How happy are you with Guild Wars 2 right now? - Page 4 — Guild Wars 2 Forums

How happy are you with Guild Wars 2 right now?

124

Comments

  • I have clicked on this poll but I don't want to vote for any of the above.

    Been playing Scourge last night. Decided to give it a 5th chance.
    I'm almost hooked.
    A billion times better than the derailing they did to Necro in the last balancing.

  • Ashen.2907Ashen.2907 Member ✭✭✭✭
    I'm mostly happy, a few things could be better.

    @Athrenn.9468 said:
    Aside from my personal opinions about the quality of storytelling from Season 3 to Path of Fire...

    (just as a 'brief' note (okay, maybe not brief at all), my problem with the last two story arcs is that the villain felt one dimensional, the pacing was unfocused and the big identity reveal was not foreshadowed properly. Writers need to play fair with their audience and their plot twists are poorly executed. That, and they tried to pack too many villains into six episodes, thus resulting in the anticlimactic resolution of the White Mantle, Jormag and Primordus plot threads in a way that was unsatisfactory. The writers need to just focus on one good antagonist and flesh out the PC's conflict with them rather than telling a bunch of separate and unrelated stories at the same time and rushing through all of them.)

    ...my main problem with Guild Wars 2 right now is that I feel kept in the dark about what I'm getting for the money I already paid. Normally a company who's selling you a product will tell you, "For $30, you get 11 new maps, 9 story episodes, 9 elite specializations, 4 raid wings, 1 new PvP game types, Etc. Etc." To me, that is what an honest business practice looks like. You tell me what you're offering and I'll tell you whether I want to buy it. That is not what I've been seeing post-Heart of Thorns.

    How many maps do I get for $30? Sure, there's the 5 base maps of the expansion, but how many Living World episodes do I get for my money's worth? I don't count LW as a free add-on that the 'generous' developers are giving me, they count as part of the expansion and I want to know how many episodes I'm getting. When Wrath of the Lich King was in presales, Blizzard told everyone up front what we were getting: 8 new zones, level increase, deathknight class, 1 new PvP game types, and a specific amount of raid wings and dungeons. That is the kind of honest dealing I expect from the industry.

    How many new raid wings am I getting and when will they be ready for release? There is no guarantee how much content we'll be getting or even when, just that it will come out when they say it's ready. When WotLK was released, most raids we're there and ready to go immediately. Again, that is what the industry standard should be in my opinion.

    I think it's my right as a customer to know how much content I'm getting and when I'll be getting it if they're already asking me to reach for my wallet. That's how honest business should be conducted, not this 'surprise-you-later' model where I'm not even told how many episodes of LW I'm getting until the penultimate episode goes live, thus telling me that there's only one more episode to go.

    Right now, I am very unimpressed by ArenaNet's business model and the recent mount scandal only made it worse. I want the developers to tell me upfront what they're selling, for how much and I'll be the judge of whether it's worth my time and money to buy it. That's what an honest deal looks like in my opinion and what they should be striving for. I don't want this mount adoption nonsense where I'm not allowed to choose the one skin I want and instead have to gamble away my gems just for a chance at getting it. To me, that is where I draw the line. Customers have a right to demand transparency. ArenaNet should be able to tell us exactly what we're getting for the money we're putting down the moment we come up to the checkout and ask to see their products.

    So to wrap it all up, here is what I am asking from ArenaNet in point form:

    • Tell your playerbase upfront how many Living World episodes/maps they can expect to come with their purchase of the expansion. You're not just doing us a 'kind service', you're being transparent with us about what we're getting for the money that you're asking from us. Five maps worth of content is not a generous sum compared to other games; in Wrath of the Lich King, there were eight zones worth of content and quests including new dungeons, raids, and 1 new PvP game type. This is what I expect as the industry standard for transparency.
    • If you can't deliver new raids, dungeons, or PvP game types with the expansion's release, tell us when we can expect to have them and what the content will be like. If other developers can bundle their new content together for the expansion's release then you should be able to either meet or beat their standard.
    • Do better with communication overall. If you're going to promise us new raids with the expansion, tell us something about those new raids so that we're not throwing money blindly at a product that we can't even see. Transparent business practices reassure your customers that you have nothing to hide from them.
    • If you can manage all of the above, please take some time to see my above point about where your story is failing. It's not the most important part of the product you're selling, but it's important enough to me that I've been disappointed by the quality of villain characterization, pacing and foreshadowing consistently.

    I understand where you are coming from. I, however, tend to look at it as $30 for what is included with the expac launch. If what is listed for the launch is worth the price of admission, to me, I buy. In this case I considered the price acceptible and so bought. If PoF had been advertised as launching with less, with the promise of more later, I would not have bought it.

  • I'm very happy with GW2 right now.

    I'm pretty happy. I hope for the addition of metas in the new maps. Otherwise mounts are great. The adoption license is fine. It's an okay tradeoff on cost and rng.

    I like this xpacs skins much more than HOT (at least none are literally trash). New elites are fun. New maps are nice.

    I think it just needs some more events and good metas.

  • Athrenn.9468Athrenn.9468 Member ✭✭✭
    I'm more or less happy. Things could be better, but they could be worse too.

    @Ashen.2907 said:

    @Athrenn.9468 said:
    Aside from my personal opinions about the quality of storytelling from Season 3 to Path of Fire...

    (just as a 'brief' note (okay, maybe not brief at all), my problem with the last two story arcs is that the villain felt one dimensional, the pacing was unfocused and the big identity reveal was not foreshadowed properly. Writers need to play fair with their audience and their plot twists are poorly executed. That, and they tried to pack too many villains into six episodes, thus resulting in the anticlimactic resolution of the White Mantle, Jormag and Primordus plot threads in a way that was unsatisfactory. The writers need to just focus on one good antagonist and flesh out the PC's conflict with them rather than telling a bunch of separate and unrelated stories at the same time and rushing through all of them.)

    ...my main problem with Guild Wars 2 right now is that I feel kept in the dark about what I'm getting for the money I already paid. Normally a company who's selling you a product will tell you, "For $30, you get 11 new maps, 9 story episodes, 9 elite specializations, 4 raid wings, 1 new PvP game types, Etc. Etc." To me, that is what an honest business practice looks like. You tell me what you're offering and I'll tell you whether I want to buy it. That is not what I've been seeing post-Heart of Thorns.

    How many maps do I get for $30? Sure, there's the 5 base maps of the expansion, but how many Living World episodes do I get for my money's worth? I don't count LW as a free add-on that the 'generous' developers are giving me, they count as part of the expansion and I want to know how many episodes I'm getting. When Wrath of the Lich King was in presales, Blizzard told everyone up front what we were getting: 8 new zones, level increase, deathknight class, 1 new PvP game types, and a specific amount of raid wings and dungeons. That is the kind of honest dealing I expect from the industry.

    How many new raid wings am I getting and when will they be ready for release? There is no guarantee how much content we'll be getting or even when, just that it will come out when they say it's ready. When WotLK was released, most raids we're there and ready to go immediately. Again, that is what the industry standard should be in my opinion.

    I think it's my right as a customer to know how much content I'm getting and when I'll be getting it if they're already asking me to reach for my wallet. That's how honest business should be conducted, not this 'surprise-you-later' model where I'm not even told how many episodes of LW I'm getting until the penultimate episode goes live, thus telling me that there's only one more episode to go.

    Right now, I am very unimpressed by ArenaNet's business model and the recent mount scandal only made it worse. I want the developers to tell me upfront what they're selling, for how much and I'll be the judge of whether it's worth my time and money to buy it. That's what an honest deal looks like in my opinion and what they should be striving for. I don't want this mount adoption nonsense where I'm not allowed to choose the one skin I want and instead have to gamble away my gems just for a chance at getting it. To me, that is where I draw the line. Customers have a right to demand transparency. ArenaNet should be able to tell us exactly what we're getting for the money we're putting down the moment we come up to the checkout and ask to see their products.

    So to wrap it all up, here is what I am asking from ArenaNet in point form:

    • Tell your playerbase upfront how many Living World episodes/maps they can expect to come with their purchase of the expansion. You're not just doing us a 'kind service', you're being transparent with us about what we're getting for the money that you're asking from us. Five maps worth of content is not a generous sum compared to other games; in Wrath of the Lich King, there were eight zones worth of content and quests including new dungeons, raids, and 1 new PvP game type. This is what I expect as the industry standard for transparency.
    • If you can't deliver new raids, dungeons, or PvP game types with the expansion's release, tell us when we can expect to have them and what the content will be like. If other developers can bundle their new content together for the expansion's release then you should be able to either meet or beat their standard.
    • Do better with communication overall. If you're going to promise us new raids with the expansion, tell us something about those new raids so that we're not throwing money blindly at a product that we can't even see. Transparent business practices reassure your customers that you have nothing to hide from them.
    • If you can manage all of the above, please take some time to see my above point about where your story is failing. It's not the most important part of the product you're selling, but it's important enough to me that I've been disappointed by the quality of villain characterization, pacing and foreshadowing consistently.

    I understand where you are coming from. I, however, tend to look at it as $30 for what is included with the expac launch. If what is listed for the launch is worth the price of admission, to me, I buy. In this case I considered the price acceptible and so bought. If PoF had been advertised as launching with less, with the promise of more later, I would not have bought it.

    But you did buy Path of Fire, and they did promise to release new Living World episodes and raids later bundled with your purchase. The only difference is that they aren't telling us how much content we can expect, when to expect it, etc. It feels 'free', but it's really not. You're paying for access to Living World episodes, raids, and everything else that requires the expansion so it really is part of the purchase price regardless of how they advertise it.

    I'm going to hide the rest of my post in spoiler tags because it comes with a warning. Keep reading if you want to know why I've come to this conclusion, but be prepared for the possibility of becoming disillusioned with the Disneyland fantasy of the game world once you start thinking about how the video game industry works:

    Just think about the economics of their decision. What is their monetary incentive to release 'free' maps and episodes? The game designers are certainly getting paid to design those maps and the writers are getting paid to write those episodic stories, so where are they getting the money to pay those people? My theory is that Living World is only profitable because their business model is heavily reliant on the gem store and regular 'free' content releases are integral to their success.

    In a conference call from 2015, it was stated that "the contribution of item sales (Gem Store) is Much Stronger than the Box Sales. The Xpac Revenue will weaken further over time." (Source) From that information, my hypothesis is that it is in ArenaNet's best interest (I.e. For their bottom line) to keep players coming back at regular intervals to check the gem store for new sales. That can only happen if they spread their content releases out over time so that every two months, players flock back to play the new content which is coordinated with the promotion of gem store sales and item releases. If my hypothesis is correct, then ArenaNet's business strategy is to intentionally hold back on content releases so that players can't complete the whole story in one go.

    This is why I believe that Living World is just a strategic ploy to keep players from figuring out that their expansion releases are lightweight compared to the industry standard established in other games. They want their players to believe that they got their money's worth with the expansion but their true motivation is to keep them coming back for 'free' content so that they are exposed to the gem store sales and new items. It's a psychological trick that makes people think that ArenaNet is doing them a favor when it's really just part of a cold, hard and calculating strategy to boost gem store sales because they know it's more profitable than box sales of the expansion on its own.

    Of course, there's nothing wrong with that. ArenaNet is a business and they need to stay competitive in the industry. How many people are playing this game because of the fact that there are no subscription fees? I'm perfectly content with their business model because it allows me to play for $30 as long as I control my gem store spending. The thing is, players are catching on to how their business strategy works and it's transparent as glass.

    You know how games like World of Warcraft reward players for playing the game? That's because you're paying a subscription fee and it's in the company's best interest to keep players putting hours of work into the game so that they keep paying subscriptions. Now, what happens when you take subscription fee revenues away? Those profits are going to come from somewhere else, and I'll bet it's the gem store. All that content that other game developers would have bundled with the expansion as gameplay rewards become microtransactions in GW2. Have you ever wondered why it feels like GW2 doesn't have as much to offer by just playing the game? It's probably because the company's profit revolves around item sales and they always save their nicest items for the cash shop.

  • I have clicked on this poll but I don't want to vote for any of the above.

    @Athrenn.9468 said:

    @Ashen.2907 said:

    @Athrenn.9468 said:
    Aside from my personal opinions about the quality of storytelling from Season 3 to Path of Fire...

    (just as a 'brief' note (okay, maybe not brief at all), my problem with the last two story arcs is that the villain felt one dimensional, the pacing was unfocused and the big identity reveal was not foreshadowed properly. Writers need to play fair with their audience and their plot twists are poorly executed. That, and they tried to pack too many villains into six episodes, thus resulting in the anticlimactic resolution of the White Mantle, Jormag and Primordus plot threads in a way that was unsatisfactory. The writers need to just focus on one good antagonist and flesh out the PC's conflict with them rather than telling a bunch of separate and unrelated stories at the same time and rushing through all of them.)

    ...my main problem with Guild Wars 2 right now is that I feel kept in the dark about what I'm getting for the money I already paid. Normally a company who's selling you a product will tell you, "For $30, you get 11 new maps, 9 story episodes, 9 elite specializations, 4 raid wings, 1 new PvP game types, Etc. Etc." To me, that is what an honest business practice looks like. You tell me what you're offering and I'll tell you whether I want to buy it. That is not what I've been seeing post-Heart of Thorns.

    How many maps do I get for $30? Sure, there's the 5 base maps of the expansion, but how many Living World episodes do I get for my money's worth? I don't count LW as a free add-on that the 'generous' developers are giving me, they count as part of the expansion and I want to know how many episodes I'm getting. When Wrath of the Lich King was in presales, Blizzard told everyone up front what we were getting: 8 new zones, level increase, deathknight class, 1 new PvP game types, and a specific amount of raid wings and dungeons. That is the kind of honest dealing I expect from the industry.

