perilisk.1874

> @"perilisk.1874" said:

> > @"Sarrs.4831" said:

> > The Sunbrood Saga

> >

> > Relax on the beach and drink martinis with little umbrellas in them.

> > Destroy castles built by the Sand Legion.

> > Defeat the seventh and most powerful Elder Dragon, the Inflatable Dragon.

> > Something something Inquest.

>

> New gemstore items: bathing suits, special dives to use with diving goggles.

Oh, beach chairs too, how could I forget?

> @"Sarrs.4831" said:

> The Sunbrood Saga

>

> Relax on the beach and drink martinis with little umbrellas in them.

> Destroy castles built by the Sand Legion.

> Defeat the seventh and most powerful Elder Dragon, the Inflatable Dragon.

> Something something Inquest.

New gemstore items: bathing suits, special dives to use with diving goggles.

> @"Ashen.2907" said:

> > @"SpyderArachnid.5619" said:

> > > @"Trise.2865" said:

> > > Person caught stealing cable angry about having to pay for cable:

> > > "Please let me continue stealing cable instead of paying for it."

> >

> > This is no where near the same thing. This is a horrible analogy.

> >

> > Build Templates didn't even exist in GW2. You can't "steal" something that never existed.

> >

> > A better analogy would be, there was no such thing as cable in existence. So we found a way to watch multiple channels for free. Then the birth of cable appears, and makes it illegal to use any other method besides theirs, and you have to pay for it now.

>

> A better analogy:

>

> Someone indicates that they are intending to open an amusement park on their property. A neighborhood kid asks if he can put up some free temporary skate trick ramps and such in a corner of the property so that some kids he knows can play around while waiting for the official park. The owner of the property says, 'sure, you can mess around until the officieal opening,' but only until then. The property owner keeps to their agreement to allow the kids to use their property for free for the entire time they worked on their official park.

Not the best analogy, since there's an obvious quality improvement from a skate ramp to an amusement park (plus they are very different), yet one of the recurrent complaints about Arenanet's implementation is that it is substantially less capable than the current free offering, even if one were to buy everything offered. You might at least hope that it's a little more stable, but it's not like there haven't been some fairly major bugs and oversights in official releases lately.

> @"Dami.5046" said:

> Pay for a new E-spec are you kidding me? You mean if they were to do that, then there would be posts complaining it shouldn't be behind a pay wall. Not seen that before have we?

>

People are used to them being behind a paywall of sorts -- just, snuggled nice and comfy in a big bundle of content and features, not naked and exposed with a direct price tag attached.

> @"ErikTheTyrant.4527" said:

> Perhaps Rytlock is the icebrood charr we see in the trailer. The icebrood charr in the tailer looks exactly like rytlock - sohothin. Maybe Jormag creates an ice construct that looks like him. I believe this because it could be some kind of mirror thing where rytlock has to fight himself. Just a thought

There's another charr that looks a lot like Rytlock.

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"Charrbeque.8729" said:

> > They can't be unlimited. People fail to realize that there's a lot of information in build/gear templates that have to be stored.

> And yet Arc templates managed to do just that. Magic?

> (hint: no, it does not need to be stored serverside)

>

>

Well, the actual item object still has to be stored, but that's just inventory slots.

> @"PookieDaWombat.6209" said:

> So, I just want to clarify: Account wide there will be 3 build template slots to start with for free and 3 equipment slots as well, with the rest to be paid for in the store? So if you have more than 1 character with more than one build this whole thing is kind of pointless? Or did I miss something?

As I understand it:

Each _character_ gets 3, plus up to 3 more paid (likely per character like bags), quick-swappable build tabs for utilities and traits. So far as I understand it, they are common across PvE, PvP, and WvW, so if you use separate builds for those, you're already at max.

Each _character_ gets 2, plus up to 4 more paid (almost certainly per character), quick-swappable gear tabs. Imagine the set of equipment slots you have now. Now add a second one you can swap to with the push of a button. Basically that, but the same item can be shared between them (with different stats/upgrades in each tab, if it's legendary)

Each _account_ gets 3, plus up to 21 more (purchased in packs of 3), paid slots for "build storage", which is common to all characters and also only covers utilities and traits. One pack of three will be discounted by 100% at launch as a limited time offer. They are functionally equivalent to a notepad file on your computer. Buying them is the same as donating money to Arenanet for charitable purposes.

