Would you buy a WvW season pass?

[subversiontwo.7501]

Once, most likely.7 years of neglect and 500 bux later, no.

[viniebc.9568]

hell no, never! mr. anet employee fake account

[Asudementio.8526]

Not at this point. Anet has shown they are incapable of managing WvW. If they could make a good effort attempt to improve WvW after years of neglect only afterwards would I consider it a possibility. Even then it would require extraordinary attention and vaue for me to advocate for it.

[tom.4051]

Would you really continue to fund anet seeing they have admitted that they were taking resources away from GW2, not only WvW, but PvE as well, in order to do those unannounced projects. There is no way to guarantee any money you spend will be spent on GW2, and in fact any money you have spent on the gem store, well where do you think the funding for those unannounced projects came from! that money you were hoping would improve the game you love wasted on basically nothing now!

But now with those projects out of the way, let's hope all effort is put rightly back into GW2Improve the game, give WvW the attention is deserves and then anet will get players spending again.

[K THEN.5162]

I'd really rather not pay to be constantly longbowed by rangers in every battleground XD

[ThunderPanda.1872]

Something that has been free for the past 7 years, now will start costing subscription fees...I can almost hear the forum exploding with outcries.

[ThunderPanda.1872]

At this stage I think they should just make a WvW battle royale mode or some kitten. Where the side losing most of their structures will be first kicked off the match.

[redwing.9580]

so kill the game mode? a lot of players would be done with the game mode if they did, they neglect the game mode and they couldn't promise that the money would be spent to improve the game mode (and even if they tried to no one would believe them due to how they have treated wvw'ers for the past few years

[TheBravery.9615]

I would like the option of my gem store purchases to fund WvW and not PvE.

There's plenty of PvE in this game to last years, while PvP and WvW are on backburners.

[nativity.3057]

No. I initially purchased GW2 because it was marketed as a game with 3 different game modes.The onus of upkeep isn't on me, but Anet developers. I do understand that 3 game modes in title is difficult to achieve.

I purchase gold and gem for cosmetic items. PvE players aren't the only ones who get gemstore cosmetics (just more common because of their ability to farm more gold, therefore have the ability to exchange gold for gems).

I don't purchase mount skins because I won't use them. I do purchase glider skins on occasion, but I have spent more on wardrobe cosmetics. Recently Anet has focused their attention on PvE centric gemstore items, not items I can use in all game modes.

Some players might disagree with the idea of having great gemstore skins, while lacking skins you can get without real money purchases. IMO I don't think that is fair for Anet. They need revenue, and providing everything for free isn't an option. I personally feel that gem value should increase. Players will have more incentive to purchase gems. Gold is free to obtain, gems aren't.

[biczkowski.2961]

Yeah, I would. They could make it a valid alternative for people with a job: Just increase the PIP gain rate by 200% when you've got a season pass. Because playing 20 hours a week to cap your tickets ... well ... that's somewhat hard if you have a life and can't spend the whole day in a game.

[b k.1648]

No. They're already working on (most of) those things, and it'll still be a mundane game mode even with them all solved.

"Server lag eliminated in WvW" - I don't have any significant lag that I can blame on the servers. The only way this could be improved for me is if they established servers in Australia, which ain't gonna happen.

"Profession balancing for WvW separate from PvE" - would be nice, but it wouldn't excite me unless they went so far the archetypes became alien to their PvE versions. I'm talking things like removing stealth completely, switching passive defenses to active blocks, reducing skill spam rate across the board, capping condition stacks back to their launch state, and bringing enchantments and hexes back to the game. Once again, ain't gonna happen.

"WvW world populations balanced" - already are close enough. Combat's a lot more even than it once was, but it still sucks because there's too little room for player skill to make a difference.

"Meaningful glory rewards in WvW" - I couldn't care less about this if the experience was enjoyable to begin with. If all I cared about was farming goodies, I would have joined in the Istan trains. Yawn.

[CrimsonRise.7650]

It might of been viable in the past, if they were serious about promoting the game mode, besides those content patches and Tournaments, but not anymore.

[subversiontwo.7501]

@"Ben K.6238" said:No. They're already working on (most of) those things, and it'll still be a mundane game mode even with them all solved.

"WvW world populations balanced" - already are close enough. Combat's a lot more even than it once was, but it still sucks because there's too little room for player skill to make a difference.This must be a regional culture thing because in the EU it is or has been the complete opposite. In the past, combat balance has never really been an issue with almost every server having some commanders who can draw a competetive composition of players. Combat balance is becomming a problem as of recent though with so few guilds and supported commanders left that a single guild leaving a server means that they effectively have no such tags/groups left (even high up in the tiers).

What is the real issue, and always has been, is that the mode is built around conflicting ideas between coverage, regions, map caps and social gameplay. It has a poorly matching balance over several conflicting points between competition and socialisation (having regions but allowing transfers and having 24hr scoring etc.). The clockwork that is to churn the mode has never really been greased and the wheels don't fit. The players quickly split into PPT and PPK extremes because of those things and that was a clear sign that things were not working as they are supposed to. They are supposed to be apart of the same process with PPK leading to PPT rather than being split into two different approaches with conflicting perspectives. As always, reset evenings are often the sign of how the mode should always be, balanced enough to turn PPK-PPT into a process where no one has given up and just focuses on one aspect due to malfunctions in the machinery.

I kind of agree with most of other points you raised, barring the first one, they are not really working on any of the things that can directly make the WvW mechanics click. They need to make organisation and content-creation in this mini sandbox be worthwhile and while rewards may not be the most important aspect of that, making sure that there are other incentives for it are certainly the most important aspect of WvW. They must achieve a better way to determine winners and losers without exhausting their playerbase and they must come up with ways to encourage players- and player-groups who take initiatives to create content.