    How many new raid wings am I getting and when will they be ready for release? There is no guarantee how much content we'll be getting or even when, just that it will come out when they say it's ready. When WotLK was released, most raids we're there and ready to go immediately. Again, that is what the industry standard should be in my opinion.

    I think it's my right as a customer to know how much content I'm getting and when I'll be getting it if they're already asking me to reach for my wallet. That's how honest business should be conducted, not this 'surprise-you-later' model where I'm not even told how many episodes of LW I'm getting until the penultimate episode goes live, thus telling me that there's only one more episode to go.

    Right now, I am very unimpressed by ArenaNet's business model and the recent mount scandal only made it worse. I want the developers to tell me upfront what they're selling, for how much and I'll be the judge of whether it's worth my time and money to buy it. That's what an honest deal looks like in my opinion and what they should be striving for. I don't want this mount adoption nonsense where I'm not allowed to choose the one skin I want and instead have to gamble away my gems just for a chance at getting it. To me, that is where I draw the line. Customers have a right to demand transparency. ArenaNet should be able to tell us exactly what we're getting for the money we're putting down the moment we come up to the checkout and ask to see their products.

    So to wrap it all up, here is what I am asking from ArenaNet in point form:

    • Tell your playerbase upfront how many Living World episodes/maps they can expect to come with their purchase of the expansion. You're not just doing us a 'kind service', you're being transparent with us about what we're getting for the money that you're asking from us. Five maps worth of content is not a generous sum compared to other games; in Wrath of the Lich King, there were eight zones worth of content and quests including new dungeons, raids, and 1 new PvP game type. This is what I expect as the industry standard for transparency.
    • If you can't deliver new raids, dungeons, or PvP game types with the expansion's release, tell us when we can expect to have them and what the content will be like. If other developers can bundle their new content together for the expansion's release then you should be able to either meet or beat their standard.
    • Do better with communication overall. If you're going to promise us new raids with the expansion, tell us something about those new raids so that we're not throwing money blindly at a product that we can't even see. Transparent business practices reassure your customers that you have nothing to hide from them.
    • If you can manage all of the above, please take some time to see my above point about where your story is failing. It's not the most important part of the product you're selling, but it's important enough to me that I've been disappointed by the quality of villain characterization, pacing and foreshadowing consistently.

    I understand where you are coming from. I, however, tend to look at it as $30 for what is included with the expac launch. If what is listed for the launch is worth the price of admission, to me, I buy. In this case I considered the price acceptible and so bought. If PoF had been advertised as launching with less, with the promise of more later, I would not have bought it.

    But you did buy Path of Fire, and they did promise to release new Living World episodes and raids later bundled with your purchase. The only difference is that they aren't telling us how much content we can expect, when to expect it, etc. It feels 'free', but it's really not. You're paying for access to Living World episodes, raids, and everything else that requires the expansion so it really is part of the purchase price regardless of how they advertise it.

    I'm going to hide the rest of my post in spoiler tags because it comes with a warning. Keep reading if you want to know why I've come to this conclusion, but be prepared for the possibility of becoming disillusioned with the Disneyland fantasy of the game world once you start thinking about how the video game industry works:

    Just think about the economics of their decision. What is their monetary incentive to release 'free' maps and episodes? The game designers are certainly getting paid to design those maps and the writers are getting paid to write those episodic stories, so where are they getting the money to pay those people? My theory is that Living World is only profitable because their business model is heavily reliant on the gem store and regular 'free' content releases are integral to their success.

    In a conference call from 2015, it was stated that "the contribution of item sales (Gem Store) is Much Stronger than the Box Sales. The Xpac Revenue will weaken further over time." (Source) From that information, my hypothesis is that it is in ArenaNet's best interest (I.e. For their bottom line) to keep players coming back at regular intervals to check the gem store for new sales. That can only happen if they spread their content releases out over time so that every two months, players flock back to play the new content which is coordinated with the promotion of gem store sales and item releases. If my hypothesis is correct, then ArenaNet's business strategy is to intentionally hold back on content releases so that players can't complete the whole story in one go.

    This is why I believe that Living World is just a strategic ploy to keep players from figuring out that their expansion releases are lightweight compared to the industry standard established in other games. They want their players to believe that they got their money's worth with the expansion but their true motivation is to keep them coming back for 'free' content so that they are exposed to the gem store sales and new items. It's a psychological trick that makes people think that ArenaNet is doing them a favor when it's really just part of a cold, hard and calculating strategy to boost gem store sales because they know it's more profitable than box sales of the expansion on its own.

    Of course, there's nothing wrong with that. ArenaNet is a business and they need to stay competitive in the industry. How many people are playing this game because of the fact that there are no subscription fees? I'm perfectly content with their business model because it allows me to play for $30 as long as I control my gem store spending. The thing is, players are catching on to how their business strategy works and it's transparent as glass.

    You know how games like World of Warcraft reward players for playing the game? That's because you're paying a subscription fee and it's in the company's best interest to keep players putting hours of work into the game so that they keep paying subscriptions. Now, what happens when you take subscription fee revenues away? Those profits are going to come from somewhere else, and I'll bet it's the gem store. All that content that other game developers would have bundled with the expansion as gameplay rewards become microtransactions in GW2. Have you ever wondered why it feels like GW2 doesn't have as much to offer by just playing the game? It's probably because the company's profit revolves around item sales and they always save their nicest items for the cash shop.

    The problem there though is let's say someone couldn't play when the Living World came due to anything. Death in the whatever, emergency, temporary coma, Meta happening in another country/continent and no waypoints in real life so they have to head there, they would have to pay for that Living World so it would be extra.

  • Ashen.2907Ashen.2907 Member ✭✭✭✭
    I'm mostly happy, a few things could be better.

    @Athrenn.9468 said:

    @Ashen.2907 said:

    @Athrenn.9468 said:
    Aside from my personal opinions about the quality of storytelling from Season 3 to Path of Fire...

    (just as a 'brief' note (okay, maybe not brief at all), my problem with the last two story arcs is that the villain felt one dimensional, the pacing was unfocused and the big identity reveal was not foreshadowed properly. Writers need to play fair with their audience and their plot twists are poorly executed. That, and they tried to pack too many villains into six episodes, thus resulting in the anticlimactic resolution of the White Mantle, Jormag and Primordus plot threads in a way that was unsatisfactory. The writers need to just focus on one good antagonist and flesh out the PC's conflict with them rather than telling a bunch of separate and unrelated stories at the same time and rushing through all of them.)

    ...my main problem with Guild Wars 2 right now is that I feel kept in the dark about what I'm getting for the money I already paid. Normally a company who's selling you a product will tell you, "For $30, you get 11 new maps, 9 story episodes, 9 elite specializations, 4 raid wings, 1 new PvP game types, Etc. Etc." To me, that is what an honest business practice looks like. You tell me what you're offering and I'll tell you whether I want to buy it. That is not what I've been seeing post-Heart of Thorns.

    How many maps do I get for $30? Sure, there's the 5 base maps of the expansion, but how many Living World episodes do I get for my money's worth? I don't count LW as a free add-on that the 'generous' developers are giving me, they count as part of the expansion and I want to know how many episodes I'm getting. When Wrath of the Lich King was in presales, Blizzard told everyone up front what we were getting: 8 new zones, level increase, deathknight class, 1 new PvP game types, and a specific amount of raid wings and dungeons. That is the kind of honest dealing I expect from the industry.

    How many new raid wings am I getting and when will they be ready for release? There is no guarantee how much content we'll be getting or even when, just that it will come out when they say it's ready. When WotLK was released, most raids we're there and ready to go immediately. Again, that is what the industry standard should be in my opinion.

    I think it's my right as a customer to know how much content I'm getting and when I'll be getting it if they're already asking me to reach for my wallet. That's how honest business should be conducted, not this 'surprise-you-later' model where I'm not even told how many episodes of LW I'm getting until the penultimate episode goes live, thus telling me that there's only one more episode to go.

    Right now, I am very unimpressed by ArenaNet's business model and the recent mount scandal only made it worse. I want the developers to tell me upfront what they're selling, for how much and I'll be the judge of whether it's worth my time and money to buy it. That's what an honest deal looks like in my opinion and what they should be striving for. I don't want this mount adoption nonsense where I'm not allowed to choose the one skin I want and instead have to gamble away my gems just for a chance at getting it. To me, that is where I draw the line. Customers have a right to demand transparency. ArenaNet should be able to tell us exactly what we're getting for the money we're putting down the moment we come up to the checkout and ask to see their products.

    So to wrap it all up, here is what I am asking from ArenaNet in point form:

    • Tell your playerbase upfront how many Living World episodes/maps they can expect to come with their purchase of the expansion. You're not just doing us a 'kind service', you're being transparent with us about what we're getting for the money that you're asking from us. Five maps worth of content is not a generous sum compared to other games; in Wrath of the Lich King, there were eight zones worth of content and quests including new dungeons, raids, and 1 new PvP game type. This is what I expect as the industry standard for transparency.
    • If you can't deliver new raids, dungeons, or PvP game types with the expansion's release, tell us when we can expect to have them and what the content will be like. If other developers can bundle their new content together for the expansion's release then you should be able to either meet or beat their standard.
    • Do better with communication overall. If you're going to promise us new raids with the expansion, tell us something about those new raids so that we're not throwing money blindly at a product that we can't even see. Transparent business practices reassure your customers that you have nothing to hide from them.
    • If you can manage all of the above, please take some time to see my above point about where your story is failing. It's not the most important part of the product you're selling, but it's important enough to me that I've been disappointed by the quality of villain characterization, pacing and foreshadowing consistently.

    I understand where you are coming from. I, however, tend to look at it as $30 for what is included with the expac launch. If what is listed for the launch is worth the price of admission, to me, I buy. In this case I considered the price acceptible and so bought. If PoF had been advertised as launching with less, with the promise of more later, I would not have bought it.

    But you did buy Path of Fire, and they did promise to release new Living World episodes and raids later bundled with your purchase. The only difference is that they aren't telling us how much content we can expect, when to expect it, etc. It feels 'free', but it's really not. You're paying for access to Living World episodes, raids, and everything else that requires the expansion so it really is part of the purchase price regardless of how they advertise it.

    I'm going to hide the rest of my post in spoiler tags because it comes with a warning. Keep reading if you want to know why I've come to this conclusion, but be prepared for the possibility of becoming disillusioned with the Disneyland fantasy of the game world once you start thinking about how the video game industry works:

    Just think about the economics of their decision. What is their monetary incentive to release 'free' maps and episodes? The game designers are certainly getting paid to design those maps and the writers are getting paid to write those episodic stories, so where are they getting the money to pay those people? My theory is that Living World is only profitable because their business model is heavily reliant on the gem store and regular 'free' content releases are integral to their success.

    In a conference call from 2015, it was stated that "the contribution of item sales (Gem Store) is Much Stronger than the Box Sales. The Xpac Revenue will weaken further over time." (Source) From that information, my hypothesis is that it is in ArenaNet's best interest (I.e. For their bottom line) to keep players coming back at regular intervals to check the gem store for new sales. That can only happen if they spread their content releases out over time so that every two months, players flock back to play the new content which is coordinated with the promotion of gem store sales and item releases. If my hypothesis is correct, then ArenaNet's business strategy is to intentionally hold back on content releases so that players can't complete the whole story in one go.

    This is why I believe that Living World is just a strategic ploy to keep players from figuring out that their expansion releases are lightweight compared to the industry standard established in other games. They want their players to believe that they got their money's worth with the expansion but their true motivation is to keep them coming back for 'free' content so that they are exposed to the gem store sales and new items. It's a psychological trick that makes people think that ArenaNet is doing them a favor when it's really just part of a cold, hard and calculating strategy to boost gem store sales because they know it's more profitable than box sales of the expansion on its own.

    Of course, there's nothing wrong with that. ArenaNet is a business and they need to stay competitive in the industry. How many people are playing this game because of the fact that there are no subscription fees? I'm perfectly content with their business model because it allows me to play for $30 as long as I control my gem store spending. The thing is, players are catching on to how their business strategy works and it's transparent as glass.

    You know how games like World of Warcraft reward players for playing the game? That's because you're paying a subscription fee and it's in the company's best interest to keep players putting hours of work into the game so that they keep paying subscriptions. Now, what happens when you take subscription fee revenues away? Those profits are going to come from somewhere else, and I'll bet it's the gem store. All that content that other game developers would have bundled with the expansion as gameplay rewards become microtransactions in GW2. Have you ever wondered why it feels like GW2 doesn't have as much to offer by just playing the game? It's probably because the company's profit revolves around item sales and they always save their nicest items for the cash shop.

    What was described as included with the expac at launch was worth the price of admission to me. Nothing described as being added later was included in my decision to purchase. I got what I paid for, and am pretty happy with it.

  • FrizzFreston.5290FrizzFreston.5290 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited November 17, 2017
    I'm mostly happy, a few things could be better.

    @Ohoni.6057 said:

    @TexZero.7910 said:
    If the entire home movie industry shifts from VHS to DVD it will be dead too right ?

    We aren't just talking about a platform shift here. If it were that simple then we wouldn't be talking about it in terms of profitability, because any mobile game could work just fine on any other platform from a "gameplay" perspective. The issue is that the "profitability" comes down to business model, which is "free to play, in theory, but LOADED with the most aggressive, pay-to-win, semi-mandatory microtransactions imaginable. For all the controversy around GW2 and Battlefront lately, highly successful mobile games get up to things that would make EA blush.

