Please lock or delete the thread is derailed to how the gem to gold conversion works - Page 2 — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Please lock or delete the thread is derailed to how the gem to gold conversion works

245

Comments

  • Dante.1508Dante.1508 Member ✭✭✭

    @Bloodstealer.5978 said:

    @Dante.1508 said:
    Since taking a 4 year break its insane how much mobile style gaming has been added to this, it feels terrible and not enjoyable at all.. I guess others don't notice because they have been here the whole time to get used to it.. But wow it feels tacked on and nothing like other mmo's i've played..

    Money is one thing ruining game flow to get money and to artificially gate customers is another thing entirely.

    Money has always been a thing of need within gaming, we all just got used to shelling out subs all those years.
    ANET dared to be different and for a long time it worked, but times change, products get older and new things cost.. so it is imperative the business finds new ways to combat mother time and keep making money in order to develop the product further and/or development something new.
    As for time gating.. heck that is as old as the arc in terms of MMO's.. time gating is used primarily to provide oxygen in the development cycle. We gamers want content and we want it yesterday.. I wish it could work within JIT space but that just isn't going to happen when you consider just how fast we can tear through content these days.
    There is a reason expansions take years to develop, test and launch.. money and through that development cycle they have to make money in order to spend money, otherwise ANET would have to continually keep holding out the prayer pot to shareholders.. that might work for awhile, but it only goes so far and the slightest hitch in the revenue stream can have profound effects on your viability. So ANET have to look at ways to support not just its own financial viability long term, but that of NCSoft as well and that is no mean feat.

    Even at the cost to customers and limiting the games life span..

  • Astralporing.1957Astralporing.1957 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @miraude.2107 said:
    I wonder if this is a soft release and that more templates will be released for free later on after they make sure this whole thing doesn't break coding in that that someone imputing a build and doing something like consuming a primer before switching to it breaks it in a way that boons never disappear, remaining fully stacked and people exploit the kitten out of it or it breaks something else like it won't let you do elite builds.

    If that was it, they would introduce small amount for free, and then slowly keep increasing it. Instead, they decided to go for full monetization. So yes, there might be more slot unlocks coming later (like more slot unlocks for bank tabs eventually appeared), but those definitely won't be free. Not if the people will pay for the initial ones anyway.

    The whole point of a social game is to play with the people you want to play with, not be forced to play with the people you don't.

  • zealex.9410zealex.9410 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Guys EA or at least boiware wasnt developming anthem with Destiny in mind, quite the opposite they were avoiding an y inspiration from destiny during anthem's development.

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

    @AlexxxDelta.1806 said:

    @Zaklex.6308 said:

    @AlexxxDelta.1806 said:

    @Zaklex.6308 said:

    @AlexxxDelta.1806 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @AlexxxDelta.1806 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @zealex.9410 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @zealex.9410 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:
    @Vancho.8750 You should know game companies, just like every other business, need to make money to survive and grow if “you work in that part of the industry”. Or do you happen to work for free with a company that gives everything for free?

    I dont think anyone is asking for free stuff. Just a more tasteful business model.

    “Tasteful”? You mean the “business model” that doesn’t charge a monthly user fee and allows players to get gems for free to buy stuff off the gemstore by exchanging game gold. That one? And the one where non-pay to-win and convenience items are sold on the gemstore?

    Yeah, the one that had doubled the gemstore updates while all other areas have slowed down, the one that has pushed lootboxes/gambling predatory tactics now harder than it ever had, the one that falsly advertises chairs then changes the art after ppl have bought said chairs and complained. The one that tied cooking 500 to the gemstore and now has split and monetised build templates in 3 diff ways. The one that you will have a much better time playing the game if you fork over some cash to buy the necessary qol (because if you are a new player all the best farms are money gated to you and farming without bags and salvage omatics is hell). The one that god forbit would lose out on a mount or a glider being a drop from a raid, dungeon, world boss, fractal, pvp or wvw as oposed to charging for it.

    And finally that one which sold you the 30 mount lootbox and then 100smth dollar bundle to get them all.

    I personally consider the business model anet has to be better than that of other devs but still theres alot to be desired and alot that leave a sour taste in my mouth.

    So what you are saying is that you don’t understand how a business works, particularly an online game business.

    How do you suppose Anet make money to pay staff, bills, taxes, health benefits and continue to develop the game? Let me guess, by growing money trees?

    Do you also think there to be magical coding fairies that create everything overnight while the staff are sleeping?

    Edit- You don’t pay a monthly fee to play and you can get gems by exchanging gold so you can get anything off the gemstore... yet you are still complaining about optional stuff being on the gemstore... silly.

    I don't know about the magical coding fairies but I'm pretty sure the actual coders only see a pitiful fraction of those gem store profits.

    The same coders who are being laid off because the seemingly satisfactory earnings are not enough to satisfy a shareholder's greed.

    The same coders who are getting burnt out working crunch, while execs who haven't played a game their whole life enjoy the fruits of their labor. Check out wage distribution in the gaming industry, particularly AAA studios. The data is really interesting.

    That's how an online gaming business works. And if this game had a monthly fee, the store would still be there and just as annoying. No need for delusions.

    What I find silly is supporting a business built on anti-consumer practices while being a consumer yourself. And doing so while arguing it's all for the benefit of the poor devs. "Gotta pay the bills". If the arguement was "gotta pay an exec's new yacht", it would be far more legitimate.

    So go complain to NCsoft, right?

    In a sense, I am. I'm not seeing a distinction at this point. I'd wager Anet and NCwest are practically the same thing at the top level. At least when it comes to decision-making over monetization and how the game is developed around it.

    Nobody blames coders and artists, the actual game devs, for monetization decisions.

    Except you'd be wrong in your assumption...until the layoffs ArenaNet had complete control over the game, including the Gem Shop, marketing, sales and distribution...and based on statements made from NCSoft West around the time of the layoffs the only thing that change is that NCSoft is taking over publishing from ArenaNet, everything else is still under their control, which is why they have a marketing team and Gem Store people that you contact for problems in the first place.

    I guess you missed the "practically" part.

    It's common knowledge that publishers have considerable pull over development in the industry today. It's not even that recent, I remember an editorial from Kotaku in 2013 with a developer source detailing the abusive relationship.

