minor item discounts. That's going to feel better to some players. If in a given month there is nothing appealing for sale, gems obtained via the plan won't go away, whereas the item price discount would not be used.

    Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. -- Santayana

  • Daddicus.6128Daddicus.6128 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @IndigoSundown.5419 said:
    This idea does not address the real issue with the gem store. That issue is providing enough new items to whet the appetites of players. Let's face it, after 6.5 years, a lot of players have already purchased as many convenience items (e.g., bag/bank/character/shared inventory slots) as they need. This puts more of a burden on cosmetics, which are going to be hit or miss with different people. With the relatively slow rate of cosmetic offerings lately, there just has not been all that many things that I -- for one -- have wanted to buy.

    That said, I'm not against the idea of a gems tore deal. However, it might be better if it were implemented a bit differently. Sign up, get the opportunity to buy a fixed amount of gems at a small discount. Over the course of several months of participation, the discount increases until it reaches a cap, which can then be maintained by not missing a month. If you were to miss a month, you'd have to start over. The advantage with this version of such a plan would be that money spent is buying gems at a discount, rather than buying access to minor item discounts. That's going to feel better to some players. If in a given month there is nothing appealing for sale, gems obtained via the plan won't go away, whereas the item price discount would not be used.

    I like this idea even better. But, I wouldn't have it start over if you fail a month. I would propose that you lose two months' worth of advantage. For example, say they give a cumulative 1% per month up to 10%. Then, if you skip a month, you drop to 8%, not all the way to zero. (Or, maybe 5% or 6% or something. Diminishing returns versus a hard drop to zero.)

  • My 2Copper.

    Why not have a sub (lets say $10 as an example) then on every first day of the month you receive a certain amount of Gems that is slightly worth more than $10? So it's like you are purchasing Gems on a monthly basis and not really paying for a game subscription. Aside from that, you get a permanent discount on the Gemstore which increases the longer you are subscribed. Rewards can also be added for long time subscribers and these rewards can be designed to mimic PVP/WvW reward tracks and those that are subscribed can choose which reward track they like to complete after a certain number of months.

    There is also the option for subscriptions plans -

    1 Month Sub - $10
    3 Month Sub - $28
    6 Month Sub - $55
    So on, so forth.

    This can be a good way to get that needed revenue injection that ANet needs(?).

    Thief main (Pretty soldier-san)

  • I'd be happy enough with a sub automatically "buying" me 800 gems every one, two or three months (not everyone is able/willing to pay those 10 dollars/euro every month so this could help).

  • Daddicus.6128Daddicus.6128 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @mDane.7182 said:
    My 2Copper.

    Why not have a sub (lets say $10 as an example) then on every first day of the month you receive a certain amount of Gems that is slightly worth more than $10? So it's like you are purchasing Gems on a monthly basis and not really paying for a game subscription. Aside from that, you get a permanent discount on the Gemstore which increases the longer you are subscribed. Rewards can also be added for long time subscribers and these rewards can be designed to mimic PVP/WvW reward tracks and those that are subscribed can choose which reward track they like to complete after a certain number of months.

    There is also the option for subscriptions plans -

    1 Month Sub - $10
    3 Month Sub - $28
    6 Month Sub - $55
    So on, so forth.

    This can be a good way to get that needed revenue injection that ANet needs(?).

    I like this idea, too.

  • Daddicus.6128Daddicus.6128 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @anninke.7469 said:
    I'd be happy enough with a sub automatically "buying" me 800 gems every one, two or three months (not everyone is able/willing to pay those 10 dollars/euro every month so this could help).

    This also has merit. I like it.

  • IndigoSundown.5419IndigoSundown.5419 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @AlexxxDelta.1806 said:
    Any kind of subscription introduced in a game whose main draw was no subscriptions won't be having any positive results. The cash store is fine as it is, it gets more frequent updates than everything else in the game after all. If they need even more revenue from it then they better find a way to get more active players playing the game and retain them.

    I agree on the negative associations with the term. A monthly package deal for gems could be branded something like a "Monthly Gem-Buyer's Discount Club." No need to use the term "subscription" at all. This idea is not a subscription to the game, as players would neither be renting the game, or renting game features, just getting a discount on gems in exchange for regular purchases.

    Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. -- Santayana

  • kharmin.7683kharmin.7683 Member ✭✭✭✭

    What is to keep those with gem subscriptions from converting to gold and thus impacting the economy?

    I am a very casual player.
    Very.
    Casual.

  • AlexxxDelta.1806AlexxxDelta.1806 Member ✭✭✭
    edited March 11, 2019

    @IndigoSundown.5419 said:

    @AlexxxDelta.1806 said:
    Any kind of subscription introduced in a game whose main draw was no subscriptions won't be having any positive results. The cash store is fine as it is, it gets more frequent updates than everything else in the game after all. If they need even more revenue from it then they better find a way to get more active players playing the game and retain them.

    I agree on the negative associations with the term. A monthly package deal for gems could be branded something like a "Monthly Gem-Buyer's Discount Club." No need to use the term "subscription" at all. This idea is not a subscription to the game, as players would neither be renting the game, or renting game features, just getting a discount on gems in exchange for regular purchases.

    No matter its name , players would still see it for what it is. Payment "tiers" and optional subscriptions always come with negative reception, especially when introduced that late into a game with an established community. Because, while optional, it would still serve as yet another advantage given to players who choose to use their cc more often than others . And in a game that already does that either directly via gem to gold or indirectly with various items improving in-game gold generation, I'm not sure if a move like that would be even worth the negative buzz.

    Again, the best way to get more gem sales is to have more players active in your game and that is only achievable with a steady delivery of fun and engaging content. Of course that is also the way that requires the most effort.

  • Blude.6812Blude.6812 Member ✭✭✭

    No thank you, there are many ways to support Anet with your money if and when you choose to.

  • TheGrimm.5624TheGrimm.5624 Member ✭✭✭✭

    An ESO style module (unlimited storage plus monthly gems) would also potentially work here. It also fits in since players could manually replicate the system by just buying more gems and additional accounts so it does hit that convenience model.

    Envy the Madman his musing when Death comes to make fools of us all.
    De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
    TheGrimm PoTBS/GW1/WAR/Rift/GW2/MWO/ESO/WoT/WoW/D2/HoTS/CU/AoC

  • I support the idea of a subscription or a battle pass type system, but not in the way you've described it. It gives very little incentive for people to subscribe unless they were willing to spend a lot of money, you'd need to be spending over $100 a month for this to be worthwhile and chances are if you're doing that you'd do so regardless.

    I'd personally offer a something around $15 that can't be purchased with gems, direct payments only so it's guaranteed revenue. Give an exclusive outfit per month/season, a small amount of gems (400?), 5% discount, access to new an exclusive new lounge areas for subscribed members with the same utility as existing ones and additional cosmetic rewards such as gliders and mount skins if necessary. They might "lose" money in the sense that an outfit, lounge, gems, etc. is more expensive than $15 but it would be guaranteed monthly revenue rather than current unpredictable quarters they have now, they might not get be getting any revenue from a potentially subscribed user if they do not like whatever was put out on the cash shop that month. Do I really need another outfit or glider? No, especially if it's something I don't like but as a bundle with additional things I see the value in it. This way I'd likely stay subscribed regardless, as long as I feel I'm getting my money's worth. Just my 2cents.

  • OutOfOrder.3719OutOfOrder.3719 Member ✭✭✭

    There should be an optional $10 subscription each month, where you can receive 10 black lion keys and 400 gems every month with the subscription :)

  • HenzyOne.5348HenzyOne.5348 Member ✭✭
    edited March 11, 2019

    If i Had my own MMORPG i would sell stuff like:

    • Item icon packs.
    • Skill icon packs.
    • World texture packs (Different tree, building, grass textures)

    Also possible subs. as support packs.

    *Crafter Supporter: You pay each month and some portion of money goes straight to game crafting and item dev. (Always get new item icon packs and weekly items that support your item progression.)

    *Warrior supporter: You pay each month and some portion of money goes straight to skills dev. (Always get new skill icons and extra boosts for exp and masteries)

    *Explorer supporter: You pay each month and some portion of money goes straight to world design or lore design. (Always get custom world texture packs and keys or whatever that is tied to exploring)

    Something like this. As i am very new to the game, my ideas could be missing pretty hard at some points but something like this.

