Make more money Anet

[Crab Fear.1624]

@"MetalGirl.2370" said:Look, we have been over this countless times in countless other threads.No. Majority don't want anything you just listed.and if YOU want to give them money, just buy $10 gems every month to support them and if you wanna pay them for every LW just buy $20 gems.and not only do they get money but you also get to buy something on Gemstore, so it's a win-win. And, like I said in other thread, if you are not interested in what's on Gemstore, you can absolutely buy gems to pay Anet and buy ME keys instead. I love keys.

Countless businesses have refused to alter their business model, and well most of those don't exist anymore. Another is on its way out. The "we" you speak of are lime the same 30 at max that say no. I'd wager that many players don't even log into the forums, so don't go thinking you know who you represent

[phokus.8934]

@Crab Fear.1624 said:

@"MetalGirl.2370" said:Look, we have been over this countless times in countless other threads.No. Majority don't want anything you just listed.and if YOU want to give them money, just buy $10 gems every month to support them and if you wanna pay them for every LW just buy $20 gems.and not only do they get money but you also get to buy something on Gemstore, so it's a win-win. And, like I said in other thread, if you are not interested in what's on Gemstore, you can absolutely buy gems to pay Anet and buy ME keys instead. I love keys.

Countless businesses have refused to alter their business model, and well most of those don't exist anymore. Another is on its way out. The "we" you speak of are lime the same 30 at max that say no. I'd wager that many players don't even log into the forums, so don't go thinking you know who you represent

Except no business in their right mind will just blindly update a pricing model. There's also a reason why they forgone the subscription model because a) it's still very much profitable and b) subscription doesn't mean everyone will continue buying into it.

It's extremely short-sighted of you or anyone else to think that changing their pricing structure by simply adding in a subscription will magically make them more profitable.

[Crab Fear.1624]

@TinLizzie.7308 said:No subscription. Period. They make nifty things and place them in the Gem store, I pony up with my credit card. I'll pay for a product. Not the promise of one. If this game starts charging any kind of subscription, I'll be done with it. It's a matter of principle for me.

If they charge an optional subscription you are done? Why anet only has 2 games, only 1 is really active. They need to be more profitable so they make other games, but without some more funding...well. I point to ESO as an example of how a game can be B2P and have an optional subscriptiom, and still be successful. Have they laid off 1/3 of their remployees? I see they got a major expansion coming this year.....

[MoriMoriMori.5349]

@Magnus Godrik.5841 said:The vast majority of players playing gw do not go on forums and are here for the way the game is now. Changing that can hurt anet more.

No, they are not here for this reason necessarily. They could be here just because all other alternatives are simply worse. That doesn't mean they silently support currenst state of the game and wouldn't like it changed to something better.

[Crab Fear.1624]

@phokus.8934 said:

@Crab Fear.1624 said:

@"MetalGirl.2370" said:Look, we have been over this countless times in countless other threads.No. Majority don't want anything you just listed.and if YOU want to give them money, just buy $10 gems every month to support them and if you wanna pay them for every LW just buy $20 gems.and not only do they get money but you also get to buy something on Gemstore, so it's a win-win. And, like I said in other thread, if you are not interested in what's on Gemstore, you can absolutely buy gems to pay Anet and buy ME keys instead. I love keys.

Countless businesses have refused to alter their business model, and well most of those don't exist anymore. Another is on its way out. The "we" you speak of are lime the same 30 at max that say no. I'd wager that many players don't even log into the forums, so don't go thinking you know who you represent

Except no business in their right mind will just blindly update a pricing model. There's also a reason why they forgone the subscription model because a) it's still very much profitable and b) subscription doesn't mean everyone will continue buying into it.

It's extremely short-sighted of you or anyone else to think that changing their pricing structure by simply adding in a subscription will magically make them more profitable.

It's like you forgot this game used to not be F2P.....

That's a change in pricing model.

Adding in an optional subscription package with some nice perks wouldn't be a bad idea.