    In our case we are not even talking about a simple developer-publisher relationship, but a parent-subsidiary one on top of that. A parent company that enforced a major restructuring of the subsidiary and a merger with their western publishing branch. Their PR can spin it however they want, but it doesn't take much to put two and two together. All one has to do to see NCsoft's growing influence over the years, is compare the gem store of early years with today's. As long as they are willing to see.

    Big publishers are often major investors. In our case they actually own the studio. The publisher doesn't even have to intervene directly in development. More often than not, developers know what's expected by the higher ups and act accordingly.

    EA never explicitly asked Bioware to make a live-service looter shooter. But Bioware management knew too well that EA prefers live service trends over single-player story-driven games. So they made a live-service looter shooter in Anthem and majorly sucked at it.

    Actually, EA did explicitly tell BioWare to make a live service game...just what do you think saying "we want you to make a game like Destiny" tells a studio?

    As a long time ArenaNet follower(like since the early days when it was called Triforge, Inc., before they got involved with NCSoft) and as someone that has is own opinion, which these are, they're our opinions of what is happening at ArenaNet, I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt and see what happens before making any judgments. I still think it's foolish for any business to try and not attract the 3 Billion mobile game market to the PC, seeing as the projected revenue for mobile gaming is expected to be almost $70 billion for 2019, imagine what a company could do with just $1b of that $70b in revenue.

    EA did no such thing. It was Bioware's choice to go for a Destiny clone (even if the project didn't start with that intention). Of course they knew EA pushes for the live-service model and chose to try and satisfy their corporate masters.

    You are right, from a business perspective, it makes sense to try and tap into the lucrative mobile market by copying some of their money-making schemes.

    But I'm not a business, I'm a player/consumer. And as such, I know that mobile gaming is synonymous with exploitative practices, low investment for max return, lack of quality control and full of money grabbing scams.

    A shareholder who just got involved with gaming because they smelled profit, would salivate at the prospect of turning the PC market into an imitation of that toxic cesspool. As a gamer since the mid 90s, I can only see it as a nightmarish future and the death of my favourite hobby. And from the looks of it (this game included), that future is not that distant.

    I'll repeat what I said previously, EA was behind the choice to have BioWare make a game like Destiny, not BioWare...that was implicit instructions from Redwood City(Redwood Shores), CA, Casey Hudson said as much himself when he was rehired.

    I've been gaming since the 90's as well, so I fully understand where you're coming from when it comes to the consumer/player side of the PC gaming, but I'm also a realist and know that the business side almost always wins unless the consumer/player side can manage to convince the businesses that it would be detrimental to their industry(i.e. - loss of income/profit) to gravitate towards the mobile way of making games. Unfortunately I don't think we have sufficient power to change the direction, unless people start to stop supporting this direction...and when you have whales, of which the vast majority of the people who spend the money on mobile games are moving towards PC gaming(PC gaming has it's own whales too) we're fighting a losing battle, so I'd suggest trying to find a way to minimize the growth of mobile tactics being used in PC games instead of downright elimination of them.

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

  • AlexxxDelta.1806AlexxxDelta.1806 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 9, 2019

    @Zaklex.6308 said:

    @AlexxxDelta.1806 said:

    @Zaklex.6308 said:

    @AlexxxDelta.1806 said:

    @Zaklex.6308 said:

    @AlexxxDelta.1806 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @AlexxxDelta.1806 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @zealex.9410 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @zealex.9410 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:
    @Vancho.8750 You should know game companies, just like every other business, need to make money to survive and grow if “you work in that part of the industry”. Or do you happen to work for free with a company that gives everything for free?

    I dont think anyone is asking for free stuff. Just a more tasteful business model.

    “Tasteful”? You mean the “business model” that doesn’t charge a monthly user fee and allows players to get gems for free to buy stuff off the gemstore by exchanging game gold. That one? And the one where non-pay to-win and convenience items are sold on the gemstore?

    Yeah, the one that had doubled the gemstore updates while all other areas have slowed down, the one that has pushed lootboxes/gambling predatory tactics now harder than it ever had, the one that falsly advertises chairs then changes the art after ppl have bought said chairs and complained. The one that tied cooking 500 to the gemstore and now has split and monetised build templates in 3 diff ways. The one that you will have a much better time playing the game if you fork over some cash to buy the necessary qol (because if you are a new player all the best farms are money gated to you and farming without bags and salvage omatics is hell). The one that god forbit would lose out on a mount or a glider being a drop from a raid, dungeon, world boss, fractal, pvp or wvw as oposed to charging for it.

    And finally that one which sold you the 30 mount lootbox and then 100smth dollar bundle to get them all.

    I personally consider the business model anet has to be better than that of other devs but still theres alot to be desired and alot that leave a sour taste in my mouth.

    So what you are saying is that you don’t understand how a business works, particularly an online game business.

    How do you suppose Anet make money to pay staff, bills, taxes, health benefits and continue to develop the game? Let me guess, by growing money trees?

    Do you also think there to be magical coding fairies that create everything overnight while the staff are sleeping?

    Edit- You don’t pay a monthly fee to play and you can get gems by exchanging gold so you can get anything off the gemstore... yet you are still complaining about optional stuff being on the gemstore... silly.

    I don't know about the magical coding fairies but I'm pretty sure the actual coders only see a pitiful fraction of those gem store profits.

    The same coders who are being laid off because the seemingly satisfactory earnings are not enough to satisfy a shareholder's greed.

    The same coders who are getting burnt out working crunch, while execs who haven't played a game their whole life enjoy the fruits of their labor. Check out wage distribution in the gaming industry, particularly AAA studios. The data is really interesting.

    That's how an online gaming business works. And if this game had a monthly fee, the store would still be there and just as annoying. No need for delusions.

    What I find silly is supporting a business built on anti-consumer practices while being a consumer yourself. And doing so while arguing it's all for the benefit of the poor devs. "Gotta pay the bills". If the arguement was "gotta pay an exec's new yacht", it would be far more legitimate.

    So go complain to NCsoft, right?

    In a sense, I am. I'm not seeing a distinction at this point. I'd wager Anet and NCwest are practically the same thing at the top level. At least when it comes to decision-making over monetization and how the game is developed around it.

    Nobody blames coders and artists, the actual game devs, for monetization decisions.

    Except you'd be wrong in your assumption...until the layoffs ArenaNet had complete control over the game, including the Gem Shop, marketing, sales and distribution...and based on statements made from NCSoft West around the time of the layoffs the only thing that change is that NCSoft is taking over publishing from ArenaNet, everything else is still under their control, which is why they have a marketing team and Gem Store people that you contact for problems in the first place.

