Is gw2 going down the path of heavy microtransactions

[MisterDapper.5984]

[deleted]

[Ayrilana.1396]

Istan was a little over the top so it’s deserving of the nerfs. It’s more-or-less in line with SW now. People are always so quick to rush to assuming that any nerfs to farms must be because they’re trying to get you to buy gems.

[Critical Lag.9075]

They probably won't touch SW. Istan was far better gold/h than SW. I think it deserved nerf, but not in the way they've done it. Sadly that's how ANet works, they almost ALWAYS go way to hard in one way or another. Also there are other ways to get nice gold without farming 24/7.

Heavy microtransactions? Maybe. Recently a lot of cool stuff is from gem store and I wish more of the items or skins were a in game rewards.

P2W? At what exactly ? You can't win in PvE, in PvP gear doesn't matter and as for WvW, well, for over 6 years we didn't get a single item in gem store that would give you any real advantage there. Also thanks to gold <-> gems, everyone can get anything from cash shop without paying real cash.

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

There are all sorts of ways to make gold in the game. As @"Ayrilana.1396" points out, Istan wasn't just "meaningful", it far exceeded all other farms. Istan had a profound impact on the marketplace. That means that only people who chose to do the same thing day in/day out could claim those rewards, while anyone choosing any other content would see less value for the same effort. Istan even lowered the value of Silverwastes farming.

Regardless, modifying farms has nothing to do with microtranactions. And P2W is a specific type of microtransaction that ANet has stayed away from.

And finally, what do any of these three things have to do with the game dying off?

The only real surprise to me is that it took ANet so long to act. They let on ages ago that they were concerned about the impact of Istan on the economy and did nothing until recently.

[Alimar.8760]

This is an interesting worry so i'd like to take the time to respond.

1. Istan has been nerfed so many times it's kinda sad yes (And almost a joke.) but I don't think it negates the farm entirely.
2. Silverwastes was nerfed similarly when it used to be the mainsteam farm. So silverwastes being nerfed is probably unlikely considering the most recent nerf it recieved was a few years ago.

Personally I don't think this will affect their gemstore philosophy. While I can't be 100% sure because of the recent financial issues, they never catered to people with money since the launch and I don't think the reduction of a farm is going to cause them to suddenly shift directions. There was a brief time in which they sold boosters for gems during the launch of the game which I personally disagreed with. But to my knowledge plenty of players also thought this was toeing the line of pay-to-win and they quickly removed those boosters in lieu of acquiring them through game play and leveling up.

The game existed before those farms were a thing, and there will always be the "next best" or "highest return rate." farm. Just because Istan is nerfed, doesn't necessarily mean the the whole of the game isn't worth playing. If anything the reduction of a farm will be a boon to the gemstore because those that relied on the gold income to buy gems because it was faster and easier than spending money will return to paying cash for gems.

Why would the farmers that make legendaries leave the game? Legendary flipping has been around since the beginning of the game and likely will continue.

My opinion is that, the small subsection of players that both buy gems with gold and real currency is in fact small. Most people who buy gems will buy gems, and most people who buy gems with gold will find other ways of paying for the gems with in game currency.

My ultimate advice is that you should give this time. Concern about the future is great because it means there are people that care, but it is still speculation. The reduction of a farm could potentially be a boon or a disadvantage. It did reduce the price of many materials and help people afford to craft or make high end legendaries, but also it did reduce the return rate of casual players salvaging and doing events. (I for one saved up many ectos from when they were 40s a piece and lost a significant chunk when Auric Basin Meta Map Farming was a thing.) Also removing one farm wont negate the current other farms out there, and Istan the way it Is, i'm sure people have found a way to use the new change to the best of their abilities.

TL,DR: The change of a farm likely will not affect gemstore. Those who buy gems with money don't always overlap heavily with those that farm and buy gems with gold. The status quo will likely remain the same or actually increase in gem sales with real world currency. This isn't a guarantee, and the best way to assuage that concern is exactly what you're doing. Posting on the forums, getting opinions, and hopefully someone at Anet will see this and maybe respond in kind.