[TheGrimm.5624]

@"TinLizzie.7308" said:No subscription. Period. They make nifty things and place them in the Gem store, I pony up with my credit card. I'll pay for a product. Not the promise of one. If this game starts charging any kind of subscription, I'll be done with it. It's a matter of principle for me.

Unless I am mis-reading I see the OP as saying we would have the following options:

• F2P (we have)
• B2P (we have)
• Gem Store Sales (Cash & Gold - we have)
• Optional Addon - Monthly Gem Sub (Cash for Gems and game perks - we don't have)

I don't think the OP is saying you have to do this, this would be an additional optional model, its the same way in ESO, its a turn on/turn off feature. Same in WoW to some degree. 95% of my account upgrades and game gifts have been in cash transactions so I already get you can go do this with cash today and the gem store. I support the game by being one of those "Whales" as its said out there. When I am happy with them I fund them more, during periods I am not, less. So if this is an optional addon, how would it affect people that didn't activate the option and how would that impact the enjoyment of your game? And note, a number of the new MMOs of this style coming out are planning on going with this method if not an outright flat sub fee. That doesn't mean GW2 needs to go full subscription but the new model is becoming, B2P with Gem Store transactions and addon account options. So before GW2 gets too far behind its time to think of additional business models. I am not on the side of having anyone have to pay more but will side on the side of more account addons that are optional and not pay to win. No World Of Tanks thank you very much.

[MetalGirl.2370]

@Crab Fear.1624 said:

@"MetalGirl.2370" said:Look, we have been over this countless times in countless other threads.No. Majority don't want anything you just listed.and if YOU want to give them money, just buy $10 gems every month to support them and if you wanna pay them for every LW just buy $20 gems.and not only do they get money but you also get to buy something on Gemstore, so it's a win-win. And, like I said in other thread, if you are not interested in what's on Gemstore, you can absolutely buy gems to pay Anet and buy ME keys instead. I love keys.

Countless businesses have refused to alter their business model, and well most of those don't exist anymore. Another is on its way out. The "we" you speak of are lime the same 30 at max that say no. I'd wager that many players don't even log into the forums, so don't go thinking you know who you represent

I don't know and I don't care if it's 30 people or 300 or 3000 or whatever ... it's still way more than the people who agree with you and that's a fact. Majority doesn't want sub fees like you can see from loads of other threads and polls. People came to GW in the first place because it didn't have monthly fee, it would be a major spit in the face to players. Like I said, if you want to support them, buy gems.

[Healix.5819]

A subscription is the last thing ArenaNet would do, as they were founded on an anti-subscription ideal. GW2 China does have an optional subscription, and it was one of the few things they said they would never do here. They could easily justify one like ESO, with increased bag/bank/material slots, infinite tools by default, full access, etc, but it would be like admitting they failed, so I doubt they would ever think of doing it. They would do something similar instead, like giving out tokens when buying gems, which would work like statuettes to buy special items.

A simple test they could do is luxury items in the range of $50-$100. Stuff such as glows/effects, larger and more impressive mounts, custom portraits/nameplates/tags and whatever else makes you stand out.

[Crab Fear.1624]

@MetalGirl.2370 said:

@Crab Fear.1624 said:

@MetalGirl.2370 said:Look, we have been over this countless times in countless other threads.No. Majority don't want anything you just listed.and if YOU want to give them money, just buy $10 gems every month to support them and if you wanna pay them for every LW just buy $20 gems.and not only do they get money but you also get to buy something on Gemstore, so it's a win-win. And, like I said in other thread, if you are not interested in what's on Gemstore, you can absolutely buy gems to pay Anet and buy ME keys instead. I love keys.

Countless businesses have refused to alter their business model, and well most of those don't exist anymore. Another is on its way out. The "we" you speak of are lime the same 30 at max that say no. I'd wager that many players don't even log into the forums, so don't go thinking you know who you represent

I don't know and I don't care if it's 30 people or 300 or 3000 or whatever ... it's still way more than the people who agree with you and that's a fact. Majority doesn't want sub fees like you can see from loads of other threads and polls. People came to GW in the first place because it didn't have monthly fee, it would be a major spit in the face to players. Like I said, if you want to support them, buy gems.

K

[TheGrimm.5624]

@MetalGirl.2370 said:I don't know and I don't care if it's 30 people or 300 or 3000 or whatever ... it's still way more than the people who agree with you and that's a fact. Majority doesn't want sub fees like you can see from loads of other threads and polls. People came to GW in the first place because it didn't have monthly fee, it would be a major spit in the face to players. Like I said, if you want to support them, buy gems.

Same question to you, why does it matter if they offer account addons? The word subscription here is getting mixed with the normal use of you have to pay this to play or you don't have access, versus this is an optional automated style of gem purchases and perks. Why does me buying gems impact your game play? That's what this comes down to. I agree if you poll people a lot of people are here because it doesn't have a forced mandatory sub to play, buy once and you are in, but that's not what is being called on here. So just taking yourself, why would it matter if other people bought into game addons. It happens everyday when a player buys extra bag spots or buys gems with cash, so what makes this different? Or are you understanding that the OP is saying this is a forced cost on everyone?

And the point of you can go and buy gems today is true, but this is a different feature since it pays the player in some gems plus additional conveniences in trade to ANet for a predictable cash flow. If someone doesn't add it, they play like normal. If someone does they get gems plus whatever else for providing that visibility and sale to Anet. If anything it should lower the ingame gold to gems ratio since more gems were exchanges for cash versus gold so just as cash sales help the gold traders, so would this model.

[TheGrimm.5624]

@Healix.5819 said:A subscription is the last thing ArenaNet would do, as they were founded on an anti-subscription ideal. GW2 China does have an optional subscription, and it was one of the few things they said they would never do here. They could easily justify one like ESO, with increased bag/bank/material slots, infinite tools by default, full access, etc, but it would be like admitting they failed, so I doubt they would ever think of doing it. They would do something similar instead, like giving out tokens when buying gems, which would work like statuettes to buy special items.

A simple test they could do is luxury items in the range of $50-$100. Stuff such as glows/effects, larger and more impressive mounts, custom portraits/nameplates/tags and whatever else makes you stand out.

Again, the word subscription here means something else. They offer game addons already today in the forms of extra bag/bank space, name changes and such. This isn't different, all are optional, you don't have to upgrade your account if you don't want to.

[Linken.6345]

@TheGrimm.5624 said:

@Healix.5819 said:A subscription is the last thing ArenaNet would do, as they were founded on an anti-subscription ideal. GW2 China does have an optional subscription, and it was one of the few things they said they would never do here. They could easily justify one like ESO, with increased bag/bank/material slots, infinite tools by default, full access, etc, but it would be like admitting they failed, so I doubt they would ever think of doing it. They would do something similar instead, like giving out tokens when buying gems, which would work like statuettes to buy special items.

A simple test they could do is luxury items in the range of $50-$100. Stuff such as glows/effects, larger and more impressive mounts, custom portraits/nameplates/tags and whatever else makes you stand out.

Again, the word subscription here means something else. They offer game addons already today in the forms of extra bag/bank space, name changes and such. This isn't different, all are optional, you don't have to upgrade your account if you don't want to.

Sure add it as long as I can pay for it with gold, since it would be no diffrent from the bag or bank upgrades.Oh wait dident the OP speak about a premium currency only for real cash?

[Linken.6345]

@Crab Fear.1624 said:

@TheGrimm.5624 said:

@Rasimir.6239 said:

@TheGrimm.5624 said:

@Rasimir.6239 said:

@TheGrimm.5624 said:

@Crab Fear.1624 said:Suggestions

• offer an optional subscription club with little xp and gold chance bonuses and maybe toss in 500 gems (not unlike ESO)I think they could pull off an ESO style optional monthly sub with gems and some account perks. Just need to make sure its not perks that grant a player a competitive advantage.You mean like unlimited crafting material storage?

