Kickstarter — Guild Wars 2 Forums
Home Guild Wars 2 Discussion

Kickstarter

While I think everything is going great regarding current development of the game and the living world/saga should stay.

Now to the main point, many people want other things beside living story, and I am sure the company don't have enough time for everything.
Many big and small companies utilize kickstarter to fund projects.
I think Anet should use kickstarter to enlarge areas of the game, for instance it could kickstart WvW maps, a GvG project, new expansion.
This way Anet could on one hand keep with the living story that is funded by it's own revenue all the while it could use kickstarter to let player decide what is worth their investment, this way Anet could hire employs for side projects without being afraid of losing money.

Comments

  • Thereon.3495Thereon.3495 Member ✭✭✭

    I think the idea of using crowdfunding to finance GW2 is interesting but only really from a marketing/advertising standpoint. Encouraging new players in is the main take-home that ANET needs to master here. Whether that's via crowdfunding I don't know.

    What can be done on KS can be accomplished by adding paid (mini) expansion content- I'd happily pay £ for a couple of new maps a year providing they were of sufficient standard and, most importantly, provide sideways progression only. New skins are fine as are new mobs and bosses but if you're adding a new farming area for instance you cannot make it better than the current farms and gate that behind a paywall.

  • kharmin.7683kharmin.7683 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 30, 2020

    Or players could opt to purchase gems on a regular (monthly) basis which would be like a subscription model.

    I am a very casual player.
    Very.
    Casual.

  • Thereon.3495Thereon.3495 Member ✭✭✭
    edited January 30, 2020

    @kharmin.7683 said:
    Or players could opt to purchase gems on a regular (monthly) basis which would be like a subscription model.

    A lot of people would call this a terrible idea as paid subs are, in general, terrible these days. But a purely optional 'gem sub' that meant I could have new bonus exclusive content such as locations to visit and explore, that doesn't fragment the player base too much and that meant I could keep those gems? I'd probably be up for that providing it wasn't too much £ and that I could opt out at any point. You already have 2 week passes to the lounges....why not passes to other exclusive zones for a £ fee?

  • KeoLegend.5132KeoLegend.5132 Member ✭✭✭

    idk if its possible because Anet is owned by NCSoft. I could be wrong about it tho

  • Skotlex.7580Skotlex.7580 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I think the greatest challenge with using crowdfunding is that... okay, we raise the money for ANet, so what do they do next?

    Hire more developers for a limited time until the paidfor content is done? Foremost, a new developer would need quite some time to adapt to GW2's codebase before that can do any meaningful changes. This means that a new developer would be inefficient for adding something new (and then all that training is wasted after fulfilling the requirement). What if it takes longer than anticipated and the money runs out? Players won't like hearing that they need to crowdfund again for an undelivered product.

    I don't know how it'd go for the other types of job required, but I suspect that it would be better to find better ways to finance the game which will ensure the ability to hire for the longhaul instead.

  • Skotlex.7580Skotlex.7580 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I think the greatest challenge with using crowdfunding is that... okay, we raise the money for ANet, so what do they do next?

    Hire more developers for a limited time until the paidfor content is done? Foremost, a new developer would need quite some time to adapt to GW2's codebase before that can do any meaningful changes. This means that a new developer would be inefficient for adding something new (and then all that training is wasted after fulfilling the requirement). What if it takes longer than anticipated and the money runs out? Players won't like hearing that they need to crowdfund again for an undelivered product.

    I don't know how it'd go for the other types of job required, but I suspect that it would be better to find better ways to finance the game which will ensure the ability to hire for the longhaul instead.

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

    @Thereon.3495 said:

    @kharmin.7683 said:
    Or players could opt to purchase gems on a regular (monthly) basis which would be like a subscription model.

