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

[Riaenvyr.2091]

1 hour ago, Obtena.7952 said:

No, it won't because all of these game philosophy and design decisions that were made to target a market that was underserved when the game was released are not bad or wrong decisions and they don't need to be revisited because people on the fringe of that market segment don't like them. If the game is too easy or the rewards to 'mobile' or whatever ... then the answer isn't to change the game, it's to play a game you DO like. 

 

It's not about being and obedient soldier or rebelling either ... it's about appreciating how the game appeals to me as a player, probably because I'm firmly in the center of the market that Anet wants this game to appeal to. I really don't want the game to stray from a model that not only works for me, but for many other people and for Anet as well. 

But... why not both?
Why would You voice just a total obliteration - or deportation - of those entertained by something else than You?
What would be keeping ANet from putting the lowest amount of effort to add, say, a different pair of horns to the newest skyscale skin and put it as a reward for something specific, like the DRM challenge mode achievs, or even a brand new challenge mode for the CMs, say, a 100% healing reduction? A simple instance-wide aura, and everything else could be kept the same, sans, perhaps, a thing against WP shenanigans, turning those to Contested as long as the boss has less than 100% HP?
Wouldn't hurt them, wouldn't hurt people who feel like blue is the only real color in the world, and that tiny number of people who keep crying about gameplay would have their hands full with joy.

Nobody wants to change the game. We wouldn't be here if we didn't love the game to the point of care.
But if Your girl starts to cut herself, You don't break up with her 'cuz she's mad. You ask her what's wrong, no?

[Obtena.7952]

13 minutes ago, Riaenvyr.2091 said:

But... why not both?

That's not a relevant question to me. I couldn't even answer it if I wanted to because it requires too much speculation about how either or both options impacts players and the game. I'm not playing that game with you. 

 

The question is WHY both if what we have is working ... the status quo simply doesn't need justification. On the other hand, any change DOES. 

Edited May 11, 2021 by Obtena.7952

[Chaba.5410]

I really don't understand why people haven't learned yet after years and years of this in other games that subscriptions don't translate into developers designing the game the way you want it to be designed.

[Clex Mix.7624]

4 hours ago, Riaenvyr.2091 said:

Where do I put the Gem Store stuff? It's enlightening, I just have no clue how it fits anything I've said in the quoted post.

Blizz learned that through the absurd success that was The Burning Crusade AND the golden age of WoW - Wrath of the Lich King? Or You mean the flop Cataclysm was, because Blizz nerfed it to the ground so people don't feel like they have to play the game? Pandas were decent, as I've heard, but then Dailylords of Draenor hit all the "sweet" spots, with Legion being praised to high Argus again. Haven't heard many positive things about BfA or Shadowlands, even from Bellular, and he's about as passionate for WoW's hope as WoodenPotatoes is for Tyria's. Well. Was.

Pretty sure the only terrible model Blizzard learned of was selling their integrity to money... and Activision.
BuT dOn'T yOu GuYs HaVe PhOnEs!? Not like there's enough real Blizzard nowadays there to hold the solemn vigil.

 

 

I have no idea how everybody comes to that conclusion.
The title says "I would play GW2 more if it was a subscription-based MMO."
I see there's a word "subscription" in the title, so the rest of the sentence is probably null and void by then, and even if a person looking to spread some hatred to balance out Eva Green's beauty makes it to the actual post, there's also "sub-based GW2" right at the beginning, which means that nothing, regardless of the amount of the word "sex" used, would catch their righteous attention anymore.

But the post is elaborating on the titular statement from the standpoint of wishing for rewards being available through gameplay, and the game having more "real" goals for players to work towards, again, for the sake of incentivizing actually playing the game.
Sure, claiming that all things from the Gem Store as they are now would simply be available for achievs and the like isn't true, but there's much more nuance to literally every single aspect of the debate than just to crucify Aodlop for suggesting such an ungodly idea.

I still think the original post was more a sigh of disappointment than even a semblance of a suggestion, but perhaps I just see way too much more through this faithful helmet than intended.

Do you not remember your own arguments you try and make? See this is where you should stop trying to act like being a philosophical savant and take the time to remember the dribble you’ve spouted. No, I didn’t direct quote the exact line from your memoirs, if you’ve tried it via mobile... just ain’t gonna happen. But I’ll help you get back to your unrelated point that TB’s BETA videos.... yes beta.... didn’t have much in regards to the gemstore? Yeah... yet day one, actually according to the wiki a day before launch, the primeval “outfit” was available.

