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

[soulknight.9620]

Sometimes i question if a simple reading skill is too much to ask for in this community. 

There will not be 3 expansions per year. Its literary said that there will be an expac with additional content every 3 months until next expac. Judging by the phrasing i would think they are saying something like an expac every 1-2 years with additional content drops in between. And you only pay for the expac, not for every content drop. 

As far as model go, it hasnt changed a bit. It was always buy-to-play. The f2p part of gw2 is nothing more than a demo for new players to try before buying the game. Its has always been this way. 

As for the whole idea, im glad they finally made it this way. Now they can finally focus on developing content and receiving payment for it instead of relying on gem store to make a revenue of some sort. 20-30 euro a year is quite acceptible price for the amount of content they plan on shipping. Its still by far the cheapest mmo out there. 

[Jukhy.2431]

Makes me wonder about the reading comprehension skills of some forum users here when you mix the expansions and updates as same, even when the article quite clearly defines them as different things. Expansions are what you pay for and the quarterly updates are added content for the related expansion. Nowhere it states that you have to pay for the updates.

[Chyro.1462]

I feel like I'm missing context. Can someone link where these 'mini expansions' going forward are mentioned?

[Jukhy.2431]

6 minutes ago, Chyro.1462 said:

I feel like I'm missing context. Can someone link where these 'mini expansions' going forward are mentioned?

https://www.guildwars2.com/en-gb/news/studio-update-guild-wars-2-in-2023/

[Vayne.8563]

2 hours ago, Lily.1935 said:

Fractals was announced before its release. And it was announced as the next dungeon, so it too was announced and it was intended as fulfilling the promise of new dungeons. Although its quite different in feel, You're incorrect here.

Perhaps what I said was a bit clumsily worded. What I mean is, don't speculate on things not announced. If its not in the blog posts its better to assume its not there than to think its coming. With this announcement it was specifically excluded and its exclusion speaks volumes more than you think.

We've had this happen before, where the community would believe that because something hadn't been added for a while that it would be announced with the next thing only to be disappointed. This is one of those cases. I'd be happy to be wrong here.

I don't speculate on stuff before I see it because it's silly to do so. Or rather, I can speculation all I want, but I don't assume what I've speculated is somehow definitely going to be true.  And I don't report those speculations as some sort of truth.

 

This community as often expressed fears as truth, they've done it throughout the years, and sometimes the fears come to pass, but in my experience, more often than not, it's just people who aren't patient enough to wait and see.

 

I lost track of how many people said there wouldn't be an expansion before HoT came out, and how many said there wouldn't be one after PoF came out.

At the end of the day it's all just guesswork. And if people express it as guesswork, I wouldn't have a problem with it.

[Epsilon Indi.2031]

The way I see it, they're going the way of the ESO model ($30 chapter release with extra DLC released later).  I'm just hoping that ANet will actually be consistentt in quality and will actually provide new things in these smaller expansions.

[quake.9023]

they need a business model thats profitable enough, that enables them to push out good and new content regularly. so if its optional to pay for them to push out content consistently? sign me up.

[kharmin.7683]

19 minutes ago, quake.9023 said:

they need a business model thats profitable enough, that enables them to push out good and new content regularly. so if its optional to pay for them to push out content consistently? sign me up.

You can do that now.  You have the option to buy gems on whatever schedule you desire.

[Cyninja.2954]

9 minutes ago, kharmin.7683 said:

You can do that now.  You have the option to buy gems on whatever schedule you desire.

The difference here though:

- in the current model, they are selling or incentivizing purchase of gems via the gem store

versus

- in the new model the incentive lies with purchasing actual game content

Both approaches dictate what the studio will focus on given that it's what they are trying to make money off of.

So, what is it you want: a focus on the gem store (which will certainly not go away entirely) or a focus on content?

Let me guess, the answer for most players will be: I want free stuff and Anet not focusing on the gem store. Right? RIGHT?

Edited February 14, 2023 by Cyninja.2954

[Gehenna.3625]

Just now, kharmin.7683 said:

You can do that now.  You have the option to buy gems on whatever schedule you desire.

Sure but for Anet that's income that can fluctuate a lot and is less stable than expansions I would think, since more people buy expansions. Besides, I prefer paying for content since companies will generally give more focus to where their income comes from. 

It also takes care of the LW issue where when you play during their release you get it for free but if you weren't there you have to pay for it. And by making expansions more frequently, you don't have a lot of time between financial peaks anymore.

So, I'm not saying you're wrong, but I also see why they're going this way.

[Gibson.4036]

One can blame a lack of reading comprehension for the reactions, but a big part is also the lack of detail in the blog post. A lot of this comes down to how often we’ll get the 2 zone, 2 strike mini-xpacs, and their actual price point.

Both details were left vague, letting skeptics imagine $25 expansions twice a year with one “free” quarterly update a piece and copaholics imagining $15 expansions every other year with robust “free” updates every quarter between.

[soulknight.9620]

25 minutes ago, kharmin.7683 said:

You can do that now.  You have the option to buy gems on whatever schedule you desire.