    If we could get high quality, content-rich games on mobile, fine, but if the industry truly does move to mobile, not just the platform, but the ideology, then it means very simple Skinnerbox simulators with the bare minimum of content, tight limitations as to what you can actually accomplish at any given time (without paying them money to keep playing), and massive advantages to those who are willing to drop thousands of dollars on the game, making it impossible for anyone to keep up with the curve otherwise.

    That's not a gaming environment I want to live in.

    It's harder to find the great games on mobile but they are definitely there. Just usually you need to pay for them.
    Alot of big names have been putting their whole series on android. And alot of older classic games are on there as well.

    So while alot of the free games are usually some skinnerbox simulator as you call it, there's are fullfledged games on mobile these days. The problem is more that those games are mixed with smaller names that indeed try to get in on the big simulator thing. Other games do provide a great deal of fun gameplay additionally to the whole grind your kitten off for stuff or pay up.

    Just take a look at console classics on the google play store. Those are not simple skinnerbox simulations.

  • Athrenn.9468Athrenn.9468 Member ✭✭✭
    edited November 17, 2017
    I'm more or less happy. Things could be better, but they could be worse too.

    @Ayumi Spender.1082 said:

    @Athrenn.9468 said:

    @Ashen.2907 said:

    @Athrenn.9468 said:
    Aside from my personal opinions about the quality of storytelling from Season 3 to Path of Fire...

    (just as a 'brief' note (okay, maybe not brief at all), my problem with the last two story arcs is that the villain felt one dimensional, the pacing was unfocused and the big identity reveal was not foreshadowed properly. Writers need to play fair with their audience and their plot twists are poorly executed. That, and they tried to pack too many villains into six episodes, thus resulting in the anticlimactic resolution of the White Mantle, Jormag and Primordus plot threads in a way that was unsatisfactory. The writers need to just focus on one good antagonist and flesh out the PC's conflict with them rather than telling a bunch of separate and unrelated stories at the same time and rushing through all of them.)

    ...my main problem with Guild Wars 2 right now is that I feel kept in the dark about what I'm getting for the money I already paid. Normally a company who's selling you a product will tell you, "For $30, you get 11 new maps, 9 story episodes, 9 elite specializations, 4 raid wings, 1 new PvP game types, Etc. Etc." To me, that is what an honest business practice looks like. You tell me what you're offering and I'll tell you whether I want to buy it. That is not what I've been seeing post-Heart of Thorns.

    How many maps do I get for $30? Sure, there's the 5 base maps of the expansion, but how many Living World episodes do I get for my money's worth? I don't count LW as a free add-on that the 'generous' developers are giving me, they count as part of the expansion and I want to know how many episodes I'm getting. When Wrath of the Lich King was in presales, Blizzard told everyone up front what we were getting: 8 new zones, level increase, deathknight class, 1 new PvP game types, and a specific amount of raid wings and dungeons. That is the kind of honest dealing I expect from the industry.

    How many new raid wings am I getting and when will they be ready for release? There is no guarantee how much content we'll be getting or even when, just that it will come out when they say it's ready. When WotLK was released, most raids we're there and ready to go immediately. Again, that is what the industry standard should be in my opinion.

    I think it's my right as a customer to know how much content I'm getting and when I'll be getting it if they're already asking me to reach for my wallet. That's how honest business should be conducted, not this 'surprise-you-later' model where I'm not even told how many episodes of LW I'm getting until the penultimate episode goes live, thus telling me that there's only one more episode to go.

    Right now, I am very unimpressed by ArenaNet's business model and the recent mount scandal only made it worse. I want the developers to tell me upfront what they're selling, for how much and I'll be the judge of whether it's worth my time and money to buy it. That's what an honest deal looks like in my opinion and what they should be striving for. I don't want this mount adoption nonsense where I'm not allowed to choose the one skin I want and instead have to gamble away my gems just for a chance at getting it. To me, that is where I draw the line. Customers have a right to demand transparency. ArenaNet should be able to tell us exactly what we're getting for the money we're putting down the moment we come up to the checkout and ask to see their products.

    So to wrap it all up, here is what I am asking from ArenaNet in point form:

    • Tell your playerbase upfront how many Living World episodes/maps they can expect to come with their purchase of the expansion. You're not just doing us a 'kind service', you're being transparent with us about what we're getting for the money that you're asking from us. Five maps worth of content is not a generous sum compared to other games; in Wrath of the Lich King, there were eight zones worth of content and quests including new dungeons, raids, and 1 new PvP game type. This is what I expect as the industry standard for transparency.
    • If you can't deliver new raids, dungeons, or PvP game types with the expansion's release, tell us when we can expect to have them and what the content will be like. If other developers can bundle their new content together for the expansion's release then you should be able to either meet or beat their standard.
    • Do better with communication overall. If you're going to promise us new raids with the expansion, tell us something about those new raids so that we're not throwing money blindly at a product that we can't even see. Transparent business practices reassure your customers that you have nothing to hide from them.
    • If you can manage all of the above, please take some time to see my above point about where your story is failing. It's not the most important part of the product you're selling, but it's important enough to me that I've been disappointed by the quality of villain characterization, pacing and foreshadowing consistently.

    I understand where you are coming from. I, however, tend to look at it as $30 for what is included with the expac launch. If what is listed for the launch is worth the price of admission, to me, I buy. In this case I considered the price acceptible and so bought. If PoF had been advertised as launching with less, with the promise of more later, I would not have bought it.

    But you did buy Path of Fire, and they did promise to release new Living World episodes and raids later bundled with your purchase. The only difference is that they aren't telling us how much content we can expect, when to expect it, etc. It feels 'free', but it's really not. You're paying for access to Living World episodes, raids, and everything else that requires the expansion so it really is part of the purchase price regardless of how they advertise it.

    I'm going to hide the rest of my post in spoiler tags because it comes with a warning. Keep reading if you want to know why I've come to this conclusion, but be prepared for the possibility of becoming disillusioned with the Disneyland fantasy of the game world once you start thinking about how the video game industry works:

    Just think about the economics of their decision. What is their monetary incentive to release 'free' maps and episodes? The game designers are certainly getting paid to design those maps and the writers are getting paid to write those episodic stories, so where are they getting the money to pay those people? My theory is that Living World is only profitable because their business model is heavily reliant on the gem store and regular 'free' content releases are integral to their success.

    In a conference call from 2015, it was stated that "the contribution of item sales (Gem Store) is Much Stronger than the Box Sales. The Xpac Revenue will weaken further over time." (Source) From that information, my hypothesis is that it is in ArenaNet's best interest (I.e. For their bottom line) to keep players coming back at regular intervals to check the gem store for new sales. That can only happen if they spread their content releases out over time so that every two months, players flock back to play the new content which is coordinated with the promotion of gem store sales and item releases. If my hypothesis is correct, then ArenaNet's business strategy is to intentionally hold back on content releases so that players can't complete the whole story in one go.

    This is why I believe that Living World is just a strategic ploy to keep players from figuring out that their expansion releases are lightweight compared to the industry standard established in other games. They want their players to believe that they got their money's worth with the expansion but their true motivation is to keep them coming back for 'free' content so that they are exposed to the gem store sales and new items. It's a psychological trick that makes people think that ArenaNet is doing them a favor when it's really just part of a cold, hard and calculating strategy to boost gem store sales because they know it's more profitable than box sales of the expansion on its own.

    Of course, there's nothing wrong with that. ArenaNet is a business and they need to stay competitive in the industry. How many people are playing this game because of the fact that there are no subscription fees? I'm perfectly content with their business model because it allows me to play for $30 as long as I control my gem store spending. The thing is, players are catching on to how their business strategy works and it's transparent as glass.

    You know how games like World of Warcraft reward players for playing the game? That's because you're paying a subscription fee and it's in the company's best interest to keep players putting hours of work into the game so that they keep paying subscriptions. Now, what happens when you take subscription fee revenues away? Those profits are going to come from somewhere else, and I'll bet it's the gem store. All that content that other game developers would have bundled with the expansion as gameplay rewards become microtransactions in GW2. Have you ever wondered why it feels like GW2 doesn't have as much to offer by just playing the game? It's probably because the company's profit revolves around item sales and they always save their nicest items for the cash shop.

    The problem there though is let's say someone couldn't play when the Living World came due to anything. Death in the whatever, emergency, temporary coma, Meta happening in another country/continent and no waypoints in real life so they have to head there, they would have to pay for that Living World so it would be extra.

    That's not a problem for the developers at all. They'll always find some way to cash in on an opportunity. If you miss unlocking it for free, they'll charge you for it. If you log in to check out the content, you're being exposed to gem store deals that you're more likely to buy. Either way, there's no such thing as a free lunch in economics. If they're advertising it as 'free' then they want something from you and it always involves money.

    @Ashen.2907 said:

    @Athrenn.9468 said:

    @Ashen.2907 said:

    @Athrenn.9468 said:
    Aside from my personal opinions about the quality of storytelling from Season 3 to Path of Fire...

    (just as a 'brief' note (okay, maybe not brief at all), my problem with the last two story arcs is that the villain felt one dimensional, the pacing was unfocused and the big identity reveal was not foreshadowed properly. Writers need to play fair with their audience and their plot twists are poorly executed. That, and they tried to pack too many villains into six episodes, thus resulting in the anticlimactic resolution of the White Mantle, Jormag and Primordus plot threads in a way that was unsatisfactory. The writers need to just focus on one good antagonist and flesh out the PC's conflict with them rather than telling a bunch of separate and unrelated stories at the same time and rushing through all of them.)

    ...my main problem with Guild Wars 2 right now is that I feel kept in the dark about what I'm getting for the money I already paid. Normally a company who's selling you a product will tell you, "For $30, you get 11 new maps, 9 story episodes, 9 elite specializations, 4 raid wings, 1 new PvP game types, Etc. Etc." To me, that is what an honest business practice looks like. You tell me what you're offering and I'll tell you whether I want to buy it. That is not what I've been seeing post-Heart of Thorns.

    How many maps do I get for $30? Sure, there's the 5 base maps of the expansion, but how many Living World episodes do I get for my money's worth? I don't count LW as a free add-on that the 'generous' developers are giving me, they count as part of the expansion and I want to know how many episodes I'm getting. When Wrath of the Lich King was in presales, Blizzard told everyone up front what we were getting: 8 new zones, level increase, deathknight class, 1 new PvP game types, and a specific amount of raid wings and dungeons. That is the kind of honest dealing I expect from the industry.

    How many new raid wings am I getting and when will they be ready for release? There is no guarantee how much content we'll be getting or even when, just that it will come out when they say it's ready. When WotLK was released, most raids we're there and ready to go immediately. Again, that is what the industry standard should be in my opinion.

    I think it's my right as a customer to know how much content I'm getting and when I'll be getting it if they're already asking me to reach for my wallet. That's how honest business should be conducted, not this 'surprise-you-later' model where I'm not even told how many episodes of LW I'm getting until the penultimate episode goes live, thus telling me that there's only one more episode to go.

    Right now, I am very unimpressed by ArenaNet's business model and the recent mount scandal only made it worse. I want the developers to tell me upfront what they're selling, for how much and I'll be the judge of whether it's worth my time and money to buy it. That's what an honest deal looks like in my opinion and what they should be striving for. I don't want this mount adoption nonsense where I'm not allowed to choose the one skin I want and instead have to gamble away my gems just for a chance at getting it. To me, that is where I draw the line. Customers have a right to demand transparency. ArenaNet should be able to tell us exactly what we're getting for the money we're putting down the moment we come up to the checkout and ask to see their products.

    So to wrap it all up, here is what I am asking from ArenaNet in point form:

    • Tell your playerbase upfront how many Living World episodes/maps they can expect to come with their purchase of the expansion. You're not just doing us a 'kind service', you're being transparent with us about what we're getting for the money that you're asking from us. Five maps worth of content is not a generous sum compared to other games; in Wrath of the Lich King, there were eight zones worth of content and quests including new dungeons, raids, and 1 new PvP game type. This is what I expect as the industry standard for transparency.
    • If you can't deliver new raids, dungeons, or PvP game types with the expansion's release, tell us when we can expect to have them and what the content will be like. If other developers can bundle their new content together for the expansion's release then you should be able to either meet or beat their standard.
    • Do better with communication overall. If you're going to promise us new raids with the expansion, tell us something about those new raids so that we're not throwing money blindly at a product that we can't even see. Transparent business practices reassure your customers that you have nothing to hide from them.
    • If you can manage all of the above, please take some time to see my above point about where your story is failing. It's not the most important part of the product you're selling, but it's important enough to me that I've been disappointed by the quality of villain characterization, pacing and foreshadowing consistently.

    I understand where you are coming from. I, however, tend to look at it as $30 for what is included with the expac launch. If what is listed for the launch is worth the price of admission, to me, I buy. In this case I considered the price acceptible and so bought. If PoF had been advertised as launching with less, with the promise of more later, I would not have bought it.

    But you did buy Path of Fire, and they did promise to release new Living World episodes and raids later bundled with your purchase. The only difference is that they aren't telling us how much content we can expect, when to expect it, etc. It feels 'free', but it's really not. You're paying for access to Living World episodes, raids, and everything else that requires the expansion so it really is part of the purchase price regardless of how they advertise it.

    I'm going to hide the rest of my post in spoiler tags because it comes with a warning. Keep reading if you want to know why I've come to this conclusion, but be prepared for the possibility of becoming disillusioned with the Disneyland fantasy of the game world once you start thinking about how the video game industry works:

    Just think about the economics of their decision. What is their monetary incentive to release 'free' maps and episodes? The game designers are certainly getting paid to design those maps and the writers are getting paid to write those episodic stories, so where are they getting the money to pay those people? My theory is that Living World is only profitable because their business model is heavily reliant on the gem store and regular 'free' content releases are integral to their success.

