Subscription based access?

[Khisanth.2948]

@kasoki.5180 said:

@Raknar.4735 said:

@kasoki.5180 said:

@"Khisanth.2948" said:Probably quit within a few months. Has any company actually done a very good job of the "optional" subscription thing?

Elder Scrolls Online

I disagree, the crafting bag you get from the "optional" sub is the reason i'm not interested in ESO. Makes the sub not feel "optional" if you want to craft.

Well, I also personally dislike it since its very convoluted and feels like a scam. But it is arguably successful, no matter what you and I think. (Note, just because I have said that ESO has that kind of model, doesnt mean I think GW2 needs to have that exact same model)

In that case you have answered the wrong question. I did not ask if there are any successful games with a subscription because there have been more than enough well known games with subscription.

A convoluted scam does not count as a good job ...

[Blaeys.3102]

@kasoki.5180 said:

@Blaeys.3102 said:Obviously a subscription will never happen in this game and isn't worth even discussing (for the many reasons people list above).

I think a better model would be a pure dlc style approach. Abandon the concept of expansions and instead charge $5-$10 dollars for a smaller update each quarter (replacing the current living world update).

Then move any personnel you have on expansions to that team and beef up what is in these updates to include things like new elite specs (2-3 professions with each update), a more aggressive fractal/raid/WvW update schedule and more relevant/larger world maps (including faster expansion into Cantha).

I would happily spend an extra $10 every 3-4 months for a beefier update with the above elements. The long term income for Anet would significantly outpace the $30 every 2-3 years they would see from larger expansions and give players more to look forward to with the smaller more frequent update.

How is that different than what some of us here have suggested as a premium model subscription? From the perspective of people who dont wanna subscribe its the same thing, while it gives additional options and QoL for people who want this hypothetical subscription/premium model. People who dont subscribe can purchase each individual dlc, while people who are in the premium/subscription programme get them with no additional cost.

It's very different. A subscription would lock people out of all parts of the game, whereas the system I describe only monetize upcoming new content. Basically, you pay to permanently add to your game vs paying to access the game you already have.

[Konig Des Todes.2086]

@Lonewolf Kai.3682 said:Based on the recent news of layoffs, and thus a potential indicator of game health, how would you feel if Anet introduces a subscription to play the game?

Based on most recent news and communications, it's not the game's health and GW2 won't be heavily affected. The problem lies with NCSoft. They seem to not be making as much profit as they wish, while NCSoft West is most profitable (and that's where Anet is, incidentally), so they're cutting costs across the board, scrapping development projects and reducing staff where they can in order to focus on pre-existing games and increasing profits.

Adding a subscription to GW2, even an optional one, will no doubt be the biggest blow towards killing it, and by all indication, it's on the better end of NCSoft's spectrum of games doing well. Both ArenaNet and NCSoft would be highly wise to not do that to GW2.

[Tiviana.2650]

While im in the camp of a good game can pull off a sub np and good sub games are vastly better in terms of content release and things to do. But in the case of GW2 adding a sub to a game that was never sub before as i understand it, would be detrimental. People wont go for it, now if they created a new ip say based on worlds some of the races came from and it was sub from the start it could work. But you cant take free and make it cost without losing your playerbase at this point in the lifecycle of the game.

[kharmin.7683]

@Blaeys.3102 said:It's very different. A subscription would lock people out of all parts of the game, whereas the system I describe only monetize upcoming new content. Basically, you pay to permanently add to your game vs paying to access the game you already have.Umm.... how is this any different than the current model? I purchase expansions and get content permanently added to my account?

[Rysdude.3824]

TBH I’d probably subscribe. But I think the better solution would be an optional subscription that gave non-competitive perks. Cosmetics, QOL stuff mostly

[Mewcifer.5198]

@ZDragon.3046 said:

@"kasoki.5180" said:ESO, WoW and Final Fantasy all have some form subscription model. And by all accounts all are doing better than GW2. But sure lets keep pretending this status quo works and keep telling ourselves that any form of subscription is whats gonna kill the game.ESO might be doing better only because its shown a road map with progressing content that looks promising to playersWow... no... just no.... Do not even mention this game or its models and ideals here unless you are talking about wow everone knew about 6 years ago.Final Fantasy probably doing fairly better yes i dont know though but I have not heard people complaining about the game much

What anet can not do

If its forced that means the game dies because a lot of people who play now are not going to suddenly feel that its fair that they need to be forced to pay to play the game thats out right unfair and devious to do to players. Personally if anet suddenly said I needed to pay to play I would probably only play 1 month after new content came out and for the rest of the time I would cut my losses and un sub.

