Before Guild Wars 2 Releases on Steam.... Hear me out.

[mythical.6315]

They just need to include every living story season on the Steam page as a DLC. Most Steam users are used to games having DLCs so it wouldn’t be anything new. 

[TexZero.7910]

10 hours ago, Linken.6345 said:

Yes without additional cost.

How much do heart of thorns cost now and you want to incorporate season 2 and season 3 in that?

Yes your asking for things for free but locked behind an expansion purchase it still make it free since its added ontop of what you already get now at no additional cost.

Edit

When you buy a car you get the car not a car + trailer+ boat + jetski.

If you got a car + trailer + boat + jetski for the price of said car then yes everthing added with a + is free of charge.

The base game is already "free".

 

The expansions are not. Adding the story complimentry with purchase still requires a purchase. It's not "Free".

Also you're whole arguement is pretty dang baseless because you got those exact same story steps for "free" as you like to put it just for loging in. So complaining that the people who came after you somehow are getting a better deal is just wrong on so many levels. They're not getting a Boat+Car+Truck. They're getting the exact same "Car" you got.

  

7 hours ago, Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:

If Heart of Thorns is free with Path of Fire, adding a couple of Living World Seasons at no additional cost would be making them free.  That's not a 'hard distinction' to make. 

Apparently it is. I've already covered why your position is incredibly flawed above.

Edited May 9, 2022 by TexZero.7910

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

None so blind as those that will not see.

[Arewn.2368]

41 minutes ago, Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:

I don't know why people say give Season Two with Heart of Thorns, like one could somehow just purchase Heart of Thorns.  Or just purchase Path of Fire without getting Heart of Thorns.  Heart of Thorns is already free with Path of Fire.  If one is going to make that suggestion, just say Seasons Two and Three with Path of Fire. 

It's not a lot of money for an Episode:  just $2.50.  There is absolutely nothing, nor any reason, a player would need to purchase all Episodes at once.  Maybe suggest half with Gold-to-Gems and half with cash. 

Oops I mistakenly thought HoT and PoF were sold separately.

In any case, they need to review and probably simplify how the games content is purchased.

"But it's cheap!" doesn't really address the issue with the model.

The simplest/most intuitive way would have been to package Expansions with Seasons. Keep in mind this needs to be thought of from a returning/new player perspective. 

[SouthPaw.9705]

21 hours ago, Khisanth.2948 said:

What they need to do is a "Re-return to..." for the steam launch 🙂

"Join now and get these free stuff for a limited time" is a proven strategy ...

I second this.

Players only have to make a one time purchase to get the core games and now LW1. That's fractals, raids and pvp as well as WvW. 

I don't think it's beyond reason to ask for a little extra to keep the servers and quality of life /staff and developers to make a little income to further upgrades (like dx11) and just show support that they are doing a good job. 

 

I've been playing 9 years and I still only pay gems for content that I think is useful or expands on the lore. 

I hated Hot map designs but I thoroughly enjoyed the core game so I handed a few quid over to say I'm still interested in playing the game, just that Hot isn't my favourite... 

 

Sorry did that make sense? I've a few drinks after work :) 

[TexZero.7910]

4 hours ago, Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:

None so blind as those that will not see.

Using the word "Free" to describe a "Purchase" is pretty blinding i'd grant you that.

 

But hey i've got a Free house for you if you'd like, it only cost about 4.5million USD.

[Ashen.2907]

20 hours ago, Linken.6345 said:

So you should have said give them away for free then?

If the LS is bundled in with the associated expansion, eliminating the ability to buy either alone, then the LS would not be free as one would need to spend real money to get it.

[Ashen.2907]

Giving one of your products away for free in order to drive sales of another is a viable concept in general. Whether or not this would result in greater revenue than just selling both in this specific instance is a very good question, one that we lack sufficient information to answer with any degree of certainty.

Personally I like the idea of bundling LW with relevant expansions without increasing the price. This should increase the perceived value of the expansions and seems likely to significantly increase activity on maps that are currently largely dormant, improvimg the experience for all.

[Linken.6345]

2 hours ago, TexZero.7910 said:

Using the word "Free" to describe a "Purchase" is pretty blinding i'd grant you that.