    I guess you missed the "practically" part.

    It's common knowledge that publishers have considerable pull over development in the industry today. It's not even that recent, I remember an editorial from Kotaku in 2013 with a developer source detailing the abusive relationship.

    In our case we are not even talking about a simple developer-publisher relationship, but a parent-subsidiary one on top of that. A parent company that enforced a major restructuring of the subsidiary and a merger with their western publishing branch. Their PR can spin it however they want, but it doesn't take much to put two and two together. All one has to do to see NCsoft's growing influence over the years, is compare the gem store of early years with today's. As long as they are willing to see.

    Big publishers are often major investors. In our case they actually own the studio. The publisher doesn't even have to intervene directly in development. More often than not, developers know what's expected by the higher ups and act accordingly.

    EA never explicitly asked Bioware to make a live-service looter shooter. But Bioware management knew too well that EA prefers live service trends over single-player story-driven games. So they made a live-service looter shooter in Anthem and majorly sucked at it.

    Actually, EA did explicitly tell BioWare to make a live service game...just what do you think saying "we want you to make a game like Destiny" tells a studio?

    As a long time ArenaNet follower(like since the early days when it was called Triforge, Inc., before they got involved with NCSoft) and as someone that has is own opinion, which these are, they're our opinions of what is happening at ArenaNet, I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt and see what happens before making any judgments. I still think it's foolish for any business to try and not attract the 3 Billion mobile game market to the PC, seeing as the projected revenue for mobile gaming is expected to be almost $70 billion for 2019, imagine what a company could do with just $1b of that $70b in revenue.

    EA did no such thing. It was Bioware's choice to go for a Destiny clone (even if the project didn't start with that intention). Of course they knew EA pushes for the live-service model and chose to try and satisfy their corporate masters.

    You are right, from a business perspective, it makes sense to try and tap into the lucrative mobile market by copying some of their money-making schemes.

    But I'm not a business, I'm a player/consumer. And as such, I know that mobile gaming is synonymous with exploitative practices, low investment for max return, lack of quality control and full of money grabbing scams.

    A shareholder who just got involved with gaming because they smelled profit, would salivate at the prospect of turning the PC market into an imitation of that toxic cesspool. As a gamer since the mid 90s, I can only see it as a nightmarish future and the death of my favourite hobby. And from the looks of it (this game included), that future is not that distant.

    I'll repeat what I said previously, EA was behind the choice to have BioWare make a game like Destiny, not BioWare...that was implicit instructions from Redwood City(Redwood Shores), CA, Casey Hudson said as much himself when he was rehired.

    I've been gaming since the 90's as well, so I fully understand where you're coming from when it comes to the consumer/player side of the PC gaming, but I'm also a realist and know that the business side almost always wins unless the consumer/player side can manage to convince the businesses that it would be detrimental to their industry(i.e. - loss of income/profit) to gravitate towards the mobile way of making games. Unfortunately I don't think we have sufficient power to change the direction, unless people start to stop supporting this direction...and when you have whales, of which the vast majority of the people who spend the money on mobile games are moving towards PC gaming(PC gaming has it's own whales too) we're fighting a losing battle, so I'd suggest trying to find a way to minimize the growth of mobile tactics being used in PC games instead of downright elimination of them.

    That's slightly off topic so I won't elaborate much but I'm pretty sure Hudson was still covered by NDA during his "break". I'm taking my info from Schreier's recent inside scoops. They detailed how development changed over time to that of a Destiny-clone, even if management avoided the term.

    Now back on topic, to Anet and their growing love of mobile tactics, I consider myself a realist too. And as such, I agree some things are inevitable because money talks.

    Although I do believe, in the age of information and social media, consumers have more power than they realize. Of course it takes good timing, a loud and dedicated fanbase and a "cause" worthy of mainstream media attention, but industry greed can be pushed back with enough noise. Battlefront is a prime example of that and we even have our own cases here. It was mostly Anet sweetening the deal a bit than full backtracking but still.

    I also agree that "voting with your wallet" doesn't work. This is not a democracy and my wallet is insignificant compared to a whale's "voting power". Still dolphins and minnows could prove a point if they ever were organized, something that seems highly improbable.

    I can only think of one thing that can fight this spreading of mobile model to all aspects of gaming. And that's their own greed.

    GW2 has gone from something very unique at launch, to something increasingly desperate for my money. A trait that's not unique at all in today's MMO business. If the trend continues, I can see it becoming yet another NCsoft property, full with scammy mobile tactics and all. Making it one of many. How long until this industry reaches saturation point with all similar properties competing? The average player's spending power is finite and no business can stay alive long term, only focusing on whales. Even luxury car brands are in financial trouble.

    On top of that, there are signs of bubble bursting. Mobile gaming has caused rapid growth. This causes suits to demand the same in all of gaming, copypasting the same model in console and PC. AAA studios are struggling to keep up with their own growth. Activision has huge layoffs because their best ever year was still considered unsatisfactory. EA is trembling at the thought of widespread lootbox bans because a huge chunk of their earnings comes from fifa packs. And of course, Anet layoffs, indicative of NCsoft's dissatisfaction to what seemed to be good financial performance (other project was just one of the reasons). Just a few cases in what seems to be a troubled year for the industry. The whole thing stinks of unsustainability and to me, it's just a matter of time.

  • Holgarf.6581Holgarf.6581 Member ✭✭✭

    @Vancho.8750 said:
    And yet i can smell that smelly smell of mobile game design. Now that i think about it the khan ur helmets seem like something that is done where i work to get more people to shell out cash for potentially worthless things that are artificially hard to get. My concern here is that this is way too obvious and lazy implementation and if people don't poke and prod about it, the design goal post will be moved little by little in a worse direction with the excuse that is "how it was working from before".

    It's how GW2 players have been conditioned over the years. Admitting that is something most can't accept.

  • kratan.4619kratan.4619 Member ✭✭✭

    And what are your better ways to monetize the game?

    Lets start with a more functional spending plan and roadmap for the company and then we can talk about what is or isn't a feasible revenue system

    What people are willing to pay depends almost entirely on whether they think it's worth it.