 

You keep trying to make a round about way of saying “gem store bad”. Well here we are, 9 years later. Games still pretty populated. Out of curiosity would you be willing to pm your api? Or at least share a ss of your achievement points? From my experience with other games it always seemed to be the most vocal about change we’re also the least relevant when it came to such things actually impacting their gameplay.

[Ashen.2907]

2 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

No, it won't because all of these game philosophy and design decisions that were made to target a market that was underserved when the game was released are not bad or wrong decisions and they don't need to be revisited because people on the fringe of that market segment don't like them. If the game is too easy or the rewards to 'mobile' or whatever ... then the answer isn't to change the game, it's to play a game you DO like. 

 

It's not about being and obedient soldier or rebelling either ... it's about appreciating how the game appeals to me as a player, probably because I'm firmly in the center of the market that Anet wants this game to appeal to. I really don't want the game to stray from a model that not only works for me, but for many other people and for Anet as well. 

This.

 

If a family recognized that there were no Italian restaurants in the area and opened one to serve interest in that type of food, someone coming in and arguing that they would eat there more if the restaurant was changed to serve sushi instead would be demonstrating that they should find a different restaurant...not that the restaurant created specifically to serve the demand for Italian food should stop serving their existing customers.

[DreamyAbaddon.3265]

I don't support this at all.

GW2 should NEVER be a sub game...

If the game becomes a subscription game then the devs would be incentivized to making games grindy as hell to keep you paying and staying and that is exactly the type of content I came here to escape from.

 

I prefer to support ArenaNet by purchasing what we presently have in the cash shop rather than a sub.

I prefer to purchase new story content than a sub.

 

[Gotejjeken.1267]

On 5/4/2021 at 8:01 PM, Riaenvyr.2091 said:

Alright, I got officially bored by the "make your own sub" argument.
Let's look at the total cost of maxing out on everything a sub-based game would give everybody for a monthly devotion.

The first character cost (because some things are account-wide):
Additional Crafting License: 2x 800 gems.
Bank Tab Expansion: 16x 600 gems.
Build Storage Expansion: 7x 500 gems.
Shared Inventory Slot: 4x 2800 gems + 2x 700 gems.
Storage Expander: 7x 800 gems.
Bag Slot Expansion: 5x 400 gems.
Build Template Expansion: 3x 300 gems.
Equipment Template Expansion: 4x 500 gems.

Total: 37 800 gems - 472,50 €

Additional character cost:
Bag Slot Expansion: 5x 400 gems.
Build Template Expansion: 3x 300 gems.
Equipment Template Expansion: 4x 500 gems.
(Character Slot itself: 800 gems.)

Total: 4900 (5700) gems - a breath above 61,25 (71,25) €

Although, because we can't have nice things and the inability to buy exact amount of in-game currencies with money is just another manipulation attempt, we'd have to buy more gems than we actually need (only 200, granted my calculations are correct, but that requires a bunch of combinations of available values on the buyer's part, and any leftover is already a perceived "discount" on the next thing to buy, which is a well-known trick abused on a regular basis by pretty much everybody).

No Living World, no special areas, no costumes, no skins, no quality of life, no nothing.

As such, for the price of a fully fleshed-out first character, you could easily get an old car, a pretty musical instrument, or, in some cases, a whole apartment, while every other character would, without a slot, trade for a triple-A game at launch, plus a cup of tea.

For comparison, a monthly subscription to WoW, which currently costs 13€ at the worst value of buying it each month, would yield a full access to everything the game has to offer for a few months more than 3 years for the price of the first character, jumping to about two weeks short of 8 years with the best value of 11€.


The reason why such an atrocious price tag that nobody without a severe lack of sense or their mother's wallet would ever even consider willingly is the F2P monetization model, which always makes everything look palatable, a philosophy native to the model, mind you, not ANet.

Still, the main thing I want to bring up - and why the "make your own sub" argument is utter trash - is the difference between the F2P and sub-based games' structure.
As I've said a couple of times at this point, a F2P game is developed in a vastly different way than a sub-based one, so a "make you own sub" would work ONLY if everybody was forced to make their own sub, which is basically a regular sub already.

F2P games make money the same way an illusionist baffles the audience: a classic misdirection.