 

But hey i've got a Free house for you if you'd like, it only cost about 4.5million USD.

So what am I buying for 4.5 million usd?

Want to see if a free house is something Im interested in.

Edit.

Im fine if people want to pay for example

35 for hot and season 2-3.

35 pof+ season 4 and ibs.

And 35 for eod + season 6.

I dont think this is what people in this thread is asking for tho.

Edited May 9, 2022 by Linken.6345

[Vayne.8563]

7 hours ago, Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:

None so blind as those that will not see.

Once, a long time ago, I saw a box of hostess twinkies in the supermarket, touting some prize giveaway.

It said, "No purchase necessary, details inside."

 

I couldn't actually get to the details without buying the box. Entry was free with a purchase.

 

There is indeed a difference between giving everyone Season 2 whether they buy the game or not, or giving Season 2 to people who are willing to spend on the game. One is free with purchase, one is free without purchase. They're different.

 

It's worth discussing whether free with purchase is a better option than just giving it to everyone. Season 1 is free, meaning everyone, even free to play accounts get it.

Including it in an expansion means it's free with purchase. You have to spend money to get it.

[Ashen.2907]

23 minutes ago, Vayne.8563 said:

Once, a long time ago, I saw a box of hostess twinkies in the supermarket, touting some prize giveaway.

It said, "No purchase necessary, details inside."

 

I couldn't actually get to the details without buying the box. Entry was free with a purchase.

 

There is indeed a difference between giving everyone Season 2 whether they buy the game or not, or giving Season 2 to people who are willing to spend on the game. One is free with purchase, one is free without purchase. They're different.

 

It's worth discussing whether free with purchase is a better option than just giving it to everyone. Season 1 is free, meaning everyone, even free to play accounts get it.

Including it in an expansion means it's free with purchase. You have to spend money to get it.

This.

 

By definition something is not free if one must spend money to get it. If ANet were to bundle LW with expansions, in order to drive sales of those expansions, I expect that the episodes would come out of the gemstore and would require real money be spent rather than gems.

[kharmin.7683]

The existing model satisfies the company's shareholders.  That's all that is important.

[Linken.6345]

4 minutes ago, Ashen.2907 said:

This.

 

By definition something is not free if one must spend money to get it. If ANet were to bundle LW with expansions, in order to drive sales of those expansions, I expect that the episodes would come out of the gemstore and would require real money be spent rather than gems.

So you also want to take hot away from pof and make people start paying for hot expansion again?

I mean in order to bundle season 2 and 3 to hot you have to pay for hot in some way I imagine.

Otherwise 2 seasons bundled into something that cost nothing is giving away it for free when buying another thing in this case pof.

 

[Ashen.2907]

1 minute ago, kharmin.7683 said:

The existing model satisfies the company's shareholders.  That's all that is important.

And changes to the model, if they increase revenue, would satisfy the shareholders even more.

[kharmin.7683]

8 minutes ago, Ashen.2907 said:

And changes to the model, if they increase revenue, would satisfy the shareholders even more.

This assumes that they haven't considered any changes.

[Ashen.2907]

13 minutes ago, Linken.6345 said:

So you also want to take hot away from pof and make people start paying for hot expansion again?

I mean in order to bundle season 2 and 3 to hot you have to pay for hot in some way I imagine.

Otherwise 2 seasons bundled into something that cost nothing is giving away it for free when buying another thing in this case pof.

 

Personally yes I would break up the HoT/PoF bundle. I would then price the individual expansions at about two thirds of the current bundle price. This would allow for special event sales during which they could be bundled for a short period while allowing for smaller "micro" purchases of the individual expansions that add up to a larger overall cash outlay over time.

The goal of the steam release is to increase the playerbase. The purpose of increasing the size of the player base is twofold:

1) increase revenue.

2) increase player experience by increasing activity.

The purpose of number 2 is to increase player retention. The purpose of increasing player retention is to increase revenue.

Everything comes down to increasing revenue. Some of the suggestions have the potential to have that effect if implemented correctly.

Your last sentence is incorrect. By definition if money is being spent to get something, even  if that something is bundled with something else, then it was not free.

Edited May 10, 2022 by Ashen.2907

[Ashen.2907]

1 minute ago, kharmin.7683 said:

This assumes that they haven't considered any changes.