You do realise that any company has only one goal - getting profit. And if only thing that they can monetise is cash shop then a lot of resources of that company would be allocated to filling cash shop and not actually producing good quality content. The whole "korean style mmo" is built around that. 

I and many other players would like to see more gameplay content more frequently and not just cash shop updates. This new approach actually allows anet to give us more frequent content with less emphasys on cash shop drops to generate that profit. 

We live in a capitalist world which means if company isnt making enough money then there is no point in sustaining a project. Especially in the current situation where every company tends to cut pay and fire people to compensate for the crysis which still persists. 

[Dreams.3128]

5 hours ago, soulknight.9620 said:

Sometimes i question if a simple reading skill is too much to ask for in this community. 

There will not be 3 expansions per year. Its literary said that there will be an expac with additional content every 3 months until next expac. Judging by the phrasing i would think they are saying something like an expac every 1-2 years with additional content drops in between. And you only pay for the expac, not for every content drop. 

Let's post this again for people that don't understand, because people are scarily lacking reading comprehension skills. I feel like I need a highlighter and to bold this particular piece of text because people SERIOUSLY think they are paying more when in reality they are paying less. 

It is like ESO or WoW or FF where they release an expansion FIRST and then they release LW stuff. Can people please, for the love of the Five, just read the passage three more times before posting.

[Taclism.2406]

The post feels to me like it essentially means "game reached peak maturity (as far as product life cycle goes), time to crank up the monetization to bank more as it declines".  Part of the process to, soon or later, switch to their unannounced project as their main game.

It doesnt mean the content we'll get until then will be bad ; but I'm not exactly hopeful since they have a huge incentive to keep working on the new thing for the next expansion rather than bugfixing / polishing and we've all seen how slow that was anyway with DE

Waiting for the detailed post to be more convincing, but so far I doubt it'll bring anything good for players

[Astralporing.1957]

1 hour ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

The difference here though:

- in the current model, they are selling or incentivizing purchase of gems via the gem store

versus

- in the new model the incentive lies with purchasing actual game content

Both approaches dictate what the studio will focus on given that it's what they are trying to make money off of.

So, what is it you want: a focus on the gem store (which will certainly not go away entirely) or a focus on content?

Let me guess, the answer for most players will be: I want free stuff and Anet not focusing on the gem store. Right? RIGHT?

Do you honestly believe that this will make them ease on gemstore? Because you make it sound as if increasing income through base game would mean shifting stuff away from gemstore, when it's by no means a given (or even expected).

[Gehenna.3625]

1 hour ago, Taclism.2406 said:

The post feels to me like it essentially means "game reached peak maturity (as far as product life cycle goes), time to crank up the monetization to bank more as it declines".  Part of the process to, soon or later, switch to their unannounced project as their main game.

I don't share your pessimism, feelings after all are just that: feelings. Time will tell of course, but this move seems to be aimed at the longevity of this game. And of course they need to make a new game. Anet cannot survive on GW2 alone indefinitely.

1 hour ago, Taclism.2406 said:

It doesnt mean the content we'll get until then will be bad ; but I'm not exactly hopeful since they have a huge incentive to keep working on the new thing for the next expansion rather than bugfixing / polishing and we've all seen how slow that was anyway with DE

They're talking a more balanced approach to content releases as the article states: 

...we’re taking a more balanced approach that will allow us to provide more support for popular game modes, make frequent quality-of-life improvements to core gameplay systems like professions, deliver new features, and expand the world of Tyria...

So if anything there will be a bigger chance on bugfixing/polishing than before.

[Pifil.5193]

19 minutes ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

Do you honestly believe that this will make them ease on gemstore? Because you make it sound as if increasing income through base game would mean shifting stuff away from gemstore, when it's by no means a given (or even expected).

 

Yeah, the gem store output didn't drop after any of the existing expansions and I don't expect it will now.

 

If anything the expansions drive the gem store a lot (glider skins, mount skins, now skiffs, rods and jade bot skins). I don't see that changing.

[Vancho.8750]

3 hours ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

The difference here though:

- in the current model, they are selling or incentivizing purchase of gems via the gem store

versus

- in the new model the incentive lies with purchasing actual game content

Both approaches dictate what the studio will focus on given that it's what they are trying to make money off of.

So, what is it you want: a focus on the gem store (which will certainly not go away entirely) or a focus on content?

Let me guess, the answer for most players will be: I want free stuff and Anet not focusing on the gem store. Right? RIGHT?

What if they do take your money for content AND pump the gem store to the max? 
Also time and time again the gaming industry has shown that this types of reasoning do not matter, money matters. 
There is the fact that getting more money doesn't equal getting better product, it actually goes in the opposite direction in many cases, since the mantra is get more for less.
I'm not saying that they shouldn't be payed, but when you read into the whole thing it seems that the content development is getting dialed down. Its like its IBS all over again but payed and Arenanet does not have really good track record from the past so people will cynical till they get a proof.   

[Jimbru.6014]

The impression I had after watching Mukluk's video about the announcement is that the first big installment of each expansion would be bought,  then the additional quarterly extensions of it would be free. But we'll see how it actually plays out in execution.

What worries me is that ANet has committed to the players to maintain a certain schedule and pace of development, and being an engineering type myself, I know how dangerous creating expectations can be. As mechanics would say, every "twenty minute job" is just one broken bolt from becoming a three day ordeal. So I just hope they're not biting off more than they can chew, and their plans leave suitable allowance for Murphy's Law. Once again, we'll see how it actually plays out.

Edited February 14, 2023 by Jimbru.6014

[Naxos.2503]

I honestly dont mind paying for content, so long as the effort it deserve is put in. If it's just pushing reskins for equipment, and a mastery that is limited to one map, which is slowly expanded with barely a difference of atmosphere and content, then it's very simple : I wont pay for it.

If time is taken to design equipment and make it not only varied but Fitting in the world, if the mastery makes sense and isn't just a one time gimmick, and can change gameplay across many previous maps, and if the map is expanded in a meaningful, thematic and contextualized way, then I will happily pay for it.

 

Just because they want to sign off on Living World doesn't mean the world they're making should be less alive. That's what I reproach to the latest releases. It's not alive, I dont feel the warmth, I dont watch fleshed out characters. I watch stereotypical characters with little to no history interract with eachother in cliche ways, in a pretty cardboard world.

When I brought friends to the game, I sold it to them like so : It's a rare thing, to see a game that was made with love. I haven't seen that love in a long while, and that's what the game needs more than frequent expansions. It need TLC.

[voltaicbore.8012]

9 hours ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

TBH, at this point it looks to me like an attempt to release LS packages (maybe slightly bigger than usual, but still much smaller than normal expansions) rebranded as expansions for PR reasons, and have us pay for that.

I truly, truly hope this is the case. I got most of LW for free, but would have gladly paid for it (and in fact did, when I missed the login windows). I think maintaining the status quo but just getting more of us to pay for it makes sense.

Institutions of any kind are extremely hard (and often costly) to change. So I'm not being specifically pessimistic about Anet when I say this, but I sincerely doubt the studio's ability to truly and radically change how they do things. I don't think they, with just a bit of corporate soul searching, magically adopt a the announced cadence and still maintain quality. In fact, I believe they will immediately miss both the release pace, and fall very short of the "expansion" quality players are happy to pay for.

Instead, the more attainable (and often, more successful) approach is to just do a bit more of what you currently do well, and try to do less of what you're bad at and can afford to abandon. For me, that would mean Anet pushes just a bit more focus on big expacs as the flagship content, even if it still takes many years to get one of them out. In the meantime, they can do less ambitious LW releases that try fewer dumb experimental things, but just get us to pay 10-15 bucks a pop for them.

The end result is that Anet gets to spend a little less time on LW (since they're not using those to push the envelope too far, but just to give a few more maps/cutscenes/events), more of us pay money for LW, and they get to spend a bit more time on expacs so we don't end up with another hollow farce like New Kaineng City. At least that's how I'd like to imagine it.

[Bast.7253]

2 hours ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

Do you honestly believe that this will make them ease on gemstore? Because you make it sound as if increasing income through base game would mean shifting stuff away from gemstore, when it's by no means a given (or even expected).

People thinking we will be getting in game skins at an increased rate over gem store are delusional. 
 

At best we might get some sets similar to the season 4 sets. Which is good. But if I’m not mistaken the gemstore stuff is outsourced.

 

Much more likely that we will get new maps, story instances, a strike mission, and more rgb IBS type masteries. 
 

This is reboxing of living world into something more profitable so they can fund their other IP with reduced staff. We may see some qol and system updates but I’ll believe it when I see it. 
 

I also wouldn’t expect more than two maps at expansion release with two more before the next expansion. “Smaller expansions” to me implies even smaller than EoD which was significantly smaller than HoT and PoF. 
 

 

[lezbefriends.7516]

Lots of people with crystal balls in this thread.

[Naxos.2503]

Just now, lezbefriends.7516 said:

Lots of people with crystal balls in this thread.

Mostly people that dont know what to expect really. That plan can go either way, but some got disappointed by past experiences and would rather avoid a repeat, while others understandbly want more content without draught and are willing to take a shot.

I'm of the first category, but again, so long as they stick the landing, I could go for it. Personally I dont see faster content as a good thing, because by definition, faster rarely goes in hand with quality, so if that's the only thing that changes, I'm unlikely to be satisfied. I'll simply stay cautious, as will others. It's not so much a crystal ball as not cutting them a blank check really, which I think is fair

[MarkoGold.7126]

So i have read the https://www.guildwars2.com/en-gb/news/studio-update-guild-wars-2-in-2023/ post and if im reading this right they have split the living season team to one that works on game improvements and one that does expansions, so does that mean instead of free living season episodes we will have to buy them in the expansions that are gonna come more often maybe once every 3-4 months or so 🙂 ? how is this not just paid dlc masquarading as an ls episodes.