The obstacle preventing me from returning to GW2 - Living Story

[Ayrilana.1396]

> @"Khisanth.2948" said:

> > @"Okami Amaterasu.9237" said:

> > > @"juhna.4980" said:

> > > Do not misunderstand. I have spent many times the base cost of this game over the years. I want to spend that money on what I want. Not on the story.

> >

> > Well, you can save up a little money and choose to not buy stuff in the gemstore for a while, and use that money instead on the LW episode you need. Or you could save up some in-game gold and convert it. You can also never pay for them when they come out again if you log in once every couple months. The point is that it's either this, or we're all forced to have a monthly subscription fee, *which I don't think anybody wants*.

>

> Actually it's more like "either way you'll have to pay" but the current way also allows you to pay with gold.

>

> > @"Ayrilana.1396" said:

> > > @"Wolfb.7025" said:

> > > The only concern I have about this topic is, why do us, the new players, have to pay for the living world chapters just to play them. It feels like it is a punishment for not playing the game before we actually joined.

> >

> > Active players get a 100% discount on a DLC episode if they log in once between when it’s released and when the next DLC or expansion is released. I don’t know many games where DLC’s are just given away for free. It’s not a punishment.

>

> With F2P games perhaps but GW2 is not a F2P game.

 

Do you see any non-F2P game that gives DLC away for free?

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

> @"Wolfb.7025" said:

> The only concern I have about this topic is, why do us, the new players, have to pay for the living world chapters just to play them. It feels like it is a punishment for not playing the game before we actually joined.

 

As I mentioned above, there aren't many options:

* Charge more to those who play during the month it's out

* Charge more to those who don't play (as is done now)

* Charge more for the expansions, which no one wants.

[zealex.9410]

> @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> > @"Wolfb.7025" said:

> > The only concern I have about this topic is, why do us, the new players, have to pay for the living world chapters just to play them. It feels like it is a punishment for not playing the game before we actually joined.

>

> As I mentioned above, there aren't many options:

> * Charge more to those who play during the month it's out

> * Charge more to those who don't play (as is done now)

> * Charge more for the expansions, which no one wants.

 

Mmos also as longrunning games need the monetisation, there isnt really any big mmo that does free dlc or does it but makes the money elsewhere.

 

Gw2 is propably the most consumer friendly out there rn.

[Gehenna.3625]

I'm sure that if EA did something like this with a game, people would be screaming all over social media that EA were nickle and diming players again by charging them full price for an expansion but not giving them the full expansion and charging players extra for parts of it they cut out or released separately.

 

The point for me is not the cost, but the fact that they charge for it at all. Especially new players who never played this game are in a way punished for not hearing or being interested in the game sooner. It's just the principle of the thing. I generally feel that ArenaNet have been relatively fair in their monetization of the game, but there are a few things that I find unfortunate and this is one of them.

 

Again, I did buy them as the cost overall for buying them wasn't too bad but to be honest, you can get either of the expansions for less than a full LS season. The typical issue that I find unfortunate in games with cash shops is where they make the game tedious to create a need or wish for alleviation which they then sell at their cash shop. Locking story content with daily zones behind an added cost when you have bought a core game and the expansions already is just not right to me.

 

Most sub games do free DLC, so it's right to say that they have to make their money somewhere, but they already do. There is the option of not charging extra for the LS chapters and make slightly less profit. I don't think it's one of the biggest money makers in the cash shop and there currently is enough on sale there I would've thought.

 

If they can sell unbreakable lockpicks for the price of an expansion etc. well, you get my point. I think it's an odd thing to do but I accepted it because well I have little choice really. In retrospect I could've skipped season 2 because it doesn't bring you new zones and there's a lot of blah blah in that story but season 3 and 4 do bring new zones so you kinda have to buy them if you missed them for whatever reason. Yes GW2, at least compared to other games, has a relatively reasonable cash shop, but that doesn't mean they're saints and it doesn't mean that they never ride the borders of what's reasonable.

 

Some of you staunch defenders may not want to hear it but I think charging for expansions and then for LS on top of that for people who missed it is just a bit of a weird thing.

[Tycko Larsson.7829]

Why do people still think its free content? It's payed content that for a limited time after going live is given out by Anet as a added bonus for active accounts.

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

> @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> The point for me is ... the fact that they charge for it at all.

How do you suggest they earn enough money to keep delivering living world content, features, & other changes?

 

I grant you that it's odd that there is content that is part of the expansion and yet sold separately. I think we'd see a bigger and more steady influx of players into the new maps _after_ they are no longer new. All the same, ANet still has to earn enough to keep NCSOFT from wanting to micromanage (or cancel) and to keep pushing out content in the manner to which we have become accustomed.

 

They tried no expansions and 100% free DLC, and it turned out, that wasn't enough.

 

[Linken.6345]

> @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> I'm sure that if EA did something like this with a game, people would be screaming all over social media that EA were nickle and diming players again by charging them full price for an expansion but not giving them the full expansion and charging players extra for parts of it they cut out or released separately.

