Yearly/Semi-Yearly Expansions Sounds a lot like Icebrood Saga we pay for.

[Pifil.5193]

Double post.

Edited February 19, 2023 by Pifil.5193
Double post, please delete.

[Pifil.5193]

On 2/18/2023 at 9:34 AM, Izzy.2951 said:

Im sorry to tell you @Firebeard.1746 but Kozumi is Right.

The translation of the new plan is: okay we are gonna have a decent but not large team working into Gw2, we are gonna try to make content with the least posible resources while trying to milk as much money as posible for other projects or directly for NCsoft pockets. Forget about major features that would require effort like a new race, raids, spvp or new pvp modes, wvw when "alliances are done", festivals etc... They are just gonna give us the minimum.

 

I have to agree, I feel like their focus is shifting to other projects again. Gw2 is falling back in priorities again.

 

If they can bring out a high quality new expansion every year or year and a half with 3-4 good and interesting maps, a good feature set and a decent storyline that won't feel rushed in order to cram it into that window then that's super. I'd love that.

 

These expansions need to add something interesting, something good beyond the cookie cutter list of two maps at start, one later, strikes a fractal and so on. It's going to get pretty dull and predictable if they just crank out what is, basically, IBS up to but not including Champions again and again. 

 

The end of February release will tell us a lot. It's the first of these after expansion "quarterly" releases after all (despite coming a year after release). If the quality is poor, the map or story is dull or there's nothing interesting in terms of rewards or features around it then that bodes ill for this new direction.

 

 

[Forum Moderator.3074]

Hey fellas remember to keep discussions civil and avoid using rude posts or getting into arguments.

[Izzy.2951]

8 hours ago, Gehenna.3625 said:

And sure, I also think that most of the profits from GW2 will go into this new project. But that's normal business practice, what can I say?

 

And I'm not justifying low effort content but I am being realistic about what to expect from a 10-year old MMO that's never had the success of WoW or FF XIV.

 

1) That is really disrespetful from a customer perspective. That you are saying you are hard focusing on gw2, and then thats not the reality. After lots of hype before EoD and all the community has given in terms of playerbase and money since half 2021 till now.

2) GW2 had the same amount of attention or players as wow or final fantasy when it launched, but the game didnt live to the expectations, and core gw2 was simply bad. 

Then if they are gonna put all the profit they are gaining into a "gw3" and then kill gw2 as they did with gw1. They are gonna be again in a position where they only have 1 game that give them profit and lets see how it works. Instead of having multiple games and giving attention to all of them. And growing the company, just as other companies do: riot, hi rez... even ncsoft.

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

I guess I'm out of the loop....what other game/project has ArenaNet announced that is repeatedly referenced in this/other threads??

[DarkSoul.2348]

Voicing my thoughts on this, To me it might me an okay model IF the quality is still there and it is not replacing the system of active players getting access to living world content for Free, also just trying to keep an open mind for what is being planned however i would rather quality over quantity but both is nice too, Rewarding the active player base is a good idea imo it makes me more likely to give back in the gem store when i can and on full expansions rather than be completely paywalled, i think the living worlds/Saga stuff works nicely so hoping it will be as good.

[EquinoxPower.4783]

1 hour ago, Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:

I guess I'm out of the loop....what other game/project has ArenaNet announced that is repeatedly referenced in this/other threads??

There was massive layoffs during 2019 I believe which revealed that they were working on some other projects, they were cancelled after the layoffs.

There are rumors now that ANet is helping Sony develop the Horizon MMO.

Edit1:
Just wanted to add why people are bringing this up, after LWS4 they said that there wouldn't be any more xpacs and announced IBS which would be, by their own words, LWS but with expansion level content. Alot of people didn't like that change and after the fiasco IBS was people got a bad taste on their mouth, also after those side projects were revealed because of the layoffs people got mad at ANet because they basically were neglacting Guild Wars 2.

With this annoucement and with the rumor I mentioned people are basically feeling a deja vu.

Edited February 19, 2023 by EquinoxPower.4783
more info, typos

[Tiviana.2650]

On 2/13/2023 at 8:38 PM, Asum.4960 said:

This isn't IBS. Living World has actively been killing this game, slowly and painfully, by being incredibly expensive to develop and sucking up the entire companies resources, for not much return. 

