would you be willing to pay a subscription — Guild Wars 2 Forums

would you be willing to pay a subscription

Let me begin with saying that I know this is a touchy subject and that there will be some strong opinions for and against it, so here go's.

So we all know that there are features and content that we want integrated in to game such as
-New races
-New classes
-player housing
-quality of life features
-more armor/weapons
but as it has been said there not enough funds or manpower to create these features without taking away from other departments. so what I want to find out is how many people would be willing to pay a monthly subscription for the hiring of more employees for the creation of more content that could be bigger, better and arrive faster then before. I know it's probably too late or too risky to change to a subscription base game, but me personally I would be willing to pay a subscription just to be able to see the game I love to play grow.

would you be willing to pay a subscription 431 votes

Yes, I wound be willing to pay a monthly subscription.
16% 73 votes
No, I wound not be willing to pay a monthly subscription.
76% 331 votes
Other.
6% 27 votes
<1345

Comments

  • Alga.6498Alga.6498 Member ✭✭✭✭

    If that will help them to create more content and faster and not cancel/scrap too much cuz running out of time, then heck yes!

    | Separatist | Nightmare Court | Inquest | White Mantle | Sunspears | Loyalists | Ascalon | Kryta | Ebonhawke | Elona | Istan | Kourna | Vabbi | Cantha | Luxon | Kurzick | 71 characters | "Rally to me, Ascalonians!" "Keep Ascalon in your heart." "May the Gods protect you." "Be blessed by the Six."

  • Just a flesh wound.3589Just a flesh wound.3589 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 12, 2018

    WoW allows their players to buy monthly subscription tokens with in game gold. If ANet had a system like that then a subscription might be acceptable to more people.

    Edit: a player buys a monthly token with real money and sells the token on the trading post for gold. The player who buys the token with gold then uses it to pay for one month subscription.

    Be careful what you ask for
    ANet might give it to you.

    Forum Guides: Images. Text

  • Elothar.4382Elothar.4382 Member ✭✭✭

    I voted yes, but it carries some caveats and explanations. Right now, it is buy to play...with a lot of cool stuff in the gem shop. Shifting to a subscription model, I would expect a lot more easy to access rewards in game. Everything's a trade-off. But if you assume that the gem shop would remain as is, then no, I would not want to pay a subscription fee on top of that.

  • Wyvern.7951Wyvern.7951 Member ✭✭
    edited July 12, 2018

    I wouldn't want them to switch fully into a subscription model. That's just asking for trouble. Aside from WoW and ffxiv, a majority of mmos haven't been able sustain themselves on a sub model. Considering how many MMOs have tried and failed on that front, I think it's safe to say it probably wouldn't be a very good solution to funding content. GW2 doesn't really have the replayability to keep people interested like that either. I remember a quote saying it was designed to be a game where you come and go in between other games.

    That said, I wouldn't mind a freemium type of subscription a la elderscrolls online style. As long as it isn't pay2win and offers gems/minor convenience/living story access/etc. Things that wouldn't put a subscription player over a free to play player, then I'd be alright with it. I'm not sure how much money that sort of system nets though. It may not be worth it, but If it was and it allowed them to create better content then I certainly wouldn't complain.

    As long as we don't get anything near as horrendous as elderscroll's shiny mount loot boxes. Those things are god awful.

  • Knighthonor.4061Knighthonor.4061 Member ✭✭✭✭

    only if its like 5$ or less per month and we get Player Housing with all the customization that Rift's player housing feature gives. Second that, no.

  • Khisanth.2948Khisanth.2948 Member ✭✭✭✭

    If I am paying a monthly subscription I am going to start expecting monthly updates ...

    @Just a flesh wound.3589 said:
    WoW allows their players to buy monthly subscription tokens with in game gold. If ANet had a system like that then a subscription might be acceptable to more people.

    Edit: a player buys a monthly token with real money and sells the token on the trading post for gold. The player who buys the token with gold then uses it to pay for one month subscription.

    That sounds like a less flexible version of what we already have.

  • GDchiaScrub.3241GDchiaScrub.3241 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 13, 2018

    Sub-fees don't guarantee content. However if you wish to emulate them yourself you are welcome to buy gems every month. I can't stop you. It could be interesting if ANET provided a discount for recurring buyers.