>

> The point for me is not the cost, but the fact that they charge for it at all. Especially new players who never played this game are in a way punished for not hearing or being interested in the game sooner. It's just the principle of the thing. I generally feel that ArenaNet have been relatively fair in their monetization of the game, but there are a few things that I find unfortunate and this is one of them.

>

> Again, I did buy them as the cost overall for buying them wasn't too bad but to be honest, you can get either of the expansions for less than a full LS season. The typical issue that I find unfortunate in games with cash shops is where they make the game tedious to create a need or wish for alleviation which they then sell at their cash shop. Locking story content with daily zones behind an added cost when you have bought a core game and the expansions already is just not right to me.

>

> Most sub games do free DLC, so it's right to say that they have to make their money somewhere, but they already do. There is the option of not charging extra for the LS chapters and make slightly less profit. I don't think it's one of the biggest money makers in the cash shop and there currently is enough on sale there I would've thought.

>

> If they can sell unbreakable lockpicks for the price of an expansion etc. well, you get my point. I think it's an odd thing to do but I accepted it because well I have little choice really. In retrospect I could've skipped season 2 because it doesn't bring you new zones and there's a lot of blah blah in that story but season 3 and 4 do bring new zones so you kinda have to buy them if you missed them for whatever reason. Yes GW2, at least compared to other games, has a relatively reasonable cash shop, but that doesn't mean they're saints and it doesn't mean that they never ride the borders of what's reasonable.

>

> Some of you staunch defenders may not want to hear it but I think charging for expansions and then for LS on top of that for people who missed it is just a bit of a weird thing.

 

Well we all know EA dont give away something free for a limited time its always paid so wouldent happen.

And sure most sub games do give free balance patches and some missions but guess what so do Gw2 even tho its not a sub game.

Side stories are free for anyone no matter how long they been gone =)

 

[Danikat.8537]

I still think changing the terminology could help a lot. Living Story is unique to GW2 and therefore unfamiliar to most people. All they can tell is it's 'the story' which sounds like it should be part of the expansion. If they said something like "Our latest DLC - A Star To Guide Us - is now available. As always it will be free for players who log in during the promotional period and then available in the gem store for 200 gems" I think a lot more people would understand what it actually is and therefore understand why they're being asked to pay for it.

 

The way I see it I play 2 MMOs. One releases an update every 4 months which I have to pay between £8 and £20 for (depending on the size of the update and if they choose to call it a DLC or an expansion pack which will later become a DLC), or I can pay £108 a year to get them "free". The other releases an update every 3 months which I can get for free if I log in within 3 months, or pay £2 to buy later (and a bigger update every 2-3 years I have to pay £25 for). I don't even have to add it up to work out which of those is a better deal for me. But I guess that perception is very dependant on which other games you play.

[ProtoGunner.4953]

Imo it is a bad practice: the core players will have them for free. Casuals and such who play irregularly or new players have to pay additionally. It makes no sense. I remember when they first introduced this practice with the argument that it is like watching a TV show and you can see it for 'free' on the TV and later if you want to re-watch it or watch it on demand, you pay for it.

 

But somehow this doesn't work. Since there are expansions and in my opinion an expansion should also include what comes _with_ this expansion. And somehow it is, for people who log in. I am pretty sure if you are new and want to continue with the story and a paywall splashes in your face this turns new players off. Something you don't want to do with new players. They just should turn it off. I am not sure how much they make with this or how much they miss out. But they have the metrics, maybe it works out for them...

[Gehenna.3625]

> @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> > @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> > The point for me is ... the fact that they charge for it at all.

> How do you suggest they earn enough money to keep delivering living world content, features, & other changes?

>

> I grant you that it's odd that there is content that is part of the expansion and yet sold separately. I think we'd see a bigger and more steady influx of players into the new maps _after_ they are no longer new. All the same, ANet still has to earn enough to keep NCSOFT from wanting to micromanage (or cancel) and to keep pushing out content in the manner to which we have become accustomed.

>

> They tried no expansions and 100% free DLC, and it turned out, that wasn't enough.

>

 

I would think that the rest they sell in the cash shop plus the sales of the box games/expansions is enough. I have no problem with paying for expansions but then I expect that with that I paid for all the content until the next expansion. Or if I'm a new player I expect that when I buy the game + expansions that I have all the areas of the game available to me.

 

I understand the cash shop and needing to make money that way, also because there is no sub. However, I do not think this is something that should be monetized on top of the expansion box price, nor do I think they need to.

[Gehenna.3625]

> @"Danikat.8537" said:

> I still think changing the terminology could help a lot. Living Story is unique to GW2 and therefore unfamiliar to most people. All they can tell is it's 'the story' which sounds like it should be part of the expansion. If they said something like "Our latest DLC - A Star To Guide Us - is now available. As always it will be free for players who log in during the promotional period and then available in the gem store for 200 gems" I think a lot more people would understand what it actually is and therefore understand why they're being asked to pay for it.

>

> The way I see it I play 2 MMOs. One releases an update every 4 months which I have to pay between £8 and £20 for (depending on the size of the update and if they choose to call it a DLC or an expansion pack which will later become a DLC), or I can pay £108 a year to get them "free". The other releases an update every 3 months which I can get for free if I log in within 3 months, or pay £2 to buy later (and a bigger update every 2-3 years I have to pay £25 for). I don't even have to add it up to work out which of those is a better deal for me. But I guess that perception is very dependant on which other games you play.