All we got was an oversaturation of OW Maps that either died shortly after release, or became a new economy deflating zerg farm spot, killing the last one, some mediocre story to play through once or twice, and endless, boring achievement grinds - for the cost of all other game modes and systems having to be abandoned and slowly whithering away. 

 

This promises still more than enough Story content and maps, but also Strikes, Fractals, Challenge Modes, ingame Rewards, System and Reward Updates and whatever "new gameplay and combat features" might entail, which very much so could be new Elite Specs, Core Skill/Weapon additions or otherwise (potentially rotated in scope every other expansion or the like). 

Additionally we know they are also investing into gamesmodes like WvW again. 

 

It honestly blows my mind that people are complaining about the outlined direction, or even remotely compare it to LW/IBS - GW2's biggest financial failure, which this, if anything, is the answer/response to. 

How well and timely they can actually execute this is a whole other question - but this is pretty much exactly what GW2 needs. 

I gladly pay for actual quality and repeatable content, updates to systems, ingame reward structures and co. 

This is genuinely the most promising Blog post in well over half a decade.

/E: And in a world where people, fsr, gladly fork over 25€/$ for a new texture and at best slight remodel of an existing asset and skeleton in form of a mount skin, or gamble their money way with Black Lion Chest lootboxes, surely we can agree that multiple entire game maps, new assets, voice acting, instanced content/quality repeatable gameplay, reward system, Masteries, new game systems as well as new gameplay and combat features, more frequent and better game balance updates and so on, is well worth the ~25€/$ these expansions are likely to cost yearly. 

The value proposition here (and of Expansions in general) is insane, and GW2's biggest strengths have always been the Gameplay/Core systems and fair Business model - it's about time GW2 plays to it's strengths. 

Companies invest into what makes money (and usually short-sightedly so). You want to pay for content and systems. The more a companies revenue is tied to actually producing quality content (rather than just MTX and the like), the better for the consumer.

 

 

if these are your thoughts and you believe they should make money by mini expansions instead of free lws, then why not nix the paid mini expansions and slap a sub fee on the game? I mean by the time you pay for 2 or more mini content patches a year a sub fee would be the same. In mmos there are 2 types, ones that you pay a sub for and all content is included , or ones you play for free and pay through micro transactions to get stuff. People are not going to pay what equates to a sub fee every year and still have to buy things from the gem store. If you are going that route you better start putting skins and utility in the game. 

[Asum.4960]

20 minutes ago, Tiviana.2650 said:

if these are your thoughts and you believe they should make money by mini expansions instead of free lws, then why not nix the paid mini expansions and slap a sub fee on the game? I mean by the time you pay for 2 or more mini content patches a year a sub fee would be the same. In mmos there are 2 types, ones that you pay a sub for and all content is included , or ones you play for free and pay through micro transactions to get stuff. People are not going to pay what equates to a sub fee every year and still have to buy things from the gem store. If you are going that route you better start putting skins and utility in the game. 

1. Because I like to buy content directly and prefer to have the ability to vote with my wallet - plus not buying one of those expansions doesn't bar you entirely from playing the game like with a sub-fee. You are free to skip some, take breaks and return at your leisure - they aren't remotely the same.

2. GW2's last two expansions were 30€ base - these smaller yearly expansions are said to be cheaper. I don't know any Sub-Fee MMO in which 20-30€ gives you a yearly sub (generally it's ~180€). We are talking <2€ a month here, if you want to look at it that way. The follow up patches to the yearly expansions were announced to be part of that expansion purchase. So that's it.

3. I don't know of any sub-fee MMO that doesn't also have a cash shop at this point. WoW for example, as far as I'm aware, is 15$ Monthly Subscription, 40$ Expansions, plus Cashshop (featuring 25$ Mounts and the like). 

 

 

[Gibson.4036]

3 hours ago, Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:

I guess I'm out of the loop....what other game/project has ArenaNet announced that is repeatedly referenced in this/other threads??

In addition to what was said above, if you check out ArenaNet’s hiring page you’ll see that they are hiring staff for an “unannounced project”.