What anet could do

A subscription model could help generate money for gw2 but it needs to be fairly close to ESO's model offering benefits that don't particularly make you better than another player in terms of status aka pay to win. All of the benefits offered need to feel like a nice to have not a must have. More importantly

it would need to be 100% optional

and not required.

A subscription for GW2 huh.... lets just look at a few things anet could do.

Free waypoint transit

• Travel the world for free no cost on way points for subbed users.

Instant access to all living story content

• If you don't happen to have it unlocked congrats now you do.
• Once played through its completely unlocked on your account forever even if you un sub.
• xpacks would need to be considered here however. Possibly subbed users can buy them greatly discounted or something idk

Gold fed transmutation Converter

• Need transmutation charges simply insert a gold coin and get a Transmutation charge, feel free to edit your fashion wars 2 style more freely and as frequently as you want.

Stat Converter

• Allows players to change stats on all gear from rare to ascended with a small gold fee based on the armor quality
  (25 silver up to 1 gold per item)
• While this does devalue legendary weapon/ amor perks of being able to stat change for free a bit if you want those perks without the sub simply get the legendary weapons and armor they would still have value here in addition to their shiny features.

Bank access from inventory

• Yes this devalues the black lion chest bank access item but hey i don't see much wrong with that if you still want it without doing an optional subscription its there for you. thus it still has value.

Black Lion Premium Express

• No longer will you have to find a black lion merchant to pick up your items bought on the TP they will simply be delivered to you via black lion mail express free of charge. Gnashblade is here to support you and your every day needs. Vote Evon Gnashblade Today!!!

Mini Mistic forge access

• Allows players to use the forge from anywhere in the game right from their inventory.

Gems

• Get a set amount of gems = to the subscription cost each time you pay.

These are just a few examples in my head that most players would probably enjoy but things that wont make players who don't sub feel like they lesser or specifically need to sub. All the above things could be considered nice to haves but not must haves. Some of these ideas might come off to people as Must haves but if you are going to pay for a few perks that wont increase your damage / skill or give you a direct advantage gameplay wise they should be some what nice perks imo.

Free waypoint transit would be an okay thing for a special member subscription.

Most the other stuff doesn't really work exception the gems thing. I think a subscription could come with some gems each month, obviously less than what it would be if you just used the money to straight up buy them. Or they could just get a percentage discount on gems for as long as they are subbed.

There could be a hub similar to the passes you can get, but have it have some daily gathering nodes that rotate what they are every two weeks or something or something as well, nothing that would create an imbalance in the game's economy, but just like a small added thing. Maybe each month can come with a "members gift box" that can be opened up and has a choice of things like map currencies or something.

If you make the benefits of the sub too much you are going into pay-to-win territory and I don't want that for this game.

But as for the game itself becoming subscription. That would not work out for people like myself. My income is not steady. With GW2 the way it is I don't have to worry about being locked out of my favorite game just because I didn't make as much money that month. But when I have extra money, I often buy gems with it to support the game.

[IndigoSundown.5419]

Let's face it. Subscriptions change the way the developers think about the game.

• Required subscription? This means that the devs have to make the game so that people have to keep paying every month. This means even more time-wasting than we see in GW2. Essentially, that's all FFIV and WoW are - games designed to waste your time.
• "Optional" subscription? In this model, you're renting features, rather than access. The devs have to make those features attractive enough that playing without them is a negative experience.

Sure, ANet puts time-wasting stuff into the game. That stuff is all optional. Compare that to the power creep in the sub games, where in order to be competitive, keep playing and thus upgrading. Also, GW2 has features that some people can't do without (max bank tabs, max bag slots, for instance). Now imagine having to both buy those slots and rent them also. That's what optional subs do. There is no optional sub without the carrot, and there is no better carrot than designing the game so that doing without said carrot makes the game annoying to play.

[Blaeys.3102]

@kharmin.7683 said:

@Blaeys.3102 said:It's very different. A subscription would lock people out of all parts of the game, whereas the system I describe only monetize upcoming new content. Basically, you pay to permanently add to your game vs paying to access the game you already have.Umm.... how is this any different than the current model? I purchase expansions and get content permanently added to my account?