    D:

    P.S. Why did auto correct do requiring idk

    Holy Warriors of [Kazo] following Kazo doctrine guided by, Our Lord and Commander, Zudo in the holy Trinity of Him and his two firm glutes.

  • eduardo.1436eduardo.1436 Member ✭✭✭

    errrr I go with "Other". I am extremely happy I don't have to pay a sub, however, every 2 weeks I always try to buy $10 gems, sometimes I can sometimes I can't.

  • Zaraki.5784Zaraki.5784 Member ✭✭✭✭

    N-E-V-E-R
    I would quit GW2 forever (or untill they would remove it).

    "Sticks and stones may break your bones but words will never be able to injure you!"
    The Grim Adventures of Billy & Mandy

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

    I don't know if such a move would be the disaster I think it would be. I suspect it would, largely because the pool of players who play MMO's is not unlimited. A lot of the players who believe in the sub model are playing one or more of the games that have subs.

    GW2 may have attracted some players who got tired of the sub game they were playing. However, GW2 certainly attracted a lot of players who don't accept or like the sub model. You could say, in fact, that the B2P aspect of GW2 is one of its primary selling points. For a six-year-old game to move away from a business model that has been successful, to one that could alienate a lot of its customers, is a large risk.

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

  • Dreadshow.9320Dreadshow.9320 Member ✭✭✭

    120$ a year with 1200 gems a month, yeah sure.

  • tizodd.8310tizodd.8310 Member ✭✭

    I'd totally be willing to pay a sub if it included monthly gems and story chapters.

    It should also be totally optional.

  • Tachenon.5270Tachenon.5270 Member ✭✭✭

    Not with the game as it is right now, no. With a few changes -- total repeal of the NPE, for one -- then maybe. Speaking of subs, if anybody from NCSoft is listening, if you'd kindly bring back City of Heroes, I'd merrily pay a sub fee for that. At least until I realized the world has moved on and you can't go back home and all that psychological stuff. I miss that game.

  • MithranArkanere.8957MithranArkanere.8957 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I would not mind having to pay for living world episodes.

    I would not mind having to pay to get Season 1 back.

    But I would never pay for a game as 'time' or 'service'. I only pay for individual specific products if I can help it.

  • Cyrin.1035Cyrin.1035 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 13, 2018

    I would LOVE a sub-model system for GW 2, but the majority of the forum community is dead against any kind of sub-model, unfortunately:

    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/20083/would-you-like-a-gw-2-optional-monthly-membership/p1

  • Oglaf.1074Oglaf.1074 Member ✭✭✭✭

    They're already making money hand over fist with these whale-friendly 2k Gem mounts.

    Freemium-styled games probably make more money than purely subscription-based "outdated" MMORPGs.

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

  • I was paying a monthly sub for LOTRO while i was there for a while.

    I'm not against paying subs; but rather than pay on monthly basis. I prefer the every three months. That way; if i get bored or want to take a hiatus from the game. I'm not paying for time i won't use. I feel this works well for me as i do take hiatuses from gw2. from all mmo's really. I'll play one a lot for a while then rotate over to another one.

    While I am open to that idea, I have to agree with people insisting that the company could actually lose money rather than gain it. There are a lot of people who probably buy through the trading post gem shop who wouldn't if they were paying monthly. Some people might feel that if they aren't paying 10-15 a month; they spend that in the store instead. if you think about it, people who do that are essentially paying an equivalent to a sub.

  • Irokou.3215Irokou.3215 Member ✭✭

    Optional subs can be done well, but ultimately with the state of the classes and "balancing efforts" this game has alongside of the increasingly dull and short lived living world experiences, I could safely say that my cash would be better allocated elsewhere for the time being.

  • Vlad Morbius.1759Vlad Morbius.1759 Member ✭✭✭

    Anyone who thinks this would help this game grow is either new to MMO's or caught in some time loop! Let me break it down in a business sense; paying will allow the company to guarantee a specific level of development which would then become hinged to deadlines and not passion. Two it also allows management to become complacent in the quality of content because they in turn are based on securing dollars and after all if this month doesn't make it i have next month. Three subscription does not ever translate to guaranteed customer satisfaction it translates to corporate satisfaction and at a very limited level. Why would any gaming company in this day and age want to limit dollar intake to a subscription....frankly you need to count yourself lucky that despite their faults Anet has given more value per dollar than any other game I've tried, and I've been playing MMO's since 1999.