    In a conference call from 2015, it was stated that "the contribution of item sales (Gem Store) is Much Stronger than the Box Sales. The Xpac Revenue will weaken further over time." (Source) From that information, my hypothesis is that it is in ArenaNet's best interest (I.e. For their bottom line) to keep players coming back at regular intervals to check the gem store for new sales. That can only happen if they spread their content releases out over time so that every two months, players flock back to play the new content which is coordinated with the promotion of gem store sales and item releases. If my hypothesis is correct, then ArenaNet's business strategy is to intentionally hold back on content releases so that players can't complete the whole story in one go.

    This is why I believe that Living World is just a strategic ploy to keep players from figuring out that their expansion releases are lightweight compared to the industry standard established in other games. They want their players to believe that they got their money's worth with the expansion but their true motivation is to keep them coming back for 'free' content so that they are exposed to the gem store sales and new items. It's a psychological trick that makes people think that ArenaNet is doing them a favor when it's really just part of a cold, hard and calculating strategy to boost gem store sales because they know it's more profitable than box sales of the expansion on its own.

    Of course, there's nothing wrong with that. ArenaNet is a business and they need to stay competitive in the industry. How many people are playing this game because of the fact that there are no subscription fees? I'm perfectly content with their business model because it allows me to play for $30 as long as I control my gem store spending. The thing is, players are catching on to how their business strategy works and it's transparent as glass.

    You know how games like World of Warcraft reward players for playing the game? That's because you're paying a subscription fee and it's in the company's best interest to keep players putting hours of work into the game so that they keep paying subscriptions. Now, what happens when you take subscription fee revenues away? Those profits are going to come from somewhere else, and I'll bet it's the gem store. All that content that other game developers would have bundled with the expansion as gameplay rewards become microtransactions in GW2. Have you ever wondered why it feels like GW2 doesn't have as much to offer by just playing the game? It's probably because the company's profit revolves around item sales and they always save their nicest items for the cash shop.

    What was described as included with the expac at launch was worth the price of admission to me. Nothing described as being added later was included in my decision to purchase. I got what I paid for, and am pretty happy with it.

    You're happy now, but would you be happy if they told you that Living World was cancelled or you had to pay extra for it? Would you be happy if there was no new 'free' content between now and Expansion 3?

    That is the psychological effect that spread out expansion releases has on people. Subconsciously you think that there's enough content there to tie you over for the next few months because you know that there's always another release just around the corner. If Living World didn't exist, the amount of content released with Path of Fire would have been outrageously lightweight for an expansion that's supposed to contain a year's worth of new features.

  • I'm mostly unhappy, a lot of things could be better.

    @Athrenn.9468 said:

    This is why I believe that Living World is just a strategic ploy to keep players from figuring out that their expansion releases are lightweight compared to the industry standard established in other games.

    I deleted the rest of your "spoiler" text in line with your intent to allow people to choose to read it or not.

    I have to question the above assumption, especially in the case of PoF. What PoF lacks is not content, it is rewards to fuel the near-endless repetition some MMO fans expect. When I comparison shop, ANet's business plan is a lot more consumer-friendly than other companies. $30 for PoF compares favorably to the first 2 ESO DLC, which sold for ~$22 and ~$30, respectively. It especially compares favorably to games which charge $40-50 for XPac's, then rent access to players. I know there is going to be disagreement on the latter assertion. I never felt more cheated by a game than when I played the big gorilla of MMO's. Ommv.

    So, for me, the Living World updates are gravy, especially at PoF's price. Maybe that's damning ANet with faint praise, but if that's the case, I'd be damning the whole industry.

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

  • Zionka.6897Zionka.6897 Member ✭✭✭
    I'm mostly happy, a few things could be better.

    Am enjoying the game as much as I always have. Maybe even more. The only thing keeping me from giving the best vote, is the fact PoF itself really is kinda lackluster, as much as I hate to admit it. beautiful maps, story is .. ok, mounts are awesome, but as people have been saying, once you've done the content, there's no reason to go back really. I have faith that season 4 will enrich it there some (always the optimist). And as someone else mentioned here, rewards and loot are sooo ho-hum, all cosmetics seem to be locked behind gems now, I never want to fight any mobs or even bosses there now that I got the standard skins all unlocked from the zone. Chests? yawns

  • I'm very unhappy with GW2 right now.

    Pretty much quit playing a week after expac dropped. There's just nothing new and interesting to do we havent been doing for the past years... EVEN AFTER EXPAC. 0 instance content, 0 great events, 0 good achieves/collections, 0 challenging titles to go for... meh... How to play gw2 nowadays? Check new MTX on gem store each week and swipe credit card, run around LA with new shiny griffon skin ---> log off... not my type of game xD

  • Athrenn.9468Athrenn.9468 Member ✭✭✭
    I'm more or less happy. Things could be better, but they could be worse too.

    @IndigoSundown.5419 said:

    @Athrenn.9468 said:

    This is why I believe that Living World is just a strategic ploy to keep players from figuring out that their expansion releases are lightweight compared to the industry standard established in other games.

    I deleted the rest of your "spoiler" text in line with your intent to allow people to choose to read it or not.

    I have to question the above assumption, especially in the case of PoF. What PoF lacks is not content, it is rewards to fuel the near-endless repetition some MMO fans expect. When I comparison shop, ANet's business plan is a lot more consumer-friendly than other companies. $30 for PoF compares favorably to the first 2 ESO DLC, which sold for ~$22 and ~$30, respectively. It especially compares favorably to games which charge $40-50 for XPac's, then rent access to players. I know there is going to be disagreement on the latter assertion. I never felt more cheated by a game than when I played the big gorilla of MMO's. Ommv.

    So, for me, the Living World updates are gravy, especially at PoF's price. Maybe that's damning ANet with faint praise, but if that's the case, I'd be damning the whole industry.

    I haven't played ESO so I can't comment on that, but again, I would question whether people would feel the same way about Path of Fire if the developers told them that there was no 'free' Living World content for Winter 2017/Spring and Summer 2018. What feels like a generous amount of content now will feel dry in comparison 4-6 months down the road. Like gravy, I believe that the promise of regular 'free' updates is the reason why Path of Fire sounds palpable. "It's enough content to tie me over for the next two months until episode 1," people might say. "It doesn't need to be enough to last me all year." Whereas if this was a game where expansions had most of their maps, dungeons, raids, PvP game modes, etc. packed into them on day 1 of the release, a longer draught between releases would be more bearable.

    I challenge people to consider the thought experiment of how they would feel about Path of Fire as a standalone product if ArenaNet said that Living World was either canceled or gated behind a mandatory paywall for all players. In this scenario, there would be no more free content updates until Expansion 3. Would it still be worth it in your opinion? If not, then I think that Living World is really part of Path of Fire's selling point. You're paying money with the promise of future free updates that are just around the corner.

  • Djinn.9245Djinn.9245 Member ✭✭✭
    I'm more or less happy. Things could be better, but they could be worse too.

    @Athrenn.9468 said:

    @IndigoSundown.5419 said:

    @Athrenn.9468 said:

    This is why I believe that Living World is just a strategic ploy to keep players from figuring out that their expansion releases are lightweight compared to the industry standard established in other games.

    I deleted the rest of your "spoiler" text in line with your intent to allow people to choose to read it or not.

    I have to question the above assumption, especially in the case of PoF. What PoF lacks is not content, it is rewards to fuel the near-endless repetition some MMO fans expect. When I comparison shop, ANet's business plan is a lot more consumer-friendly than other companies. $30 for PoF compares favorably to the first 2 ESO DLC, which sold for ~$22 and ~$30, respectively. It especially compares favorably to games which charge $40-50 for XPac's, then rent access to players. I know there is going to be disagreement on the latter assertion. I never felt more cheated by a game than when I played the big gorilla of MMO's. Ommv.

    So, for me, the Living World updates are gravy, especially at PoF's price. Maybe that's damning ANet with faint praise, but if that's the case, I'd be damning the whole industry.

    I haven't played ESO so I can't comment on that, but again, I would question whether people would feel the same way about Path of Fire if the developers told them that there was no 'free' Living World content for Winter 2017/Spring and Summer 2018. What feels like a generous amount of content now will feel dry in comparison 4-6 months down the road. Like gravy, I believe that the promise of regular 'free' updates is the reason why Path of Fire sounds palpable. "It's enough content to tie me over for the next two months until episode 1," people might say. "It doesn't need to be enough to last me all year." Whereas if this was a game where expansions had most of their maps, dungeons, raids, PvP game modes, etc. packed into them on day 1 of the release, a longer draught between releases would be more bearable.

    I challenge people to consider the thought experiment of how they would feel about Path of Fire as a standalone product if ArenaNet said that Living World was either canceled or gated behind a mandatory paywall for all players. In this scenario, there would be no more free content updates until Expansion 3. Would it still be worth it in your opinion? If not, then I think that Living World is really part of Path of Fire's selling point. You're paying money with the promise of future free updates that are just around the corner.

    I've been reading your comments and I honestly don't understand what you're on about. Living World updates are clearly a separate entity from Expansions as they are charged a separate amount in the gemstore if you fail to login while they are active. I personally did not buy PoF thinking that Living World Season 4 had anything to do with it.

  • Ohoni.6057Ohoni.6057 Member ✭✭✭✭
    I'm more or less happy. Things could be better, but they could be worse too.

    @FrizzFreston.5290 said:
    It's harder to find the great games on mobile but they are definitely there. Just usually you need to pay for them.
    Alot of big names have been putting their whole series on android. And alot of older classic games are on there as well.

    Agreed, there are several mobile games I play or have played, some that were very straight forward "games games," some that were Skinner box games that I engaged with eyes-open, there is a wide variety, but again, there are certain types of games that are both ubiquitous in mobile and also relatively uncommon outside of mobile, and they are the ones that seem to deliver the highest return on investment (because, of course, the prey on the worst aspects of human psychology), and so when people talk about "moving to mobile," you can't really have that discussion without discussing those sorts of games. It would be like describing something as a "Vegas-like" or "Atlantic City vibe," and NOT be talking about anything to do with gambling. It may be technically accurate to do so, there are other aspects to those locations, but it would be at best confusing, at worst misleading.

    @Athrenn.9468 said:
    Either way, there's no such thing as a free lunch in economics. If they're advertising it as 'free' then they want something from you and it always involves money.

    Yes and no. Yes, they would like you to spend, and have mechanisms in place to increase those odds, but many F2P products do understand that not everyone will spend, and are based on the concept that plenty won't. Now someone needs to pay, but typically that means one person paying the price for 5-10 others. The games that handle this best establish a very careful balance between what you get for free and what you pay for, so that people who pay feel they've gotten something of value to them, while people who play for free don't feel that they're missing out on so much that it makes the game seem shallow and unrewarding. It's a difficult balance to walk, and GW2 has managed it at least decently, most of the time, but occasionally they wobble. What matters is how they fix it, and the current situation. . . they have not handled well.

    Yet.

    That is the psychological effect that spread out expansion releases has on people. Subconsciously you think that there's enough content there to tie you over for the next few months because you know that there's always another release just around the corner. If Living World didn't exist, the amount of content released with Path of Fire would have been outrageously lightweight for an expansion that's supposed to contain a year's worth of new features.

    Exactly. OR they would have postponed the release until LWs4 was in the can and then dumped it all out at once with the expansion, in which case people would likely be done with all of it by now and would then have another 3-4 years before ANet was ready to do that again. By spacing out the LW content, it focuses player attention on the new map for a few months, gives them something to anticipate in the near future, allows later maps to adapt a little to commentary on the earlier ones, and makes the true content droughts much shorter.

  • Darjamtar.4712Darjamtar.4712 Member
    edited November 17, 2017
    I'm very unhappy with GW2 right now.

    I am disappointed in that it seems that all NPC's have been buffed up. I have 11 toons, my main is a warrior that didnt have any problems with random trash mobs. Now if more then 2 mobs attack , im dead in a few seconds. My legendary weapon is not hitting as hard as the low level mobs are hitting me. With conditions, they are hitting for 2 or 3k plus burns ect, my legendary weapon is crit'ing for less then that. I didnt have a problem prior to the expansion and all my gear and armor is ascended besides my main weapon. I guess they want me to spend 500 in the store to upgrade my gear to fight more then 2 level 56 mobs ( not elite, not champions, just common mobs). Time for another game, this game has went from enjoyable to pay, pay, pay to play, or get 5 people to run around with you to farm anything on the main maps. How sad is it that your elite gear hits and protects you less then a common npc's gear does.

  • Ohoni.6057Ohoni.6057 Member ✭✭✭✭
    I'm more or less happy. Things could be better, but they could be worse too.

    @Djinn.9245 said:
    I've been reading your comments and I honestly don't understand what you're on about. Living World updates are clearly a separate entity from Expansions as they are charged a separate amount in the gemstore if you fail to login while they are active. I personally did not buy PoF thinking that Living World Season 4 had anything to do with it.

    No, LW is part of the expansion. You need to buy PoF to gain access to s4, just as you needed to buy HoT to gain access to s3, even though s2 was part of the original box purchase. Yes, if you do not log in during the content, you have to pay extra to unlock it, but that's only if you do not log in during the content. So log in. During the content. It's basically just a reason to keep players consistently engaged, rather than just waiting until the season is over and binging it all.

  • I'm mostly happy, a few things could be better.

    Gameplay especially old stuff can't be left to the dustbins of too old to care. The story of the game is bound to this content and it does a disservice to the players and devs efforts to deem material not important enough to be playable. Dungeons need love, they are in some ways a persons first look at the game and their current state doesn't reflect well on the effort devs put in creating these elements.

