Should Anet Monetize Content

[coso.9173]

The only way I would potentially pay a sub or buy dlcs for gw2 is that we would get vast improvements in many things, specially character customization, length of chapters, specially the story length. Size of maps, amount of extras like armor, pets, housing, (or its gw2 equivalent) emotes, mounts, etc.Compare it to ffxiv for example. Just in the amount of available stuff.

[Randulf.7614]

@coso.9173 said:The only way I would potentially pay a sub or buy dlcs for gw2 is that we would get vast improvements in many things, specially character customization, length of chapters, specially the story length. Size of maps, amount of extras like armor, pets, housing, (or its gw2 equivalent) emotes, mounts, etc.Compare it to ffxiv for example. Just in the amount of available stuff.

Yeah, but we should expect those things as part of the existing model surely? I'm not sure charging for an expac and then not getting this kind of quality without paying even more, is a message they want to put out

[HAsAsIN.6724]

@Adry.7512 said:Before voting please read description. This is assuming that Anet will abstain from any P2W models. There will be no P2W, but there will be more monetizing of content. This does not mean that players wont have access to anything unless they pay massive amount of money, but money will be required for big content (Ex: 10-35 dollars depending on the size of the content). Please consider the fact that GW2, while having massive amounts of content and a healthy playerbase that love the game, still manage to profit on the low-end in their quarterlies. They have been suffering on this subject for many years and it may effect the game's growth and longevity in the future. If you love the game and want it to continue to grow and provide us with content, and maybe even future games, then consider this before voting. Sometimes change can be hard and dangerous. But in this poll let us assume that the change wont be destructive and instead it will be fair and sustainable, while also abiding by the poll descriptions.

If you have an idea not listed, please feel free to describe it below.

idk about pay to win but free to play accounts can get the optimal gear for wvwvw.

[Danikat.8537]

@maddoctor.2738 said:

@"Cyninja.2954" said:True, the main goal here is to increase revenue and that indeed works often better without a subscription (and the alternatives given in this pole are pretty bad). So, what does a business do which wants to increase revenue and already is without a subscription?

Making Heart of Thorns free was going to cause a decline in revenue, the idea behind a move like that is to reduce the barrier for entry, and then cover up the deficiency with increased gem store sales. We don't know how much that move affected the introduction of new players to the game, we see only total revenue after all, not the different amounts earned by gem store and box sales, but it's rather clear that the "gap" created by going free to play isn't covered by increased gem sales.

Instead of changing the way the game monetized at this stage, the developers should take a look at the mix of content and gem store items they offer, and provide what the players want and are willing to support the game for. Increase revenue with content and gem store offerings, not by introducing new paywalls

We don't even see total revenue, only the profit passed on to their parent company, after all the costs to keep Anet running have been taken out. We can't tell how much of the change is down to changes in the money coming in, or changes in their expenditure.

That's one reason I don't think it does any good for us to speculate on how Anet should run their business, we don't even have enough information to know what they're already doing, just some of the end products.

[Obfuscate.6430]

I couldn't vote because I didn't like any of the options. I agree that something needs to be done but I don't think throwing money at it without addressing some core problems first will help the longevity of the game; infact asking for money for actual game content while those problems still exist might make things worse.

Guild Wars 2 never had good advertising and it still doesn't. I feel like we're an isolated group compared to other popular game communities. If we had some better PR, we might attract new players and entice those who left to return.

One of the problems is that cosmetic releases in the cash shop sometimes undermine achievable cosmetics in the game which, if we really look at it, is helping to invalidate what people work towards like reward skins and legendaries. If they gave us a way to permanently display our Black Lion Skin collections, our outfits, our Living Story reward skins it might re-ignite interest or at least create more incentive for collecting cosmetic items.
There are other strong underlaying issues but I will leave that for some other thread.

I am conflicted about the idea of monetizing story chapters. I think it would depend on the scope of the content and the price. I am conflicted because what draws people to this game is the very fact that there is no subscription and new content releases outside of expansions are free. However, if the downward spiral trend keeps happening with it's profit margin, how will it continue to develop?

