I would play GW2 more if it was a subscription-based MMO. [MERGED]

[Obtena.7952]

1 hour ago, Samnang.1879 said:

 

6 new world bosses or something new literally every week and new content every month. 

 

People will take that over 5 years = 1 expansion, + HEAVY content drought in between... this is why WoW sells so well. And before people tell me to go play wow, i'm not going to play it even if someone put a gun to my head, i'm just using it as an example.

This stuff isn't actually true. You seem to be jumping ravines here to make whatever point you are trying to do ... the fact is that how fast content is developed has nothing to do with how the revenue is made, subs or GS purchases. That's just bad assumptions you are making. 

[voltaicbore.8012]

4 hours ago, Riaenvyr.2091 said:

I completely agree with absolutely every single word You've just said, even though the last three make me more curious, but I completely agree with them, too!

No, really.
Where did You get the impression that any of these ideas would go against my grain?

 

Well my general point here is that GW2 might not have looked all that different (from a monetization angle) had it been designed with a subscription from the ground up. My impression of your position is that you think the game would be noticeably different, thanks to the difference between f2p and sub models. That's it, really. We do see many (if not the vast majority) of issues around this topic quite similarly, it seems.

 

I did make an analogy earlier basically stating that GW2 would be a different game (the whole Tesla with a combustion engine wouldn't really be a Tesla in the first place), but that was very imprecise on my part. I still struggle to put it more clearly, but I think a more accurate representation of my feelings are as follows:

 

(1) I think GW2 really wouldn't change that much, subscription or not. But

(2) if designing this game with a subscription means that it took on a lot of the typically restrictive features of other big sub games (gear treadmill, BiS gear being locked behind RNG drops in raids, losing all conveniences when sub lapses, no more gold to gem conversion, etc), that kind of game can hardly be called GW2 at all.

 

As for more gameplay-oriented (as opposed to monetization and pay-for-convenience) aspects of the game, I think those would be even more unaffected by the subscription model. Without going on a salty old veteran scree about the numerous opportunities ANet arguably squandered over the years, I think ANet's primary issues of (1) preferring to throw a new shiny system at players instead of fixing existing ones, and (2) not caring enough about world building (in a game that lacks the pure gameplay hooks that other lore-indifferent titles do) would remain unchanged. Going back to the idea of subscriptions pressuring devs to make games worth players' time vs f2ps making games inconvenient enough to justify one-time purchases, I think the sad reality is that ANet thinks that abandoning dungeons and giving us fractals instead is what makes the game worth our time, just as they think throwaway living world mastery tracks is also worth our time.

 

I guess this kind of gets into the territory of reward structure as well, @Malitias.8453. I'm probably not the best person to talk about rewards in GW2, as I'm not a fan of most of the cosmetics I see on the gem store. I think most of them are too gaudy and over-designed, I'm more a fan of simple/clean lines. As such, I'm very indifferent to seeing some of these skins move out of the gem store and into the game itself, and I don't think I have a good perspective on the value of doing such a thing. As for non-cosmetic gem store purchases coming into the game as gameplay rewards, I get the feeling that GW2 would follow the model of "get these conveniences when you have a sub, and lose almost all of them when your sub lapses." I don't see ANet making bank tabs or stuff like that directly earnable, but instead might just retain the gold-to-gems conversion system as a catch-all in-game-reward system.

Edited May 5, 2021 by voltaicbore.8012

[Maikimaik.1974]

2 hours ago, Joote.4081 said:

A subscription would be a darn sight cheaper than the gem store, that's for sure

It's already been calculated that buying literally every account upgrade available during the 9 years since GW2 released would still only cost half as much money as staying subscibed to WoW for the same amount of time.

If you were to only buy what I deem somewhat necessary to play comfortably you'd spend only a fith of the amount you would have spent on a WoW subscripton + all the expansions released since then.

Edited May 5, 2021 by Maikimaik.1974

[Maikimaik.1974]

2 hours ago, Samnang.1879 said:

 

6 new world bosses or something new literally every week and new content every month. 

 

People will take that over 5 years = 1 expansion, + HEAVY content drought in between... this is why WoW sells so well. And before people tell me to go play wow, i'm not going to play it even if someone put a gun to my head, i'm just using it as an example.