And before you start unloading your "But GW2 has gold-to-gem conversion!" miniguns, consider the fact that most other F2P games gift players a lot of free stuff otherwise found only in cash shop (e. g. customization items/bag slots in Vindictus), or said items are actively being traded on the auction house (BDO outfits immediately come to mind).
So although I'd say our cash shop version is superior to any overall, because we're able to buy literal everything offered in the Gem Store with our playtime, it's far from unique in the MMORPG market, and certainly far from perfect.

But shoot away, anyway.
Ideas are bulletproof.

 

A bit ironic bringing up Vindictus when Nexon (in general) has the WORST F2P structures in existence.  Vindictus was particularly bad (I played from Beta in 2010 for about 3 years) and died early because of the 'boat structure' where you had a limited number of free runs a day and if you wanted more had to buy tokens / passes / etc.  Not to even get into the farce that enhancing weapons was...

 

Anyway, GW2 at its core is a 'buy to play' model anyway.  You have to buy expansions and such to get full features, the gem store is really just an addon.  I mean yeah all the QoL stuff would cost (bank expansions, char slots, etc.) but really even with the calculations above it's only $500 which is less than a retail PS5 and the game has been around for almost 9 years now.  

 

In short GW1 was B2P, GW2 is B2P and should stay this way--if you want subs go play WoW or watch Netflix.  

Edited May 11, 2021 by Gotejjeken.1267

[Riaenvyr.2091]

55 minutes ago, Clex Mix.7624 said:

Do you not remember your own arguments you try and make? See this is where you should stop trying to act like being a philosophical savant and take the time to remember the dribble you’ve spouted. No, I didn’t direct quote the exact line from your memoirs, if you’ve tried it via mobile... just ain’t gonna happen. But I’ll help you get back to your unrelated point that TB’s BETA videos.... yes beta.... didn’t have much in regards to the gemstore? Yeah... yet day one, actually according to the wiki a day before launch, the primeval “outfit” was available.

 

You keep trying to make a round about way of saying “gem store bad”. Well here we are, 9 years later. Games still pretty populated. Out of curiosity would you be willing to pm your api? Or at least share a ss of your achievement points? From my experience with other games it always seemed to be the most vocal about change we’re also the least relevant when it came to such things actually impacting their gameplay.

Of course I don't, that's why the quotes exist.
I talk to anybody who comes in and challenges my ideas, because why wouldn't I, which usually means many people and, therefore, many ideas at once, especially with so many virtue lighthouses around who don't have much to say except "Burn, heretic!" You know, they might not be exactly creative in their assaults, but I just can't let them all down in the same way. Call it a character quirk.
But such people wouldn't be able to look me straight in the eyes due to those gnarled spines, so there's no real and lasting impression left, even if they were to throw themselves at me with all the logical force they could muster combined.
You think I'd need to iron my shirt after that grand total of a single - but very passionate! - newton hit me?
Can't look bad at the funeral of their mindless rage, now can I.

If I wanted to say that I think the Gem Store is bad, I'm pretty sure I'm narcissistic enough to do so with a flair and a flourish.
Wasn't that Your idea to begin with?

21 341 AP, almost 7500 hours played.
But I know You're asking just so You can validate more of Your ad homs, because, precisely like with questions about age once somebody starts losing their ground, the sole point is simply to discredit an idea based on nothing even close to logic.
"You're too young, You don't know a thing yet!" or "You're too old, You're so out of touch with reality at this point!"

You're neither the first, nor the last, and certainly so far nobody worth remembering.
So by all means, give it Your best. You couldn't insult Yourself even if You tried.
Well, judging by Your arguments, at least not intentionally.

[Vancho.8750]

One huge argument against GW2 sub is another game of NCSOFT 

WILDSTAR PA PA PAAAAA.

The game was almost GW2 on how the combat worked but it imploded for many reasons but one of it was the sub, they just didn't have the content cadence to back it up and we are talking the time when the King of MMOs was bleeding on a deathbed. 

Edited May 11, 2021 by Vancho.8750

[Clex Mix.7624]

21 minutes ago, Riaenvyr.2091 said:

Horrifying.
But You do You.
Just don't forget to clean Your uniform.
o7

Again you’re assuming that just because you have a philosophical argument against why something is the way it is, doesn’t mean it holds water. 

 

I implore you to divulge the level of play in which you partake. Because as it stands I’ve not seen a median of how to gauge what stipulates a suitable design change for any argument against the current design philosophy when it comes to rewards. 