[mezuzel.4987]

@kharmin.7683 said:

@Adry.7512 said:This correction does not change the fact that GW2 is not doing well. The worry is the longevity of the game.

Not doing well by your standards. Do you have access to Anet's full financials? Do you know their financial strategy? Are you an investor? It may look bleak to those on the outside, but none of us know how these figures relate to the company's vision and direction as a whole.

Well said. It never fails to amaze me how many people think they know better than ANet about whether the game is about to go into maintenance mode, ANet is in dire financial trouble, etc. - when they have zero access to internal company data/goals, or any kind of job training in the topic at hand. I'm quite certain ANet, just like every other game company out there, has employees with degrees in game design, business, etc. who are able to make well-informed decisions about the direction of the game, given their access to behind-the-scenes GW2 data and knowledge of the industry at large. (With the caveat, of course, that we're all only human and make mistakes sometimes.)

[Raknar.4735]

@Obfuscate.6430 said:I am conflicted about the idea of monetizing story chapters. I think it would depend on the scope of the content and the price. I am conflicted because what draws people to this game is the very fact that there is no subscription and new content releases outside of expansions are free.

Just wanted to chime in to say that the story chapters are technically already monetized. HoT and PoF story come with the box price, while LS chapters cost gems to unlock.Arenanet hands out those chapters for free during their active period to keep people active/attentive, but they are not actually free content releases, since anyone that wasn't around during the release time still has to buy them.

[Donutdude.9582]

This has been discussed to death. The same model is fine. Stop it.

[Taril.8619]

There's a lot that goes into financial debates, most notably costs to develop (Since that directly affects your profit margins)

But other things too, such as marketing. Now, maybe it's just me, but in the ~8 years that the game has been alive. I haven't seen ANY marketing about it, about its expansion releases, its new living world stories, the addition of a new class, mounts, gliders and what have you. Only its initial launch do I recall actually seeing GW2's name being mentioned in video game news articles.

Which is a significant limitation to attracting players. Given that the result of which, I've only seen players being advised to go play GW2 as an off remark when discussing other much more widely marketed MMO's (Such as WoW, FFXIV and BDO). While, yes, this can work, especially given how such games have been not doing particularly amazingly as of late (XIV's Shadowbringers had a great opening, but some people have noted disatisfaction as time has gone on, especially in respect to Healers whom have had a mass exodus from the role and/or game entirely due to how poorly their changes went over)

As far as the actual monetization model that GW2 uses, it can work and it has sustained the game for many years which is more than can be said for other MMO titles (RIP City of Heroes/Villains, Warhammer Online, Wildstar and Star Wars: Galaxies) and cosmetic and QoL MTX is becoming a more prominent feature of MMO's (Including ones with subscriptions like WoW and FFXIV).

At the end of the day, it simply comes down to the same things as any MMO, which is having a consistent playerbase sticking around for consistent content releases and having some source of revenue from the playerbase (Be it subscriptions or MTX the main difference between these models ends up with MTX being able to make more money due to Whales who'll purchase large amounts of even ridiculously priced things because they have money to burn, while subscriptions offer a more stable and predictable income as you can quantify how many people will be paying money each month)

[Kulvar.1239]

The game has almost no advertisement.Expansions are already sold for money, why don't we see them more often ?The poll leave almost no room for other means of monetizing the game.

There was a recent discount on the game : 50% ! Did they made any announcement to bring new players ? I haven't seen any.

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

Odd, I see video game news articles on Guild Wars 2 all the time. Whenever something happens regarding the game, the studio, etc., someone (or many someones) writes about it.

[Severo.7091]

Keep it the same. Why mess with somethiing that works.

[Fueki.4753]

They shouldn't change their business model.The last time they tried to change it (selling QoL in form of loadouts), the community wasn't very welcoming.Plus, if they sold elite specs and dungeons separated from expansions why should we bother paying for the expansions?And lore can't be charged for anyway, since there is the official wiki where it's going to be written down and the access is for free.

