perilisk.1874

Because ANet has gone from improving their game to shamelessly stealing from community efforts the laziest possible way to make a penny Right because a free update that has been in development for 2+ years doesn’t need any return on investment ? /sThe update wasn't being developed in the void. It's part of a whole game, which does already give a return on investment.Where do you think the money from overpriced mount skins go to? Because i thought they were meant to be used to fund exactly this kind of features. And somehow you don’t think that the introduction of a new free big update doesn’t need a new kind of revenue stream? I tell you where the revenue of “overpriced mount skins” goes to: the living story.If only there was some generally accepted way of monetizing both content and new features at the same time.

How do you know that you have to spend hundreds (!) of euros for the build template system? Well, we could look at other things to make an educated guess about prices. Let's assume the account upgrades are 800g/3, the build slots are 400/1, and the gear slots are 600/1. Yes, we don't know exactly, but we know what they charge for similar items. It's probably not too far off the mark. Let's also assume a basic account with 5 characters, who missed the temporary discount on the first account upgrade, and wants all template system upgrades. From what we know, they can buy 21 extra account slots (7 800g), 3 extra build slots per character (5 3 400g), and 4 extra gear slots per character (5 4 * 600g). That's a grand total of 23,600 gems. At 800 gems for $10, that's $295 USD. You can convert to Euros on your own. If you use more characters, it may be higher. If you don't fully utilize the system it will be lower. If you take your free gear slot and say "thanks, bye", as a lot of casuals will do, it will be 0. But this is the general scale of number you are looking at.

The equipment and build templates aren't actually "templates", they're just quick-swappable setups. The actual "templates" are the account build storage. They use the word "template" to refer to things that aren't, and don't use that word to describe things that are, and then wonder why people are confused.

Yes. If only because they would be somewhat more likely to do it right, rather than arbitrarily hamstringing it just to make the case for monetization.

That's weird, I thought the complete lack of plans for an expansion and the ability to provide "expansion-level" features through living world were big points of contention recently. Especially now that the implementation of build templates seems to indicate that "provide expansion-level features through living world" means selling those expansion-level features bit by bit so that the total price tag is an order of magnitude higher.

My support chrono has 30+ Wow. Well, I'm only speaking for my own experience, and I don't raid, so that probably limits the need a bit.

There isn't much reason right now to use them the way the game is designed, at least in PvE. The main thing is switching between condi, power, or support. So, 3? But you can always just use more alts, which have a lot of other benefits.

Sure, because it would be abandoning its niche of grown gamers with okay access to money and variable access to time, and would be competing in an arena where it is out of its depth, and it would fail as a game. Then these discussions would certainly be unnecessary. There is a model that works just fine for GW2: paid expansions on a regular basis, supplemented by a non-predatory cash shop with cosmetics and non-essential conveniences.

It's not enough to grab the torch if you lose it, you have to use it on the brazier again to light it. Basically, if you don't have the light effect around you, you aren't actually good to go yet.

Did they cover it? If they don't support it right now, it seems like something that they would eventually allow to work as part of an equipment template, since (like attributes/upgrades on a legendary), you can freely swap it at will.

Their presentation in the new map suggests this was far from universal. The female FL aren't happy at being free of their horrible males, they're worried about how other female charr look down on them for being noncombatants. And it was already kind of implicitly there -- for the Olmakhan to exist, there had to be a critical mass of FL charr who had the same similar views about social progress, and that would also there were quite a few who were on the same side (even if just quietly) but preferred to stay and reform rather than leave. Oddly enough, the Flame Legion were simultaneously the ugliest and the least alien of the legions in its social structure -- you can kind of see how the Olmakhan could evolve from what they were. The simple fact is that Sylvari other than the Pale Tree don't reproduce, that we know of, so many of the forces pushing societies to develop rules about sexual relationships, including marriage, aren't actually applicable for them (nor is there any purpose for them having sexual urges or relationships -- simple friendships serve the same psychological need). There's no such thing as a Sylvari shotgun marriage. They're aping sexual beings, and as a result they might be socially sexual beings, but they aren't biologically sexual beings, they're just a bunch of sterile drones modeled after human males and females.

if i was a "legendary hero",. i will build a harem.... the real problem with someone "marry" the PC, is the multitude os tastes of playerbase, and romantic stuff is too much subjetive. Joko doesn't need his anymore. How do you feel about Choya?