    *Players cant sub for all 3 support packs.
    They can choose

    • Main pack. (pay more and get more)
    • Secondary Pack(pay less and get less)
    • Cant have it all.

    Idea would be, creating simple content so it wont hurt too much whole dev. while getting constant feedback about what players want to grow in the game.
    Since no one ever would be able to read all the forums and filter all the ideas and complaints. So players can have little boost while supporting the game in ways that have some impact on how game will evolve. Ofc supporters should have bit more complicated choices about what exactly they are supporting and more complicated rewards but yea. Something something.

  • Zaklex.6308Zaklex.6308 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Daddicus.6128 said:

    @IndigoSundown.5419 said:
    This idea does not address the real issue with the gem store. That issue is providing enough new items to whet the appetites of players. Let's face it, after 6.5 years, a lot of players have already purchased as many convenience items (e.g., bag/bank/character/shared inventory slots) as they need. This puts more of a burden on cosmetics, which are going to be hit or miss with different people. With the relatively slow rate of cosmetic offerings lately, there just has not been all that many things that I -- for one -- have wanted to buy.

    That said, I'm not against the idea of a gems tore deal. However, it might be better if it were implemented a bit differently. Sign up, get the opportunity to buy a fixed amount of gems at a small discount. Over the course of several months of participation, the discount increases until it reaches a cap, which can then be maintained by not missing a month. If you were to miss a month, you'd have to start over. The advantage with this version of such a plan would be that money spent is buying gems at a discount, rather than buying access to minor item discounts. That's going to feel better to some players. If in a given month there is nothing appealing for sale, gems obtained via the plan won't go away, whereas the item price discount would not be used.

    I like this idea even better. But, I wouldn't have it start over if you fail a month. I would propose that you lose two months' worth of advantage. For example, say they give a cumulative 1% per month up to 10%. Then, if you skip a month, you drop to 8%, not all the way to zero. (Or, maybe 5% or 6% or something. Diminishing returns versus a hard drop to zero.)

    That's pretty much taking what a lot of mobile games to for monetization schemes, and they do reset you back to zero if you miss a month, so it's not like people aren't used to the idea of a discount being set back to zero if you miss a month and have to start over again. It would be the same as if you had to cancel for a month or two for what ever reason, you get set back to zero and start all over again, not that big a deal(auto-payments would help with you forgetting a month in most cases).

    Yes...no...maybe...what do you want, can't you see I'm busy saving the world...AGAIN!

  • IndigoSundown.5419IndigoSundown.5419 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @kharmin.7683 said:
    What is to keep those with gem subscriptions from converting to gold and thus impacting the economy?

    The gems--->gold exchange is not a gold faucet. It is not in itself a gold sink, but gold-->gems is.

    Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. -- Santayana

  • No matter its name , players would still see it for what it is. Payment "tiers" and optional subscriptions always come with negative reception, especially when introduced that late into a game with an established community. Because, while optional, it would still serve as yet another advantage given to players who choose to use their cc more often than others . And in a game that already does that either directly via gem to gold or indirectly with various items improving in-game gold generation, I'm not sure if a move like that would be even worth the negative buzz.

    Again, the best way to get more gem sales is to have more players active in your game and that is only achievable with a steady delivery of fun and engaging content. Of course that is also the way that requires the most effort.

    I see the merit in this argument. As long as an adjustment to the cash shop doesn't detract from the quality or frequency of new content, then I think more options for people to spend money is pro-consumer in this case. Of course, to minimize the negative knee-jerk response, these payment "tiers" can be released alongside fun and engaging content (e.g. a new living story chapter or expansion).

  • Limodriver.4106Limodriver.4106 Member ✭✭✭

    good idea except that money might go into another side project? so whats the point?

  • Crab Fear.1624Crab Fear.1624 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Limodriver.4106 said:
    good idea except that money might go into another side project? so whats the point?

    If gw2 dies for another project other than gw3, I'm done with the company.

©2010–2018 ArenaNet, LLC. All rights reserved. Guild Wars, Guild Wars 2, Heart of Thorns, Guild Wars 2: Path of Fire, ArenaNet, NCSOFT, the Interlocking NC Logo, and all associated logos and designs are trademarks or registered trademarks of NCSOFT Corporation. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.