  • ReaverKane.7598ReaverKane.7598 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 13, 2018

    The myth that Free to Play games (which this isn't) are lower quality and can't do as much as pay to play games has been entirely destroyed by the Juggernaut that is League of Legends, also, look at all the Destiny 2 vs Warframe videos, and see why a game that asks for money constantly isn't automatically better.

    Guild Wars 2 was marked as 8th in the top 10 PC games by revenue in 2017, so it's doing better than a lot of games. (BTW #1 was League of Legends)
    The problem with GW2 is how it has been run, and lots of mistakes made by Arena Net.
    PvP was getting a lot of publicity for the game, and growing, until they just killed it, completely.
    WvW, another "unique" aspect of the game, has been orphaned since times immemorial.
    PvE has been the support pillar of the game, but even in that area there's been a lot of ground to cover.
    The first 2 years of the game were wasted with the once-only content, which means that's a ton of dev man-hours that today have very little impact in the game.
    Arena Net, is still, as recently as this latest release figuring out how to organize their workflow, that's not something that is solved with just throwing money at it.

    Also, answering the question, subscription is the solution from greedy companies that sell for irresponsible players (or just people that don't know the alternatives).
    For 20 years games were made, sold and that's it. For years you could easily pirate most games, and still companies were making a profit. There's simply no justification to be paying the price of a new PC game every 4 months to play the same game.

  • The OP presumes that the issue of "not enough resources to do everything" can be countered by a subscription. Ignore the fact that a subscription might decrease funding and there will still not be enough people at ANet to do everything. Businesses set priorities with the resources they have; increase those resources and a smart business doesn't always change the priorities, but might instead just do all of it a little faster (or a little more thoroughly).

    In short, instead of asking us about whether some people are willing to pay more for the game, why not keep letting ANet know how important the things you do want are.


    @Tort.1975 said:
    -New races

    Not everyone wants that.

    -New classes

    Not everyone wants that either.

    -player housing

    Lots of people have no interest in that.

    -quality of life features

    You'd have to be more specific.

    -more armor/weapons

    This particular itch won't ever get fully scratched. There will never, ever be enough skins in the game.

    but as it has been said there not enough funds or manpower to create these features without taking away from other departments.

    This isn't an issue of subscription|not, this is a business dilemma for every product ever made: there's always more good ideas than there are people to work on them.

    so what I want to find out is how many people would be willing to pay a monthly subscription for the hiring of more employees for the creation of more content that could be bigger, better and arrive faster then before.

    There is absolutely no guarantee that increasing the cost of the game is going to result in more of the sorts of features you want to see. The best use of, let's say, 20% more funding might not be new races, professions, housing, or skins. It might be revamping the game engine or managing six-plus story releases per year (instead of 4 or so). It might be balancing every month instead of every 2-4 months.

    "Face the facts. Then act on them. It's ...the only doctrine I have to offer you, & it's harder than you'd think, because I swear humans seem hardwired to do anything but. Face the facts. Don't pray, don't wish, ...FACE THE FACTS. THEN act." — Quellcrist Falconer

  • Altosk.8492Altosk.8492 Member ✭✭
    edited July 13, 2018

    @ReaverKane.7598 said:
    The myth that Free to Play games (which this isn't) are lower quality and can't do as much as pay to play games has been entirely destroyed by the Juggernaut that is League of Legends, also, look at all the Destiny 2 vs Warframe videos, and see why a game that asks for money constantly isn't automatically better.

    Guild Wars 2 was marked as 8th in the top 10 PC games by revenue in 2017, so it's doing better than a lot of games. (BTW #1 was League of Legends)
    The problem with GW2 is how it has been run, and lots of mistakes made by Arena Net.
    PvP was getting a lot of publicity for the game, and growing, until they just killed it, completely.
    WvW, another "unique" aspect of the game, has been orphaned since times immemorial.
    PvE has been the support pillar of the game, but even in that area there's been a lot of ground to cover.
    The first 2 years of the game were wasted with the once-only content, which means that's a ton of dev man-hours that today have very little impact in the game.
    Arena Net, is still, as recently as this latest release figuring out how to organize their workflow, that's not something that is solved with just throwing money at it.