    People will spend $30 on mount skins if they think the money is going toward game development and not just more DLC

    People will spend $10 on an outfit if the game they are playing that outfit in is engaging and fun

    They aren't going to spend that money if all they have to look forward to is never ending overworld zerg gold grind to purchase more content from the gemstore

    There's a reason FateGO prints money while other games with the same monetization schemes are virtually unknown outside of Asia
    There's a reason WoW is still going strong while other $15 a month games fell by the wayside

    This is mostly opinions being represented as facts.
    I will pay $30 for am ount if I like the look of them ount, I do not care what they do with the money at all, never even crosses my mind. The same goes for any outfit.
    I play this game solely for the purpose of open world PvE, any instanced content is not content for me.

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

    @Substance E.4852 said:

    Lets start with a more functional spending plan and roadmap for the company and then we can talk about what is or isn't a feasible revenue system

    What people are willing to pay depends almost entirely on whether they think it's worth it.

    People will spend $30 on mount skins if they think the money is going toward game development and not just more DLC

    People will spend $10 on an outfit if the game they are playing that outfit in is engaging and fun

    They aren't going to spend that money if all they have to look forward to is never ending overworld zerg gold grind to purchase more content from the gemstore

    There's a reason FateGO prints money while other games with the same monetization schemes are virtually unknown outside of Asia
    There's a reason WoW is still going strong while other $15 a month games fell by the wayside

    I disagree with this line of thinking. Playing a computer game should not be viewed as an investment. Any money spent should be considered for the entertainment value of it at the time of spending it. Whether or not that money goes toward one thing or another ought to be irrelevant. Seems to me that this is pretty much GW2 status quo as they keep making gem store items and people keep buying them and playing the game.

    /me shrugs

    I am a very casual player.
    Very.
    Casual.

  • Astralporing.1957Astralporing.1957 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 9, 2019

    @kharmin.7683 said:
    I disagree with this line of thinking. Playing a computer game should not be viewed as an investment. Any money spent should be considered for the entertainment value of it at the time of spending it.

    In that case 90% of the gemshop is way overpriced. The only argument for things costing as much as they do is if they fund more than what we receive directly by buying them.

    The whole point of a social game is to play with the people you want to play with, not be forced to play with the people you don't.

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

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @kharmin.7683 said:
    I disagree with this line of thinking. Playing a computer game should not be viewed as an investment. Any money spent should be considered for the entertainment value of it at the time of spending it.

    In that case 90% of the gemshop is way overpriced. The only argument for things costing as much as they do is if they fund more than what we receive directly by buying them.

    Items in the gem shop are only as valuable as the buyer perceives them. If 90% of the gem shop were priced too high, then players wouldn't pay it.

    There are very few things I've actually bought gems for (instead of gold -> gem) because I don't agree with the prices. Fortunately, there is nothing in the gem shop that is required to play the game

    I am a very casual player.
    Very.
    Casual.

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

    @AlexxxDelta.1806 said:

    @kharmin.7683 said:

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @kharmin.7683 said:
    I disagree with this line of thinking. Playing a computer game should not be viewed as an investment. Any money spent should be considered for the entertainment value of it at the time of spending it.

    In that case 90% of the gemshop is way overpriced. The only argument for things costing as much as they do is if they fund more than what we receive directly by buying them.

    Items in the gem shop are only as valuable as the buyer perceives them. If 90% of the gem shop were priced too high, then players wouldn't pay it.

    It's perfectly possible for the vast majority of a playerbase to perceive an item as overpriced, only to be irrelevant because a select few have enough spending power to make it a commercial success.

    That is a valid point, but one we can never prove one way or the other. Unfortunately.

    I am a very casual player.
    Very.
    Casual.

  • I rather pay a 50$ sub fee as long as i get constant content that i can play, as well as more stats and gearing options, and more pvp and pve options.

    Yes this game is free to play, but the content leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I think that 50% of the content (objects) from the game are from the gem shop.

    Yes guild wars 2 has to make money as a business, however, they want profit margins or basically they want endless growth. Imagine trying to make more money this year than you did last year - endless upper growth or on a graph you're trying to grow your profit as high as possible every year.

    Basically the easiest way to say this is - imagine your an athlete who wants big muscle gains and you want "endless" growth. So you take drugs and exercise for endless growth. But you can kill your self that way.

    In this sense, capitalism in business is after endless positive growth...and the more they stay "stuck" at a certain number, the more they will fire people and cut corners to make gains. Staying stuck is not good in business, you want to go up, higher, more money, endless disease, endless hunger addiction, always up.

    So as you can see, microtransactions make more money than a subscription fee, and it cuts projects and game design so they can keep the investors happy.

    The investors are always looking for endless growth, and they do a lot of damage to video games in order to see their money growth.

    So yea, capitalism is full greed because it has an illusion goal of infinite gains in investments.

  • Swagger.1459Swagger.1459 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 10, 2019

    @Vancho.8750 This game exists because of money, not the goodwill of donors or volunteers.

    You do not understand business, like at all, nor how generous Anet has been to gw2 players. And you clearly don’t have any better recommendations.

    “things got little bit more pushy with the "Macro" transactions”... Game doesn’t run in free pal.

  • Acheron.4731Acheron.4731 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Swagger.1459 said:
    @Vancho.8750 This game exists because of money, not the goodwill of donors or volunteers.

    You do not understand business, like at all, nor how generous Anet has been to gw2 players. And you clearly don’t have any better recommendations.

    “things got little bit more pushy with the "Macro" transactions”... Game doesn’t run in free pal.

    I don't think people are arguing that anet needs to make money.
    The argument is they would like to see anet put as much effort into providing expansion-like content in the game and funnel resources into abandoned gamemodes with at least half the vigor of what they do with the gemstore and finding ways to monetize poorly packaged or designed 'garbage'.
    The game is just screaming 'buy this now' rather than 'play this now'

    A true friend of the crown

  • Randulf.7614Randulf.7614 Member ✭✭✭✭

    It's the nature of the industry. You expect it from companies like EA have no interest in their playerbase or community, but even companies like Nintendo are getting in on the act and going all in on it to a degree which is shocking for those that used to have integrity (1 character + currency = same price as a new game..)

    Anet threw integrity away a long time ago with skins out of place in their game world in order to make a quick buck. I'm not against micro transactions at all - bank slots, inventory slots, wardrobe slots etc, but the game like so many other games now is heavily dominated by micro transactions that it has become unbalanced. And of course it is all optional, but it is the overall perception that has built up.

    This whole topic is moot though. There will not ever be a change in this direction or philosophy from a feedback thread.

    What sleep is here? What dreams there are in the unctuous coiling of the snakes mortal shuffling. weapon in my hand. My hand the arcing deathblow at the end of all things. The horror. The horror. I embrace it. . .