I hope this helps.

[DiabolicalHamSandwich.8756]

Really? nerfing Istan is what caused you to feel like this game is moving towards heavy microtransactions/P2W? A map that had been more so on the ridiculous side to begin with? I suppose this is what happens when you allow things to run wild for a while. People forget things weren't normal to begin with when you come for it.

[Kal Spiro.9745]

But, it's definitely true that once I have the Covert Charr Backpack Set on sale right now, I'll win, right?

[phs.6089]

What particular item in gem-store will let me one shot those that didn't farm Istan?What on Earth you talking about? gear is farmable, legendaries are farmable.It's back to farm, not farm Istan and buy by gold.

[MisterDapper.5984]

@"Alimar.8760" said:This is an interesting worry so i'd like to take the time to respond.

1. Istan has been nerfed so many times it's kinda sad yes (And almost a joke.) but I don't think it negates the farm entirely.
2. Silverwastes was nerfed similarly when it used to be the mainsteam farm. So silverwastes being nerfed is probably unlikely considering the most recent nerf it recieved was a few years ago.

Personally I don't think this will affect their gemstore philosophy. While I can't be 100% sure because of the recent financial issues, they never catered to people with money since the launch and I don't think the reduction of a farm is going to cause them to suddenly shift directions. There was a brief time in which they sold boosters for gems during the launch of the game which I personally disagreed with. But to my knowledge plenty of players also thought this was toeing the line of pay-to-win and they quickly removed those boosters in lieu of acquiring them through game play and leveling up.

The game existed before those farms were a thing, and there will always be the "next best" or "highest return rate." farm. Just because Istan is nerfed, doesn't necessarily mean the the whole of the game isn't worth playing. If anything the reduction of a farm will be a boon to the gemstore because those that relied on the gold income to buy gems because it was faster and easier than spending money will return to paying cash for gems.

Why would the farmers that make legendaries leave the game? Legendary flipping has been around since the beginning of the game and likely will continue.

My opinion is that, the small subsection of players that both buy gems with gold and real currency is in fact small. Most people who buy gems will buy gems, and most people who buy gems with gold will find other ways of paying for the gems with in game currency.

My ultimate advice is that you should give this time. Concern about the future is great because it means there are people that care, but it is still speculation. The reduction of a farm could potentially be a boon or a disadvantage. It did reduce the price of many materials and help people afford to craft or make high end legendaries, but also it did reduce the return rate of casual players salvaging and doing events. (I for one saved up many ectos from when they were 40s a piece and lost a significant chunk when Auric Basin Meta Map Farming was a thing.) Also removing one farm wont negate the current other farms out there, and Istan the way it Is, i'm sure people have found a way to use the new change to the best of their abilities.

TL,DR: The change of a farm likely will not affect gemstore. Those who buy gems with money don't always overlap heavily with those that farm and buy gems with gold. The status quo will likely remain the same or actually increase in gem sales with real world currency. This isn't a guarantee, and the best way to assuage that concern is exactly what you're doing. Posting on the forums, getting opinions, and hopefully someone at Anet will see this and maybe respond in kind.

I hope this helps.

Thank you for your response. I don't think the game is going towards P2W, but I've seen it too many times in other games and it worries me. NCsoft is a Korean company and they love these P2W/Heavy microtransaction game styles. I know the parent company isn't the same as Anet, but they're still influential.

Istan farm is all I've known since restarting a few months ago. Initially I left the game after launch a month later. Since there wasn't really end game to be had. I do agree Istan needed some nerfs, but they gutted it.

Like you said I'll have to give it some time. I can still efficiently generate large quantities of gold.

[MoriMoriMori.5349]

@"MisterDapper.5984" said:So I wanted to give my two cents based on what I know from fellow farmers. Since Istan got nerfed again and it's most likely a waste of time to farm now.