Most of the popular suggestions on these forums also go in that direction from direct suggestions dealing with population balance to suggestions such as GvG support that will provide guild content to spur on players to create guilds that ultimately will provide organisation to battle groups and open tags for pickup content. ArenaNet has aknowledged these things now but it has taken them a completely unacceptable amount of time and, more importantly, while recognizing them they are not prioritizing them or actively working on them yet. They have confirmed that so it is not really a discourse, it's fact.

ArenaNet's biggest recent misstep in WvW is not recognizing this player behaviour. For example, yesterday was reset night and re-link night. I have accounts on four european servers, all in the higher tiers. I hopped around on them and every server pairing looked the same a couple of hours into reset: There was a tag on one out of four maps and there was a queue to that map, no other map. The other maps were very barren (not filled with roaming action). So there is no screaming shortage of players but there is a severe shortage of organisation and content-creation. However, the approaches ArenaNet have taken recently is to create player influx.

The upcomming Warclaw is very typical of their recent approaches. Trying to encourage players to enter the mode is not a bad thing on its own: obviously, funnelling players into a mode is a good thing and something that should be encouraged continously. However, funnelling players into extremes of queues and barren wastes is not something that will make players take part in the content or organize to create content, no mount is going to encourage players to organize and tag up. It will encourage players to enter but not encourage them to play, consume and create content. Encouraging guild-creation with guild-content (to spread initiatives to content out) will. Encouraging the playerbase to spread thin over maps as well as servers (=population balance) through objectives/scoring will. Those are the two major things needed. Most server pairs have enough players to populate and consume at least 2-3 maps but they do not have the content-creation resources for it. Tags funnels players into the mode's content and makes them stay there much better than mounts. Players who do get content are also more likely to buy skins and upgrades, because they play the game enough to see a value in them if done right.

That goes for the whole microtransaction-era. Far too many companies seem to lose sight of that they make games first and foremost. Transactions tend to be successful with happy players who have a game to play.

[Gorani.7205]

@Korgov.7645 said:If instead of Repair Hammers, Portable Cannons, Golem Rush, Toxic Living Story, vertical map design, or movement gimmicks there was:

• Server lag eliminated in WvW
• Profession balancing for WvW separate from PvE
• WvW world populations balanced
• Meaningful glory rewards in WvW

Would you use gems to buy WvW season pass?

This is magic fairy dust that will not happen, because magic does not exist in any programmers repertoire.I can see some gem store monetization by selling siege skins and commander icons, but not what you suggested here.

[Pagan Highlander.5948]

Same, they benefit from selling Gem Items. The fact that GW2 was free to play After buying the game is what attracted me to this MMO. Having them start charging for any portion of this game or the game in general would be the end of my playing as I for one will never play any game again with a subscription.

[ILoveMonotony.1479]

At this point in time I wouldn't. I might have done that before the 23.6.2015 patch when the combat was, in my personal opinion, much better.

That said, with the amount of irritating combat mechanics added since Heart of Thorns, I do not believe that a mere skill split cuts it anymore. Only a complete rework of every ability in the game would make me buy a pass. And that's not going to happen.

[Jura.2170]

@Korgov.7645 said:If instead of Repair Hammers, Portable Cannons, Golem Rush, Toxic Living Story, vertical map design, or movement gimmicks there was:Would you use gems to buy WvW season pass?

I don't think Living Story and vertical map design are toxic, and I like gliding. I wanted to wait and see what the mount would be like too

I would buy a season pass if the money was used to improve the game

[Korgov.7645]

@Jura.2170 said:

@"Korgov.7645" said:If instead of Repair Hammers, Portable Cannons, Golem Rush, Toxic Living Story, vertical map design, or movement gimmicks there was:Would you use gems to buy WvW season pass?

I don't think Living Story and vertical map design are toxic, and I like gliding. I wanted to wait and see what the mount would be like too

The living story chapter that extended into WvW was Toxic_Alliance or something. There were extra themed NPCs added to WvW back then.

[Some Call Me Tim.2319]

@Korgov.7645 said:If instead of Repair Hammers, Portable Cannons, Golem Rush, Toxic Living Story, vertical map design, or movement gimmicks there was:

• Server lag eliminated in WvW
• Profession balancing for WvW separate from PvE
• WvW world populations balanced
• Meaningful glory rewards in WvW

Would you use gems to buy WvW season pass?

Pass to wvw? That I already get into with the money I’ve already spent? umm no. Why on earth would I want to pay even more for something I’ve already paid for??

[Iozeph.5617]

@"Korgov.7645" said:If instead of Repair Hammers, Portable Cannons, Golem Rush, Toxic Living Story, vertical map design, or movement gimmicks there was:

• Server lag eliminated in WvW
• Profession balancing for WvW separate from PvE
• WvW world populations balanced
• Meaningful glory rewards in WvW

Would you use gems to buy WvW season pass?

Not no but hell no. These are things which should have been and still should be part of the service right now. Why offer negative reinforcement for lackluster quality thus far? Smacks of this:

[SnowMochi.7602]

I would not buy a pass, not for game money nor real money. Reason being: if everyone bought a pass to this lag-free environment, then there would be lag all over again, except this time, it would be an expensive, paid-for lag.

Now, IF they came out with a pass that would allow me to play the game on a private server with my guild ONLY, then I would buy it.

[Diku.2546]

No. ANet needs to fix the broken match-up mechanics 1st...imho

[xZombieTaco.5809]

If it was an "Optional" thing for people who love the game and want to see it improve I'd support it whole heartedly. So long as the money from these fans would be used towards WvW. Whether that means adding more devs to WvW or getting new events/content I'd GLADLY give anet my money.

[SweetPotato.7456]

How about, after the week you get a token for the next week that give you all of the above ?