[Sobx.1758]

1 hour ago, Tiviana.2650 said:

if these are your thoughts and you believe they should make money by mini expansions instead of free lws, then why not nix the paid mini expansions and slap a sub fee on the game? I mean by the time you pay for 2 or more mini content patches a year a sub fee would be the same. In mmos there are 2 types, ones that you pay a sub for and all content is included , or ones you play for free and pay through micro transactions to get stuff. People are not going to pay what equates to a sub fee every year and still have to buy things from the gem store. If you are going that route you better start putting skins and utility in the game. 

Not having exact (unless you somehow have them, then share values and source please) values like actual release time between the expansions or their price aside... it really feels your calculations here are WAY off. Please show what numbers you've used to reach the conclusion you did.

 

Now even with the calculations aside, I'd still rather pay per content released (=expansion) than for a possibility to play the game (even if it's "to play the game beyond core", which for some reason some people apparently see as a grey area, when it's not one?). I don't want to basically keep paying to log in. I also don't want to see or feel I somehow need to play this month because I already paid for it. I want to play and not play whenever I want without sub pressuring me into or against it. If I dislike the expansion, I'll just not get it, big deal.

[Pifil.5193]

30 minutes ago, Gibson.4036 said:

In addition to what was said above, if you check out ArenaNet’s hiring page you’ll see that they are hiring staff for an “unannounced project”.

Yep, currently nine roles open across a number of disciplines for an "Unannounced Project". There's also one open for GW2 and a couple that don't specify.

 

If anyone thinks that their focus is fully on gw2 then they're fooling themselves.

[Astralporing.1957]

3 hours ago, Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:

I guess I'm out of the loop....what other game/project has ArenaNet announced that is repeatedly referenced in this/other threads??

Nobody really knows, but they do seem to have an Unreal Engine project running somewhere in the background for which they're recruiting. Also, they were doing a lot of hiring before/after EoD, and yet their content creation capabilities at this moment seem to be even lower than at the early IBS times (when a significant number of Anet devs were working for projects other than GW2).

Of course, it is possible that they are hiring people with Unreal Engine experience for jobs that have nothing to do with UE, and that their devs nowaday are just not capable of even close to the efficiency levels the IBS-era devs were capable of. Is it likely, though? Personally i don't think so.

[Gibson.4036]

I guess this shouldn’t feel too unfamiliar.

Three campaigns, an expansion, then mini-expansions to bridge to the next thing…

 

Edited February 20, 2023 by Gibson.4036

[Epsilon Indi.2031]

I'm gonna post what I think is going to happen here.

We'll get an expansion.  Now this expansion will have the following
1) New Maps
2) New Masteries
3) New Story Content
4) New Elite Specs (Maybe?)

However!  The new maps will come out in the LW format where one is released once per 3-4 months.  New masteries will also follow how they were in HoT, one per map.  The story content will follow the same LW pattern.  All of this will be a bit more l inked now that ANet can guarantee whoever has the expansion has access to all the masteries meaning maps can utilize masteries from other chapters in their design.  Elite specializations I'm not sure how those would be delivered in this system.  Perhaps they'd come in groups of three per map release or all at once.

This would be the trade-off for more fractals, strikes, WvW, & pvp updates, I suppose.  Which I really hope that's what they're doing and they're not just saying that, delivering once, then focusing on whatever side-projects they're making again.

[Lily.1935]

14 hours ago, Pifil.5193 said:

 

I have to agree, I feel like their focus is shifting to other projects again. Gw2 is falling back in priorities again.

 

If they can bring out a high quality new expansion every year or year and a half with 3-4 good and interesting maps, a good feature set and a decent storyline that won't feel rushed in order to cram it into that window then that's super. I'd love that.

 

These expansions need to add something interesting, something good beyond the cookie cutter list of two maps at start, one later, strikes a fractal and so on. It's going to get pretty dull and predictable if they just crank out what is, basically, IBS up to but not including Champions again and again. 

 

The end of February release will tell us a lot. It's the first of these after expansion "quarterly" releases after all (despite coming a year after release). If the quality is poor, the map or story is dull or there's nothing interesting in terms of rewards or features around it then that bodes ill for this new direction.

 

 

I'm not sure where people are getting this notion from. Considering that the studio had announced that guild wars 2 moving forward would be their primary focus. Personally, I'd prefer it if they had the resources to produce other products, but I'm not an expert in the field so I don't know if that's the case. Has Arena Net mentioned this anywhere that they're re-reshifting their focus or is this speculation?