  • Calistin.6210Calistin.6210 Member ✭✭✭

    @Vancho.8750 said:
    Since i work in that part of the industry and i know how the sausage is made, some design choices have me worried. Usually i ignore them but after the lay offs things got little bit more pushy with the "Macro" transactions and the design of some content like the Skyscale unlock(bland, boring and unimaginative for the most part like most mobile game practices) and now with build templates (looks like copy of a mobile game feature the only part missing is charging for changing builds, don't get any kitten ideas from that). I don't think GW2 could survive a mobile game flop for pushing too hard. In the mobile space you can always reskin, recycle and reuse a flop into something "new" and it can be churned out quicker, not so much in the PC. Even in the mobile space you don't push way too hard on your crown jewel game that is in the public eye.
    Now that MO is out and Chris Corry will oversee NCSOFT west and from what i read his experience is in the mobile space from Kabam, that puts some doubt in the future of the game.

    Would explain some of the things I am not liking as I pretty much despise mobile gaming, p2w and the harsh monetization they tend to have. Not saying gw2 is there yet but a journey starts with a first step.

  • Swagger.1459Swagger.1459 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @AlexxxDelta.1806 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Acheron.4731 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:
    @Vancho.8750 This game exists because of money, not the goodwill of donors or volunteers.

    You do not understand business, like at all, nor how generous Anet has been to gw2 players. And you clearly don’t have any better recommendations.

    “things got little bit more pushy with the "Macro" transactions”... Game doesn’t run in free pal.

    I don't think people are arguing that anet needs to make money.
    The argument is they would like to see anet put as much effort into providing expansion-like content in the game and funnel resources into abandoned gamemodes with at least half the vigor of what they do with the gemstore and finding ways to monetize poorly packaged or designed 'garbage'.
    The game is just screaming 'buy this now' rather than 'play this now'

    Right, and money also funds game development, so let’s complain that Anet is trying to make money... That’s a smart idea!

    Some of you think it must be easy and cheap to develop a game and that things happen overnight.

    Only a tiny fraction of that money goes back to development (even less these days). You can pretend the main purpose for the increasingly aggressive monetization is development funding but that won't make it true. Repeating it like a mantra wont do it either.

    Anyone who has been with the game long enough can tell the difference. If the monetization is increasing but the game is looking cheaper, it doesn't take a genius to figure out where the money goes.

    In the end, we bought a game not a store. If the store ends up looking like it's the priority, why should should I care if they can keep the lights on?

    Sorry, I didn’t pretend anything, that’s you making things up and assuming. And if you bothered to pay attention I wrote “also”, not directly or entirely.

    If you don’t like how Anet monetizes the game then don’t play it. Your problem is solved then.

  • Killthehealersffs.8940Killthehealersffs.8940 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 10, 2019

    @Vancho.8750 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:
    @Vancho.8750 No, you just want Anet to bend over backwards for you, so you don’t have to spend an additional penny on the game. Yet, you want things like the UI reworked, new armors, more cultural armors , reworks of old armors... Things cost time and money, yet you complain about a game company that doesn’t charge you a monthly fee and only offers non-essential items on the gemstore... None of which you need to progress in the game... Which you can get for $0 by trading your gold for gems, but you complain about how the game is monetized.

    You still haven’t provided Anet with a better monetizing plan either, despite your claim.

    I get you don't like to read but this is getting really annoying you repeating the kitten over and over like you don't have anything useful to say. All im asking is for the game to come first and then the magnetization. And you constantly come around with gems to gold, gold costs time and some point money is worth more then gold per hour, and on top of that the gems are bought for real money and traded with someone else for the gold, arenanet doesn't lose from this. Stop going back to but money this and that, the argument is that they employ bland and boring mobile gameplay loop more and more instead of of a PC game.

    The guy that paid 10 dollars real money helps the company to invest/create new content
    By collecting gold YOU BENEFIT from ppl that used cash to get an item for free. The company cannot use the ingame gold to pay the Electrical Bills and keep the servers running up .
    The person that payed 10 dollars + and you by converting gold to gems = doesnt mean that the company will earn 20 real dollars
    1 pays and 1 ''benefit''

    mod , i will grand you 5 months of peace
    but you will offer me 5 ''cookies'' to munch afterwards :P
    up until now i have less than 15 cookies eaten , because i am not trying to get fat

  • chad.8701chad.8701 Member ✭✭

    @Vancho.8750 said:
    Since i work in that part of the industry and i know how the sausage is made, some design choices have me worried. Usually i ignore them but after the lay offs things got little bit more pushy with the "Macro" transactions and the design of some content like the Skyscale unlock(bland, boring and unimaginative for the most part like most mobile game practices) and now with build templates (looks like copy of a mobile game feature the only part missing is charging for changing builds, don't get any kitten ideas from that). I don't think GW2 could survive a mobile game flop for pushing too hard. In the mobile space you can always reskin, recycle and reuse a flop into something "new" and it can be churned out quicker, not so much in the PC. Even in the mobile space you don't push way too hard on your crown jewel game that is in the public eye.
    Now that MO is out and Chris Corry will oversee NCSOFT west and from what i read his experience is in the mobile space from Kabam, that puts some doubt in the future of the game.

    Sad fact is mobile gaming makes so much more money then PC games and Console games combined.
    That being said, You can see why they are are moving in that direction.

  • perilisk.1874perilisk.1874 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Killthehealersffs.8940 said:

    @Vancho.8750 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:
    @Vancho.8750 No, you just want Anet to bend over backwards for you, so you don’t have to spend an additional penny on the game. Yet, you want things like the UI reworked, new armors, more cultural armors , reworks of old armors... Things cost time and money, yet you complain about a game company that doesn’t charge you a monthly fee and only offers non-essential items on the gemstore... None of which you need to progress in the game... Which you can get for $0 by trading your gold for gems, but you complain about how the game is monetized.

    You still haven’t provided Anet with a better monetizing plan either, despite your claim.

    I get you don't like to read but this is getting really annoying you repeating the kitten over and over like you don't have anything useful to say. All im asking is for the game to come first and then the magnetization. And you constantly come around with gems to gold, gold costs time and some point money is worth more then gold per hour, and on top of that the gems are bought for real money and traded with someone else for the gold, arenanet doesn't lose from this. Stop going back to but money this and that, the argument is that they employ bland and boring mobile gameplay loop more and more instead of of a PC game.