I had suggested elsewhere that they could just implement the gear tabs as special type of bag not priced much more than a standard 20-slot bag. It's implicitly monetized, but it's not _new_ monetization, so there's less room for complaint.

That would effectively do what you're suggesting, with a minor gold sink -- but it would come with the tradeoff of sacrificing inventory bags for equipment tabs, rather than handing the new stuff out like candy.

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"Menadena.7482" said:

> > Huh? I was not saying anything about traits or how many you can have? I was saying why the equipment template was a useful feature.

> Perilisk was likely responding to the post above yours, just quoted yours by mistake.

>

No, I'm just saying the OP was talking specifically about the limit applied to account build storage. Maybe I didn't notice that the conversation had shifted to something more general.

> @"Menadena.7482" said:

> > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > Still not enough to satisfy the needs, unless you either don;t run many chars, or don't change builds too much (or both). Basically, if you do have need of this feature, it won't be enough for you. It will only be okay, if you really didn't need it.

>

> Well, even if you do not change builds all the time this has a couple of uses. For example, no more carrying around things to equip in inventory that you MIGHT need (but probably will not). It also means during whatever festival you can have an equipment build with whatever the popular skins are loaded on trash blues/greens while keeping your real equipment ready to swap back to.

No, the 24 cap is on utility/trait templates. It's basically the same kind that GW1 had (with a much higher limit, for free), the kind that you can supposedly save and load from a text file as a chatcode.

To believe that Arenanet imposed this because of technical reasons is basically to believe that they can't save more than 24 strings per account. Even if they had some insanely broken account database, there's still nothing stopping them from reading/writing it to a file client side, same as any options settings. It's broken by design -- crippled so they can sell you the crutches, and expect you to act grateful because they gave you one crutch for free.

> @"Firebeard.1746" said:

> Then by that logic what you're saying doesn't conflict with what i'm saying. They still needed money but didn't have it. If anyone enjoys their brand, they should be willing to support them.

It's a business, not a charity, or so I hear.

> @"flog.3485" said:

> > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > @"flog.3485" said:

> > > > @"Konrad Curze.5130" said:

> > > > > @"Eddbopkins.2630" said:

> > > > > Why won't arc build work anymore?

> > > >

> > > > Because ANet has gone from improving their game to shamelessly stealing from community efforts the laziest possible way to make a penny

> > >

> > > Right because a free update that has been in development for 2+ years doesn’t need any return on investment ? /s

> > The update wasn't being developed in the void. It's part of a whole game, which _does_ already give a return on investment.

> > Where do you think the money from overpriced mount skins go to? Because i thought they were meant to be used to fund exactly this kind of features.

> >

>

> And somehow you don’t think that the introduction of a new free big update doesn’t need a new kind of revenue stream? I tell you where the revenue of “overpriced mount skins” goes to: the living story.

If only there was some generally accepted way of monetizing both content and new features at the same time.

> @"yoni.7015" said:

> > @"Braile.3894" said:

> > Hey, I hope anet sees this thread.

> >

> > So basically my idea is an optional subscription for gw2 for convenience stuff like:

> > - Unlimited build and gear templates or atleast give us an incredible high cap.

> > - Increased bag size / bank size / material storage size.

> > - previous lw chapters are fully accessible even tho you didn't catch them at release while you are subbed.

> > - maybe some unique cosmetic stuff?

> >

> > Keep in mind that it's still bad as a customer to pay for all this stuff but while some of us are still engaged enough to pay for a sub like this but are not willing to spend hundreds of euro for a build template system that doesn't work in high end

>

> How do you know that you have to spend hundreds (!) of euros for the build template system?

> >

>

>

Well, we could look at other things to make an educated guess about prices.

Let's assume the account upgrades are 800g/3, the build slots are 400/1, and the gear slots are 600/1. Yes, we don't know exactly, but we know what they charge for similar items. It's probably not too far off the mark.

Let's also assume a basic account with 5 characters, who missed the temporary discount on the first account upgrade, and wants all template system upgrades.

From what we know, they can buy 21 extra account slots (7 * 800g), 3 extra build slots per character (5 * 3 * 400g), and 4 extra gear slots per character (5 * 4 * 600g).

That's a grand total of 23,600 gems. At 800 gems for $10, that's $295 USD. You can convert to Euros on your own.

If you use more characters, it may be higher. If you don't fully utilize the system it will be lower. If you take your free gear slot and say "thanks, bye", as a lot of casuals will do, it will be 0. But this is the general scale of number you are looking at.