 

As it stands the invariable methods as to how players obtain digital rewards across a multitude of games is and always will be at the behest of the devs. Heck, even in WoW world first raiders can’t convince Blizzard to change their design philosophy when it comes to rewards and drop rates. Very rarely will any massive community discussion have an impact as to implementation. Unless you can guarantee an exodus en mass, your entire argument is moot.

 

But I can guarantee that if anet decided to adopt a sub model at least 50% of the player base would quit overnight. Considering their stance on pay walls has been anti sub since 05’. The amount of games that have come and gone or at least a sub model have been vast. WoW is one of two dinosaurs that were able to keep the payment model because of its popularity. Guild wars doesn’t have a large enough player base to attempt adopting a sub. 

[Clex Mix.7624]

8 minutes ago, Riaenvyr.2091 said:

Of course I don't, that's why the quotes exist.
I talk to anybody who comes in and challenges my ideas, because why wouldn't I, which usually means many people and, therefore, many ideas at once, especially with so many virtue lighthouses around who don't have much to say except "Burn, heretic!" You know, they might not be exactly creative in their assaults, but I just can't let them all down in the same way. Call it a character quirk.
But such people wouldn't be able to look me straight in the eyes due to those gnarled spines, so there's no real and lasting impression left, even if they were to throw themselves at me with all the logical force they could muster combined.
You think I'd need to iron my shirt after that grand total of a single - but very passionate! - newton hit me?
Can't look bad at the funeral of their mindless rage, now can I.

If I wanted to say that I think the Gem Store is bad, I'm pretty sure I'm narcissistic enough to do so with a flair and a flourish.
Wasn't that Your idea to begin with?

21 341 AP, almost 7500 hours played.
But I know You're asking just so You can validate more of Your ad homs, because, precisely like with questions about age once somebody starts losing their ground, the sole point is simply to discredit an idea based on nothing even close to logic.
"You're too young, You don't know a thing yet!" or "You're too old, You're so out of touch with reality at this point!"

You're neither the first, nor the last, and certainly so far nobody worth remembering.
So by all means, give it Your best. You couldn't insult Yourself even if You tried.
Well, judging by Your arguments, at least not intentionally.

Your entire argument relies on the assumption that you’re right. That in your own mind you’re infallible. That you above all other players have more of an enlightened narrative as to how your time and money spent should be rewarded.

 

but in all of your ramblings you’ve failed to make any valid argument as to possibly justifying upending the playerbase to the point of killing the game. Plain and simple. You haven’t stuck to one point. And to try and make the argument that the OP wasn’t about adding a sub is just asinine. 

 

Just because you feel passionate about something doesn’t mean you’re right or wrong for that matter, but you miss the point that sometimes things are more black and white than you care to admit. No amount of philosophical points of view are going to fundamentally change the fact that it all comes down to making money. If anet are the only ones to reap rewards for people playing their game to you... then stop playing. If you find no quantifiable reasons of getting something out of the game... walk. 

 

Its a business. You’re welcome to continue partaking or not. You’re not forced to stay. Though one could argue the fact that since you are seemingly unable to do so proves the model works. Carrot. Stick.

[Rukario.1695]

The only thing I've seen here is a lot of hot air from the ones trying to defend the idea of making GW2 Sub-based.  The comments that are incessantly arguing to make GW2 a sub-based game are nearly identical to spam at this point and I've lost interest in reading more than half of this entire thread.

 

To those who are supporting Anet's current choices with keeping GW2 B2P rather than P2P Sub, thanks.  You do us right.

 

If you don't have a logical, undeniable point for why a subscription service would be better, or somehow isn't already accommodated for by allowing Gem Purchases whenever you want and as frequently as you want, then you should just drop it already. Beating a dead horse isn't the "hip, new cool thing to do" it's just disappointing, and it results in digging your own grave.

Edited May 11, 2021 by Rukario.1695

[Clex Mix.7624]

1 minute ago, Clex Mix.7624 said:

Again, trying to act more enlightened and you can’t even give and valid points outside of your feelings. 

 

You can act act as smart as you want but the truth of the matter is nothing you spew holds any weight. Your vaunted higher learning as amounted to a steaming pile of trash because you failed to adopt the core concept of higher learning and that’s critical thinking. 

To put a direct point on the matter... clearly, anet doesn’t care about your feelings. They’re here to make money. If they deem the current model works... so be it. 