Also, I doubt the game is going to grow at all, if Arenanet starts to charge for expansion features separately from expansions; or if they suddenly start to charge for things that were free before.All that would drive current players away. Also, it'd cause Arenanet to gain the image of a greedy company, working against them trying to get new players.They don't need even more problems getting new players.

[Donari.5237]

@Adry.7512 said:

@Donari.5237 said:I can't say I'm sure they have a thoroughly competent Marketing division -- there've been some fairly mindboggling moves from them on that front -- but I'm sure that people outside the company without access to the numbers and stats regarding cashflow can't give meaningful unsolicited advice.

Sometimes they can give advise. Businesses function in terms of costs vs net income....based on the income that is left after costs, results in future growth, whether that be in new projects, new games, an Xpac, etc, basically anything other than the regular costs. GW2 currently dishes out a huge sum of content on a yearly basis. They dish out a map, new story, etc. every 2 months. This is good for a rich company, but its not for a company that does not yield significant quarterly income. There are many ways to monetize a game....yes it may be unfair if done in an unfair manner. But a lot of times the term unfair can be thrown around very loosely. I believe that they can monetize content in a fair manner. There may be a bit of a backlash because the population is used to something else, but if its done right, the longterm profits will show, and the players will flock to it. Fairly monetizing content is fine, and it works. A game with this amount of content needs to find a way to monetize it before it eats itself from the inside. Meaning, its not profitable, the company is starving per say. It is like an athlete that is pushing himself/herself too hard, but not giving its body enough nutrition, the athlete will crash or pass out, and the athlete's performance will dwindle.

Very well. Let me be clearer. To build on what the posters above me have said, I am pretty sure that you can't give meaningful advice. You've stated some opinions but not credentials. You've shown nothing that says you have access to their internal data and planning that would let you give constructive criticism. Even your belief that they do not yield significant quarterly income bears some scrutiny. How do we know what amount is satisfactory to the bean counters? Why should a game be leveraged for ever more moolah and then ditched when it doesn't double its intake every year? (That last is not what you said, that is a more general complaint about the game industry that I have heard from friends who actually are employed in making major games). Steady solid profit is enough to justify a game's support, imo, they don't need to squeeze the players for more and more dollars. If ANet starts to flounder financially, they'll hire experts to help them. The odds of a forum post telling them something they don't already know are pretty low.

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

Your other thread should show you that most of the playerbase is happy with the current model.Chasing away most of the playerbase by changing the model does not bode well for increased income.

[Black Storm.6974]

Monetising the content would be against the philosophy at the base of Guild Wars 2.

I think that most of the actual player base could feel cheated (and they would be right), having to buy more than just big expansions. Many player joined the game thinking that they will never have to pay for other contents, because this is what ArenaNet told to them.

[Teratus.2859]

I've already made my views on subfees very clear on multiple threads.. (Long and short.. I hate them)

However!I have also been a long time and vocal advocate for traditional paid expansions in Gw2 as well.This is where Anet has dropped the ball in Gw2 quite a lot over the years.I'm not talking about the quality of Gw2 expansions either.. i'm talking about the frequency of them.

This game is 8 years old now and we've only barely gotten an announcement of a 3rd xpack.I believe expansions are the right way to go in MMO's.. but I don't hate the living world, in fact I respect Anet a lot for sticking with such a generous free content attitude to it over all these years.. and I am greatful for all the free content they have given us as well.I've enjoyed the living world over the years even though the waiting between episodes has always been a drag for me.