    It detracts from new players by disinteresting them in the story undermining the whole experience.

  • I'm mostly unhappy, a lot of things could be better.

    @Athrenn.9468 said:

    @IndigoSundown.5419 said:

    @Athrenn.9468 said:

    This is why I believe that Living World is just a strategic ploy to keep players from figuring out that their expansion releases are lightweight compared to the industry standard established in other games.

    I deleted the rest of your "spoiler" text in line with your intent to allow people to choose to read it or not.

    I have to question the above assumption, especially in the case of PoF. What PoF lacks is not content, it is rewards to fuel the near-endless repetition some MMO fans expect. When I comparison shop, ANet's business plan is a lot more consumer-friendly than other companies. $30 for PoF compares favorably to the first 2 ESO DLC, which sold for ~$22 and ~$30, respectively. It especially compares favorably to games which charge $40-50 for XPac's, then rent access to players. I know there is going to be disagreement on the latter assertion. I never felt more cheated by a game than when I played the big gorilla of MMO's. Ommv.

    So, for me, the Living World updates are gravy, especially at PoF's price. Maybe that's damning ANet with faint praise, but if that's the case, I'd be damning the whole industry.

    I haven't played ESO so I can't comment on that, but again, I would question whether people would feel the same way about Path of Fire if the developers told them that there was no 'free' Living World content for Winter 2017/Spring and Summer 2018. What feels like a generous amount of content now will feel dry in comparison 4-6 months down the road. Like gravy, I believe that the promise of regular 'free' updates is the reason why Path of Fire sounds palpable. "It's enough content to tie me over for the next two months until episode 1," people might say. "It doesn't need to be enough to last me all year." Whereas if this was a game where expansions had most of their maps, dungeons, raids, PvP game modes, etc. packed into them on day 1 of the release, a longer draught between releases would be more bearable.

    I challenge people to consider the thought experiment of how they would feel about Path of Fire as a standalone product if ArenaNet said that Living World was either canceled or gated behind a mandatory paywall for all players. In this scenario, there would be no more free content updates until Expansion 3. Would it still be worth it in your opinion? If not, then I think that Living World is really part of Path of Fire's selling point. You're paying money with the promise of future free updates that are just around the corner.

    And as to that thought experiment, I'm telling you that Path of Fire as is, no living world content, compared favorably to the competition -- at least for me. As to whether it's enough for the masses, I'd say no. Then, a lot of players, at least those commenting on forums, play for rewards a lot more than I do. So, I may (or may not) be atypical. You can also probably tell that I am not really enamored of the rest of the industry. It's possible that I will be migrating to SP games in the future, assuming there are any worth their salt.

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

  • Ashen.2907Ashen.2907 Member ✭✭✭✭
    I'm mostly happy, a few things could be better.

    @Athrenn.9468 said:

    @Ayumi Spender.1082 said:

    @Athrenn.9468 said:

    @Ashen.2907 said:

    @Athrenn.9468 said:
    Aside from my personal opinions about the quality of storytelling from Season 3 to Path of Fire...

    (just as a 'brief' note (okay, maybe not brief at all), my problem with the last two story arcs is that the villain felt one dimensional, the pacing was unfocused and the big identity reveal was not foreshadowed properly. Writers need to play fair with their audience and their plot twists are poorly executed. That, and they tried to pack too many villains into six episodes, thus resulting in the anticlimactic resolution of the White Mantle, Jormag and Primordus plot threads in a way that was unsatisfactory. The writers need to just focus on one good antagonist and flesh out the PC's conflict with them rather than telling a bunch of separate and unrelated stories at the same time and rushing through all of them.)

    ...my main problem with Guild Wars 2 right now is that I feel kept in the dark about what I'm getting for the money I already paid. Normally a company who's selling you a product will tell you, "For $30, you get 11 new maps, 9 story episodes, 9 elite specializations, 4 raid wings, 1 new PvP game types, Etc. Etc." To me, that is what an honest business practice looks like. You tell me what you're offering and I'll tell you whether I want to buy it. That is not what I've been seeing post-Heart of Thorns.

    How many maps do I get for $30? Sure, there's the 5 base maps of the expansion, but how many Living World episodes do I get for my money's worth? I don't count LW as a free add-on that the 'generous' developers are giving me, they count as part of the expansion and I want to know how many episodes I'm getting. When Wrath of the Lich King was in presales, Blizzard told everyone up front what we were getting: 8 new zones, level increase, deathknight class, 1 new PvP game types, and a specific amount of raid wings and dungeons. That is the kind of honest dealing I expect from the industry.

    How many new raid wings am I getting and when will they be ready for release? There is no guarantee how much content we'll be getting or even when, just that it will come out when they say it's ready. When WotLK was released, most raids we're there and ready to go immediately. Again, that is what the industry standard should be in my opinion.

    I think it's my right as a customer to know how much content I'm getting and when I'll be getting it if they're already asking me to reach for my wallet. That's how honest business should be conducted, not this 'surprise-you-later' model where I'm not even told how many episodes of LW I'm getting until the penultimate episode goes live, thus telling me that there's only one more episode to go.

    Right now, I am very unimpressed by ArenaNet's business model and the recent mount scandal only made it worse. I want the developers to tell me upfront what they're selling, for how much and I'll be the judge of whether it's worth my time and money to buy it. That's what an honest deal looks like in my opinion and what they should be striving for. I don't want this mount adoption nonsense where I'm not allowed to choose the one skin I want and instead have to gamble away my gems just for a chance at getting it. To me, that is where I draw the line. Customers have a right to demand transparency. ArenaNet should be able to tell us exactly what we're getting for the money we're putting down the moment we come up to the checkout and ask to see their products.

    So to wrap it all up, here is what I am asking from ArenaNet in point form:

    • Tell your playerbase upfront how many Living World episodes/maps they can expect to come with their purchase of the expansion. You're not just doing us a 'kind service', you're being transparent with us about what we're getting for the money that you're asking from us. Five maps worth of content is not a generous sum compared to other games; in Wrath of the Lich King, there were eight zones worth of content and quests including new dungeons, raids, and 1 new PvP game type. This is what I expect as the industry standard for transparency.
    • If you can't deliver new raids, dungeons, or PvP game types with the expansion's release, tell us when we can expect to have them and what the content will be like. If other developers can bundle their new content together for the expansion's release then you should be able to either meet or beat their standard.
    • Do better with communication overall. If you're going to promise us new raids with the expansion, tell us something about those new raids so that we're not throwing money blindly at a product that we can't even see. Transparent business practices reassure your customers that you have nothing to hide from them.
    • If you can manage all of the above, please take some time to see my above point about where your story is failing. It's not the most important part of the product you're selling, but it's important enough to me that I've been disappointed by the quality of villain characterization, pacing and foreshadowing consistently.

    I understand where you are coming from. I, however, tend to look at it as $30 for what is included with the expac launch. If what is listed for the launch is worth the price of admission, to me, I buy. In this case I considered the price acceptible and so bought. If PoF had been advertised as launching with less, with the promise of more later, I would not have bought it.

    But you did buy Path of Fire, and they did promise to release new Living World episodes and raids later bundled with your purchase. The only difference is that they aren't telling us how much content we can expect, when to expect it, etc. It feels 'free', but it's really not. You're paying for access to Living World episodes, raids, and everything else that requires the expansion so it really is part of the purchase price regardless of how they advertise it.

    I'm going to hide the rest of my post in spoiler tags because it comes with a warning. Keep reading if you want to know why I've come to this conclusion, but be prepared for the possibility of becoming disillusioned with the Disneyland fantasy of the game world once you start thinking about how the video game industry works:

    Just think about the economics of their decision. What is their monetary incentive to release 'free' maps and episodes? The game designers are certainly getting paid to design those maps and the writers are getting paid to write those episodic stories, so where are they getting the money to pay those people? My theory is that Living World is only profitable because their business model is heavily reliant on the gem store and regular 'free' content releases are integral to their success.

    In a conference call from 2015, it was stated that "the contribution of item sales (Gem Store) is Much Stronger than the Box Sales. The Xpac Revenue will weaken further over time." (Source) From that information, my hypothesis is that it is in ArenaNet's best interest (I.e. For their bottom line) to keep players coming back at regular intervals to check the gem store for new sales. That can only happen if they spread their content releases out over time so that every two months, players flock back to play the new content which is coordinated with the promotion of gem store sales and item releases. If my hypothesis is correct, then ArenaNet's business strategy is to intentionally hold back on content releases so that players can't complete the whole story in one go.

    This is why I believe that Living World is just a strategic ploy to keep players from figuring out that their expansion releases are lightweight compared to the industry standard established in other games. They want their players to believe that they got their money's worth with the expansion but their true motivation is to keep them coming back for 'free' content so that they are exposed to the gem store sales and new items. It's a psychological trick that makes people think that ArenaNet is doing them a favor when it's really just part of a cold, hard and calculating strategy to boost gem store sales because they know it's more profitable than box sales of the expansion on its own.

    Of course, there's nothing wrong with that. ArenaNet is a business and they need to stay competitive in the industry. How many people are playing this game because of the fact that there are no subscription fees? I'm perfectly content with their business model because it allows me to play for $30 as long as I control my gem store spending. The thing is, players are catching on to how their business strategy works and it's transparent as glass.

    You know how games like World of Warcraft reward players for playing the game? That's because you're paying a subscription fee and it's in the company's best interest to keep players putting hours of work into the game so that they keep paying subscriptions. Now, what happens when you take subscription fee revenues away? Those profits are going to come from somewhere else, and I'll bet it's the gem store. All that content that other game developers would have bundled with the expansion as gameplay rewards become microtransactions in GW2. Have you ever wondered why it feels like GW2 doesn't have as much to offer by just playing the game? It's probably because the company's profit revolves around item sales and they always save their nicest items for the cash shop.

    The problem there though is let's say someone couldn't play when the Living World came due to anything. Death in the whatever, emergency, temporary coma, Meta happening in another country/continent and no waypoints in real life so they have to head there, they would have to pay for that Living World so it would be extra.

    That's not a problem for the developers at all. They'll always find some way to cash in on an opportunity. If you miss unlocking it for free, they'll charge you for it. If you log in to check out the content, you're being exposed to gem store deals that you're more likely to buy. Either way, there's no such thing as a free lunch in economics. If they're advertising it as 'free' then they want something from you and it always involves money.

    @Ashen.2907 said:

    @Athrenn.9468 said:

    @Ashen.2907 said:

    @Athrenn.9468 said:
    Aside from my personal opinions about the quality of storytelling from Season 3 to Path of Fire...

    (just as a 'brief' note (okay, maybe not brief at all), my problem with the last two story arcs is that the villain felt one dimensional, the pacing was unfocused and the big identity reveal was not foreshadowed properly. Writers need to play fair with their audience and their plot twists are poorly executed. That, and they tried to pack too many villains into six episodes, thus resulting in the anticlimactic resolution of the White Mantle, Jormag and Primordus plot threads in a way that was unsatisfactory. The writers need to just focus on one good antagonist and flesh out the PC's conflict with them rather than telling a bunch of separate and unrelated stories at the same time and rushing through all of them.)

    ...my main problem with Guild Wars 2 right now is that I feel kept in the dark about what I'm getting for the money I already paid. Normally a company who's selling you a product will tell you, "For $30, you get 11 new maps, 9 story episodes, 9 elite specializations, 4 raid wings, 1 new PvP game types, Etc. Etc." To me, that is what an honest business practice looks like. You tell me what you're offering and I'll tell you whether I want to buy it. That is not what I've been seeing post-Heart of Thorns.

    How many maps do I get for $30? Sure, there's the 5 base maps of the expansion, but how many Living World episodes do I get for my money's worth? I don't count LW as a free add-on that the 'generous' developers are giving me, they count as part of the expansion and I want to know how many episodes I'm getting. When Wrath of the Lich King was in presales, Blizzard told everyone up front what we were getting: 8 new zones, level increase, deathknight class, 1 new PvP game types, and a specific amount of raid wings and dungeons. That is the kind of honest dealing I expect from the industry.

    How many new raid wings am I getting and when will they be ready for release? There is no guarantee how much content we'll be getting or even when, just that it will come out when they say it's ready. When WotLK was released, most raids we're there and ready to go immediately. Again, that is what the industry standard should be in my opinion.

    I think it's my right as a customer to know how much content I'm getting and when I'll be getting it if they're already asking me to reach for my wallet. That's how honest business should be conducted, not this 'surprise-you-later' model where I'm not even told how many episodes of LW I'm getting until the penultimate episode goes live, thus telling me that there's only one more episode to go.

    Right now, I am very unimpressed by ArenaNet's business model and the recent mount scandal only made it worse. I want the developers to tell me upfront what they're selling, for how much and I'll be the judge of whether it's worth my time and money to buy it. That's what an honest deal looks like in my opinion and what they should be striving for. I don't want this mount adoption nonsense where I'm not allowed to choose the one skin I want and instead have to gamble away my gems just for a chance at getting it. To me, that is where I draw the line. Customers have a right to demand transparency. ArenaNet should be able to tell us exactly what we're getting for the money we're putting down the moment we come up to the checkout and ask to see their products.