 

Trying to justify your your stance on “wanting more” for your time is yes... narcissistic. The two options are as follows... play or don’t.

[Obtena.7952]

39 minutes ago, Riaenvyr.2091 said:

My entire argument relies on the assumption that I'm right. 

You appear to be rather well read and intelligent ... and so you should know better. This isn't a question of Anet's business model being right or wrong. It's about if it works ... for them and for players. The fact that the game has existed for 8+ years with this model shows it does. 

[Maikimaik.1974]

1 hour ago, Clex Mix.7624 said:

Your entire argument relies on the assumption that you’re right.

I think this sums up the whole premise of this thread pretty nicely.

This is probably one of the most pointless threads on this forum.

[Rukario.1695]

Just now, Maikimaik.1974 said:

I think this sums up the whole premise of this thread pretty nicely.

This is probably one of the most pointless threads on this forum.

You couldn't be more right.

[Rukario.1695]

14 minutes ago, Clex Mix.7624 said:

Trying to justify your your stance on “wanting more” for your time is yes... narcissistic. The two options are as follows... play or don’t.

I wouldn't say it's narcissistic, I would say it's being overly entitled.  This entire thread has been about entitlement to items locked in the GS because somehow it's caused by not having a subscription service.  The whole argument is a farce.  They can buy what they want out of the GS using Gold.  The fact that they refuse to, or otherwise complain about any of the content they could do in order to afford it, simply says that they want a cheaper way to get more GS stuff than what the current GS allows for.

 

It's purely just misdirected greed, entitlement, and generally seen as a delusion near akin to "the world should revolve around me."

 

It doesn't matter what you have to say against them because they'll spin a hyperbole about semantics and assumptions on why what they say would work and how it would work. Consequently the majority of these "pro-subscription" arguments are just a lot of "ums" and "ahs" - trying to make their stance so wildly volatile and confusing that no one understands what they're saying or asking for anymore.

 

The stance of the recent replies has been that of a troll trying to confuse their prey.  I wish a moderator would step in and lock the thread and leave it at that, because nothing worthwhile has been said by the "pro-subscription" side of things since around page 5 or so.  This topic is a giant waste of time and energy best used, in this case, for them to go play content, get rewards, earn gold, and buy some of these "restricted GS rewards" because they for some reason need to have the satisfaction of knowing they're paying a sub -- when in reality it matters not at all.

Edited May 11, 2021 by Rukario.1695

[medivh.4725]

Where is the dislike button, put in dislike button on next forum update thanks....

[Clex Mix.7624]

9 minutes ago, Rukario.1695 said:

I wouldn't say it's narcissistic, I would say it's being overly entitled.  This entire thread has been about entitlement to items locked in the GS because somehow it's caused by not having a subscription service.  The whole argument is a farce.  They can buy what they want out of the GS using Gold.  The fact that they refuse to, or otherwise complain about any of the content they could do in order to afford it, simply says that they want a cheaper way to get more GS stuff than what the current GS allows for.

 

It's purely just misdirected greed, entitlement, and generally seen as a delusion near akin to "the world should revolve around me."

 

It doesn't matter what you have to say against them because they'll spin a hyperbole about semantics and assumptions on why what they say would work and how it would work. Consequently the majority of these "pro-subscription" arguments are just a lot of "ums" and "ahs" - trying to make their stance so wildly volatile and confusing that no one understands what they're saying or asking for anymore.

 

The stance of the recent replies has been that of a troll trying to confuse their prey.  I wish a moderator would step in and lock the thread and leave it at that, because nothing worthwhile has been said by the "pro-subscription" side of things since around page 5 or so.  This topic is a giant waste of time and energy best used, in this case, for them to go play content, get rewards, earn gold, and buy some of these "restricted GS rewards" because they for some reason need to have the satisfaction of knowing they're paying a sub -- when in reality it matters not at all.

When pointing out that a sub from launch would have cost $1700 dollars they simply change the subject or refuse to put their money where their mouth is. It's that simple. If you want to spend the money, do it... and yeah entitlement is definitely what it is, but it's taken to the extreme, hence why I consider it rampant narcissism.

 

As a consumer I'd like to see a bit more on the side of Anet to incentivize players to keep playing. I've taken multiple year long breaks because PERSONALLY I didn't have a reason to do so. Lately I've started doing more with the game and I get more out of it. It's just how it's designed. Take it or leave it. I've played WoW for 15 years off and on. When I felt the game wasn't worth it I canceled my sub and that was it... in fact I think I was more annoyed with their canceling process than things not being to "my liking" in-game. 