Something along the lines of storage expansion, else some other boost to crafting. I say crafting since in general crafting impacts players making their own gear but there is so much out there it's not as much a farmable thing. Question comes down to what architexture they have on hand they could employ, in GW2 terms it might just be more bank tabs vs unlimited like ESO.I actually find ESO's "double bank space and (unlimited) material storage" as part of their optional subscription a pretty bad example of such a system, as it is only really optional if you don't want to craft. Personally I have a bank built up to 180 slots as well as several alts with 120+ bag slots in ESO dedicated solely for storing crafting materials (since I don't play that game often enough to feel like paying for ESO+, I'd rather invest the money into other entertainment), and whenever I do play ESO, I spend considerable time moving crafting materials around, without room to store other stuff in my bank. I'd really hate to see GW2 go the same way and make an integral part of the game a real nuissance just to push people towards taking up an "optional" subscription.

The main point of the perk would be to trade cash for gems which players could do now directly. So the advantage to a sub would need to be another slight perk above the gems since Anet could predict these gem sales for the sake of budgeting whereas today all they have is some directional indicators which are terrible for budgeting long term unfunded projects. ESOs also comes with the free DLCs which we already have here if you login while the living story is up so that's a wash. Key is you have to have something of player values but that is still acquirable in game so that its not pay to win advantageous. Maybe that's BLTC keys or increased magic find/coin loot drop (those are already low anyway). Something a player playing normally can get to themselves with enough time.

The DLC are free if you subscribe in ESO

You are only renting the dlc, try to play them when your sub runs out mate.

[Ashen.2907]

@Crab Fear.1624 said:

@TinLizzie.7308 said:No subscription. Period. They make nifty things and place them in the Gem store, I pony up with my credit card. I'll pay for a product. Not the promise of one. If this game starts charging any kind of subscription, I'll be done with it. It's a matter of principle for me.

If they charge an optional subscription you are done? Why anet only has 2 games, only 1 is really active. They need to be more profitable so they make other games, but without some more funding...well. I point to ESO as an example of how a game can be B2P and have an optional subscriptiom, and still be successful. Have they laid off 1/3 of their remployees? I see they got a major expansion coming this year.....

I expect that if 1/3 of their employees were spending years working on nothing that contributed to the company's revenue they would lay them off.

[Crab Fear.1624]

@Linken.6345 said:

@TheGrimm.5624 said:

@Healix.5819 said:A subscription is the last thing ArenaNet would do, as they were founded on an anti-subscription ideal. GW2 China does have an optional subscription, and it was one of the few things they said they would never do here. They could easily justify one like ESO, with increased bag/bank/material slots, infinite tools by default, full access, etc, but it would be like admitting they failed, so I doubt they would ever think of doing it. They would do something similar instead, like giving out tokens when buying gems, which would work like statuettes to buy special items.

A simple test they could do is luxury items in the range of $50-$100. Stuff such as glows/effects, larger and more impressive mounts, custom portraits/nameplates/tags and whatever else makes you stand out.

Again, the word subscription here means something else. They offer game addons already today in the forms of extra bag/bank space, name changes and such. This isn't different, all are optional, you don't have to upgrade your account if you don't want to.

Sure add it as long as I can pay for it with gold, since it would be no diffrent from the bag or bank upgrades.Oh wait dident the OP speak about a premium currency only for real cash?

what is the first word in the body of my OP?

[Aenaos.8160]

Just buy 800-1600 gems per month.That is your optional sub right there.Then buy 800-1600 gems every time a episode drops.That is your paid DLC.The items proposed to be included in a sub are already offered in the Gem Store.Gems, XP/Magic Find and all kinds of boosts.For Anet to offer month long versions of such boosts for the price of a monthly sub would mean they'd end up losing money as currently to buy the equivalent amount of boosts requires way more money(s).This is not a healthy discussion for the game which btw is still one of the most successful MMOs out there.See what happened to so many games that decided to milk their players and are now staying open in zombie mode just to provide a service to the few whales that play and support them and the bots that populate their worlds.

[InfernoSub.5098]

This entire thread stemmed from some fantasy thought process that OP developed that is completely disconnected from reality. I've attached a photo of earnings from GW2. Source is NCSoft's earnings report. Source: http://global.ncsoft.com/global/ir/earnings.aspxClearly, GW2 is doing better now than it did in 2016. No one is "struggling" - it's business as usual for everyone. Layoffs doesn't mean lack of earnings.