So, in the latest Guild Chat, there was a random line, that was immediately corrected. It was talking about how build templates might not be completely valid for a particular character. It was something like (going from memory): "So, if you haven't paid to unlock that e-spec yet... I mean, paid for the expansion that has that e-spec". Now, that could easily just be misspeaking and correcting... or it could be more along the lines of "Oh crap, we're not supposed to talk about that yet". Anyway, I thought it might be a good idea to get people talking before they get too set on a path, on the off chance that this is another expansion-level feature they are looking to independently monetize. So: Would you be willing to pay outright for an e-spec?Would you be concerned that it could introduce a genuine P2W element to the game if the new e-spec starts off a bit OP?Would it make a difference to you whether they were sold one by one, or in a pack of all nine?Would it make a difference if some professions received new ones before others?How many gems would you pay for one e-spec? How many for a full set?

Attempting to shame people into being taken advantage of isn't actually going to go anywhere If you recognize that as being shamed, then you realize the truth in it. If you think this isn't something people should expect to pay for, your expectations are massively out of whack. I recognize it as an attempt to shame. I didn't say it worked, in fact I think it makes people even more angry than they already were, since they know exactly how much they spend and when, and in many cases it's a false accusation from a smug and self-righteous kitten. You think the game is going to be better off if petty little cash grabs drive away people who are already dropping tens or hundreds of dollars on the game a year due largely to goodwill and liking how arenanet runs things versus other companies? You are acting under the delusion that the people who don't feel it's appropriate to pay for the kingly privilege of accessing a few lines of client-side text in-game (you know, like your options settings), instead of in a notepad, are somehow freeloaders, that people who are about to lose access to feature they have grown accustomed to, that they cannot even get back by paying if they wanted to, should be happy that their gameplay experience has been sacrificed on the altar of Korean profits. Consider that usually these sorts of cashgrabs fall into a few categories: Random oopsie, where company legitimately does something boneheaded without it really meaning anything bigger. But usually they course correct once the plan fails to survive contact with the enemy.Arrogant new management that (wrongly) thinks it knows the company's market better than the old management. The only difference is that it isn't accidental, and that arrogant new management might prefer to run the company into the ground and float away on their golden parachute, rather than admit that they were wrong and caused the company's problems.Sheer, panicked desperation from a game that is either literally financially unsustainable, or that, while it could trundle along just fine, has received Ultimatums and is waiting for the bullet in the back of the head from Corporate Masters any day.The bullet is already loaded, and corporate is just trying to see how much it more it can squeeze from the marks before it pulls the plug.Well, let's hope it was just a one-off bad call.

How do you know that isn't how things work in Tyria?

Attempting to shame people into being taken advantage of isn't actually going to go anywhere -- it doesn't make a serious attempt to address the idea that things are being monetized in a scummy way, so it just sounds fatuous. "I think all these stupid little fees my bank charges are sleazy and ridiculous!""Oh, so you think banks should just work for free, huh? Gosh, you sure are selfish." Understand this -- in any business, there are things people expect to pay for, and things they expect to get for free, within reason, and that doesn't make them selfish or bad people. The same people who are pissed off about build templates might well shell out $30 for a mount skin. People go to a fancy restaurant, they can be perfectly fine paying $15 for a nice dessert, but if they saw on their receipt that they got charged a small surcharge for napkins, or utensils, or water, they would be ticked off. Also, understand that Arenanet is providing a version of this feature which is deliberately, massively crippled, solely to be able to profit from it. There's no other explanation that fits the facts we know so far. They showed that you can easily import/export to a text string. Effectively, a build template is a text string. There's absolutely no harm in keeping that list of text strings client side, they can validated against game data as needed, and the list could be... maybe not unlimited, but very very big. But if they did that, they couldn't directly nickel and dime you to use it. So instead, not only do you have to pay out the wazoo for something with zero marginal cost to them, but even if you decided to pay the absolute maximum, you would have access to a library comprising a grand total of... 24 builds. Twenty. Four. Across 9 professions. Slightly less than three builds per profession. That's a joke for a free version of the feature, much less the be all and end all of paid versions. And it's all because they had to justify improving their game to some bean counter, in all likelihood.

For one slot?? No way. 400g per tab, like bag slots, would be a "fair price". They could have dodged the issue altogether if they implemented a "equipment set bag" as a special form of bag that has no inventory slots, but adds a gear tab. Sell them in game at a reasonable price (something like 30g). See, nothing being put in the cash shop at all. Of course, if you don' t want to sacrifice 20+ general purpose inventory slots for 19 quick-swap inventory slots, then you'll need buy some bag slots. But paying for bag slots is nothing new, so why complain now? If it was up to me, I would have implemented it like this:Build library: A free client-side list with a monetized cloud backup. Up to 1000 client-side builds technically supported. First 40 are synced to the cloud gratis (for paid accounts, natch), and you can sync more by paying for a storage expander in chunks of 40, 1000 gems for each expander.Build tabs: All characters get 4 for free. You can purchase more in groups of 4, up to 20, as an account upgrade, like extra craft licenses. 400 per chunk.Gear sets: As per above, technically not directly monetized at all. 30g each.