How nerfing some farming spot giving obnoxiously excessive income is "going in direction of pay to win"? Pay to win in what, sorry? In your imaginary "fashion wars"? You literally get everything you need to play 90% of the content when you reach lv 80, everything. With exception of Ascended gear which is only really needed for high-tier fractals (and by the time you'll be ready for those, you'll have that gear naturally). Those people going full-drama mode over harder access to some shiny trinkets worth nothing except some dubious points in "status" (however ridiculous it may sound in a game), making false claims that the game surely ends due to this, start to really disgust me.

If anything, I totally don't mind tons of micro-transactions, until they are only related to QoL and visuals. Heck, I'm both hands voting for this, as it will help develop the game, and will provide more options to customize your character, hopefully. For the life of mine I can't understand why people making fuss about a lot of cosmetics-related micro-trasactions in games, it's nonsensical.

[MoriMoriMori.5349]

Also, it makes me crack each time I see people talking kitten about their fears of pay to win coming to GW2, when it's literally here for years - like, almost every e-spec only available from paid expansions is way, way better than core profession - and I rarely hear somebody complaining about this, for some reason.

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

@MoriMoriMori.5349 said:Also, it makes me crack each time I see people talking kitten about their fears of pay to win coming to GW2, when it's literally here for years - like, almost every e-spec only available from paid expansions is way, way better than core profession - and I rarely hear somebody complaining about this, for some reason.

Pay-to-win refers to the predatory practice of making it impossible to complete or continue a game without spending on microtransactions to remain current. Purchasing an expansion is the macrotransaction that makes some of this game's content buy-to-play. They could, I suppose, offer WvW and PvP for Core-only, HoT-only, and PoF-only players, but it would whittle down the community of each. Instead, they leave it up to the player to decide whether they want to have every option or not. After all, you can compete in both modes with core alone (you're just more limited and generally have to be better).

[MoriMoriMori.5349]

@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:Pay-to-win refers to the predatory practice of making it impossible to complete or continue a game without spending on microtransactions to remain currentThat hardly required clarifications, as whatever they do to Ishtan farming still is not related to pay to win, as "to win" you need just a set of exotic armor and few tenths of gold to cover everyday expenses. Unless you can explain how it is.

And here:

@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:Pay-to-win refers to the predatory practice of making it impossible to complete..it almost seems like you rig the meaning of the word the way which would help to prove your point. Pay to win doesn't refer only to cases when win is simply impossible without investing real cash, but to all cases when doing so can grant you more mechanical advantage in a given individual encounter. And almost any e-spec does give you such advantage being way better than core professions (sometimes times better in terms of dps and sustain).

[Ben K.6238]

Classifying elite specs as "pay-to-win" is absurd; you may as well classify the game as pay-to-win because you can't win if you don't buy the game.

The games that are widely considered as "pay-to-win" are indeed the ones where you can purchase shortcuts or power boosts to give you a substantial advantage over players who don't. Of course, you can nit-pick for all situations where making purchases may give you some tiny advantage in some circumstances, but the only widespread consideration that will earn is derision.

[Danikat.8537]

Anet has always been against the idea of players farming one area of the game to the exclusion of all else and they've gone out of their way to prevent that. That's why we have Diminishing Returns - where if you stay in the same place for too long you'll stop getting drops. That's also why they changed dungeons so you have to do different dungeon paths to get the big reward instead of picking the quickest one and doing it over and over and over and prevent multi-loot in Auric Basin. Oh, and the starter map champion farm of course - but that had other problems too, mainly that people would yell at new players for starting events "out of order" when they couldn't possibly have known there was an order and it would be impossible for them to join in once the mass of high level players came to kill it.

Apart from the champion farm (which is still possible on higher level maps, I even see people running it in Frostgorge Sound occasionally) they've never completely removed a farm from the game, just reduced how effective it is to do that and nothing else. My understanding is they've done the same with Istan and it's now equal with maps like Silverwastes and Auric Basin instead of being obviously the single best source of gold in the game.

Also if everything goes to plan you should find that now the market isn't being as flooded with items and materials from Istan the value of each individual one will go up again, which will also increase the profit from the farm (and from farming other areas).