But given the choice I would have preferred to have new content delivered in large paid expansions rather than be dripped out in small episodes over many years.I much prefer getting lots of content in one go and I don't mind paying a one time fee for that, hence why I have no regrets about my collectors edition of Gw2 nor about buying the ultimate editions of both expansions.. a trend I will be continuing with the 3rd one as well. ^^

[Arukayos.1798]

Honestly, I think the only thing that's needed to incentivize player purchases more is even more cosmetics. At first glance, this sounds kind of ridiculous considering that Guild Wars 2 already has a gigantic selection of cosmetics, right? However, it's worth noting that the biggest gold sinks are cosmetics on the gem store, mount skins, and of course - legendaries. Legendaries are what keep people earning gold. Now, I understand that there are TB Barons and people maximizing the economy for their in-game income, but for an overwhelming majority of the playerbase, the highest gold/hour activity is your day job at McDonalds. The game is deliberately designed in a way where all farms give middling amount of rewards to encourage Cash-To-Gems purchases, and this is a good thing.

This is where the problem comes in, however. The game doesn't get light/medium/heavy armor skins often enough, only adding like 3 with PoF for example. The rest is pretty much our core selection. People enjoy mixing and matching their armor sets - outfits are rather underwhelming, and the selection could certainly be improved. Things like the "Profane Set" or the "Viper Set" on the gemstore were huge hits, and they should consider investing more into those as opposed to outfits. The added homogeneity of many armors looking too similar to one another is also an issue.

Or here's another example: there still isn't a Scepter skin as flashy as several legendaries for other weapon types. Both Meteorlogicus and Xiuquatl are kind of underwhelming in my opinion. This means that if my main uses a scepter, I don't really have anything to work towards, even though I would love to be working on a legendary. I honestly believe that, compared to balancing elite specs, figuring out the meta, adding lore and voice acting, designing entire maps etc as expansion content - a weapon skin is waaaay less effort. There should be at least 7-8 legendaries per weapon type, ranging from subdued to flashy for each type of player, as these are what ultimately keep people playing the game and in many cases - decide to drop some $$$ on them.

So yeah, no whooping huge changes. A few more grand cosmetics which are rather hefty endeavors and/or require large amounts of gold is really all that we need.

PS: I didn't select either of the choices since they weren't very exhaustive and didn't propose more monetization options beyond "hur dur dlc content" or "nothing needs to change!!" - I suggest making a better poll.

[casualkenny.9817]

Think the bigger problem is replenishing the player pool. Players drop out of games all the time, some are easily bored by nature, some have completed all that they wanted to do, some do not find the horizontal system appealing, some take breaks. This is all part of the natural process for games.

While older players eventually reach some form of saturation point, in that they have more or less bought all the acc upgrades and skins that they would want to.

The solution cannot be to try to get subscription money from(a) mature players who already don't have much left to do in-game, and who mostly have stayed because they are comfortable with the current model (pricing and game)(b) potential new players, who will look at this monetization, and just go elsewhere.

That's the whole point of making the core game free years ago, dropping the price of older expansions, then making the older one free, etc. It is to ensure that the active population in the Impt zones do not fall below the critical threshold that would get this game branded as a truly-dead game. Having more monetization is impt for more profit or survival, but having low in-game population is instantly fatal.

In the end, a game's lifespan will depend more on its ability to continuously draw new customers (both to replenish, and also to have fresh accs that need pay-upgrades and that might convert gems to gold).

If the game developers cannot do it (and I believe old games generally will have this inevitable problem), then we just enjoy the game while it lasts. All things live and die in their proper times. (provided that that murderer doesn't do it again)

You want to offer something more constructive, think of ways to make the game content more fun or known to the market, to draw new blood and retain old. The gemstore team will take care of the rest.

[Headhunter.4796]

The current model seems fine. I mean: I bought both expansions and all available living story seasons since I appreciate the content.If I can do it, other people can do it, and they reel in like what, 50-100 euro for that alone? Sounds enough to me.