WoW is experiencing one of it's biggest mid-expansion content droughts ever right now. It's been almost 6 months since the last major patch and it'll be a couple more months till the next one.

[Malitias.8453]

20 minutes ago, Maikimaik.1974 said:

WoW is experiencing one of it's biggest mid-expansion content droughts ever right now. It's been almost 6 months since the last major patch and it'll be a couple more months till the next one.

That's actually the reason why I looked for other MMOs to play and finally gave GW2 another try.

[Tatwi.3562]

On 5/1/2021 at 1:51 PM, Aodlop.1907 said:

Unpopular, I know. 

But a sub-based GW2 would mean that all the amazing mounts and sets that have been released over the years would be earnable in game, by completing achievements, dungeons, raids or PvP feats instead of...bought with real life money, or gold grinded by following a zerg of 40+ players circling on the same map for hours.

I love GW2. But it does feel pointless sometimes. The feeling of logging in and wondering what to do is a very common feedback among people who've stopped playing GW2.

 

I just wish more rewards were unlockable in game. Sadly, this can't happen with their current business model, and to me that's a shame.

I've always played the game with the idea that converting gold to gems and buying something useful was my "end game content". So from that perspective, every item sold with gems is "unlockable in game". Of course, I am imagine that most of the rest of you do more than spend 8 years wandering the world collecting random things, doing random things, and finishing very little. Still, I even though I don't actively participate in most of the game play systems required to unlock items (no raids/fractals/strikes/drm (1 for story, grudgingly...), have yet finished HoT or PoF maps even), I can still observe that there is a heck of a lot of content that is there in the game to unlock.

 

I'm not saying it's wrong for you to share your thoughts and opinions, but I am saying that I think you've got this one wrong. A subscription wouldn't fix the problem of you not having enough real life time to "collect'em all", because I really don't think anyone is supposed to do everything or get everything or complete everything - there's simply too much for that to be feasible for most people (especially adults and children with other hobbies/pursuits).

[Malitias.8453]

 

34 minutes ago, Tatwi.3562 said:

A subscription wouldn't fix the problem of you not having enough real life time to "collect'em all", because I really don't think anyone is supposed to do everything or get everything or complete everything - there's simply too much for that to be feasible for most people (especially adults and children with other hobbies/pursuits).

I think you might have misunderstood what OP meant.
He wants more skins, especially the ones for mounts, to be unlockable through specific ingame activities, like a griffon skin as proof for successfully clearing a specific raid.

A lot of vanity items are a testimony to either the amount of time spent grinding or cash thrown, rather than proof of skill.

[DarcShriek.5829]

I wouldn't play at all if GW2 was sub based.

[Samnang.1879]

6 hours ago, Maikimaik.1974 said:

WoW is experiencing one of it's biggest mid-expansion content droughts ever right now. It's been almost 6 months since the last major patch and it'll be a couple more months till the next one.

 

Which proves my point that GW2 needs more money to release content faster to keep players regular. And to get money, make optional sub model.

 

I----------------------------

[The Greyhawk.9107]

2 hours ago, Samnang.1879 said:

 

Which proves my point that GW2 needs more money to release content faster to keep players regular. And to get money, make optional sub model.

 

I----------------------------

How does that prove your point?  If WoW, which already has subs and as such an allegedly steadier stream of income, is still having a content drought, then why would GW2 adopting any kind of Sub system for sure translate to more frequent content?

[Samnang.1879]

1 hour ago, The Greyhawk.9107 said:

How does that prove your point?  If WoW, which already has subs and as such an allegedly steadier stream of income, is still having a content drought, then why would GW2 adopting any kind of Sub system for sure translate to more frequent content?

 

It proves that people leave a game to find a new one when there is content drought.

 

 

I---------------------------------------

 

...don't understand why so many are against sub model. I pay more for a large big mac meal weekly than MMO subs... and big mac does more damage to one's health than paying for a sub in a game. I---------------------------------------

 

realy struggle to understand this mentality that a game has to be free for pay forever.

Edited May 6, 2021 by Samnang.1879

[Hesione.9412]

2 hours ago, Samnang.1879 said:

 

It proves that people leave a game to find a new one when there is content drought.

 

 

I---------------------------------------

 

...don't understand why so many are against sub model. I pay more for a large big mac meal weekly than MMO subs... and big mac does more damage to one's health than paying for a sub in a game. I---------------------------------------

 

realy struggle to understand this mentality that a game has to be free for pay forever.

Those of us that can't afford a sub also aren't buying large big mac meals. Or any takeaways.

[Dawdler.8521]

3 hours ago, Samnang.1879 said:

 

It proves that people leave a game to find a new one when there is content drought.

 

 

I---------------------------------------

 

...don't understand why so many are against sub model. I pay more for a large big mac meal weekly than MMO subs... and big mac does more damage to one's health than paying for a sub in a game. I---------------------------------------

 

realy struggle to understand this mentality that a game has to be free for pay forever.

Yes people leave when there is less content.

 

And sub games have just as much or more content drought even when they are driven by a studio 10x the size of Anet.

 

What exact part of this makes it so hard to understand why people say sub doesnt make a game better?

Edited May 6, 2021 by Dawdler.8521

[SoulGuardian.6203]

This post is as irrelevant as it is utter nonsense. ANet have said countless times that they have never used a subscription fee and never will.

If you are happy to pay subscription, which I'm sorry to say it just makes no sense why you'd play more by paying it- You could buy gems religiously every week to help out the devs and contribute... I'm sure though, this post was for the mere purpose to grab people's attention!?

[The Greyhawk.9107]

5 hours ago, Samnang.1879 said:

 

It proves that people leave a game to find a new one when there is content drought.

 

 

I---------------------------------------

 

...don't understand why so many are against sub model. I pay more for a large big mac meal weekly than MMO subs... and big mac does more damage to one's health than paying for a sub in a game. I---------------------------------------

 

realy struggle to understand this mentality that a game has to be free for pay forever.

That money adds up.  I've been play GW2 pretty regularly since launch.  I bought the base game and each of the current expansions. Add in a 15 usd sub each month over that length of time comes to roughly 1600 usd.  That several times more than I've paid even with Gem Store purchases to date.  Plus there have been a couple periods in during those years that I've been unemployed, and wouldn't have been able to play this game at all for several months at a time.

 

I'm sorry you don't understand, but try something that may help.  Try to find a game that started Free to play or buy to play that switch to subs and managed to not fold.

[Obtena.7952]

9 hours ago, Samnang.1879 said:

 

Which proves my point that GW2 needs more money to release content faster to keep players regular. And to get money, make optional sub model.

 

I----------------------------

That doesn't make sense ... something happening or not in WoW has nothing to do with GW2. 

[Milosz.5938]

Sub -base sounds like 'not wise' joke. For you maybe OK but... some people maybe play in Guild Wars 2 because it's buy to play (?). If you want subscription base game go WoW or FFXIV.  GW2 has great payment model   -   akysh from it with such horrible ideas.

 

[Rukario.1695]

Main issues:

1. Pretty much all of their revenue comes from both F2P & P2O Expansion players.  Going sub-based would basically kill the playerbase, because people play games to have fun, not to feel like they are locked into a subscription service that they have to use or otherwise feel like they've wasted their money.  The Gem Store is there as both a gold sink and to fund the game, it isn't going to go away just because of a subscription.  We are already paying for the LWS's that we missed in addition to the expansions.  Those who avoid subscription-based games aren't going to stay with GW2 just because it's GW2.
    
2. You have posted about this and have already been told all of this before.  Either you're dense or you just want to get rid of players because they have skins that you just want / to complain you can't just get for free / or you want to feel special because for some reason you think them buying it (just like you) somehow makes it lose value because it's not rare anymore.  You say you want a sub service, then make it yourself.  Buy gems once a month.  There, you get your skins and your sub.  Leave the livelihood of other players out of your entitled, repetitive posts about the same topic.
    
3. Games do not go from F2P / P2O Expansion => Subscription.  They go from Subscription => F2P / P2O Expansion.

Edited May 6, 2021 by Rukario.1695

[Malitias.8453]

1 hour ago, Rukario.1695 said:

Going sub-based would basically kill the playerbase, because people play games to have fun, not to feel like they are locked into a subscription service that they have to use or otherwise feel like they've wasted their money.

No argument against that it would most likely kill the player-base, your reasoning is illogical though. People enjoy games in different ways and the payment model is not defining what is fun to them. It influences which design decisions can or must be made in order to make the product profitable.
Edit: It's these design decisions, which are influenced by the payment model, that people have different opinions on.
I don't know anybody who "enjoys" paying money in any way, no matter what kind of payment model.

 

1 hour ago, Rukario.1695 said:

Either you're dense or you just want to get rid of players because they have skins that you just want / to complain you can't just get for free / or you want to feel special because for some reason you think them buying it (just like you) somehow makes it lose value because it's not rare anymore.

Going into insult-mode, because you disagree with, or don't understand the way someone else enjoys his video games just throws the accusations you're making right back at you.

 

 

Edited May 6, 2021 by Malitias.8453

[Zephire.8049]

19 hours ago, Maikimaik.1974 said:

WoW is experiencing one of it's biggest mid-expansion content droughts ever right now. It's been almost 6 months since the last major patch and it'll be a couple more months till the next one.

Reminds me of the infamous drought of 2010.

 

ICC came out on December 8th, 2009.

Ruby Sanctum on June 22nd, 2010.

Cataclysm on Dec 7th, 2010.

 

That was it, and Ruby Sanctum was dropped by players after a few weeks because it had all the depth of IBS' finale with loot that was weaker than ICC's loot.

 

During this time players still had to pay their monthly subscription and then pay for Cataclysm to top it off. I paid nearly $300CAD during this time only for my main classes to be utterly gutted after the fact (they were fine in the Cata beta), which was when I quit WoW for good and swore off subscription-only games since your money does not guarantee content. (Plus all the psychological aspects of the subscription-only model)

 

GW2 has had content droughts before but at least you aren't expected to pay for the privilege of waiting, and, iirc, has never gone a full year with only a minor content patch.

[Malitias.8453]

@Zephire.8049 I usually don't play a game when there's no content to play, which is when I unsub. You're making it sound as if you're forced to play during content droughts.

[Maikimaik.1974]

20 minutes ago, Malitias.8453 said:

@Zephire.8049 I usually don't play a game when there's no content to play, which is when I unsub. You're making it sound as if you're forced to play during content droughts.

Many players are on a 6 month sub because it's much cheaper that way, so if you're unlucky you cannot unsub at the right moment.

[Zephire.8049]

26 minutes ago, Malitias.8453 said:

@Zephire.8049 I usually don't play a game when there's no content to play, which is when I unsub. You're making it sound as if you're forced to play during content droughts.

If you know there's not going to be any content any time soon, sure, you can unsub. But companies rarely tell you "There will be no content for a year" so it's either keep playing to prepare for new content you think will come out or unsub to save money and potentially have to grind old content out ASAP if new content does drop.

 

There's also the social aspect of it, so even if you don't have an interest in the (lack of) content, if all your friends continue to play it's either pay to also play so you can socialize with them or drop it and potentially lose that social group. If you've never run into that issue, cool and I'm glad for you, but back in the 00s it was a tough choice at times.

 

And as @Maikimaik.1974 said, if you sub for multiple months at a time you can't unsub in the middle of it to save money—you are out that 3-, 6-, 12-month sub money regardless of how much or how little content is put out or if you decide to play or not.

[Malitias.8453]

9 minutes ago, Maikimaik.1974 said:

Many players are on a 6 month sub because it's much cheaper that way, so if you're unlucky you cannot unsub at the right moment.

I don't know anyone who does that personally, but I see the point.
Would be a different thing if you were able to just pause a subsciption, but that's usually not possible and/or involves a lot of effort (talking to support/billing).
I guess it's kind of like pre-ordering a game. Shouldn't do that.

[Malitias.8453]

5 minutes ago, Zephire.8049 said:

There's also the social aspect of it, so even if you don't have an interest in the (lack of) content, if all your friends continue to play it's either pay to also play so you can socialize with them or drop it and potentially lose that social group. If you've never run into that issue, cool and I'm glad for you, but back in the 00s it was a tough choice at times.

Is it kind of like what people refer to as "peer-pressure"?
I really actually never encountered that or thought about it.
Lucky me, I guess?