    So to wrap it all up, here is what I am asking from ArenaNet in point form:

    • Tell your playerbase upfront how many Living World episodes/maps they can expect to come with their purchase of the expansion. You're not just doing us a 'kind service', you're being transparent with us about what we're getting for the money that you're asking from us. Five maps worth of content is not a generous sum compared to other games; in Wrath of the Lich King, there were eight zones worth of content and quests including new dungeons, raids, and 1 new PvP game type. This is what I expect as the industry standard for transparency.
    • If you can't deliver new raids, dungeons, or PvP game types with the expansion's release, tell us when we can expect to have them and what the content will be like. If other developers can bundle their new content together for the expansion's release then you should be able to either meet or beat their standard.
    • Do better with communication overall. If you're going to promise us new raids with the expansion, tell us something about those new raids so that we're not throwing money blindly at a product that we can't even see. Transparent business practices reassure your customers that you have nothing to hide from them.
    • If you can manage all of the above, please take some time to see my above point about where your story is failing. It's not the most important part of the product you're selling, but it's important enough to me that I've been disappointed by the quality of villain characterization, pacing and foreshadowing consistently.

    I understand where you are coming from. I, however, tend to look at it as $30 for what is included with the expac launch. If what is listed for the launch is worth the price of admission, to me, I buy. In this case I considered the price acceptible and so bought. If PoF had been advertised as launching with less, with the promise of more later, I would not have bought it.

    But you did buy Path of Fire, and they did promise to release new Living World episodes and raids later bundled with your purchase. The only difference is that they aren't telling us how much content we can expect, when to expect it, etc. It feels 'free', but it's really not. You're paying for access to Living World episodes, raids, and everything else that requires the expansion so it really is part of the purchase price regardless of how they advertise it.

    I'm going to hide the rest of my post in spoiler tags because it comes with a warning. Keep reading if you want to know why I've come to this conclusion, but be prepared for the possibility of becoming disillusioned with the Disneyland fantasy of the game world once you start thinking about how the video game industry works:

    Just think about the economics of their decision. What is their monetary incentive to release 'free' maps and episodes? The game designers are certainly getting paid to design those maps and the writers are getting paid to write those episodic stories, so where are they getting the money to pay those people? My theory is that Living World is only profitable because their business model is heavily reliant on the gem store and regular 'free' content releases are integral to their success.

    In a conference call from 2015, it was stated that "the contribution of item sales (Gem Store) is Much Stronger than the Box Sales. The Xpac Revenue will weaken further over time." (Source) From that information, my hypothesis is that it is in ArenaNet's best interest (I.e. For their bottom line) to keep players coming back at regular intervals to check the gem store for new sales. That can only happen if they spread their content releases out over time so that every two months, players flock back to play the new content which is coordinated with the promotion of gem store sales and item releases. If my hypothesis is correct, then ArenaNet's business strategy is to intentionally hold back on content releases so that players can't complete the whole story in one go.

    This is why I believe that Living World is just a strategic ploy to keep players from figuring out that their expansion releases are lightweight compared to the industry standard established in other games. They want their players to believe that they got their money's worth with the expansion but their true motivation is to keep them coming back for 'free' content so that they are exposed to the gem store sales and new items. It's a psychological trick that makes people think that ArenaNet is doing them a favor when it's really just part of a cold, hard and calculating strategy to boost gem store sales because they know it's more profitable than box sales of the expansion on its own.

    Of course, there's nothing wrong with that. ArenaNet is a business and they need to stay competitive in the industry. How many people are playing this game because of the fact that there are no subscription fees? I'm perfectly content with their business model because it allows me to play for $30 as long as I control my gem store spending. The thing is, players are catching on to how their business strategy works and it's transparent as glass.

    You know how games like World of Warcraft reward players for playing the game? That's because you're paying a subscription fee and it's in the company's best interest to keep players putting hours of work into the game so that they keep paying subscriptions. Now, what happens when you take subscription fee revenues away? Those profits are going to come from somewhere else, and I'll bet it's the gem store. All that content that other game developers would have bundled with the expansion as gameplay rewards become microtransactions in GW2. Have you ever wondered why it feels like GW2 doesn't have as much to offer by just playing the game? It's probably because the company's profit revolves around item sales and they always save their nicest items for the cash shop.

    What was described as included with the expac at launch was worth the price of admission to me. Nothing described as being added later was included in my decision to purchase. I got what I paid for, and am pretty happy with it.

    You're happy now, but would you be happy if they told you that Living World was cancelled or you had to pay extra for it? Would you be happy if there was no new 'free' content between now and Expansion 3?

    That is the psychological effect that spread out expansion releases has on people. Subconsciously you think that there's enough content there to tie you over for the next few months because you know that there's always another release just around the corner. If Living World didn't exist, the amount of content released with Path of Fire would have been outrageously lightweight for an expansion that's supposed to contain a year's worth of new features.

    The existence, or non-existence, of LS4 doesnt play into my happiness with PoF, or GW2 in general. I bought something, the expansion, that I enjoy. It was fairly inexpensive for the amount of entertainment I got/get from it. Whether or not there is a LS4 doesnt really matter to my enjoyment of what I received for my purchase price.

  • Athrenn.9468Athrenn.9468 Member ✭✭✭
    I'm more or less happy. Things could be better, but they could be worse too.

    @Ohoni.6057 said:

    @Athrenn.9468 said:
    Either way, there's no such thing as a free lunch in economics. If they're advertising it as 'free' then they want something from you and it always involves money.

    Yes and no. Yes, they would like you to spend, and have mechanisms in place to increase those odds, but many F2P products do understand that not everyone will spend, and are based on the concept that plenty won't. Now someone needs to pay, but typically that means one person paying the price for 5-10 others. The games that handle this best establish a very careful balance between what you get for free and what you pay for, so that people who pay feel they've gotten something of value to them, while people who play for free don't feel that they're missing out on so much that it makes the game seem shallow and unrewarding. It's a difficult balance to walk, and GW2 has managed it at least decently, most of the time, but occasionally they wobble. What matters is how they fix it, and the current situation. . . they have not handled well.

    Maybe I didn't word my statement correctly, or at least not in a way that expressed my viewpoint as precisely as I would have wanted. When I said "There's no such thing as a free lunch in economics," I meant that someone is paying for it. Who is paying for the advertisement that you see while walking on the street? If you buy the product, then you are! The cost of advertising is incorporated into the product.

    In the case of Living World episodes, I highly suspect that the cost of producing 6-10 'free' episodes worth of content every year is partly incorporated into the price of the expansion, but also considered a form of advertising for the gem store since Living World releases are coordinated with new products which you can clearly see in the patch notes of each episodic release. "If you log in during this two-month window, it's free!" is a good way of drawing players back regularly to check out the content as well as the gem store. Not everyone needs to throw down money to make the advertising effective, but you're right that someone has to and it must be working because they keep doing it.

  • I have clicked on this poll but I don't want to vote for any of the above.

    @Ohoni.6057 said:

    @Djinn.9245 said:
    I've been reading your comments and I honestly don't understand what you're on about. Living World updates are clearly a separate entity from Expansions as they are charged a separate amount in the gemstore if you fail to login while they are active. I personally did not buy PoF thinking that Living World Season 4 had anything to do with it.

    No, LW is part of the expansion. You need to buy PoF to gain access to s4, just as you needed to buy HoT to gain access to s3, even though s2 was part of the original box purchase. Yes, if you do not log in during the content, you have to pay extra to unlock it, but that's only if you do not log in during the content. So log in. During the content. It's basically just a reason to keep players consistently engaged, rather than just waiting until the season is over and binging it all.

    I will never understand this logic fallacy. :/ Yes, you are gated by expansions, but when you purchase any of the expacs you don't gain access to the living stories or new players would not have to purchase them on top of the expansion. If they were included, new players would pay for the expac you would also get the Living Stories. If you don't log in during the time they are active even if you have the expansion you don't gain access to the living stories that were released that are related to the expac. It's not included with the expac it's never been and the idea that it's part of it needs to stop and at most can be considered DLC that is related. It's deceptive to players that purchase the expacs and aren't active during the living stories or were not part of the game at the time. :/ I had to explain this many times to new players who were confused about the Living Stories because veteran players would tell them it was part of the expac but that they had to also purchase them. That whole sentence makes little to no sense when you need to explain it. Less when they don't even know and the story jumps from one plot point to 4 down the line. They are carved out pieces of DLC that are free for a limited time for logging in but are not part of an expansion and based on LS2 and LS3 they really are just a bridge between expacs so yeah... still not understanding how people think they are included when you don't look at it from the outside in.

  • Ohoni.6057Ohoni.6057 Member ✭✭✭✭
    I'm more or less happy. Things could be better, but they could be worse too.

    @Athrenn.9468 said:
    If they were included, new players would pay for the expac you would also get the Living Stories. If you don't log in during the time they are active even if you have the expansion you don't gain access to the living stories that were released that are related to the expac. It's not included with the expac it's never been and the idea that it's part of it needs to stop and at most can be considered DLC that is related.

    Ok, then answer this. What if you do log into the game even once during the period during which the Living World chapter is available, how much extra do you have to pay to play that content?

  • I have clicked on this poll but I don't want to vote for any of the above.

    @Ohoni.6057 said:

    @Athrenn.9468 said:
    If they were included, new players would pay for the expac you would also get the Living Stories. If you don't log in during the time they are active even if you have the expansion you don't gain access to the living stories that were released that are related to the expac. It's not included with the expac it's never been and the idea that it's part of it needs to stop and at most can be considered DLC that is related.

    Ok, then answer this. What if you do log into the game even once during the period during which the Living World chapter is available, how much extra do you have to pay to play that content?

    Better question. If they were part of the expac why are they not advertised as part of it on the actual store front?

  • Ohoni.6057Ohoni.6057 Member ✭✭✭✭
    I'm more or less happy. Things could be better, but they could be worse too.

    @RoChan.1926 said:

    @Ohoni.6057 said:

    @Athrenn.9468 said:
    If they were included, new players would pay for the expac you would also get the Living Stories. If you don't log in during the time they are active even if you have the expansion you don't gain access to the living stories that were released that are related to the expac. It's not included with the expac it's never been and the idea that it's part of it needs to stop and at most can be considered DLC that is related.

    Ok, then answer this. What if you do log into the game even once during the period during which the Living World chapter is available, how much extra do you have to pay to play that content?

    Better question. If they were part of the expac why are they not advertised as part of it on the actual store front?

    Because the PoF content is available at launch, the LW content comes later. If they advertised it as being part of the package then people would be even more confused that it wasn't there.

  • I have clicked on this poll but I don't want to vote for any of the above.

    @Ohoni.6057 said:

    @RoChan.1926 said:

    @Ohoni.6057 said:

    @Athrenn.9468 said:
    If they were included, new players would pay for the expac you would also get the Living Stories. If you don't log in during the time they are active even if you have the expansion you don't gain access to the living stories that were released that are related to the expac. It's not included with the expac it's never been and the idea that it's part of it needs to stop and at most can be considered DLC that is related.

    Ok, then answer this. What if you do log into the game even once during the period during which the Living World chapter is available, how much extra do you have to pay to play that content?

    Better question. If they were part of the expac why are they not advertised as part of it on the actual store front?

    Because the PoF content is available at launch, the LW content comes later. If they advertised it as being part of the package then people would be even more confused that it wasn't there.

    We have a precedence we can look at called HoT and evaluate since at the time we are discussing this we do not know what they have in store for PoF. Now this can all change with PoF and they can start charging everyone, new and old to LS4 or they can charge no one for LS4 only time will tell, but I highly doubt Anet are going to change their practices with LS4. So forget about PoF and think of just HoT instead. HoT isn't packaged with the LS3 and it's not even mentioned as part of the expansion, because even Anet knows it's not part of the expansion. It's a separate, carved-out experience to bridge the gap between expansions. When Anet sells HoT they are only selling what comes directly within the expansion. So if Anet is considering and selling it that way, why do you believe it's part of it?

  • Dashiva.6149Dashiva.6149 Member ✭✭✭
    I'm very happy with GW2 right now.

    Gemstore shenanigans aside, I think the game as a whole is in a pretty good spot after 5 years , at least for the content I enjoy the most. Sure, there is always room for improvement but there is nothing ingame that I have major issues with at the moment.

    Except Braham of course. Because that is one annoying character I could live without.

  • Ohoni.6057Ohoni.6057 Member ✭✭✭✭
    I'm more or less happy. Things could be better, but they could be worse too.

    @RoChan.1926 said:
    When Anet sells HoT they are only selling what comes directly within the expansion. So if Anet is considering and selling it that way, why do you believe it's part of it?

    Because HoT is required to access the LWs3 content, whether or not you try to buy it separately, and because if you did buy HoT and were playing at the time, you did not have to buy the LWs3 content separately. There definitely are conditions on the arrangement, but LWs3 definitely flowed from HoT just as LWs2 flowed from the base game.

  • I have clicked on this poll but I don't want to vote for any of the above.

    @Ohoni.6057 said:

    @RoChan.1926 said:
    When Anet sells HoT they are only selling what comes directly within the expansion. So if Anet is considering and selling it that way, why do you believe it's part of it?

    Because HoT is required to access the LWs3 content, whether or not you try to buy it separately, and because if you did buy HoT and were playing at the time, you did not have to buy the LWs3 content separately. There definitely are conditions on the arrangement, but LWs3 definitely flowed from HoT just as LWs2 flowed from the base game.

    Being gated does not mean inclusion.

    Consider that even the jargon when talking about the base expansion and how additional content are described. It's called Heart of Thorns expansion but the additional content are called Living World Season 3. When it's announced it's called "The return of the Living Word!" not "The continuation of Heart of Thorns story!" The chapters in HoT are called Acts where as in Living Story they are called Episodes. They indicate a clear cut difference, separation, and non-inclusion because they are separate content that happen to bridge story from story to another with most plot points completed, but most importantly completing the main plot point of the expansion.