    A lot of people would call this a terrible idea as paid subs are, in general, terrible these days. But a purely optional 'gem sub' that meant I could have new bonus exclusive content such as locations to visit and explore, that doesn't fragment the player base too much and that meant I could keep those gems? I'd probably be up for that providing it wasn't too much £ and that I could opt out at any point. You already have 2 week passes to the lounges....why not passes to other exclusive zones for a £ fee?

    But....

    You already have an optional gem subscription. Just buy gems at the beginning of every month. Why should doing that grant bonus, exclusive content to you versus those who choose to spend money for gems on a non-standard cycle? And, if it did, how could that not fragment the player base at all? Of course it would; it would be naive to think that it wouldn't "too much". And what is the definition of "too much" fragmentation of the player base?

    Yes, for the GW2 model, I think that this is a terrible idea.

    I am a very casual player.
    Very.
    Casual.

  • Thereon.3495Thereon.3495 Member ✭✭✭

    I'm sorry to have derailed the Kickstarter thread, this is off topic and I promise to get back on topic after this reply!

    @kharmin.7683 said:
    But....

    You already have an optional gem subscription. Just buy gems at the beginning of every month. Why should doing that grant bonus, exclusive content to you versus those who choose to spend money for gems on a non-standard cycle? And, if it did, how could that not fragment the player base at all? Of course it would; it would be naive to think that it wouldn't "too much". And what is the definition of "too much" fragmentation of the player base?

    Yes, for the GW2 model, I think that this is a terrible idea.

    I've just re-read what I posted and you are correct, my ideas make very little sense! Second times the charm so....

    The idea that I meant to put across was that, for a monthly fee = that of buying x amount of gems on a monthly basis with real money, you could get extra content and get to keep that amount of gems. This means a regular monthly income from the playerbase- if you buy x amount of gems anyway per month with £ you get free content for nothing but this would also encourage those who hardly ever buys gems and people who only gold>gems to spend some £ on a regular basis.

    Okay so the thorny issue of extra content and £ gating maps leading to fragmentation.... I understand what you're saying but you could argue that those without the expansions are already fragmented from the rest of the playerbase. These new maps could be smaller in scope...maybe just a single boss or a boss+a farm....somewhere to chill and soak in the sights like a beach (think a new type of lounge)... hell, they don't have to even be in Tyria. Give us mini Mist maps or mini fractals. So long as the rewards are not better than core Tyria and the content is different then I personally see this as many mini expansions that you pay for in monthly installments to get access to.

    No one likes paying extra- I'm not too well off at the moment myself so I'd have to consider my own suggestion more before taking it on. But we cannot lie to ourselves that GW2 will be around for many years to come when so many have left the company in recent years and the restructuring. ANET needs to be able to show decent profit (or at least the promise of it) to be allowed to carry on running GW2 and any ideas we can suggest to increase the length of time this amazing game is still around should be noted down. This is one of a few ideas I have and is of course just an opinion, feel free to disagree.

  • Strider Pj.2193Strider Pj.2193 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @kharmin.7683 said:
    Or players could opt to purchase gems on a regular (monthly) basis which would be like a subscription model.

    My concern with that, is there isn’t a way to show that those gems purchased would be for WvW (or raids or sPvP) unless for WvW you are using them to transfer. Which is monetizing the behavior that many feel has negatively impacted the mode.

    Otherwise, gem purchases only go towards General game maintenance.

    And with the prevailing thought (right or wrong) is that WvW sees no significant development time compared to PvE.

    Thank You for the {MEME}

  • Give me new expansion and you have my money.

  • Trise.2865Trise.2865 Member ✭✭✭✭

    "I want to give ANet more money."
    "Okay, buy some gems."
    "No, I want to give it to them in a way that makes me feel like an investor."
    "Okay, buy stock."
    "No, I want more creative influence than that."
    "Okay, get a degree and apply to work there."
    "Look, if you're not going to take me seriously, I'm gonna quit and play another game."
    "..."

    If we want ANet to step up their game, then we must step up ours.