[phokus.8934]

@Crab Fear.1624 said:

@phokus.8934 said:

@Crab Fear.1624 said:

@"MetalGirl.2370" said:Look, we have been over this countless times in countless other threads.No. Majority don't want anything you just listed.and if YOU want to give them money, just buy $10 gems every month to support them and if you wanna pay them for every LW just buy $20 gems.and not only do they get money but you also get to buy something on Gemstore, so it's a win-win. And, like I said in other thread, if you are not interested in what's on Gemstore, you can absolutely buy gems to pay Anet and buy ME keys instead. I love keys.

Countless businesses have refused to alter their business model, and well most of those don't exist anymore. Another is on its way out. The "we" you speak of are lime the same 30 at max that say no. I'd wager that many players don't even log into the forums, so don't go thinking you know who you represent

Except no business in their right mind will just blindly update a pricing model. There's also a reason why they forgone the subscription model because a) it's still very much profitable and b) subscription doesn't mean everyone will continue buying into it.

It's extremely short-sighted of you or anyone else to think that changing their pricing structure by simply adding in a subscription will magically make them more profitable.

It's like you forgot this game used to not be F2P.....

That's a change in pricing model.

Adding in an optional subscription package with some nice perks wouldn't be a bad idea.

Are you seriously saying that the free to play game is the same as buying it? I suggest you read up on the limitations of free to play in GW2.

[hellsqueen.3045]

@"Crab Fear.1624" said:Suggestions

• Introduce a new premium currency that can only be obtained with real world money, keep the old one for certain items, but upgrade items to premium status as well
• Charge for living story content
• make mini expansions for lower prices and release faster
• offer an optional subscription club with little xp and gold chance bonuses and maybe toss in 500 gems (not unlike ESO)
• lower the price of HoT permanently, otherwise there are those who will go to other places where they can get the game much cheaper (shouldn't that money go in your pocket?)
• crank out more skins for weapons, gliders, helmets, boots, and gloves (armor)

While it is all good and well, and we can all play once we have bought the game, the special cosmetics and cash shop items should not be free, or earned simply by farming gold. We already have content to "earn". Please, you are generous enough. It is time to start making more money so you can make more content.

• Gems are premium currency. It just so happens they give you a method to earn them via playing and the conversion rate is so terrible it still ends up promoting purchases anyway.
• Living World DOES NOT OFFER ENOUGH TO WARRANT CHARGING FOR THEM. They are filler story between expansions. This is why they generally release a new set of items in the gem store relevant to the Living World Story when they release, so that people can get new cosmetics that they happened to make for the living story and can manage to make profit elsewhere. Furthermore, if you miss the free story periods, you do have to pay for Living World. If anything, they should offer various packages when stories release that can provide some players with the option to spend gems on a Living World Episode __ Preparation package and they are provided with things to give them a headstart, eg: Map Currency, Maps Magic Currency, Unique Boosters in increase gain of said items, etc. Small things that cover a level of cost for them and give a small but not pay to win boost to experiencing the new map. Maybe they get their new mastery first from an extra EXP boost and they get their mini first because they got some map currency in advance, etc. Earnable items that people spent to get a little bonus on.
• Living Worlds are essentially mini expansions. We don't need more living worlds. Living World sets up for Expansions, this is a good system.
• NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Gem Store is the optional way of doing subscriptions and means people with higher incomes can splurge to cover the costs of people who cannot spend as often!!! Someone with tons of income who has pretty much brought out the entire gem store of skins and is buying packages and gatherings tools and instruments and etc, is doing this game a masssive service. And the ones who are then turning gems into gold, even moreso! This is a good system, it rewards people with money without punishing people without.
• Okay but like if someone is going to get HoT elsewhere for a lower price, it is usually because someone got access to a game they were never going to play and resold it. At the end of the day, ANet always got their money from that item, it just means someone else who got that item initially from ANet usually sells it elsewhere. And ANet makes deals with various companies to sell their product so they can get part of the cost, eg. people purchasing a copy of the game in a store will still have gotten money to Anet, in fact Anet would have gotten their money first.
• Or they could focus more on the state of the game and keep the rate of skins as they are because the skins have always been in high output, but a game can't exist just based on skins.