 

I find value in the gem store items on Guild Wars 2 more than other games I play. LoL is a prime example of crazy costs for cosmetics. I personally find their costs to be ridiculous. Quality of life from gathering tools, to outfits so I don't have to burn transmute charges. I get what I deem a necessity. Sure, I'd want everything for little to no effort... but I'm a realist. I play Guild Wars for what it is, a game I don't HAVE to spend money on to play, outside the expansion costs which is entirely reasonable. 

[Sarge shot Grif.6450]

Wait you really think they wouldn't force us to gamble for stuff if the game had a sub? God that kind of naivety is almost impressive.
Seriously though a sub would absolutely make this game lose a huge chunk of the playerbase VERY quickly.

[jasepo.1527]

On 5/1/2021 at 12:51 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.

Have you seen the state of WoW lately? Even with subscription-based model, they have a "Black Lion Trading" on its own, at very very high draconian prices.
My point is, the model wouldn't change the business model Anet would've want to adopt. That depends on them.

[crewthief.8649]

On 5/10/2021 at 4:50 PM, kharmin.7683 said:

They don't need to know every possible choice.  You're exaggerating to make some kind of point, I think?

 

It's called Market Research.  I'm sure that Anet has professionals in marketing and finance who study the industry and can help guide the direction of the company for the most financial gain for their shareholders.  They would be in a much better position than any mere player on the forum to know what model works best for them.

EDIT: Oh, and Anet was trying something new until the parent company shut it down.  Check the forums search for Layoffs to read up on that.

Imagine the arrogance of someone who thinks they have more information on the topic than the company in question. As you stated, I can guarantee Anet conducts market research on a very regular basis. Not just that, but why would they abandon a core competency of theirs (at this point Anet is well known for a non-subscription model, that is exceptional in quality) in order to try and replicate the core competency of another firm (in this case, Blizzard)? They have a solid niche in the market, they’re quite clearly doing well (consistent new content release, an expansion on the way, etc.), it would make zero business sense to upend their entire business model in favor of a subscription-based service.

[Clex Mix.7624]

1 hour ago, crewthief.8649 said:

Imagine the arrogance of someone who thinks they have more information on the topic than the company in question. As you stated, I can guarantee Anet conducts market research on a very regular basis. Not just that, but why would they abandon a core competency of theirs (at this point Anet is well known for a non-subscription model, that is exceptional in quality) in order to try and replicate the core competency of another firm (in this case, Blizzard)? They have a solid niche in the market, they’re quite clearly doing well (consistent new content release, an expansion on the way, etc.), it would make zero business sense to upend their entire business model in favor of a subscription-based service.

A couple points to this. First there's no written rule of law or anything of that matter that stipulates having a sub based payment model that a Dev would be beholden to add "more loot" to any activity. WoW recently reduced the amount of rewards that dropped in mythic+'s and raids. WoW also has very little "collections"/achievements that reward anything of use, in fact... other than "Toys" it's really nothing. All gearing is either done through rng drops or grinding arenas. 

 

Secondly, it's pretty common for people to think their ideas are far superior to others, especially the Dev's. There have been at least 30 mmo's that have started and failed in WoW's lifetime. I remember trying out The Matrix online while also playing guild wars 1 and wow. It was awful and they expected a sub. Digital monetization aside, what the game currently offers for 1 payment wall to play all the content is pretty vast.

 

 

[MokahTGS.7850]

20 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

You appear to be rather well read and intelligent ... and so you should know better. This isn't a question of Anet's business model being right or wrong. It's about if it works ... for them and for players. The fact that the game has existed for 8+ years with this model shows it does. 

Not only that GW2 works, but GW1 as well.  B2P models work.  It has also been proven with the huge number of games that use that model.  Many of these games are multiplayer games.  MMOs are actually a small part of the online gaming audience.  Game companies look at all of this to determine what their pricing model will be.

 

ANet also knew from the start that the fan base from GW1 would not have embraced GW2 if it were to switch models.

 

Subs do not equal better game.

[XenoSpyro.1780]

On 5/1/2021 at 11:51 AM, Aodlop.1907 said:

would be earnable in game, by completing achievements, dungeons, raids or PvP feats instead of...bought with real life money

WoW Store mounts be like : "Let me introduce myself."