What I mean is, if all my equipment template slots are taken by my actual build setups, how can I mess with stats or other weapons without screwing up my existing templates? The same way you mess with weapons and stats without screwing your current one equipment template, i.e., you can't. Maybe the issue is calling it a "template"? It's not something you can save and share like build templates, it's just an equipment set, kind of like weapon swapping, except it works better with sharing equipment between sets. You have one right now, you will get a second one free, and you can buy 4 more on a character by character basis.

Hold on ... what makes you think that even if this feature was released in 2012, you wouldn't be charged for it? What you are saying doesn't make sense. the timing has NOTHING to do on whether Anet is going to monetize a feature or not. Because for all that Arenanet's volunteer shills say otherwise, GW1 and GW2 were pretty similar in monetization on launch (character slots, bag slots, bank slots, charging per expansion/campaign, optional paid cosmetics), and while they've shifted to more cash shop and less content drops, the overall monetization ethos still mostly holds. Build templates is a deviation from the norm for Arenanet (worse, it's a feature that's deliberately crippled so it can be more easily monetized), and that doesn't bode well for the future of the game. They didn't release templates in 2012 because you couldn't freely swap traits in 2012, whereas you could freely swap attributes in GW1 by the time templates were released. But that distinction hasn't been relevant for a while now. Yes, build templates would be more useful when linked to a gear swapping feature, and giving inventory slots was always going to be monetized. But monetizing a list of chatcodes that could just as easily be stored client side in unlimited quantities is just charging people because you can -- and even if you paid all the monies, you'd still have less functionality than you originally could have had through tolerated 3rd party tools.

he is talking about equipment templates and you showing him build templates (traits and utilitys) You must admit that the whole thing is a bit confusing. Some upgrades will be character bound while others will be account-wide. So, to clarify this: Build template storage will be account-wide while the max number of build tabs and equipment tabs will be character-specific and must be expanded via Gem Store per char?As I understand it, you will get a list of 3-6 strings of text for your account (depending on whether you get the free ones), which you can pay to expand to up to 24 strings of text. You can copy/paste from that list to a character-specific list of 3 strings of text, and you can pay on a character by character basis to expand that to 6 strings of text. Or you can open notepad in a separate window and get infinity strings of text for your account, to be assigned to your characters as you please, for free. Until they ban everyone running GW2 on Windows for violating TOS.

No, build templates are separate from equipment templates. Build templates are just lists of skills and traits; they're purely a UI shorthand. Equipment templates are actually an entire separate set of equipment slots, but set up so the same item can exist in multiple tabs, or something like that. Not everyone who is complaining about Arenanet's approach on build templates is opposed to what they are doing with equipment templates.

I mean... they're charging you for a list of chatcodes, making you pay piecemeal for something that can be stored client-side in untold quantities at no marginal cost to Arenanet. The whole thing is a ridiculous joke. It's not like they can't do smart marketing -- Ascended cooking was a sneaky way to make garden plots more valuable, but it was framed in a way that they were giving, rather than taking. Portal tomes are a cheap, non-cash-shop convenience, but they shine the most in a shared inventory slot. They definitely could have figured out how to use client-side build templates as a way to better sell the paid equipment templates. But they didn't, and they've created something more limited and inconvenient than what a lot of people had already gotten used to having.

So ... are you a yes man? Or not That’s a horrible analogy and doesn’t even fit. We get 3 free, buy more if ya need more. And what do you think the devs put food on the table by volunteering at Anet? Seriously, shame on anyone who thinks they are entitled to be handed every little thing for free. Y’all get 3 free, so be grateful for that... Easiest way to make a counter argument against a great analogy - say it's a bad analogy.That's a horrible argument and doesn't even fit. Anet didn’t take anything away. They added build templates and gave 3 free. Can you comprehend that? Now compare it to your analogy... Every character already had three build templates, and that isn't rain on your leg.

I definitely wouldn't call it obscure, but I very strongly doubt that the majority of players use the build templates from ArcDPS. I'm sure the majority of the hardcore fractals/wvw/pvp players do use it, but the majority of players in the game wouldn't be in those hardcore groups. But a lot of the people who aren't using ArcDPS for templates are doing in part because templates aren't that critical for them. IOW, they're the people least interested in buying them anyway. The people most likely to feel exploited and angry is the very same set of people they are trying to convince to part with money.

If anything, I think it would cause less complaining if build templates were paywalled behind a one-off account upgrade that gave, like, 500 general slots and thirty saved slots per character. Wasn't surprised that gear templates are going to be paid per-character-per-template, of course, because they're the equivalent of a 19-slot bag with both more and less functionality.