They have always had the capacity to make more content, they were funneling funds into another project that was failing. All this money can now be presumed to be more focused into Guild Wars, which I believe can be seen with the most recent influx of updates and changes and communication from the ANet team, which hopefully is the direction that stays from here on out.

Your suggested changes are ridiculous and would stand to damage the health of the game.

Many people chose Guild Wars because it was pay to play.There was no subscription.There was free content updates.There was skins that you could buy.There was quality of life and extra things you could buy instead of subscriptions.Yet, it wasn't pay to win.

People hate pay to win.

But if you really think ANets design is the wrong one, then I dare you to write out a comparison of the way ANet are doing this now and then go look at Warframe.

Warframe is Free To Play and still runs its game off of a similar system to Guild Wars. You can earn everything, including the premium currency by playing but you can also pay money to experience it easier without hindering other players. Warframe runs their game solely off the optional purchases and are doing beyond fine.

If Warframe can, so can Guild Wars 2 and ANet. And they are.It is not a dying monetization scheme, it is the one that is best for the community.

[TheGrimm.5624]

We all have the ability to generate gold in game and convert it to gems. When a player uses real cash to buy gems what they are measuring is the value of this worth that item since that same funds are what they might use for something in the real world. In game gold is a measure of is the time I spent to acquire that gold worth the item that I can use only in here. So a measure of in game gold is should I spend more time in here now, where as a cash sale is more am I willing to support this business and do I like where they are going. Have know a lot of people that won't question converting gold to gems but the same people will stop to say will I spend cash and the answer is do I like where they are going. Why are kickstarters a popular source of cloud funding right now is because its a way for gamers to tell developers, yes that would be a good concept or no I am not supporting that. Some of what I translated into the OP's post was that concept of a way for players to show a forward motion of yes, keep that up. With forced sub models you don't have that, its a pay for usage, which I didn't take as being proposed and would agree GW2 should NOT have.

@hellsqueen.3045 said:They have always had the capacity to make more content, they were funneling funds into another project that was failing. All this money can now be presumed to be >more focused into Guild Wars, which I believe can be seen with the most recent influx of updates and changes and communication from the ANet team, which hopefully >is the direction that stays from here on out.

Agree. Every business pulls funds from one source to try and create others, that's the nature of business. In this case I really don't like mobile games and knowing part of that funding might have been more mobile development reduced some of my support during the time and impacted some of the previous year's support. That's how players can impact business decision, they show it via sales/purchases with cash. ANet can not get that same indication via in game gem purchases via gold because it not like players can use in game gold out of game unless they are doing something that breaks TOS. Which means if they want something from the store they can just convert farmable materials into gems and acquire it, while not supporting further growth. You also can't report gold to gems sales to stockholders since it made them no money so it therefore is not used by investors to value the company and that is a factor on whether we get further game development.

When I buy an expansion I am paying for access to new content. I want the money spent on gems to go to the content between expansions. Bug fixes and keeping the lights on comes from the cost of the expansion. In reality I know it's not that cut and dry but if you had to recap it that's how I would go.

@hellsqueen.3045 said:Your suggested changes are ridiculous and would stand to damage the health of the game.

Many people chose Guild Wars because it was pay to play.There was no subscription.There was free content updates.There was skins that you could buy.There was quality of life and extra things you could buy instead of subscriptions.Yet, it wasn't pay to win.

People hate pay to win.

But if you really think ANets design is the wrong one, then I dare you to write out a comparison of the way ANet are doing this now and then go look at Warframe.

Warframe is Free To Play and still runs its game off of a similar system to Guild Wars. You can earn everything, including the premium currency by playing but you can also pay money to experience it easier without hindering other players. Warframe runs their game solely off the optional purchases and are doing beyond fine.