    The guy that paid 10 dollars real money helps the company to invest/create new content
    By collecting gold YOU BENEFIT from ppl that used cash to get an item for free. The company cannot use the ingame gold to pay the Electrical Bills and keep the servers running up .
    The person that payed 10 dollars + and you by converting gold to gems = doesnt mean that the company will earn 20 real dollars
    1 pays and 1 ''benefit''

    Selling gold makes gems more valuable in terms of gold, though, so you're still indirectly helping to monetize.

  • Killthehealersffs.8940Killthehealersffs.8940 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 10, 2019

    @perilisk.1874 said:

    @Killthehealersffs.8940 said:

    @Vancho.8750 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:
    @Vancho.8750 No, you just want Anet to bend over backwards for you, so you don’t have to spend an additional penny on the game. Yet, you want things like the UI reworked, new armors, more cultural armors , reworks of old armors... Things cost time and money, yet you complain about a game company that doesn’t charge you a monthly fee and only offers non-essential items on the gemstore... None of which you need to progress in the game... Which you can get for $0 by trading your gold for gems, but you complain about how the game is monetized.

    You still haven’t provided Anet with a better monetizing plan either, despite your claim.

    I get you don't like to read but this is getting really annoying you repeating the kitten over and over like you don't have anything useful to say. All im asking is for the game to come first and then the magnetization. And you constantly come around with gems to gold, gold costs time and some point money is worth more then gold per hour, and on top of that the gems are bought for real money and traded with someone else for the gold, arenanet doesn't lose from this. Stop going back to but money this and that, the argument is that they employ bland and boring mobile gameplay loop more and more instead of of a PC game.

    The guy that paid 10 dollars real money helps the company to invest/create new content
    By collecting gold YOU BENEFIT from ppl that used cash to get an item for free. The company cannot use the ingame gold to pay the Electrical Bills and keep the servers running up .
    The person that payed 10 dollars + and you by converting gold to gems = doesnt mean that the company will earn 20 real dollars
    1 pays and 1 ''benefit''

    Selling gold makes gems more valuable in terms of gold, though, so you're still indirectly helping to monetize.

    More ppl using using the gold>gem conversion and less ppl using real money . spikes up the prices for the convertion
    More ppl using the gold from Fractals + Raids =the company dont gain anything from them , but their playtime/they keep beeing online

    mod , i will grand you 5 months of peace
    but you will offer me 5 ''cookies'' to munch afterwards :P
    up until now i have less than 15 cookies eaten , because i am not trying to get fat

  • Killthehealersffs.8940Killthehealersffs.8940 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 10, 2019

    @Vinceman.4572 said:

    @Killthehealersffs.8940 said:
    The guy that paid 10 dollars real money helps the company to invest/create new content
    By collecting gold YOU BENEFIT from ppl that used cash to get an item for free. The company cannot use the ingame gold to pay the Electrical Bills and keep the servers running up .
    The person that payed 10 dollars + and you by converting gold to gems = doesnt mean that the company will earn 20 real dollars
    1 pays and 1 ''benefit''

    I recommend to do some serious research about the gem exchange to gold and vice versa. The connection was already shown in several well-founded documents by long-term observations. The overall result is: Arenanet benefits the most. Just saying. :)

    Ok tell me
    You pay 10 dollars per month , for 1 year
    I use gold>gems for 1 year
    How much money the company makes ?

    I dont effect you , because simply by converting money i dont increase the price of next Mount Skin .thats the company setting the prices .
    But if you use real money , you will get more gold . The company wants the cash ...the gold is something for the players to manage among them .
    And by you spending money you lower/try to stabilize the gold-gem conversion from highly spiking up , so i can benefit from low prices in my turn
    You offer cash , i offer my free company ingame

    mod , i will grand you 5 months of peace
    but you will offer me 5 ''cookies'' to munch afterwards :P
    up until now i have less than 15 cookies eaten , because i am not trying to get fat

  • Swagger.1459Swagger.1459 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 10, 2019

    @Vancho.8750

    “ And you constantly come around with gems to gold, gold costs time and some point money is worth more then gold per hour, and on top of that the gems are bought for real money and traded with someone else for the gold, arenanet doesn't lose from this.”

    This says a lot about your understanding of the monetization of the game. Anet makes exactly $0 from someone exchanging their gold for gems... $0

    I’m not trying to be rude, but you’re not being honest, and certainly do not understand how generous Anet is.

  • Swagger.1459Swagger.1459 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @perilisk.1874 said:

    @Killthehealersffs.8940 said:

    @Vancho.8750 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:
    @Vancho.8750 No, you just want Anet to bend over backwards for you, so you don’t have to spend an additional penny on the game. Yet, you want things like the UI reworked, new armors, more cultural armors , reworks of old armors... Things cost time and money, yet you complain about a game company that doesn’t charge you a monthly fee and only offers non-essential items on the gemstore... None of which you need to progress in the game... Which you can get for $0 by trading your gold for gems, but you complain about how the game is monetized.

    You still haven’t provided Anet with a better monetizing plan either, despite your claim.

    I get you don't like to read but this is getting really annoying you repeating the kitten over and over like you don't have anything useful to say. All im asking is for the game to come first and then the magnetization. And you constantly come around with gems to gold, gold costs time and some point money is worth more then gold per hour, and on top of that the gems are bought for real money and traded with someone else for the gold, arenanet doesn't lose from this. Stop going back to but money this and that, the argument is that they employ bland and boring mobile gameplay loop more and more instead of of a PC game.

    The guy that paid 10 dollars real money helps the company to invest/create new content
    By collecting gold YOU BENEFIT from ppl that used cash to get an item for free. The company cannot use the ingame gold to pay the Electrical Bills and keep the servers running up .
    The person that payed 10 dollars + and you by converting gold to gems = doesnt mean that the company will earn 20 real dollars
    1 pays and 1 ''benefit''

    Selling gold makes gems more valuable in terms of gold, though, so you're still indirectly helping to monetize.

    Sorry, but Anet makes exactly $0 dollars when someone exchanges gold to gems.

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

    @zealex.9410 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:
    @Vancho.8750 This game exists because of money, not the goodwill of donors or volunteers.

    You do not understand business, like at all, nor how generous Anet has been to gw2 players. And you clearly don’t have any better recommendations.

    “things got little bit more pushy with the "Macro" transactions”... Game doesn’t run in free pal.