> @"Lillis.9473" said:

> On the Guild Chat, one of the last questions was about whether changing skills on the bar affect the template. The content designer showed that changing skills on the active bar did change the active template. I wanted to note that this is not desirable. I have some set builds that I use in raids, but certain encounters require me to change one or two skills. Sometimes the party composition includes more than one ranger or warrior, meaning spirits or banners can be split between them. These are exceptions and I would rather they not be saved to the "normal" build stored in the template. I would much prefer if template changes only get saved if you change the actual template, not the skill bar.

>

> My 2 cents.

> Thanks,

> Lillis

The equipment and build templates aren't actually "templates", they're just quick-swappable setups. The actual "templates" are the account build storage. They use the word "template" to refer to things that aren't, and don't use that word to describe things that are, and then wonder why people are confused.

> @"Tukaram.8256" said:

> Would you rather have it locked behind an expansion? :)

Yes. If only because they would be somewhat more likely to do it right, rather than arbitrarily hamstringing it just to make the case for monetization.

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> Which we have right now last I checked even if some people enjoy complaunikg about every small detail.

That's weird, I thought the complete lack of plans for an expansion and the ability to provide "expansion-level" features through living world were big points of contention recently. Especially now that the implementation of build templates seems to indicate that "provide expansion-level features through living world" means selling those expansion-level features bit by bit so that the total price tag is an order of magnitude higher.

> @"ButcherofMalakir.4067" said:

> > @"perilisk.1874" said:

> > There isn't much reason right now to use them the way the game is designed, at least in PvE. The main thing is switching between condi, power, or support. So, 3? But you can always just use more alts, which have a lot of other benefits.

>

> My support chrono has 30+

Wow. Well, I'm only speaking for my own experience, and I don't raid, so that probably limits the need a bit.

There isn't much reason right now to use them the way the game is designed, at least in PvE. The main thing is switching between condi, power, or support. So, 3? But you can always just use more alts, which have a lot of other benefits.

> @"Cyninja.2954" said:

> Agreed, if GW2 was sub based, some of these discussions would not be necessary.

Sure, because it would be abandoning its niche of grown gamers with okay access to money and variable access to time, and would be competing in an arena where it is out of its depth, and it would fail as a game. Then these discussions would certainly be unnecessary.

There is a model that works just fine for GW2: paid expansions on a regular basis, supplemented by a non-predatory cash shop with cosmetics and non-essential conveniences.

> @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said:

> My biggest problem is that the "checkpoints" don't work. The third and fourth braziers don't light. I just stand there, pressing F and nothing happens.

It's not enough to grab the torch if you lose it, you have to use it on the brazier again to light it. Basically, if you don't have the light effect around you, you aren't actually good to go yet.

> @"Hoover.6394" said:

> So if I understand it right, for the equipment template, it won’t allow same item in different skins/dyes for different slot?

> Say I have a shoulder piece and I can’t have it in gold in my scourge template and green in my reaper template?

Did they cover it?

If they don't support it right now, it seems like something that they would eventually allow to work as part of an equipment template, since (like attributes/upgrades on a legendary), you can freely swap it at will.

> @"Aaron Ansari.1604" said:

> As for the Flame Legion... well, unless there's something in the new map, [what we know isn't pretty.](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Salina_Scorchstep)

Their presentation in the new map suggests this was far from universal. The female FL aren't happy at being free of their horrible males, they're worried about how other female charr look down on them for being noncombatants. And it was already kind of implicitly there -- for the Olmakhan to exist, there had to be a critical mass of FL charr who had the same similar views about social progress, and that would also there were quite a few who were on the same side (even if just quietly) but preferred to stay and reform rather than leave. Oddly enough, the Flame Legion were simultaneously the ugliest and the least alien of the legions in its social structure -- you can kind of see how the Olmakhan could evolve from what they were.

> Sylvari- The NPC Danikat is thinking of is [Androel.](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Androel) I don't really have anything to add here, either- the sylvari are too young to have any societal traditions regarding coupling. 'Partner' or 'love' seem to be the most common terms they use, and they do seem to have a taste for overblown romance.