    Also, answering the question, subscription is the solution from greedy companies that sell for irresponsible players (or just people that don't know the alternatives).
    For 20 years games were made, sold and that's it. For years you could easily pirate most games, and still companies were making a profit. There's simply no justification to be paying the price of a new PC game every 4 months to play the same game.

    GW2 made #8 on Top Premium at 87mil which is half of the # 10 spot of top free to play, which is FIFA Online 3 at 163mil(#1 is LoL at 2.1B). Just because the game made that much money on game sales doesn't mean they have it to spend on production. I would assume that NCSoft takes it and only filters back what the Anet needs to get the job done. That being said I would fully support a optional sub to this game if it meant that Anet could hire more in house workers to further the quality of the game and speed up things like balance changes/content release. As it seems right now, they are short handed and hastily getting mediocre content out the door. Some of it is getting pushed back like raids and some isn't even making it out, just look at HoT legendary weapons. We still don't have them all and we won't probably until next year or even the next Xpack. We all know how good/fair Anet has been to us so just because IF THEY DID add a option sub doesn't mean everything about what we have now would change. Honestly though this game would never get one. The community is so set on not having one that if the option did present itself with the guarantee of increase production value, content and a plethora of new features/updates, they would rather see it burn to nothing. Then complain that it did.

    EDIT: I'm just going to put this in here to set my stance on the subject. I honestly don't care if this game does or doesn't get a optional sub. I'm split on the subject and I'm okay/open minded to the idea that's all. I'm okay without and okay if it gets one.

  • Palador.2170Palador.2170 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I would gladly pay a sub to play a really awesome game.

    GW2 is a good game with a lot of really awesome potential that it failed to live up to. I would not pay a sub for GW2.

    Lip synching is just mime karaoke.

  • castlemanic.3198castlemanic.3198 Member ✭✭✭✭

    GW2 is an amazing investment without any subscription options, and it's why I've sunk so much money into this game just for skins. If an optional subscription model was introduced, I'd feel like my investment wasn't worth it anymore and would probably refuse to put any more money into it.

    If you join a debate and provide little to no proof when the other side provides lots of evidence, you can't then declare yourself the winner of that debate. Veterans can make signatures apparently.

  • Khisanth.2948Khisanth.2948 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Oglaf.1074 said:
    They're already making money hand over fist with these whale-friendly 2k Gem mounts.

    Freemium-styled games probably make more money than purely subscription-based "outdated" MMORPGs.

    Which is why everything switched to that model. I mean would any business go "hey I heard this freemium thing makes less money, lets switch"?

  • Oglaf.1074Oglaf.1074 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Khisanth.2948 said:

    @Oglaf.1074 said:
    They're already making money hand over fist with these whale-friendly 2k Gem mounts.

    Freemium-styled games probably make more money than purely subscription-based "outdated" MMORPGs.

    Which is why everything switched to that model. I mean would any business go "hey I heard this freemium thing makes less money, lets switch"?

    Aye, it has overtaken the subscription fee model for a reason.

    Except those sneaky. sneaky MMORPGS who get away with having their cake (sub fee) and eating it too (premium store).

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

  • I don't really think it's needed and in the end I don't think it would benefit the game as much as you suggest. If people want to support the game regularly they can do that via buying gems every month already.

  • Blude.6812Blude.6812 Member ✭✭✭✭

    May I respectively suggest that the OP use the search function for similar topics. You would discover that this have been discussed, suggested, thoroughly examined and dismissed many many many many times in the past.

  • AliamRationem.5172AliamRationem.5172 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I would absolutely pay a subscription, and I do in a sense with monthly gem purchases (in fact, I pay more than I did for WoW!). However, I'm not sure that's a winning strategy for this game as I doubt I am like most players in this. But if there were no other considerations and paying a subscription meant more content? There's no question I'd be willing to pay for that.

  • crepuscular.9047crepuscular.9047 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 13, 2018

    @Tort.1975 said:
    Let me begin with saying that I know this is a touchy subject and that there will be some strong opinions for and against it, so here go's.