Its different in that it injects income into a company more often and more reliably, while also increasing the rate at which we potentially see more premium style features (such as elite specializations) - and potentially ups the value of the periodic content.

Keep in mind I wasn't comparing to what we have now, but rather comparing the idea of a more dlc style approach (pay for each living world installment, but have more features included as potential additions) to the large expansion model, where we only see those features every few years.

[Dreamy Lu.3865]

After all those years, I still play GW1 and there is still no monthly fee. Accordingly, I believe it is not necessary for GW2. :)

[Obtena.7952]

I did a calculation ... I actually spend MORE on the game than any sub would earn Anet from me. Of course, I don't know where I fall in the average per player spending. I think it's important to note that if Anet is targeting the market I think they are and that market is responding to patronizing the game, then I think that market has more disposable income than they have time. Sub based games favour people with time ... the GW2 model (B2P they call it?) favours people with money.

[SkyShroud.2865]

i will move to another gamenot the only tree in the forest

[kharmin.7683]

@Obtena.7952 said:Sub based games favour people with time ... the GW2 model (B2P they call it?) favours people with money.

Well said!

[Krystal.3271]

I see in some games, there is a thing called monthly gem sub pack. It is not an access or P2P sub like FF14, it is like: if you use 25$ to buy gems directly, you will get 2k gems immediately but if you buy a monthly gem sub, you will get 100 gem per login day, in total, you will get 3k gems after 30 days. This may work for GW2 since it promotes players entering game everyday besides full account daily rewards.

Edit: 3k gems, not 3k gold :sweat_smile:

[Dawdler.8521]

@Krystal.3271 said:I see in some games, there is a thing called monthly gem sub pack. It is not an access or P2P sub like FF14, it is like: if you use 25$ to buy gems directly, you will get 2k gems immediately but if you buy a monthly gem sub, you will get 100 gem per login day, in total, you will get 3k gold after 30 days. This may work for GW2 since it promotes players entering game everyday besides full account daily rewards.There is absolutely nothing stopping you from buying gems on a monthly basis in GW2.

I really dont understand why people keep arguing for a model that already exist as an option.

[DaFishBob.6518]

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@Krystal.3271 said:I see in some games, there is a thing called monthly gem sub pack. It is not an access or P2P sub like FF14, it is like: if you use 25$ to buy gems directly, you will get 2k gems immediately but if you buy a monthly gem sub, you will get 100 gem per login day, in total, you will get 3k gold after 30 days. This may work for GW2 since it promotes players entering game everyday besides full account daily rewards.There is absolutely nothing stopping you from buying gems on a monthly basis in GW2.

I really dont understand why people keep arguing for a model that already exist as an option.

There is nothing stopping a person from buying monthly but convincing a new person to spend on gems every month is not likely to happen because there's no incentive to spend month after month when they can just choose to buy when ever they really feel like it. The suggestion for monthly plans is about adding that incentive in order to possibly push a few more people into buying monthly.

Whether or not this is an idea worth it to Anet is up to their business planners to decide of course.

[Ashantara.8731]

@Lonewolf Kai.3682 said:Based on the recent news of layoffs, and thus a potential indicator of game health, how would you feel if Anet introduces a subscription to play the game?

I've already spent far over a thousand dollars on this game. I am not going to pay for a suddenly introduced subscription.

[Bloodstealer.5978]

@Mikali.9651 said:NO, this is not about GW2 itself and its profit. This is about Anet as a whole. This is about Anet working on many different projects and thus investing the money they got from GW2 into them, while not doing any RoI on those other projects. Those same projects that got canceled and new have started. That is a lot of money wasted and NCSoft decided it is time for Anet to stop with it.

This layoff is about the people that worked on other projects that have never seen the light, it is not about GW2. GW2 itself is not affected negatively. This is not about GW2 not earning enough money, it is about GW2 earning money and spending that money for other projects, thus all the profit they got actually been reduced with no return at all.

And as a side effect of mismanagement from Anet, they also reduced the quality of updates and content, and also the number of people working on GW2, all for the favor of developing other projects. And that has been seen on the graph.

You can't stop nurturing your main project and even lessen the development, in the favor of projects that just get scrapped and scrapped over again.NCSoft is here to tell Anet to stop with that bs, and to concentrate on what is the reality, GW2+GW and maybe 1 more project, not more.