[ugrakarma.9416]

All these discussions make me look at gw2 like a patient who has a time to die, and the only discussion is how to make this passage more humanly dignified, without suffering.

Speculation aside, however, I believe it is right for them to experiment with new business models if they believe the old model is no longer appropriate.

Another thing, which has been repeated many times is the issue of Steam, many users point out that the current model of Living World is not appropriate for Steam because it sounds like a scam for steam users. If so, there is no reason to panic. This is the steam model: xpacs, mini-xpacs and "bundles packs".

Edited February 20, 2023 by ugrakarma.9416

[Monika Mu Phi.4378]

1 hour ago, Sobx.1758 said:

..I'd still rather pay per content released (=expansion) than for a possibility to play the game (even if it's "to play the game beyond core", which for some reason some people apparently see as a grey area, when it's not one?). I don't want to basically keep paying to log in. I also don't want to see or feel I somehow need to play this month because I already paid for it. I want to play and not play whenever I want without sub pressuring me into or against it. If I dislike the expansion, I'll just not get it, big deal.

I agree - I'd rather have the choice to pay for an expansion rather than a required sub fee to play everything. 

 

I also agree, when ANet is ready with all of the details, there needs to be transparency about what we are purchasing, how much it will cost, and how often.  Perhaps it's on the way, and they're just not ready to provide that info right now. 

It seems simple to me.  Promises should be the features that can be produced in the time given.  Surprises could be a mix of top-secret story twists, and features that are in progress which may or may not be ready in time. 

We all want to see ANet thrive as a company.  It is wise for ANet to continue earning and keeping GW/GW2 player trust, which can be done by using a player-centric philosophy:  

• We need to be assured the money we pay for these mini expansions is being used for that purpose, first and foremost.
• Responsibly budget funding for new projects without sacrificing your current product.  We will cheer your successes!
• While planning new expansion (+ releases), include something new for all modes - PvE, PvP, and WvW.
• Recognize elites AND casuals (and everyone between) ARE your player base.
• Make all items able to be earned in each mode, rather than having to mix and mingle modes.  Let us "play the way we want to play".
• Use the forum, surveys, and beta tests to increase communication and buy-in. 

 

GW2 Beta testing with the blue pop-up mini questionnaires were so much fun and made me feel like part of the community!  How about offering a Pre-Purchase option that would include:

1) beta access for 1 to 2 weeks, with zero progress retained,

2) ending with a player feedback survey for each content type tested, which

3) rewards 3 Black Lion/Gem Store items of the player's choice AND a special Title which refers to beta testing and adds tiers with each pre-purchase/beta survey.

 

 

[soulknight.9620]

You guys caught anet by their lie! Gj at that! Ofc any shady company that wants to ditch a product updates its core engine to dx11 while putting loads of work into doing so. Well you know... thats how most companies do... or do they?  

[Blazing Rathalos.1904]

21 hours ago, Pifil.5193 said:

 

These expansions need to add something interesting, something good beyond the cookie cutter list of two maps at start, one later, strikes a fractal and so on. It's going to get pretty dull and predictable if they just crank out what is, basically, IBS up to but not including Champions again and again. 

 

Well, we already know it won't be just those things:

Quote

The first release in an expansion cycle is the launch point for a new story arc, bringing with it two new open-world maps, two Strike Missions, new gameplay and combat features, new Masteries, and new rewards. In the following quarterly updates, we’ll add another open-world map, additional story chapters, challenge modes for the Strike Missions, a new fractal dungeon and challenge mode, new rewards, and additions to the new systems introduced in that expansion.

 

Basically all of this hinges on what Arenanet is able to deliver in "gameplay and combat features". Until we actually know that, I don't think we can determine whether this will be worth it out. This will also be a major indication of how much resources the studio is actually putting into the game still.

 

Just a waiting game, in the end.

[Pifil.5193]

6 hours ago, Blazing Rathalos.1904 said:

 

Well, we already know it won't be just those things:

 

Basically all of this hinges on what Arenanet is able to deliver in "gameplay and combat features". Until we actually know that, I don't think we can determine whether this will be worth it out. This will also be a major indication of how much resources the studio is actually putting into the game still.

 

Just a waiting game, in the end.

 

Well the IBS had quite a few "new gameplay and combat features" too.  Including the United Legions Waystation and the buffs from the Slayer tracks in the DRMs.