    So we all know that there are features and content that we want integrated in to game such as
    -New races
    -New classes
    -player housing
    -quality of life features
    -more armor/weapons
    but as it has been said there not enough funds or manpower to create these features without taking away from other departments. so what I want to find out is how many people would be willing to pay a monthly subscription for the hiring of more employees for the creation of more content that could be bigger, better and arrive faster then before. I know it's probably too late or too risky to change to a subscription base game, but me personally I would be willing to pay a subscription just to be able to see the game I love to play grow.

    First and foremost, subscription based business model MMOs are pretty much dead, even the sole survivor WoW is starting to shift away towards 'micro' transactions.

    a subscription based model creates a mentality of "oh, I must play as much as possible to get the most out of my subscription", and possibly on the other side of the fence for casuals "why the heck am I paying the same price as those hardcores when I'm only playing less than a tenth of their play time"



    onto the features you suggested

    -New races

    unlike other MMOs where races have a part through race traits, in GW2 it's just a slap on skin that brings no diversity to the game because how little impact personal story have on PvE and how useless racial skills are; this ensures everyone are one the same playing field.
    Imagine an asura (extra 10% int) warrior vs a char (extra 10% health pool) warrior, identical gears, traits, skills, and player skill level, can you imagine how pissed that asura player would be constantly losing because char have extra 10% health pool; and it will create an imbalance of race class combinations

    -New classes

    and I'm guess the next thing you will add to that is the possibility of new weapons?
    It's a massive undertaking, this is the very reason why Elite specialisation exists, reusing existing classes and weapons without creating new ones.

    -player housing

    pretty much failed in every game, your home instance is your 'player housing'; creating new things in new zones does not incur too much cost, but to put new things on top of existing things is very expensive because dev need to make adjustments to existing properties, testing team needs to go back and verify existing things does not get broken by new things.
    Just look at the release of current LW, it is totally unrelated to raids but it broke raid boss Xera

    -quality of life features

    they have already implemented plenty of it, just look at how much things they had done since the release of HoT, and they are continously working on it as a side task beyond adding new contents.

    -more armor/weapons

    I'm assuming you are talking about skins...
    armors, i too wish they make more armor sets than individual pieces and outfits, after all it's Fashion Wars 2, outfits makes things stale; but management at anet said it is taking way too much time, just 1 set (6 pieces, 5 races, 2 genders) takes them months to complete, plus the additional time to tweak because of complaints from fashionista about imperfections from mix ups; but there's currently 2,045 individual pieces of armor skins (include armor) in game.
    weapons, i don't know about how long you been playing the game considering this is your very first post, there are 3,033 weapon skins
    as a third year player, I have devotes quite a significant amount of my time unlocking skins since the introduction of wardrobe unlocker in Black Lion Chest, so far I have only unlocked close to 50% of the skins in-game currently; and the number is continuing to grow with more living world and expansions

    [RIP Fashion Wars 2005-2018]     [TTS] [KA] [SI]     [RIP Fashion Wars 2005-2018]
    Praise the Inevitable Eternal Transcendent King Palawa Ignacious Joko, the Beloved and Feared Undying Eternal Monarch of All !!!
    ... til Aurene ate him for dessert 😭
  • rdfaye.4368rdfaye.4368 Member ✭✭✭

    If there is a sub, I won't play. Real life trumps the game, sometimes for weeks.

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

    NO!!! Also, stop assuming that everyone wants new races, classes and player housing, or even some of those other items you listed...those are things you want, everyone needs to stop talking for everyone else.

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

  • Sanity Obscure.6054Sanity Obscure.6054 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 13, 2018

    It would be an immediate uninstall. My love for this game would fold faster than Superman on laundry day.

  • Chasind.3128Chasind.3128 Member ✭✭✭

    GW2 is to shallow and casual for a subscription.
    You can just stand anywhere and press 1 1 1 1 1 1, log in for daily, 1 1 1 1 1 1 , change outfit - endgame content right there.

  • BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
    For that game? bwaaahahahaha!
    Srsly i play it for nearly 6 years .. but pay for it with that balacing? with that lack of content ? with that bugs they bringt with every patch?
    bwaaahahahah .. this question made my day

©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.