If Warframe can, so can Guild Wars 2 and ANet. And they are.It is not a dying monetization scheme, it is the one that is best for the community.

Will have to talk to a guildmate that plays Warframe tonight. Not sure I get your point here. After a quick glance it looks like Warframe uses a model that is more you pay the more bonus currency you get. GW2 uses a flat method with no discount the more you buy. In reality for those that spend cash to support versus convert to gold this would be an increase and kind of along the same lines that the OP is talking about. Actually was surprised GW2 didn't use this method first time I bought gems, why wasn't there a per gem discount the more was purchased. Could be a tipping scale do I spend 20 or 40 or 100.

Now I will play the other side, why doesn't GW2 offer discounts on more gems, see above, a discount would reduce the incoming cash since you would get more for less. So its up to ANet to say is there value in that reacquiring sale versus the instant sales. In this case some of the points of the posts are to say the value is in seeing a more constant reacquiring funding and insight into whether players are happy with the game direction. Most companies use subs to know their player count and to measure future expectations. An account addon would do something similar here. The price for this insight to ANet would be in some form that makes the game more convenient to the players choosing this additional option. Again, play World Of Tanks, that is a pay to win model I would never want to see here. A lot of posts in this train of thought is all or nothing where as a lot of posters are saying existing model or plus, which it looks like this thread went to as well. GW2's strength is in its B2P versus Sub2Play and should remain. They should offer additional options as well on top of that.

We still come back to the same question:

• GW2 is a B2P, and is committed to that
• Players can buy gems today with cash, there is no limit, they can do this themselves daily, weekly, monthly, whenever
• Gem sales via cash is a source of income and is optional, and there is no price break on buying more or less
• Gold to gems is NOT a source of income, it will keep some players in game and there is a chance of future sales via items and expansions

So why would an account addon that allowed for a reacquiring gem purchase with a discount or some account convenience since it was automated and allowed ANet directional feedback on how the game was being managed impact other players? We are not talking about subscription that limits game access. People that don't buy gems today still wouldn't. All it might do is give the people that do buy gems for cash already more incentive to do so if want to show support and are happy with direction. This doesn't take time from game development. The account receivable and business analysts are not coding environments or doing skill balancing.

So to players that say no other options, why? Besides it not being a service they offer today? If you had friend that is playing because GW2 has B2P and still did tomorrow why would they quit because someone else was buying gems and paying for future development?

[Crab Fear.1624]

@phokus.8934 said:

@Crab Fear.1624 said:

@phokus.8934 said:

@Crab Fear.1624 said:

@"MetalGirl.2370" said:Look, we have been over this countless times in countless other threads.No. Majority don't want anything you just listed.and if YOU want to give them money, just buy $10 gems every month to support them and if you wanna pay them for every LW just buy $20 gems.and not only do they get money but you also get to buy something on Gemstore, so it's a win-win. And, like I said in other thread, if you are not interested in what's on Gemstore, you can absolutely buy gems to pay Anet and buy ME keys instead. I love keys.

Countless businesses have refused to alter their business model, and well most of those don't exist anymore. Another is on its way out. The "we" you speak of are lime the same 30 at max that say no. I'd wager that many players don't even log into the forums, so don't go thinking you know who you represent

Except no business in their right mind will just blindly update a pricing model. There's also a reason why they forgone the subscription model because a) it's still very much profitable and b) subscription doesn't mean everyone will continue buying into it.

It's extremely short-sighted of you or anyone else to think that changing their pricing structure by simply adding in a subscription will magically make them more profitable.

It's like you forgot this game used to not be F2P.....

That's a change in pricing model.

Adding in an optional subscription package with some nice perks wouldn't be a bad idea.

Are you seriously saying that the free to play game is the same as buying it? I suggest you read up on the limitations of free to play in GW2.

So, they did change their model right? You were wrong.

Edit: Companies will adapt to changes or the will go out of business. They won't stick to a model just because YOU think it's nuts.

[Healix.5819]

@"InfernoSub.5098" said:Clearly, GW2 is doing better now than it did in 2016. No one is "struggling" - it's business as usual for everyone. Layoffs doesn't mean lack of earnings.