 

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Icebrood_Saga_mastery_tracks

 

But you're right, it's a waiting game. They've had a year to prepare this upcoming EoD release so we'll get a hint of what they're planning on delivering when that arrives.

[Epsilon Indi.2031]

13 hours ago, Lily.1935 said:

I'm not sure where people are getting this notion from. Considering that the studio had announced that guild wars 2 moving forward would be their primary focus. Personally, I'd prefer it if they had the resources to produce other products, but I'm not an expert in the field so I don't know if that's the case. Has Arena Net mentioned this anywhere that they're re-reshifting their focus or is this speculation?

The problem is, this isn't the first time ANet has promised to deliver or focus on other game modes in tandem with LW/expansion release only to not do it, or do it once and drop it entirely after

[Seth Moonshadow.2710]

I can see paying $103.96 ($25.99 one for each of us) per year. But if they are going to produce more each year, they need to make $$$, then I don't really see that as being sustainable for us. $25.99 is a fare price IMHO for 3 maps (two at the start, one later), some story, and repeatable content (events, meta, Champs). "New Rewards" not so much once my legendary collections is complete there isn't much left in the game to do except my favorite part: Map exploration & Completion, Events, Champs, World Bosses, Meta Events, and Festivals.

For many the game is still JUST a GAME and not a second of even first job! A form of Entertainment. When it becomes WORK then we will find other forms of "Entertainment". "Entertainment is a form of activity that holds the attention and interest of an audience or gives pleasure and delight." When that no longer applies it's time to go. Keep the "Challenges" in the areas that WANT THEM, Strikes with challenge motes active, Fractals with challenge motes active / T4, RAIDs (if those are still a thing?) with challenge motes active. PvE doesn't want to just #1 that's true, but you know the level players want. Stop trying to change players and embrace them. In other words make that first run/instance PvE level and the more difficult/"meta" style play for the "Challenge Motes"! After all The name says it!

I'd also like to see this included:

14 hours ago, Monika Mu Phi.4378 said:

We all want to see ANet thrive as a company.  It is wise for ANet to continue earning and keeping GW/GW2 player trust, which can be done by using a player-centric philosophy:  

• We need to be assured the money we pay for these mini expansions is being used for that purpose, first and foremost.
• Responsibly budget funding for new projects without sacrificing your current product.  We will cheer your successes!
• While planning new expansion (+ releases), include something new for all modes - PvE, PvP, and WvW.
• Recognize elites AND casuals (and everyone between) ARE your player base.
• Make all items able to be earned in each mode, rather than having to mix and mingle modes.  Let us "play the way we want to play".
• Use the forum, surveys, and beta tests to increase communication and buy-in. 

 

GW2 Beta testing with the blue pop-up mini questionnaires were so much fun and made me feel like part of the community!  How about offering a Pre-Purchase option that would include:

1) beta access for 1 to 2 weeks, with zero progress retained,

2) ending with a player feedback survey for each content type tested, which

3) rewards 3 Black Lion/Gem Store items of the player's choice AND a special Title which refers to beta testing and adds tiers with each pre-purchase/beta survey.

 

 

I think the biggest mistake from the post  was lack of information regarding price point and planned frequency of Release/Expansion cycle. Given that those have been very unstable over the years from 3 week releases to a year long drought. More precise information would have helped keep things less dramatic.

[Seth Moonshadow.2710]

3 hours ago, Andifulated.3482 said:

The problem is, this isn't the first time ANet has promised to deliver or focus on other game modes in tandem with LW/expansion release only to not do it, or do it once and drop it entirely after

Exactly! I think they should have, by now, ended their "Exploring" phase of what they can do with the code and game and should have a VERY good idea of what they SHOULD be doing!  This "we’ve put a renewed emphasis on developing Guild Wars 2 with a player-centric approach" statement in different forms keeps coming around. I just hope they do actually return to the original Manifesto put out by Mike O'Brian

The question is are they going to "STICK WITH IT"!?  What they have laid out CAN WORK !

[Albadaran.1283]

If they add new mounts, new skill sets and new professions, I have no problem with paying for it. But I'm not sure if I'd buy when its just a side story, with new lands and monsters. Still I'm very curious about all those vague continent spots on the map. O well, we will see.