[Raknar.4735]

@MoriMoriMori.5349 said:

@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:Pay-to-win refers to the predatory practice of making it impossible to complete or continue a game without spending on microtransactions to remain currentThat hardly required clarifications, as whatever they do to Ishtan farming still is not related to pay to win, as "to win" you need just a set of exotic armor and few tenths of gold to cover everyday expenses. Unless you can explain how it is.

And here:

@Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:Pay-to-win refers to the predatory practice of making it impossible to complete..it almost seems like you rig the meaning of the word the way which would help to prove your point. Pay to win doesn't refer only to cases when win is simply impossible without investing real cash, but to all cases when doing so can grant you more

mechanical

advantage in a given individual encounter. And almost any e-spec does give you such advantage being way better than core professions (sometimes times better in terms of dps and sustain).

If you say e-specs are P2W, then there's pretty much no Non-P2W MMORPG around. Most expansions in other games change the max lvl cap, only if you buy the expansion. By your definition WoW, FFIX etc. are all P2W, because without the expansions you can't get to the highest Lvl, a purely mechanical advantage. With the higher lvl also come new skills, more mechanical advantages.Any B2P game is P2W, since you first have to buy to play it, by your definition of P2W.

[MoriMoriMori.5349]

Not getting somewhere is not pay to win. You simply won't be able to participate in game this way. Getting somewhere and finding yourself at mechanical disadvantage comparing to those who paid - is pay to win. You again seem to try to juggle with words to justify your point.

No, not every game where you have to buy something is like that. Some games may completely exclude competition part, others simply won't let you access certain parts of it where you could find such competition, and some games won't build their paid classes on purpose so much stronger than base classes, simply providing you different experiences while playing them, without significant mechanical advantage.

As GW2 allows you to go into PvP (as owner of the core game, without expacs; not sure about free to play accounts), yet won't give you access to strongest classes played by those who paid, it's pay to win, by definition.

[Gehenna.3625]

I think your question could've been valid if you used different argumentation. Of course I don't think P2W is going to happen because it will tick too many people off, but heavy monetization... Of course, the game is actually already being heavily monetized so perhaps we are already there. Still it is possible that they will come out with a higher amount of new items and more RNG style approaches if revenue keeps dropping.

But make no mistake, this game is already heavily monetized.

[Goettel.4389]

P2W <> buying skins/qol for real money.Hope that helps you.

[Raknar.4735]

@"MoriMoriMori.5349" said:Not getting somewhere is not pay to win. You simply won't be able to participate in game this way. Getting somewhere and finding yourself at mechanical disadvantage comparing to those who paid - is pay to win. You again seem to try to juggle with words to justify your point.

No, not every game where you have to buy something is like that. Some games may completely exclude competition part, others simply won't let you access certain parts of it where you could find such competition, and some games won't build their paid classes on purpose so much stronger than base classes, simply providing you different experiences while playing them, without significant mechanical advantage.

As GW2 allows you to go into PvP (as owner of the core game, without expacs; not sure about free to play accounts), yet won't give you access to strongest classes played by those who paid, it's pay to win, by definition.

I repeat myself, WoW, ESO , FFIX etc. are P2W by your definition.

WoW allows you to gank players that can't reach max Lvl, because they haven't bought the latest expansion.ESO offers the crafting bag to paying customers, which is not only convenience.FFIX adds news classes and a raised lvl-cap.LoL (even though it isn't a MMORPG) has players that don't have all champions, yet you can buy them, giving you and advantage by having a wider champion pool.

How is "not getting somewhere" not pay to win by your definition? There could be new items in that location, that could potentially be stronger. Different types of food buffs etc.

Funny how you said someone else "rigs the meaning of the word the way which would help to prove his/her point", yet you're doing the same.

[Blocki.4931]

Everytime the "but muh expansions are p2w!!!" argument comes up I just want to bite into my keyboard. You can't prove them wrong because to them the mere fact that you had to invest a single real world currency unit proves them right and there is absolutely nothing you can do.