The simple fact is that Sylvari other than the Pale Tree don't reproduce, that we know of, so many of the forces pushing societies to develop rules about sexual relationships, including marriage, aren't actually applicable for them (nor is there any purpose for them having sexual urges or relationships -- simple friendships serve the same psychological need). There's no such thing as a Sylvari shotgun marriage. They're aping sexual beings, and as a result they might be socially sexual beings, but they aren't biologically sexual beings, they're just a bunch of sterile drones modeled after human males and females.

> @"ugrakarma.9416" said:

> > @"VAHNeunzehnsechundsiebzig.3618" said:

> > I think you are on something there. The PC is such a legendary character by now, s/he really does not need to give a kitten nor does s/he need to take any abuse. Someone disrespects your partner? Welcome to a world of pain. Those dragon slaying hands can dish out plenty of punishment, if needed. Any partner for the PC is actually 'good enough' because the PC says so - and who in their right mind would disagree with a rampaging murder machine who killed three elder dragons, is the champion of another one, has taken down the White Mantle, fed Joko to his/her pet dragon and roflstomped Scarlet into the dust? Oh - and god killer to it. You know, just to round it up.

> >

> > Would anyone dare to disagree? Seriously? People would be that dumb? Insulting the partner of a person who was killed by a god just to come back and destroy that god as punishment for its bad manners?

>

> if i was a "legendary hero",. i will build a harem....

>

> the real problem with someone "marry" the PC, is the multitude os tastes of playerbase, and romantic stuff is too much subjetive.

Joko doesn't need his anymore. How do you feel about Choya?

So, in the latest Guild Chat, there was a random line, that was immediately corrected. It was talking about how build templates might not be completely valid for a particular character. It was something like (going from memory): "So, if you haven't paid to unlock that e-spec yet... I mean, paid for the expansion that has that e-spec". Now, that could easily just be misspeaking and correcting... or it could be more along the lines of "Oh crap, we're not supposed to talk about that yet".

Anyway, I thought it might be a good idea to get people talking before they get too set on a path, on the off chance that this is another expansion-level feature they are looking to independently monetize. So:

1. Would you be willing to pay outright for an e-spec?

2. Would you be concerned that it could introduce a genuine P2W element to the game if the new e-spec starts off a bit OP?

3. Would it make a difference to you whether they were sold one by one, or in a pack of all nine?

4. Would it make a difference if some professions received new ones before others?

5. How many gems would you pay for one e-spec? How many for a full set?

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"perilisk.1874" said:

> > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > I'm starting to think there needs to be more of what SWTOR does ... BOTH a sub AND a store. I used to think free players were the worst kind of player .. but I'm realizing the worst players are the ones that think they should get the most by giving the least. At least free players aren't delusional about what they get ... they are even thankful they can play for free.

> >

> > Attempting to shame people into being taken advantage of isn't actually going to go anywhere

>

> If you recognize that as being shamed, then you realize the truth in it.

>

> If you think this isn't something people should expect to pay for, your expectations are massively out of whack.

>

>

I recognize it as an attempt to shame. I didn't say it worked, in fact I think it makes people even more angry than they already were, since they know exactly how much they spend and when, and in many cases it's a false accusation from a smug and self-righteous kitten. You think the game is going to be better off if petty little cash grabs drive away people who are already dropping tens or hundreds of dollars on the game a year due largely to goodwill and liking how arenanet runs things versus other companies?

You are acting under the delusion that the people who don't feel it's appropriate to pay for the kingly privilege of accessing a few lines of client-side text in-game (you know, like your options settings), instead of in a notepad, are somehow freeloaders, that people who are about to lose access to feature they have grown accustomed to, _that they cannot even get back by paying if they wanted to_, should be happy that their gameplay experience has been sacrificed on the altar of Korean profits.

Consider that usually these sorts of cashgrabs fall into a few categories:

1. Random oopsie, where company legitimately does something boneheaded without it really meaning anything bigger. But usually they course correct once the plan fails to survive contact with the enemy.

2. Arrogant new management that (wrongly) thinks it knows the company's market better than the old management. The only difference is that it isn't accidental, and that arrogant new management might prefer to run the company into the ground and float away on their golden parachute, rather than admit that they were wrong and caused the company's problems.

3. Sheer, panicked desperation from a game that is either literally financially unsustainable, or that, while it could trundle along just fine, has received Ultimatums and is waiting for the bullet in the back of the head from Corporate Masters any day.

4. The bullet is already loaded, and corporate is just trying to see how much it more it can squeeze from the marks before it pulls the plug.

Well, let's hope it was just a one-off bad call.