    Im very thankful anet is giving me 2 or 3 days worth of content every 3 to 4 months but i dont consider that worth spending money for or sticking around in the meantime for.

    > Everything else that's replayable and supposed to keep me playing sees a 10th of that support and it has caused my friends and me to lose interest in the game, a game we've sunk thousands of hours.

    Me (and my friends) are all open to support the game if it can in turn support us with a good, strong content plan that we find better in quantity and quality than the current one, we are also open to pay money for said content because we've seen what that enables other devs to do.

    I'm going to go out on a limb and guess those other modes you find replayable that are supposed to keep you playing would be sPvP and WvW, neither of which really bring in any money for ArenaNet at all, basically you have the PvE content supporting the PvP/WvW content, so there's no wondering which is going to get more service over the other.

    As for it being 2 or 3 days worth of content, again, that's each players personal opinion/threshold of what they find replayable, for example: the Prologue I find infinitely replayable, enough so that I've brought 3 characters through it and considering a few more. Of course that's just my personal opinion of it and I wouldn't dare apply it to anyone else that plays GW2.

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

  • zealex.9410zealex.9410 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Zaklex.6308 said:

    @zealex.9410 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:
    @Vancho.8750 This game exists because of money, not the goodwill of donors or volunteers.

    You do not understand business, like at all, nor how generous Anet has been to gw2 players. And you clearly don’t have any better recommendations.

    “things got little bit more pushy with the "Macro" transactions”... Game doesn’t run in free pal.

    Im very thankful anet is giving me 2 or 3 days worth of content every 3 to 4 months but i dont consider that worth spending money for or sticking around in the meantime for.

    > Everything else that's replayable and supposed to keep me playing sees a 10th of that support and it has caused my friends and me to lose interest in the game, a game we've sunk thousands of hours.

    Me (and my friends) are all open to support the game if it can in turn support us with a good, strong content plan that we find better in quantity and quality than the current one, we are also open to pay money for said content because we've seen what that enables other devs to do.

    I'm going to go out on a limb and guess those other modes you find replayable that are supposed to keep you playing would be sPvP and WvW, neither of which really bring in any money for ArenaNet at all, basically you have the PvE content supporting the PvP/WvW content, so there's no wondering which is going to get more service over the other.

    Its actually fractals and raids, and i dont get how these dont really bring the money like lw would, everyone wants to look good, everyone wants qol.

    As for it being 2 or 3 days worth of content, again, that's each players personal opinion/threshold of what they find replayable, for example: the Prologue I find infinitely replayable, enough so that I've brought 3 characters through it and considering a few more. Of course that's just my personal opinion of it and I wouldn't dare apply it to anyone else that plays GW2.

    Its just the average time ive found it takes to complete an episode, post that replaybility varries.

  • Swagger.1459Swagger.1459 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @perilisk.1874 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:
    Sorry, but Anet makes exactly $0 dollars when someone exchanges gold to gems.

    But they do make money when people buy gems to exchange for gold. The exchange rate is reactive. Every time people buy gems with gold, it moves the exchange rate in favor of gems (that is, gems can buy more gold), which makes it cheaper to buy in-game items with fixed gold prices, like icy runestones or the griffon mount. That implicitly raises the value of gems, which entices more people to buy them.

    No kidding, it’s pretty obvious that Anet makes money when someone buys gems with money...

    A player exchanging gold to gems is a $0 transaction, that’s the point, but some are obviously unaware of this.

  • Calistin.6210Calistin.6210 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @perilisk.1874 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:
    Sorry, but Anet makes exactly $0 dollars when someone exchanges gold to gems.

    But they do make money when people buy gems to exchange for gold. The exchange rate is reactive. Every time people buy gems with gold, it moves the exchange rate in favor of gems (that is, gems can buy more gold), which makes it cheaper to buy in-game items with fixed gold prices, like icy runestones or the griffon mount. That implicitly raises the value of gems, which entices more people to buy them.

    No kidding, it’s pretty obvious that Anet makes money when someone buys gems...

    A player exchanging gold to gems is a $0 transaction, that’s the point, but some are obviously unaware of this.

    Uh no it's not a 0$ transaction because those gems were not aquired free, they didn't magically spawn from a chest in game like gold or drop from a boss etc etc. For it to be a 0$ transaction then the gems would have had to be generated in game from WITHIN the game eco system.

    Instead someone spent real $$$ to buy those gems to then inject them into the "game eco sytem". As such every time someone buys gems with gold or gold with gem Anet has made $$$ because those gems come from only one source. Anet themselves as they are the only gem sellers which by defaults make anyone using gold to buy some Anets little gold bots for their gold selling business so to speak

  • Swagger.1459Swagger.1459 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @Calistin.6210 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @perilisk.1874 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:
    Sorry, but Anet makes exactly $0 dollars when someone exchanges gold to gems.

    But they do make money when people buy gems to exchange for gold. The exchange rate is reactive. Every time people buy gems with gold, it moves the exchange rate in favor of gems (that is, gems can buy more gold), which makes it cheaper to buy in-game items with fixed gold prices, like icy runestones or the griffon mount. That implicitly raises the value of gems, which entices more people to buy them.

    No kidding, it’s pretty obvious that Anet makes money when someone buys gems...

    A player exchanging gold to gems is a $0 transaction, that’s the point, but some are obviously unaware of this.

    Uh no it's not a 0$ transaction because those gems were not aquired free, they didn't magically spawn from a chest in game like gold or drop from a boss etc etc. For it to be a 0$ transaction then the gems would have had to be generated in game from WITHIN the game eco system.

    Instead someone spent real $$$ to buy those gems to then inject them into the "game eco sytem". As such every time someone buys gems with gold or gold with gem Anet has made $$$ because those gems come from only one source. Anet themselves as they are the only gem sellers which by defaults make anyone using gold to buy some Anets little gold bots for their gold selling business so to speak

    Really? I would like you to tell me how much money Anet earns for their bank account if a player exchanges gold to get 8,000 gems?

  • Swagger.1459Swagger.1459 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @perilisk.1874 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Calistin.6210 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @perilisk.1874 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:
    Sorry, but Anet makes exactly $0 dollars when someone exchanges gold to gems.

    But they do make money when people buy gems to exchange for gold. The exchange rate is reactive. Every time people buy gems with gold, it moves the exchange rate in favor of gems (that is, gems can buy more gold), which makes it cheaper to buy in-game items with fixed gold prices, like icy runestones or the griffon mount. That implicitly raises the value of gems, which entices more people to buy them.