Only thing I can say is that it's beyond silly to assume you will stay100% on top of things if you willingly choose to not partake in contemporary content. You just shouldn't be able to expect that. New specs have new mechanics that completely change how a class plays/works??? Imagine my shock.

[MoriMoriMori.5349]

@"Raknar.4735" said:I repeat myself, WoW, ESO , FFIX etc. are P2W by your definition.

If they allow you to access competitive content where you'll be at mechanical disadvantage comparing to those who paid, they are. You don't need to prove me it on per case basis :) This in definition of the term - "pay to win".

@"Raknar.4735" said:FFIX adds news classes and a raised lvl-cap.

It's not about what they add, but about whether or not you'll be at disadvantage while doing competitive content. As you can guess, there are tons of ways how you can add new classes and rise levelcap without giving mechanical disadvantage to those who don't have access to them. Making them different, but not that more powerful, as was mentioned already, or scaling everyone down somehow to "a common denominator" - to name few. I haven't played neither WoW, nor FF, so no idea whether the issue exists there.

@"Raknar.4735" said:How is "not getting somewhere" not pay to win by your definition?

Because you won't be able to participate in the game regardless of whether you want it or not. Not being able to play the game is not equivalent to not being able to win, like not being able to work some job at all isn't equivalent to working the job without being paid, as your manager takes your salary - the last case is the real issue, as you are exploited to benefit someone else.

[Raknar.4735]

@MoriMoriMori.5349 said:

@"Raknar.4735" said:I repeat myself, WoW, ESO , FFIX etc. are P2W by your definition.

If they allow you to access competitive content where you'll at mechanical disadvantage comparing to those who paid, they are. You don't need to prove me it on per casis basis :) This in definition of the term - "pay to win".

I wouldn't play a purely PvE game, without competition, if others could just buy the best gear. Your definition of P2W only exists in competitive game modes. There is no real definition of P2W. My definition is also applicable to pure PvE games.

@"Raknar.4735" said:FFIX adds news classes and a raised lvl-cap.

It's not about what they add, but about whether or not you'll be at disadvantage while doing competitive content. As you can guess, there are tons of ways how you can add new classes and rise levelcap

without

giving mechanical disadvantage to those who don't have access to them. Making them different, but not that more powerful, as was mentioned already, or scaling everyone down somehow to "a common denominator" - to name few. I haven't played neither WoW, nor FF, so no idea whether the issue exists there.

Scaling down people to a "common denominator"? Good luck with that, there's way too many variables.Adding different mechanics to new classes is a mechanical advantage , because non-paying customers can't use that mechanic, no matter if the mechanic is good or bad.

@"Raknar.4735" said:How is "not getting somewhere" not pay to win by your definition?

Because you won't be able to participate in the game regardless of whether you want it or not. Not being able to play the game is not equivalent to not being able to win, like not being able to work some job at all isn't equivalent to working the job without being paid, as your manager takes your salary - the last case is the real issue, as you are exploited to benefit someone else.

So we should just restrict everyone that doesn't buy expansion from ever leaving PvE areas? That would remove the P2W by your definition, because they won't be able to participate anymore. You'd rather remove the choice of playing in those modes, even with a subpar build, than letting them play.

Using your analogy (which imho is pretty bad for this): The person without the job atleast has the choice to work (even if it is without being paid). He doesn't have to, he's not forced to work for no salary, yet for some reason he does. A hobby would be a better analogy.

Your definition of P2W isn't the only one. There's no globally accepted definition of P2W. If you find it, post it.As it stands you're using an arbitrary definition of P2W that is solely based on your own opinions.

[Obtena.7952]

It was always microtransaction heavy ... that's GW2's business model.

[Randulf.7614]

@Obtena.7952 said:It was always microtransaction heavy ... that's GW2's business model.

Exactly and Istan was a mess. Couldn’t even see what was going on so if nerfing it means a better playing experience then fantastic.

There is zero link between the nerf and the business model though