    If you log into the game during the active LS episode you pay 0 gems for a limited time once the limited time offer expires you pay the regular price of 200 gems per episode. What other limited time offer do you consider part of something when you purchase? I'd really like to know of an example because I honestly have never seen one. A limited time offer is just that. If they wanted to they could start charging the player base 1 gem or 100 gems because the current offer on the table is 0 gems. So just because we currently pay 0 gems doesn't mean that it's included in the expansion price (because it isn't included in the price when others have to pay for it separately). And again I re-iterate this strongly, you can own the expansion and not have access to the Living World episodes. You can also qualify for the limited time offer without the expansion. If they were so integrated as you claim, neither of those two facts would be true.

    When you, Anet, I, the game shop describe what is included in your purchase for an expansion (HoT for example) you do not include LS3 into it because when you pay the price of the expansion as sold by the store front you only have access to what you paid for. You don't get to access the new zones, new masteries, or any other accouterments that come with the Living Story 3 you only get HoT maps, achievements, masteries, etc. That's it. The rest is extra, except for a limited time offer of 0 gems for the first 2 months. And if you aren't explicitly telling new players that what the get if they purchase HoT expansion is just what they actually can access prior to any additional payments then you are being dishonest with them.

  • MarkoNS.3261MarkoNS.3261 Member ✭✭✭
    I'm mostly unhappy, a lot of things could be better.

    i only log in to do raids on monday, and daily fractals other then that the game does not offer me anything interesting or rewarding to do.

    Kittenizer Tm in Full ACTION.

  • Ohoni.6057Ohoni.6057 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited November 17, 2017
    I'm more or less happy. Things could be better, but they could be worse too.

    @RoChan.1926 said:
    And again I re-iterate this strongly, you can own the expansion and not have access to the Living World episodes. You can also qualify for the limited time offer without the expansion. If they were so integrated as you claim, neither of those two facts would be true.

    Is that true? I've never tested it myself but were people who were F2P while LWs3 was going on able to unlock the LW chapters for free? You can't actually play them without HoT, right? At the very least it would be very difficult to navigate some of the maps without gliding. I will point out one distinction in your theory though, if you unlock them by logging in at the time, it is not "being able to buy it for 0 gems," its just playing the game. You never have to actually go into the Gem Store and make a purchase of any kind, which is NOT the case with any other "sale" in the game, in which they do list a gem store item at a "cost" of 0 gems.

    When you, Anet, I, the game shop describe what is included in your purchase for an expansion (HoT for example) you do not include LS3 into it because when you pay the price of the expansion as sold by the store front you only have access to what you paid for.

    I don't agree with your interpretation, but I am curious why you seem so very hung up on this semantic point. What is your practical angle on this discussion?

  • Myrdreth.6829Myrdreth.6829 Member ✭✭✭
    I'm more or less happy. Things could be better, but they could be worse too.

    @Ohoni.6057 said:
    I was in the mostly happy category this time last week, but the Mount Skins thing put me in a bad mood. I still think most of the game is in a good place, which is why I didn't want to say that I was "mostly unhappy," but they NEED to do something about the 30 skins locked behind the gambling box before I would consider giving them any more money.

    Yeah, me too.

  • I have clicked on this poll but I don't want to vote for any of the above.

    @Ohoni.6057 said:

    @RoChan.1926 said:
    And again I re-iterate this strongly, you can own the expansion and not have access to the Living World episodes. You can also qualify for the limited time offer without the expansion. If they were so integrated as you claim, neither of those two facts would be true.

    Is that true? I've never tested it myself but were people who were F2P while LWs3 was going on able to unlock the LW chapters for free? You can't actually play them without HoT, right? At the very least it would be very difficult to navigate some of the maps without gliding. I will point out one distinction in your theory though, if you unlock them by logging in at the time, it is not "being able to buy it for 0 gems," its just playing the game. You never have to actually go into the Gem Store and make a purchase of any kind, which is NOT the case with any other "sale" in the game, in which they do list a gem store item at a "cost" of 0 gems.

    I actually owned LS3 before I bought HoT recently so it is true, you can own LS3 without HoT and can potentially own both LS3 and LS4 without HoT or PoF. You can't play them without the expansion but you do have them without it. You also cannot directly buy the Living Stories in the store directly and must go through your journal ( I am making the assumption that it might have something to do with coding or in general with the way the LS in implemented) as you buy it directly from your journal that takes you to a cash shop check out. So yeah 0 gem items that already exist in the cash shop can show that but the LS is handled differently and not purchasable directly through the cash ship to show case that it's either buy or locked. But here is an exert from the wiki regarding unlocking the stories.

    Episodes of the Living World must be unlocked in order to play them. Unlocked episodes can be accessed by any level 80 character on your account. There are two methods for unlocking episodes. Episodes can be unlocked for free simply by logging in to any character during the episode's original release window. This lasts until the next episode is released; for Season 3 (current season), episodes are on a cadence to be released two to three months apart. After the release window, players can unlock the episode for 200 Gem[s]. The journal will indicate this with a "lock" icon and a "Buy Now" button.

    I don't agree with your interpretation, but I am curious why you seem so very hung up on this semantic point. What is your practical angle on this discussion?

    I figured semantics would come up at some point. You yourself are hung up on the phrase "inaccessible without the X expansion" where as I am looking at it from a more practical, face value point of view where "what am I paying for?" actually has context and definable data. If you were to buy HoT today on a brand new account you only have access to what is in the actual expansion itself, you can even create a list based on what is on the cash shop store front. When you look into your journal you have lock on the LS3 tab indicating no access. So if it's included why then are you paying for a separate purchase?

  • Zaklex.6308Zaklex.6308 Member ✭✭✭✭
    I'm very happy with GW2 right now.

    I have no problems with GW2, it's a GAME, so it doesn't have to satisfy my every whim.

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

  • Ohoni.6057Ohoni.6057 Member ✭✭✭✭
    I'm more or less happy. Things could be better, but they could be worse too.

    @RoChan.1926 said:
    I figured semantics would come up at some point. You yourself are hung up on the phrase "inaccessible without the X expansion" where as I am looking at it from a more practical, face value point of view where "what am I paying for?" actually has context and definable data. If you were to buy HoT today on a brand new account you only have access to what is in the actual expansion itself, you can even create a list based on what is on the cash shop store front. When you look into your journal you have lock on the LS3 tab indicating no access. So if it's included why then are you paying for a separate purchase?

    But again, if you bought HoT any time before spring of 2015, and you logged into the client during that period, then the content is just available, ready and waiting to play, free of charge, no purchase necessary, not even for zero gems. It is just content in the game. And it's clearly not content that they intend to be paid for by purchasing it directly, since most likely only a tiny fraction of the people that play it actually do that relative to the numbers that "get it for free." Ultimately, I guess it's up to ANet to define what they consider it to be, but I've always just considered it to be a natural extension of the previous expansion's content, just as s1-2 was a natural extension of the original box purchase. I considered the payment for picking the chapters up late to be less of a "deferred payment," and more of a "late fee" for not logging in for it earlier.

    I guess the closest example that I can think of would be TV, where in the modern era, a show will come on at, say, 8PM tonight, and if I watch it at 8PM tonight, it's totally free. And because I have a cable-provided DVR, I could record that program, and save it on my cable box, indefinitely, and watch it months later unless I removed it. For free.
    And I can also watch the show On Demand any time I want, for free, but in most cases only for a fixed period of time, maybe a month, maybe six weeks, eight, something in that range. If I wanted to watch that show three months from now, when it had cycled out of the active programs, I could no longer watch it for free. I'd have to pay maybe a few bucks to purchase or rent that episode in order to watch it. Of course all of that is contingent on having bought into the cable system in the first place, much like the expansion.

    Now, personally, I do think they could do a little better on this. I do think they could offer better bundled rates and special deals on older content, so that more casually-minded people could pick it up for "whatever" money, but I see the value in having some sort of incentive to "get it while it's hot," and the associated fees are relatively minor in the grand scheme of things.

  • I'm very unhappy with GW2 right now.

    I have waited some months to actually read and hear the comments about the expansion, didn't rush or bought it yet.

    The new gambling system of getting new pet skins killed it for me, Not gonna buy the new expansion unless they change it.

    Besides, I already have pointless gambling in games like Overwatch... not gonna help sail this boat.

  • I have clicked on this poll but I don't want to vote for any of the above.

    @Zaklex.6308 said:
    I have no problems with GW2, it's a GAME, so it doesn't have to satisfy my every whim.
    @Ohoni.6057 said:

    @RoChan.1926 said:
    I figured semantics would come up at some point. You yourself are hung up on the phrase "inaccessible without the X expansion" where as I am looking at it from a more practical, face value point of view where "what am I paying for?" actually has context and definable data. If you were to buy HoT today on a brand new account you only have access to what is in the actual expansion itself, you can even create a list based on what is on the cash shop store front. When you look into your journal you have lock on the LS3 tab indicating no access. So if it's included why then are you paying for a separate purchase?

    But again, if you bought HoT any time before spring of 2015, and you logged into the client during that period, then the content is just available, ready and waiting to play, free of charge, no purchase necessary, not even for zero gems. It is just content in the game. And it's clearly not content that they intend to be paid for by purchasing it directly, since most likely only a tiny fraction of the people that play it actually do that relative to the numbers that "get it for free." Ultimately, I guess it's up to ANet to define what they consider it to be, but I've always just considered it to be a natural extension of the previous expansion's content, just as s1-2 was a natural extension of the original box purchase. I considered the payment for picking the chapters up late to be less of a "deferred payment," and more of a "late fee" for not logging in for it earlier.

    I guess the closest example that I can think of would be TV, where in the modern era, a show will come on at, say, 8PM tonight, and if I watch it at 8PM tonight, it's totally free. And because I have a cable-provided DVR, I could record that program, and save it on my cable box, indefinitely, and watch it months later unless I removed it. For free.
    And I can also watch the show On Demand any time I want, for free, but in most cases only for a fixed period of time, maybe a month, maybe six weeks, eight, something in that range. If I wanted to watch that show three months from now, when it had cycled out of the active programs, I could no longer watch it for free. I'd have to pay maybe a few bucks to purchase or rent that episode in order to watch it. Of course all of that is contingent on having bought into the cable system in the first place, much like the expansion.

    Now, personally, I do think they could do a little better on this. I do think they could offer better bundled rates and special deals on older content, so that more casually-minded people could pick it up for "whatever" money, but I see the value in having some sort of incentive to "get it while it's hot," and the associated fees are relatively minor in the grand scheme of things.

    I am not debating the value of it per say, but I will consistently state that because it's a separate purchase it has its own value outside of the expansion and visa versa. The problem I have with the statement of being included with the expansion is that whenever someone is being critical of an specific expansion, like the current PoF, someone always chimes in with "But LS4!" when it's a own entity with it's own story. Worse is that I have seen people actually tell new players that LS is included which then creates a confusion with LS3 and HoT which then someone has to clarify. I've had so many map debates because I explain that it's a separate, stand alone purchase outside of the expansions if you missed it. :/ So the more people continue to believe in the "it's free on release so it's part of it" the more it creates problems and is disingenuous. It's not sold or advertised that way by anyone but veteran players and I cannot fathom as to why. State the facts not opinions is all I am asking for in terms of Expansions/Living Stories and when criticizing please apply it correctly.

    I suppose we can always ask Anet but I don't know, other than Customer Service (and I don't think they would know anything outside of the unlocking methods), how to contact them for an actual answer that would put this to rest (not that I feel they would give a direct answer per say because if they say inclusive then people are going to be mad about a separate purchase).

  • Vayne.8563Vayne.8563 Member ✭✭✭✭
    I'm mostly happy, a few things could be better.

    @Athrenn.9468 said:

    @Ashen.2907 said:

    @Athrenn.9468 said:
    Aside from my personal opinions about the quality of storytelling from Season 3 to Path of Fire...

    (just as a 'brief' note (okay, maybe not brief at all), my problem with the last two story arcs is that the villain felt one dimensional, the pacing was unfocused and the big identity reveal was not foreshadowed properly. Writers need to play fair with their audience and their plot twists are poorly executed. That, and they tried to pack too many villains into six episodes, thus resulting in the anticlimactic resolution of the White Mantle, Jormag and Primordus plot threads in a way that was unsatisfactory. The writers need to just focus on one good antagonist and flesh out the PC's conflict with them rather than telling a bunch of separate and unrelated stories at the same time and rushing through all of them.)

    ...my main problem with Guild Wars 2 right now is that I feel kept in the dark about what I'm getting for the money I already paid. Normally a company who's selling you a product will tell you, "For $30, you get 11 new maps, 9 story episodes, 9 elite specializations, 4 raid wings, 1 new PvP game types, Etc. Etc." To me, that is what an honest business practice looks like. You tell me what you're offering and I'll tell you whether I want to buy it. That is not what I've been seeing post-Heart of Thorns.

    How many maps do I get for $30? Sure, there's the 5 base maps of the expansion, but how many Living World episodes do I get for my money's worth? I don't count LW as a free add-on that the 'generous' developers are giving me, they count as part of the expansion and I want to know how many episodes I'm getting. When Wrath of the Lich King was in presales, Blizzard told everyone up front what we were getting: 8 new zones, level increase, deathknight class, 1 new PvP game types, and a specific amount of raid wings and dungeons. That is the kind of honest dealing I expect from the industry.

    How many new raid wings am I getting and when will they be ready for release? There is no guarantee how much content we'll be getting or even when, just that it will come out when they say it's ready. When WotLK was released, most raids we're there and ready to go immediately. Again, that is what the industry standard should be in my opinion.

    I think it's my right as a customer to know how much content I'm getting and when I'll be getting it if they're already asking me to reach for my wallet. That's how honest business should be conducted, not this 'surprise-you-later' model where I'm not even told how many episodes of LW I'm getting until the penultimate episode goes live, thus telling me that there's only one more episode to go.