    No kidding, it’s pretty obvious that Anet makes money when someone buys gems...

    A player exchanging gold to gems is a $0 transaction, that’s the point, but some are obviously unaware of this.

    Uh no it's not a 0$ transaction because those gems were not aquired free, they didn't magically spawn from a chest in game like gold or drop from a boss etc etc. For it to be a 0$ transaction then the gems would have had to be generated in game from WITHIN the game eco system.

    Instead someone spent real $$$ to buy those gems to then inject them into the "game eco sytem". As such every time someone buys gems with gold or gold with gem Anet has made $$$ because those gems come from only one source. Anet themselves as they are the only gem sellers which by defaults make anyone using gold to buy some Anets little gold bots for their gold selling business so to speak

    Really? I would like you to tell me how much Anet money earns for their bank account if a player exchanges gold to get 8,000 gems?

    $100. You can be pedantic, I guess, and argue that they make nothing in that specific transaction because the price was paid when the gems were bought, not when they were spent to buy gold. But by that logic, nothing in the gem store makes them money.

    Anet earns $0 dollars off that exchange pal.

    This is what I mean by some of you not getting it.

  • Swagger.1459Swagger.1459 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Listen peeps...

    I buy 8,000 gems with money then anet earns $100.

    If I exchange game gold for 8,000 gems then anet makes $0 off that transaction... Fantasy currency doesn't magically turn into real life cash...

    If you peeps think you are putting cash in anet's coffers from exchanging your gold to gems then you better rethink that. Some of you should also rethink the complaints about non-essential items being on the gemstore with all things considered.

  • Swagger.1459Swagger.1459 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Calistin.6210 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:
    Listen peeps...

    I buy 8,000 gems with money then anet earns $100.

    If I exchange game gold for 8,000 gems then anet makes $0 off that transaction... Fantasy currency doesn't magically turn into real life cash...

    If you peeps think you are putting cash in anet's coffers from exchanging your gold to gems then you better rethink that. Some of you should also rethink the complaints about non-essential items being on the gemstore with all things considered.

    No.

    If you buy 8k gems with this "fantasy currency" (the gold) someone bought cash shop currency (gems) which cost 100$.

    The only way your argument works is if it was done like say in DDO where you can earn turbine points simple by playing the game and releveling alt to earn more TP simply by playing the game. Then in this method you could say some transaction where the TP was grinded for in game and generated in game made Turbine 0$

    In GW2 however you can't earn gems by grinding in game you can only exchange gold for gems in the exchange if someone buys the gems first and puts them up for sale first. Good luck buying gem if everyone stop buy it from Anet..then Anet would indeed be making 0$ per transaction.

    You really don’t understand how it works. Think you should ponder this stuff for a while, because Anet doesn’t earn $200 from a $100 purchase...

    And this whole time you thought you were putting money in anets pockets by changing gold to gems...

  • Calistin.6210Calistin.6210 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @Swagger.1459 said:

    @Calistin.6210 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:
    Listen peeps...

    I buy 8,000 gems with money then anet earns $100.

    If I exchange game gold for 8,000 gems then anet makes $0 off that transaction... Fantasy currency doesn't magically turn into real life cash...

    If you peeps think you are putting cash in anet's coffers from exchanging your gold to gems then you better rethink that. Some of you should also rethink the complaints about non-essential items being on the gemstore with all things considered.

    No.

    If you buy 8k gems with this "fantasy currency" (the gold) someone bought cash shop currency (gems) which cost 100$.

    The only way your argument works is if it was done like say in DDO where you can earn turbine points simple by playing the game and releveling alt to earn more TP simply by playing the game. Then in this method you could say some transaction where the TP was grinded for in game and generated in game made Turbine 0$

    In GW2 however you can't earn gems by grinding in game you can only exchange gold for gems in the exchange if someone buys the gems first and puts them up for sale first. Good luck buying gem if everyone stop buy it from Anet..then Anet would indeed be making 0$ per transaction.

    You really don’t understand how it works. Think you should ponder this stuff for a while, because Anet doesn’t earn $200 from a $100 purchase...

    And this whole time you thought you were putting money in anets pockets by changing gold to gems...

    I never said they made 200$ did I, I said whoever originally bought the gem spent 100$ and the others using the exchange after he put it in there are making Anet money via proxy from the original purchaser.

    You instead are being willfully obtuse with some meh duh highly unlikely scenario/example where the person buying gems for gold is getting the gems off the exchange from someone that might not have possibly bought the gem from Anet themselves and instead got them from the exchange to then sell them again. It's a stupid example as that would be a great way to lose gold and gems.

    I think your the one that needs to ponder things a little more. If the exchange wasn't profitable for Anet it wouldn't exist and everyone would be forced to buy directly from Anet.

    Alas Anet is far smarter than some people and realizes every gem purchase made with gold via the exchange brings $$$ into their coffers.

    Dunno all this time maybe you thought the people selling gems for gold in the exchange didn't buy them first from Anet and would keep buying gems from Anet if they couldn't sell it for gold in said exchange......

  • Acheron.4731Acheron.4731 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Calistin.6210 said:

    @perilisk.1874 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:
    Sorry, but Anet makes exactly $0 dollars when someone exchanges gold to gems.

    But they do make money when people buy gems to exchange for gold. The exchange rate is reactive. Every time people buy gems with gold, it moves the exchange rate in favor of gems (that is, gems can buy more gold), which makes it cheaper to buy in-game items with fixed gold prices, like icy runestones or the griffon mount. That implicitly raises the value of gems, which entices more people to buy them.

    You are in for it now.... I mean how dare you bring logic and common sense into this! :astonished:

    you called it :)

    A true friend of the crown

  • Calistin.6210Calistin.6210 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 11, 2019

    @Swagger.1459 said:
    @Calistin.6210

    I'm trying to be helpful to you, so let's do this again.. Exactly how much money does anet earn if you exchange gold to get 8,000 gems?

    I am trying to help you. Do you really think when you use the exchange to buy gems the only person you are dealing with is the other player selling the gems?

    You are not.

    Stop being pedantic and trying to prove that you right over some petty technicality when the technicality you think you are using is false.

  • Swagger.1459Swagger.1459 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Calistin.6210

    You’re not answering the question... when I explained it before you said “no”, so you tell us how much real cash anet gets if you just exchanged gold to get 8,000 gems?

This discussion has been closed.
©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.