Kurrilino.2706

> @"Crab Fear.1624" said:

> 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.

>

> EDIT: seriously, dude. what are your awesome suggestions that they can do right now and make more money. old content won't keep your game alive, especially when it's free to play. you slapped them all down like you have some kind of high ground, but what idea did you put forth? NONE.

No idea why you attack this person.

Just for the case you didn't notice. The lights will go off anyways.

If you decide to throw money at a dying game it's your thing to do. But don't attack people who are not oblivious to the world around them.

Firing a huge chunk of the staff including key position people and openly announcing there will be no future content is not ringing a bell i assume.

> @"Vayne.8563" said:

> Okay, let's say Anet listened, and gets rid of the gem store. How then do you recommend they fund the game moving forward? What's your solution to the problem of paying staff, rent, utilities? They'd have to up their income since the entire payment model is based on box sales and cash shop sales.

>

> Should they go subscription? If they did how would that hurt people now who play this game because it's free to play? Should they offer an optional subscription?

>

> It's very nice to ask for stuff you want. But when asking for a change creates a problem, you should probably include possible solutions, because the way it's phrased, what you're asking for can't be done.

I am absolutely on your side here, but the OP has a point as well.

People want to play a video game and not a Gem Store.

A very huge part of upgrades and changes go to the Gem Store and very little to the video game.

This creates a natural conflict of interests. People who play a video game couldn't care less where the money comes from.

The people who create the game couldn't care less about the content. It's just the medium that keeps the people clicking into the Gem Store.

This is the state of the situation since day 1.

This is only my observation and i don't have a real solution but GW1 prooved to be a good one.

The game had very very little ingame economy. And the Gem Store was marginal at best. The only thing they sold were character slots and such.

Then real money maker was the gaming content like the addons. From my perspective the people were more happy this way.

Those days there wasn't a single post about the Gem Store in the forums. Actually people were asking to add more stuff to the Gem Store when i

think about it.

So yeah. I guess if A-Net would focus a little bit more on playable content and less about features or fashion people would be more willing to invest

in the gem store. Of course i am aware this needs a completely new approach to the game and requires flexibility and creativity, areas A-Net didn't exactly shine in GW2

These are just my 2 cents

> @"Dibdabs.3410" said:

> I don't even know who most of the NPCs who accompany me on missions in GW2 are. :D

Same here. Nobody asked me to be commander and i don't want to be commander. I don't have commanding powers anyways.

Let someone more qualified handle the job.

I also don't wanna be in a guild where i can't chose who to be with. None of the NPC but Taimi mean anything to me and i would gladly

sacrifice all of them in a fight against any random enemy.

I liked GW1 way better, when i have been the person doing my adventure not a mixed army and of course being able to chose

my companion was an epic design descision.

But yeah... who cares there are thousands of other commanders awailable anyways.

I am back adventuring in the wilderness which is the exact reason why i play a RPG.

Let Kralkatorik have Tyria.

Best regards,

An unmotivated, unqualified but well celebrated leader of huge armies.

> @"Ashantara.8731" said:

> Dear devs,

>

> It is really hard to find armor sets or outfits for female characters that look fitting for an adventurer. This is the main reason I (almost) exclusively play male characters.

>

> I mean, this is GW2 and not Conan the Barbarian after all, no? ;) It would be nice to have more options to be able to dress female human and norn characters properly, namely as female adventurers and not as princesses or seductresses. :+1:

>

> Thank you.

Dear OP,

please consider your own opinion well... your own opinion.

The bad thing with opinions is that they are irrelevant as soon as it concerns someone else than you.

Just because you don't like something doesn't mean you run around asking to change it for everyone.

Other people may like what they see. And if you don't like it there are tons of options to dress your character without a single inch of skin visible.

Thank you.

I also wanted to thank GW to consider everyone's liking and if any, i would ask

for way more high heels and body flattering armor especially for the heavy class. There is no need to cover everything with hanging down curtains from waist down.

The Revenant armor would be excellent without the fluffed edges carpet dragging on the floor.