    Right now, I am very unimpressed by ArenaNet's business model and the recent mount scandal only made it worse. I want the developers to tell me upfront what they're selling, for how much and I'll be the judge of whether it's worth my time and money to buy it. That's what an honest deal looks like in my opinion and what they should be striving for. I don't want this mount adoption nonsense where I'm not allowed to choose the one skin I want and instead have to gamble away my gems just for a chance at getting it. To me, that is where I draw the line. Customers have a right to demand transparency. ArenaNet should be able to tell us exactly what we're getting for the money we're putting down the moment we come up to the checkout and ask to see their products.

    So to wrap it all up, here is what I am asking from ArenaNet in point form:

    • Tell your playerbase upfront how many Living World episodes/maps they can expect to come with their purchase of the expansion. You're not just doing us a 'kind service', you're being transparent with us about what we're getting for the money that you're asking from us. Five maps worth of content is not a generous sum compared to other games; in Wrath of the Lich King, there were eight zones worth of content and quests including new dungeons, raids, and 1 new PvP game type. This is what I expect as the industry standard for transparency.
    • If you can't deliver new raids, dungeons, or PvP game types with the expansion's release, tell us when we can expect to have them and what the content will be like. If other developers can bundle their new content together for the expansion's release then you should be able to either meet or beat their standard.
    • Do better with communication overall. If you're going to promise us new raids with the expansion, tell us something about those new raids so that we're not throwing money blindly at a product that we can't even see. Transparent business practices reassure your customers that you have nothing to hide from them.
    • If you can manage all of the above, please take some time to see my above point about where your story is failing. It's not the most important part of the product you're selling, but it's important enough to me that I've been disappointed by the quality of villain characterization, pacing and foreshadowing consistently.

    I understand where you are coming from. I, however, tend to look at it as $30 for what is included with the expac launch. If what is listed for the launch is worth the price of admission, to me, I buy. In this case I considered the price acceptible and so bought. If PoF had been advertised as launching with less, with the promise of more later, I would not have bought it.

    But you did buy Path of Fire, and they did promise to release new Living World episodes and raids later bundled with your purchase. The only difference is that they aren't telling us how much content we can expect, when to expect it, etc. It feels 'free', but it's really not. You're paying for access to Living World episodes, raids, and everything else that requires the expansion so it really is part of the purchase price regardless of how they advertise it.

    I'm going to hide the rest of my post in spoiler tags because it comes with a warning. Keep reading if you want to know why I've come to this conclusion, but be prepared for the possibility of becoming disillusioned with the Disneyland fantasy of the game world once you start thinking about how the video game industry works:

    Just think about the economics of their decision. What is their monetary incentive to release 'free' maps and episodes? The game designers are certainly getting paid to design those maps and the writers are getting paid to write those episodic stories, so where are they getting the money to pay those people? My theory is that Living World is only profitable because their business model is heavily reliant on the gem store and regular 'free' content releases are integral to their success.

    In a conference call from 2015, it was stated that "the contribution of item sales (Gem Store) is Much Stronger than the Box Sales. The Xpac Revenue will weaken further over time." (Source) From that information, my hypothesis is that it is in ArenaNet's best interest (I.e. For their bottom line) to keep players coming back at regular intervals to check the gem store for new sales. That can only happen if they spread their content releases out over time so that every two months, players flock back to play the new content which is coordinated with the promotion of gem store sales and item releases. If my hypothesis is correct, then ArenaNet's business strategy is to intentionally hold back on content releases so that players can't complete the whole story in one go.

    This is why I believe that Living World is just a strategic ploy to keep players from figuring out that their expansion releases are lightweight compared to the industry standard established in other games. They want their players to believe that they got their money's worth with the expansion but their true motivation is to keep them coming back for 'free' content so that they are exposed to the gem store sales and new items. It's a psychological trick that makes people think that ArenaNet is doing them a favor when it's really just part of a cold, hard and calculating strategy to boost gem store sales because they know it's more profitable than box sales of the expansion on its own.

    Of course, there's nothing wrong with that. ArenaNet is a business and they need to stay competitive in the industry. How many people are playing this game because of the fact that there are no subscription fees? I'm perfectly content with their business model because it allows me to play for $30 as long as I control my gem store spending. The thing is, players are catching on to how their business strategy works and it's transparent as glass.

    You know how games like World of Warcraft reward players for playing the game? That's because you're paying a subscription fee and it's in the company's best interest to keep players putting hours of work into the game so that they keep paying subscriptions. Now, what happens when you take subscription fee revenues away? Those profits are going to come from somewhere else, and I'll bet it's the gem store. All that content that other game developers would have bundled with the expansion as gameplay rewards become microtransactions in GW2. Have you ever wondered why it feels like GW2 doesn't have as much to offer by just playing the game? It's probably because the company's profit revolves around item sales and they always save their nicest items for the cash shop.

    What you're saying here is obvious, but it still changes nothing. I enjoy the game and I know Anet is a business. These things are not mutually exclusive. This is the same in most creative business. I was in publishing. A writer writes a book. When the writer creates that book, he/she is being an artist. The editor is being a technician. The companies that own the publishing house are being a business. The business people worry about the bottom dollar and never really care about the art, except that it sells, but that doesn't devalue a good book. The same can be said for this game.

    Business decisions are made by the suits. That's true in most big and medium sized businesses. But the Disneyworld fantasy of a programmer sitting there having fun creating something fun, that's all still there. Nothing about why something is the way it is changes that. The suits say we need to do it this way but if you can't see the love put into the maps by people developing them, then you're just not looking. Anet isn't a person, it's a company with close to 400 people some of whom are probably not even working on Guild Wars. Do I believe many of the devs love the game they're developing. Sure I do. And to some devs, it's going to be just a job, because that's the way the world works. But you'd have to be blind to not see that a great deal of vision and care goes into the designs of maps and creatures. Even the way the did mounts....it blew a lot of people away.

    Nothing you've said changes my opinion about the company. They've always been a business. Because some guy sitting in his garage can't make a triple A MMO all by himself.

  • Vayne.8563Vayne.8563 Member ✭✭✭✭
    I'm mostly happy, a few things could be better.

    @Djinn.9245 said:

    @Athrenn.9468 said:

    @IndigoSundown.5419 said:

    @Athrenn.9468 said:

    This is why I believe that Living World is just a strategic ploy to keep players from figuring out that their expansion releases are lightweight compared to the industry standard established in other games.

    I deleted the rest of your "spoiler" text in line with your intent to allow people to choose to read it or not.

    I have to question the above assumption, especially in the case of PoF. What PoF lacks is not content, it is rewards to fuel the near-endless repetition some MMO fans expect. When I comparison shop, ANet's business plan is a lot more consumer-friendly than other companies. $30 for PoF compares favorably to the first 2 ESO DLC, which sold for ~$22 and ~$30, respectively. It especially compares favorably to games which charge $40-50 for XPac's, then rent access to players. I know there is going to be disagreement on the latter assertion. I never felt more cheated by a game than when I played the big gorilla of MMO's. Ommv.

    So, for me, the Living World updates are gravy, especially at PoF's price. Maybe that's damning ANet with faint praise, but if that's the case, I'd be damning the whole industry.

    I haven't played ESO so I can't comment on that, but again, I would question whether people would feel the same way about Path of Fire if the developers told them that there was no 'free' Living World content for Winter 2017/Spring and Summer 2018. What feels like a generous amount of content now will feel dry in comparison 4-6 months down the road. Like gravy, I believe that the promise of regular 'free' updates is the reason why Path of Fire sounds palpable. "It's enough content to tie me over for the next two months until episode 1," people might say. "It doesn't need to be enough to last me all year." Whereas if this was a game where expansions had most of their maps, dungeons, raids, PvP game modes, etc. packed into them on day 1 of the release, a longer draught between releases would be more bearable.

    I challenge people to consider the thought experiment of how they would feel about Path of Fire as a standalone product if ArenaNet said that Living World was either canceled or gated behind a mandatory paywall for all players. In this scenario, there would be no more free content updates until Expansion 3. Would it still be worth it in your opinion? If not, then I think that Living World is really part of Path of Fire's selling point. You're paying money with the promise of future free updates that are just around the corner.

    I've been reading your comments and I honestly don't understand what you're on about. Living World updates are clearly a separate entity from Expansions as they are charged a separate amount in the gemstore if you fail to login while they are active. I personally did not buy PoF thinking that Living World Season 4 had anything to do with it.

    Except that without PoF you can't even play the LIving World Season 4. It's required for playing, just as HoT was required to play Season 3.

  • I'm very unhappy with GW2 right now.

    Pof killef gw2 for me. The fact that it does not have meta the maps are boring and not worth the time, also it does not have even wold bosses nor dungeons. The pve aspect because of that looks more like a longer living world story instead of an expansion and this makes me worry for the future expansions.
    Also it killed pvp and wvw with the broken and overtuned elite specks, it's a horrible experience to play in those mods.

  • Sykper.6583Sykper.6583 Member ✭✭✭
    I'm mostly happy, a few things could be better.

    Mostly fine with how things are going. Really wish they would follow up on the whole '6 raids a year' deal they anticipated in the interview.

  • Erasculio.2914Erasculio.2914 Member ✭✭✭✭
    I'm mostly unhappy, a lot of things could be better.

    @Ohoni.6057 said:
    No, LW is part of the expansion. You need to buy PoF to gain access to s4, just as you needed to buy HoT to gain access to s3, even though s2 was part of the original box purchase.

    I agree.

    In fact, back when HoT was released, there were massive topics on the old forum complaining about how the expansion was too expensive, and the argument used more often by those defending the price was how HoT came with the next season of the Living World as part of its package. The following season of the Living World has always been used by ArenaNet as a selling point of their GW2 expansions.

    "Tomorrow my master chokes on his own whip!" - Lore of Skaen, PoE

  • I'm mostly unhappy, a lot of things could be better.

    Wow, only 17% of us actually love this game?

  • I'm mostly happy, a few things could be better.

    @Salonikios.3154 said:
    Wow, only 17% of us actually love this game?

    So in your mind, GW2 only have 580+ players?

  • I'm very unhappy with GW2 right now.

    If you asked me that right after PoF launched I would have said "very happy" But between the horrible storyline, poorly balanced balathazar fight, and Mount Skin money grab, I'm very unhappy and barely play anymore. EAnet keeps pandering to the top 5% of the game. Those with every legendary, thousands of gold in the bank, tens of thousands of gems, and just screws the rest of the player base.

  • I'm mostly happy, a few things could be better.

    Mostly Happy, Mountgate didn't effect the way I like/dislike "The game". For instance, I am much more put off by the fact I can't join my guild in WvW than I am about Skins that are more of a luxury (to me).

  • Ashen.2907Ashen.2907 Member ✭✭✭✭
    I'm mostly happy, a few things could be better.

    @Arioch.6507 said:
    Mostly Happy, Mountgate didn't effect the way I like/dislike "The game". For instance, I am much more put off by the fact I can't join my guild in WvW than I am about Skins that are more of a luxury (to me).

    This.

  • Oglaf.1074Oglaf.1074 Member ✭✭✭✭
    I have clicked on this poll but I don't want to vote for any of the above.

    I'm happy with the game itself, but extremely unhappy, saddened and disappointed in Anet's conduct as of late.

    Please Anet give us a hide Chest Armour-option. Tattoo-clad Norns everywhere beg of you.

  • Ohoni.6057Ohoni.6057 Member ✭✭✭✭
    I'm more or less happy. Things could be better, but they could be worse too.

    @RoChan.1926 said:
    I am not debating the value of it per say, but I will consistently state that because it's a separate purchase it has its own value outside of the expansion and visa versa. The problem I have with the statement of being included with the expansion is that whenever someone is being critical of an specific expansion, like the current PoF, someone always chimes in with "But LS4!" when it's a own entity with it's own story.

    But it IS content that you get for free with the expansion, so it is part of what you get when you buy the expansion, at least assuming that you buy it before the season starts. Again, it has no value of its own unless you miss out on it "on first airing,* just like how a TV show has no value of its own unless you miss the first airing. Now that argument applies far less when you're talking about a year or more down the road when players have already missed chapters.

    I've had so many map debates because I explain that it's a separate, stand alone purchase outside of the expansions if you missed it.

    Maybe just. . . don't have those debates?

    @Salonikios.3154 said:
    Wow, only 17% of us actually love this game?

    I do love the game, but not unconditionally. It can get some work did.

  • Vayne.8563Vayne.8563 Member ✭✭✭✭
    I'm mostly happy, a few things could be better.

    @Salonikios.3154 said:
    Wow, only 17% of us actually love this game?

    Funny how people make this assumption. No, because the question was asked on the heels of something that really got the community riled up and many of the responses reflect just that. If you'd ask this question the day before that, you'd have gotten a different graph because people think with their emotions. You'd have gotten the same response after any of the missteps that Anet made, like the HoT character slot fiasco. People aren't thinking about the game, they're thinking about the company and can't seperate the two. They vote how they vote to punish, because they're angry.

    If you'd have asked this same question 1 week after POF released you'd have gotten a completely different answer. This poll was posted when it was, in my opinion, to try to prove some kind of point. I won't fall for it, because I know how fickle most people are and how short term their memory is. You kitten them off, they get mad, until the next time you make them happy.

    To me, this poll is essentially meaningless in the long term.

  • I'm very happy with GW2 right now.

    My vote is based on the fact that I am having more fun in game than I ever have before. I've been around since beta. I will acknowledge that there has been content that I didn't care for in the past but the amount of other content available means I just don't play the content I don't like.

    The next time you get angry at someone try walking a mile in their shoes. After that, who cares! You're a mile away and you have their shoes! -Someone with more awesome quotes than me

©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.