Sorry but I think you might be reading way too much from that ANET comm.ANET as a business has to find ways to further sustain itself moving forward. It is heavily reliant on GW2, much like it was with GW1. Now 6+ yrs in ANET will undoubtedly need to look into new ideas, new projects otherwise it runs the risk of seeing its financial stability jeopardised by declining revenue from its only basket, which would be totally reasonable to expect. Time is the killer of all things and MMO's suffer that just the same.6yrs is a good ole age but numbers will almost certainly have reduced and will continue to fall over time, with spike for sure when fresh content emerges , but essentially it will keep falling maybe only slowly but at some point in the future ANET will need another revenue stream or see itself recede.There is nothing wrong whatsoever in developing new projects, new ideas in fact I would hazard a guess NC Soft welcomed that, but not all projects ever see the light of day and when the whole business portfolio is seeing a downturn it will be those projects, R&D etc that will face the chopping block in order to stem the bleeding of money.YOu say ANET reduced the quality of updates and content.. please elaborate as actually I an likely other feel the quality was very much on an upturn... cos ya know content quality is very much subjective.. so please do elaborate how your able to blanket that comment as fact.It is very common for companies to move skills and experience around the business when looking into the development of new things, how is that hurting GW2 when you quite clearly state GW2 is the moneypit that seems to be funding these other areas, where is this mismanagement you speak of, cos attempting to find areas in which the business can expand its portfolio rather than relying on an older product forever is good management not bad or mismanagement. Letting your business stagnate and decline with nothing new to move forward with would be bad management and an area for genuine concern for all concerned.

Sorry I find your post to be misinformed, misguided, contradictory and actually pretty disrespectful if I am honest.. maybe try setting up your own business and see how long you can keep it running just by sitting back and watching the clouds go by.

[Burnfall.9573]

@"Lonewolf Kai.3682" said:Based on the recent news of layoffs, and thus a potential indicator of game health, how would you feel if Anet introduces a subscription to play the game?

http://quotationsquotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/top-Trust-quotes-about-love-20152.jpg

Anet would win my trust again and that looks unlikely with having 6 years of unlearned lessons of repeating the same problems over and over again. With having Thief and Mesmer being not being reworked and with the thirst for Power Creep, 1 shotting with continues bad designs with each new specializations= Too Late= Never!!

have a good day

[Goettel.4389]

From free to play to sub, in 2019?Any CFO crazy enough to suggest that would end up something like this:

[TunaDan.1205]

I didnt read the entire thread, but my two cents are worth two cents.If a sub to play the game were introduced now, I would be kinda turned off.If a sub were introduced that included about the same worth in goodies/gems from their store, then that would be a different story.If I payed $15/month for a monthly box of about $15 worth of store consumables, I'd try it for a few months. They could go a bit further and offer a little discount for buying 3, 6, 12 months or whatever in advance.

[Gehenna.3625]

I've thought about this topic for a bit and there are two things that I end up with:1) Any sub should not be for the game. I can see a sub for gems so you can get reduced prices for gems in return for a longer commitment (better deals when you sub to the gem store for 3,6,9,12 months)2) ArenaNet have just heard jobs will be lost and people are kneejerking to "save" ArenaNet. That is pointless. Whatever damage is done is already done and the job loss is also done. I do not think that it's reasonable to believe that some player actions or ideas are going to change anything, well intended as it might be.

[AlexxxDelta.1806]

The main reason I started playing this game was the no sub model so I would quit. Subscription model in gaming is slowly dying anyway, even WoW is just a shadow of its former self.

[SlateSloan.3654]

the layoffs where about employee who where asigned to unanounced projects.

no need to think about subscriptions or go into player panic mode.that the revenue goes down is good for us players as it puts arenanet into a position to think about their change management and the way they deliver and sell content. i think its long overdue that ncsoft takes more control as sometimes i wonder in what world anet chiefs are living in.

[kettering.6823]

I had to opt out of playing FFXIV with my friend because I can't afford the monthly subscription. Similarly, I wouldn't be able to afford a monthly subscription to GW2. I'm certain I'm not the only one who wouldn't be able to play the game anymore if they suddenly decided to add a subscription tomorrow. Others have already mentioned that adding one after 6+ years of being buy to play/free to play would be a ridiculous thing regardless.