Keep in mind that 2016-2018 includes expansion sales, as each expansion was launched near the end of the year and spilled into the next. They also got lucky in 2018 with a series of fortunate events that kept sales higher for longer, such as popular streamers choosing GW2 after Bless failed. At the current rate, 2019 is going to be around 55 or worse if there's a shock to quarterly earnings due to the layoffs.

[Crab Fear.1624]

@derd.6413 said:

@Crab Fear.1624 said:

@derd.6413 said:let's go over them one by one

• no
• no
• no
• no
• you're argument is terrible but they probably should still consider a way to sell older xpacs cheaper
• would be nice but probably not

i'd give it a 1/6, it overall would just be pointless since anet is making enough money to support development and more money doesn't mean more good content (if it even would make them more money given that it would antagonize parts of their playerbase)

players like you, who want everything free, are in large, part of the reason those layoff happened not to long ago. not all content will meet your standards of good, but more content is better than less content.

with no expansion on the horizon any time soon, how do you expect they will keep the lights on? how will they keep the wheel turning? magic?

the freeloader player base can be antagonized all day, they are not what keeps the game going.

um no, anet lay-offs had nothing to do with anet not making enough money so you can cut the guilt tripping and i don't want everything for free, i want anet to not turn into EA or activision when it comes to monetization (or anything really)

anet makes enough money they're not going bankrupt. stop with that nonsense.

um yes

"Citing an internal email, Kotaku reported that NCSoft West’s CEO Songyee Yoon told employees: “Our live game business revenue is declining as our franchises age, delays in development on PC and mobile have created further drains against our revenue projects, while our operating costs in the west have increased … Where we are is not sustainable, and is not going to set us up for future success.”"

https://www.geekwire.com/2019/guild-wars-2-developer-arenanet-confirms-layoffs-canceled-projects/

it clearly says they were not making enough money.

they didn't make enough money to fund additional projects, and that probably contributed to it as well.

edit: thought I should point at those reasons are in that TOP 10 list I gave you.

[derd.6413]

@Crab Fear.1624 said:

@derd.6413 said:

@Crab Fear.1624 said:

@derd.6413 said:let's go over them one by one

• no
• no
• no
• no
• you're argument is terrible but they probably should still consider a way to sell older xpacs cheaper
• would be nice but probably not

i'd give it a 1/6, it overall would just be pointless since anet is making enough money to support development and more money doesn't mean more good content (if it even would make them more money given that it would antagonize parts of their playerbase)

players like you, who want everything free, are in large, part of the reason those layoff happened not to long ago. not all content will meet your standards of good, but more content is better than less content.

with no expansion on the horizon any time soon, how do you expect they will keep the lights on? how will they keep the wheel turning? magic?

the freeloader player base can be antagonized all day, they are not what keeps the game going.

um no, anet lay-offs had nothing to do with anet not making enough money so you can cut the guilt tripping and i don't want everything for free, i want anet to not turn into EA or activision when it comes to monetization (or anything really)

anet makes enough money they're not going bankrupt. stop with that nonsense.

um yes

"Citing an internal email, Kotaku reported that NCSoft West’s CEO Songyee Yoon told employees: “Our live game business revenue is declining as our franchises age, delays in development on PC and mobile have created further drains against our revenue projects, while our operating costs in the west have increased … Where we are is not sustainable, and is not going to set us up for future success.”"

https://www.geekwire.com/2019/guild-wars-2-developer-arenanet-confirms-layoffs-canceled-projects/

it clearly says they were not making enough money.

they didn't make enough money to fund additional projects, and that probably contributed to it as well.

edit: thought I should point at those reasons are in that TOP 10 list I gave you.

they weren't talking about gw2 they were talking about all their mmo's which has 2 completely different ramification

[kharmin.7683]

@TheGrimm.5624 said:

Now I will play the other side, why doesn't GW2 offer discounts on more gems, see above, a discount would reduce the incoming cash since you would get more for less.How would that impact the in-game economy?