I find it very unlikely that the shareholders are particularly involved in considering changes. But ANet have made it abundantly clear that they are looking to make changes.

[Linken.6345]

24 minutes ago, Ashen.2907 said:

I find it very unlikely that the shareholders are particularly involved in considering changes. But ANet have made it abundantly clear that they are looking to make changes.

Wait what were have Anet been abundantly clear that they will change the price/inclusion of living world bundles?

[Ashen.2907]

15 minutes ago, Linken.6345 said:

Wait what were have Anet been abundantly clear that they will change the price/inclusion of living world bundles?

He said, "any changes."

The fact that the game is being added to Steam shows that ANet is interested in changing the existing model in order to increase the player base. Being on steam means more than just having a new way to launch the game. It involves, inherently, changes to revenue generation. This is why (in part at least) existing accounts will be differentiated from steam accounts.

So, ANet has officially announced that not only are they looking at new ways to monetize the game (steam) but that they are working on changing the base game to accommodate the new monetization model. Any of the player suggestions are minor number tweaks compared to the scope of the changes ANet has committed to. I hope that they are considering various possibilities such as those raised in the various forum threads on the subject.....and I hope that they are employing people with much better understanding of marketing, consumer psychology, and monetization trends than your average forumite when making their decisions.

I would like to think that we all want the game, and ANet, to come out ahead due to the steam launch and merely disagree about exactly how to best achieve that. In my experience using lesser services/products to increase the perceived value of primary services/products with careful pricing as part of an actual long term plan/model can produce more revenue than individual price points on everything under the sun.

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

It seems is has been forgotten that playing Living World Seasons (sans Season One) already requires a purchase: the associated expansion(s).  No change there.  Thus, in the bundle with expansion suggestions, the Living World Season are moving from paid (with additional purchase) to free (with additional purchase). 

[Ashen.2907]

19 minutes ago, Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:

It seems is has been forgotten that playing Living World Seasons (sans Season One) already requires a purchase: the associated expansion(s).  No change there.  Thus, in the bundle with expansion suggestions, the Living World Season are moving from paid (with additional purchase) to free (with additional purchase). 

I honestly did not know that you couldnt buy a d play a LW chapter without first buying an expansion. Thank you for the clarification. 

[Linken.6345]

1 hour ago, Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:

It seems is has been forgotten that playing Living World Seasons (sans Season One) already requires a purchase: the associated expansion(s).  No change there.  Thus, in the bundle with expansion suggestions, the Living World Season are moving from paid (with additional purchase) to free (with additional purchase). 

You are correct if we only talk about season 3+

[Vayne.8563]

2 hours ago, Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:

It seems is has been forgotten that playing Living World Seasons (sans Season One) already requires a purchase: the associated expansion(s).  No change there.  Thus, in the bundle with expansion suggestions, the Living World Season are moving from paid (with additional purchase) to free (with additional purchase). 

Except for Season 2, which is what we're talking about. Season 2 currently does not require HoT or PoF or EoD in order to purchase it. 

There are people who come back to the game, having never bought an expansion.  I know Season 2 doesn't require an expansion because it came out before expansions. With all free codes floating around right now as bonuses from Amazon Prime and Twitch or whoever is doing it now (I got some of those from Humblebundle over the years), there are people who can buy Season 2 without having ever spent a cent.  Making it free would give it to those people for free, not requiring them to spend a cent on the game to get all content pre-HOT.

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

Are we only talking about Season 2?  Seems we've seen Seasons 3, 4, 5 (The Icebrood Saga) and even Season 6 bandied about. 

If we are only speaking about Season Two, again why the suggestion it be bundled with Heart of Thorn (which is really suggesting it be bundled with Path of Fire). 

Also, no Living World Seasons require an expansion to purchase them; only to access them (yes, 3,4,5 and likely 6). 

Edited May 10, 2022 by Inculpatus cedo.9234
typo

[kharmin.7683]

23 minutes ago, Dante.1508 said:

Are you by chance a shareholder. You act like one.

No, but I understand how businesses work.  With many of the requests that filter through the forum, I don't believe that a lot of other people have a realistic idea of how and why companies make decisions.  /shrug