[ShinigamiPL.4086]

My few comments:

• The idea that you receive new content if you pay for it is fair. But there should be a new content in the first place. ESO launched in 2014 and already received 3 exp and 4th is on the way. WoW get exp every 2 years. GW2 had only 2 . So if Anet wants our money maybe they should come up with some product to sell?
• GW2 is in P2W model and it's not a bad one. HoT came with stronger characters (specs) and inventory than vanila. PoF was the same. We all survived that
• Anet in my opinion should stay with current business model without additional dlc that we pay for. I think that dlc model comes with some bad blood attitude where developers say that we CAN buy but no pressure, but on the other hand if you buy that OPTIONAL dlc with that dungeon (no harms right?) it will most likely come with some reward (like armor with some dedicated prefix) and how will we balance it? Im afraid that it will end with being stronger / more usefull so it will be aggresive p2w model so maybe its just simpler to say: you should pay for gw2 every 2 years.
• If they wanna increase player base they should really ask and make some research why ppl left in the first place. Abandoned content like wvw or pvp - ring any bells? Is this the special time of a year when someone from Anet come and say about this Major wvw update that they have been working for probably since GW1 Nightfall exp?

[Cynder.2509]

Maybe a plus subscription which includes a crafting bag will suffice/irony off

No, I'm completely fine with how things were and have been. One of the major things why I didn't like MMOs was because almost every single one (talking about good ones that aren't p2w here) of them had a subscription fee at that time and I didn't like the aspect of paying for something every month when you don't even know if you have the time and energy to actually play actively. I'd rather buy something once and have access to it whenever I want. All that aside from the fact that I'm too broke for a subscription fee every month. By the way as I mentioned earlier that I didn't like MMOs is more meant as me having had a love/hate relationship with them as I always liked stuff like their worldbuilding, lore, immersion, creature design, race designs and soundtrack. The aspects that I didn't like were, as mentioned, subscription fees, the complexicity of builds and stuff, the fact that you need a stable internet (during the early 2000s this was quite a problem here) and that they were based on PC (and I didn't had one in the early 2000s). However GW2 changed my opinion of MMOs completely and so I grew very fond of them. I'm thankful for such experience <3

[kharmin.7683]

@ShinigamiPL.4086 said:My few comments:

• The idea that you receive new content if you pay for it is fair. But there should be a new content in the first place. ESO launched in 2014 and already received 3 exp and 4th is on the way. WoW get exp every 2 years. GW2 had only 2 . So if Anet wants our money maybe they should come up with some product to sell?Hard to compare GW2 and these other games that have a subscription based model. Of course ESO and WoW should have a more aggressive release schedule; if not, the subscribers would leave.

• GW2 is in P2W model and it's not a bad one. HoT came with stronger characters (specs) and inventory than vanila. PoF was the same. We all survived thatHow is GW2 P2W? How does a player win in GW2? Everyone has the same ability to complete all of the content with the same rewards. Is there some way to beat the game that I don't know about?

• Anet in my opinion should stay with current business model without additional dlc that we pay for. I think that dlc model comes with some bad blood attitude where developers say that we CAN buy but no pressure, but on the other hand if you buy that OPTIONAL dlc with that dungeon (no harms right?) it will most likely come with some reward (like armor with some dedicated prefix) and how will we balance it? Im afraid that it will end with being stronger / more usefull so it will be aggresive p2w model so maybe its just simpler to say: you should pay for gw2 every 2 years.No. No subscription model, please. If a player wants to do as you suggest, then they can purchase gems on a schedule or in a large portion every two years.

• If they wanna increase player base they should really ask and make some research why ppl left in the first place. Abandoned content like wvw or pvp - ring any bells? Is this the special time of a year when someone from Anet come and say about this Major wvw update that they have been working for probably since GW1 Nightfall exp?This assumes that they aren't doing this already. Just because Anet is not asking on the forums (which is a very small portion of the player base) does not mean that they don't have other metrics that help drive the direction of their resources. As for content being abandoned, perhaps their statistics show that WvW and PvP have a very small population when compared to other content?

[coso.9173]

I'd personally buy more things from the gemstone if it was available, but their model of cycling things makes it hard to find the thing you want when it is available.Also I hate 99% of the outfits. I don't want to look like a shiny disco ball. I don't like floating crystals, or huge shoulder pads, or shining armor, I want simple well designed stuff.

[Ashantara.8731]

I am not going to pay for those servers (EU)! :angry: