Poll - Would you pay more for a bigger expansion?

[Lucius.2140]

Assuming theres a content -> price ratio equivalent to Secrets of the Obscure.

You pay 50 $$ then you get twice SoTo, etc.

Edited November 13 by Lucius.2140

[TexZero.7910]

SoTo hasn't been worth what it was priced at to begin with so no.

[Lucius.2140]

Added that as an option, can you please vote there?

Is the last one.

Edited November 13 by Lucius.2140

[ShadowCatz.8437]

2 hours ago, Lucius.2140 said:

Added that as an option, can you please vote there?

Is the last one.

We don't know what the next part of SoTO will be so it is too early to talk about price. One thing that is certain that this "update" from SoTO didn't have any interesting story as at one point you just get into one instance have some NPC talk and then return to in game world (Nayos).

EDIT:

There is also the problem with how some achievements now have to be done before you even start The Survivors story line which seem backward (another way to force player to restart this story from Duress, but not enter The Survivors instance as you need to collect some books to finish up that achievement - there is no yellow indicator for an active achievements or anything else if you don't search on gw2 wiki for how to do this).

 

I get a feeling that SoTO have been much more rushed then anything before as we now have Rifts that is more or less the only enemy (feature) of this package. Especially Nayos is annoying with tons of mobs that respawn nearly as fast as you kill them. Doesn't make me feel too happy about this part of SoTO map.

Most of Mastery from Inner Nayos seem to be related to Strike Mission and isn't that useful for the rest of this content or even other maps. Convergence isn't explained at all from how fast I went through this package story line, so it feels like you get thrown out in the blue with this last update...

I don't understand why ArenaNet didn't make Rift in Nayos maps gate way to other small worlds where one could explore for a short time after have fought back enemy Kryptis. We have had DRM (and we have also had other Rift like feature like those portals that you have to enter and fight a boss during Unstable Magic) which too some degree worked like that so it isn't impossible to make something like this if ArenaNet would have wanted to create a more variation between Rifts and also mobs and creatures to fight.

Edited November 13 by ShadowCatz.8437

[Curunen.8729]

It depends how much they can physically do in a year. If money is a limiting factor I don't mind paying a bit more until it isn't.

But also would prefer that "bigger" means eg all classes get more new gameplay and comprehensive balance patches - more new weapons, skills, traits, elites etc. Rather than bigger meaning a whole map worth of content each quarter.

Generally I like soto in theme and design more than any other expansion, and while the second chapter was a little short, I still enjoyed all the story, characters and atmosphere of Nayos.

Edited November 14 by Curunen.8729

[Ashen.2907]

I am willing to spend for content that I consider to be worth my time and money. I averaged several thousand dollars per year until I saw the released content to be unworthy. An increase in size over SotO would mean little to me because more trash is not worth more money.

[Zzik.5873]

Cant vote yet, I need to wait for all the update drop.

[ShadowKatt.6740]

I was given Guild Wars as a gift, because a friend wanted me to be able to play with them. After that I paid full price for Factions, for Nightfall, and for Eye of the North. When Guild Wars 2 came out I preordered it, as I did for Heart of Thorns, Path of Fire, and End of Dragons.

I have no problem paying for content, but previously it has been worth the price. When an expansion was released ALL of it was released. However that results in a spike of attendance that taipers off over time and that doesn't work well for Anets metrics. I don't have any major problems with SotO so far save for one thing: They're drip feeding us content not because it's doing anything for us; quite the opposite. It's good for THEM at our expense. Just keep running the same events over and over and over and over again. Trust us, you'll want to be ready for when we get around to releasing the rest of the expansion.....someday.

[DanAlcedo.3281]

It's a once per year purchase. 

Doesn't matter to me the content to price ratio. 

[Gop.8713]

As long as I'm playing the game I'm going to keep the game up to date, the cost of that isn't particularly impt to me . . .

And the game is already so vast that I don't need new 'content', which is a vague term. I would prefer less content so I could delve further into the parts of the game that I only flirt with now . . .

So for me what would stop me paying for an expansion is if I felt like the game was introducing more than I could keep up with, or doing it more frequently than I could keep up with . . .

[Burnfall.9573]

Is there a No button for me to spam?

[Eloc Freidon.5692]

The update was good, but SotO hasn't justified the $5 price difference so far. it is so infinitesimal compared to how much was lost. At least from what we know so far.

We're going to need a lot more than just the final map and more weapon access on professions.

 

So far this expansion is just paying for QoL features, letting mounts use gliding masteries, and a couple living world maps.

[RagiNagi.1802]

1 hour ago, Gop.8713 said:

As long as I'm playing the game I'm going to keep the game up to date, the cost of that isn't particularly impt to me . . .

And the game is already so vast that I don't need new 'content', which is a vague term. I would prefer less content so I could delve further into the parts of the game that I only flirt with now . . .

So for me what would stop me paying for an expansion is if I felt like the game was introducing more than I could keep up with, or doing it more frequently than I could keep up with . . .

I share this view. However, I would be willing to pay more if they finally decided to fix the quest/collection system. And promised not to have the so many unusable items clogging your inventory.

Apart from that I like it. Every expansion has focused on something. HoT did gliding, PoF did mounts, EoD.. yeah that did nothing, SOTO has given freedom of builds. It's very refreshing to see that many more profession builds are present now on build pages such as SC and others.

I think the price per content ratio is quite ok, given that there is no monthly sub for this game. And there is soo much to do.

[Danikat.8537]

I bought HoT when it first came out and cost £34.99, so obviously I would be willing to pay more than the £21.99 SotO costs.

Spoiler

Although like most people I was surprised by the cost of HoT and the fact that there was no 'upgrade' version without the base game (the play-for-free version was announced around the same time). I justified it to myself because I buy gems periodically anyway so getting the Ultimate Edition for £79.99 and subtracting the £42.50 the gems would cost on their own brought the price down to £37.49 for the expansion and Deluxe edition items, which is about what I'd expected to pay for a Deluxe edition of an expansion, so that was more reasonable to me.

But whether I buy anything depends on what it is as well as how much there is. Buying twice as much of something I'll never play is twice as useless as buying it once, so I wouldn't get it even if it was really good value for people who do enjoy it.

Real example: my other MMO does seperate story/map DLC and dungeon DLC. The dungeon ones are actually slightly cheaper but I never buy them because I don't play dungeons in that game often enough that it's worth paying for more of them. I think it's a reasonable price for what it is, but I don't want it so I'm not going to buy it just because it's priced fairly.

So I couldn't say what I'd pay for another expansion until I know the details. (Also pricing it in dollars means my answer could be inaccurate anyway if the exchange rate changes between then and now. Assuming I get the right currency in the first place - I can guess from the fact that the poll doesn't bother to specify that it's American dollars, but there's about 25 other currencies it could be.)

[Ashantara.8731]

12 hours ago, TexZero.7910 said:

SoTo hasn't been worth what it was priced at to begin with so no.

It seemed worth it when you look at the content that was released with the first patch, as well as all the non-content specific updates that have been advertized on release.

However, the latest patch (Update 1) is leaving a bad taste in my mouth. If the two follow-up patches (Update 2+3) hold just as little, then SotO will have offered less than a Living World season content-wise.

Edited November 14 by Ashantara.8731

[Polar.8634]

It is not like the more money you spend the better content you get. Product quality does not only depend on money spent by customer.

 

[Pifil.5193]

If it was good quality and not just padded out with nonsense or low quality stuff I'd be happy to pay more for it.

However, I'm pretty sure that this is all the team working on gw2 currently can deliver. Maybe they can ramp up again in the future.

[Lucius.2140]

8 hours ago, Burnfall.9573 said:

Is there a No button for me to spam?

There's two "No" button.

I didn't add quality options because i didn't think the poll too much, arund 1 min.

However it would have been a general quality option to not complicate the pull further or to reduce the "price per equivalent" content options.

At this point i think it will just skew thing (too late to put it).

[Burnfall.9573]

5 minutes ago, Lucius.2140 said:

There's two "No" button.

I didn't add quality options because i didn't think the poll too much, arund 1 min.

However it would have been a general quality option to not complicate the pull further or to reduce the "price per equivalent" content options.

At this point i think it will just skew thing (too late to put it).

 

You did good with the options of the poll. Therefore, I select 

No, SoTo wasn't worth it.

 

As Polar stated, "It is not like the more money you spend the better content you get. Product quality does not only depend on money spent by customer" 

I am in full agreement with that statement

Edited November 14 by Burnfall.9573

[Randulf.7614]

It's largely irrelevant. They assign the cost after its made. If they dont have the resources to make a big expansion anymore because they are focused on something else, then it doesn't matter if it's 2x or 3x the price of SoTo.

It's an old game, which despite the fact has an enormously healthy population, simply isn't getting the same innovation and resources it once had. I'd love a big expansion, but it's not happening

[evilcat.6817]

It could be easier to prepare smaller expansion in the year (for AN)

It could be more engaging for players to have new content every year. Without waiting that maybe in 2 years there will be new stuff.

[Lucius.2140]

18 minutes ago, Randulf.7614 said:

It's largely irrelevant. They assign the cost after its made. If they dont have the resources to make a big expansion anymore because they are focused on something else, then it doesn't matter if it's 2x or 3x the price of SoTo.

It's an old game, which despite the fact has an enormously healthy population, simply isn't getting the same innovation and resources it once had. I'd love a big expansion, but it's not happening

Rarely a cost is "just" assigned after the product is made, thats a recipe for financial failure. 

Theres a budget limit but who knows if unexpected willingness to pay more could help Nsoft give them more budget.

The problem is if SoTo is a failure in player satisfaction. I suppose they could move their announced system, to make the next expansion after 1 and half year; so that they deliver a little more or specially the proffesion weapons.

The poll is young but the general idea is giving is: 25-30% don't liked it, 25-30% thinks the price is spot on and 45-50% is willing to pay around twice to get more of this*.

Ofc, that doesn't consider forum bias.

*I'm putting the % as ranges because i have seen them evolve.

Edited November 14 by Lucius.2140

[Ashantara.8731]

The options are weird.

I'm voting "Yes, I would pay more if the scope of the whole thing was more than it currently seems to be, which is less than a Living World Season."

[kharmin.7683]

1 hour ago, Randulf.7614 said:

I'd love a big expansion, but it's not happening

Yeah, because Anet would release a big expansion and in less than a week people would finish it and complain about not having any new content.

[Randulf.7614]

6 minutes ago, kharmin.7683 said:

Yeah, because Anet would release a big expansion and in less than a week people would finish it and complain about not having any new content.

Of course, but that will happen no matter what they do and no matter what the game is. No games company will take those players into account so that is largely irrelevant. People were completing Zelda after a few days, Mario in a single night. I suspect Baldurs Gate 3 was rinsed in a few days too. And any expac for any mmo. That would never factor into whether they make a large expansion or not because those are an extreme minority of players and an mmo expansion can't really be "finished". 

It's not happening because they said they can't commit to it anymore. And we already know expac 5 is in the works, so even if they change their mind, a big expansion is at least 3-4 years off from today. 

But a handful of players rinsing it and complaining, factors into precisely nothing