 

I don't think LS is unique. It's just another name for a content patch. SWTOR also does something like this for example. They bring out an expansion and then they bring story updates and other bits with patches. As for the math it really depends because you get a lot more than dlc for the sub that you ignore here.

 

What makes it strange is that here people get it for free when they are playing at that moment but people who are new to the game get penalized for being new to the game. I just don't think it's that great of an idea to charge people for content that you gave away for free to players in the past basically.

 

So when someone gets GW2 for x-mas this year, they have to pay an extra layer for story content and zones that they cannot access otherwise. You may think that's fine but I still find it odd.

 

[zealex.9410]

> @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> I'm sure that if EA did something like this with a game, people would be screaming all over social media that EA were nickle and diming players again by charging them full price for an expansion but not giving them the full expansion and charging players extra for parts of it they cut out or released separately.

>

> The point for me is not the cost, but the fact that they charge for it at all. Especially new players who never played this game are in a way punished for not hearing or being interested in the game sooner. It's just the principle of the thing. I generally feel that ArenaNet have been relatively fair in their monetization of the game, but there are a few things that I find unfortunate and this is one of them.

>

> Again, I did buy them as the cost overall for buying them wasn't too bad but to be honest, you can get either of the expansions for less than a full LS season. The typical issue that I find unfortunate in games with cash shops is where they make the game tedious to create a need or wish for alleviation which they then sell at their cash shop. Locking story content with daily zones behind an added cost when you have bought a core game and the expansions already is just not right to me.

>

> Most sub games do free DLC, so it's right to say that they have to make their money somewhere, but they already do. There is the option of not charging extra for the LS chapters and make slightly less profit. I don't think it's one of the biggest money makers in the cash shop and there currently is enough on sale there I would've thought.

>

> If they can sell unbreakable lockpicks for the price of an expansion etc. well, you get my point. I think it's an odd thing to do but I accepted it because well I have little choice really. In retrospect I could've skipped season 2 because it doesn't bring you new zones and there's a lot of blah blah in that story but season 3 and 4 do bring new zones so you kinda have to buy them if you missed them for whatever reason. Yes GW2, at least compared to other games, has a relatively reasonable cash shop, but that doesn't mean they're saints and it doesn't mean that they never ride the borders of what's reasonable.

>

> Some of you staunch defenders may not want to hear it but I think charging for expansions and then for LS on top of that for people who missed it is just a bit of a weird thing.

 

Eso has paid dlc, wow asks you for a sub, ff14 asks you for a sub, bdo doesnt ask for money but with how overpiced/p2w their cashshop is they are better off not asking for more.

 

Theres no such thing as "free dlc in sub based mmos" u pay a sub, u play the content. U dont pay a sub u arent getting to play the content.

 

Anet is giving u a 2-3 sometimes 4 month grace period to get the episode for free even if you login with a f2p acount and or u dont own expansions u can still bank it.

 

Both Pof and hot come at a lower price point and buying them with the lw in a bundle comes around the price of your normal mmo expansion.

 

I give anet alot of shit for questionable desicions and or bad moves but LOL at monetosation practices they are prob 1 of the best or the best available.

[zealex.9410]

> @"Danikat.8537" said:

> I still think changing the terminology could help a lot. Living Story is unique to GW2 and therefore unfamiliar to most people. All they can tell is it's 'the story' which sounds like it should be part of the expansion. If they said something like "Our latest DLC - A Star To Guide Us - is now available. As always it will be free for players who log in during the promotional period and then available in the gem store for 200 gems" I think a lot more people would understand what it actually is and therefore understand why they're being asked to pay for it.

>

> The way I see it I play 2 MMOs. One releases an update every 4 months which I have to pay between £8 and £20 for (depending on the size of the update and if they choose to call it a DLC or an expansion pack which will later become a DLC), or I can pay £108 a year to get them "free". The other releases an update every 3 months which I can get for free if I log in within 3 months, or pay £2 to buy later (and a bigger update every 2-3 years I have to pay £25 for). I don't even have to add it up to work out which of those is a better deal for me. But I guess that perception is very dependant on which other games you play.

 

Its not unique it has a diff name but in essence its a paid dlc with an extremly generous "free aquisition" period

[zealex.9410]

> @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> > @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> > > @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> > > The point for me is ... the fact that they charge for it at all.

> > How do you suggest they earn enough money to keep delivering living world content, features, & other changes?

> >

> > I grant you that it's odd that there is content that is part of the expansion and yet sold separately. I think we'd see a bigger and more steady influx of players into the new maps _after_ they are no longer new. All the same, ANet still has to earn enough to keep NCSOFT from wanting to micromanage (or cancel) and to keep pushing out content in the manner to which we have become accustomed.

> >

> > They tried no expansions and 100% free DLC, and it turned out, that wasn't enough.

> >

>

> I would think that the rest they sell in the cash shop plus the sales of the box games/expansions is enough. I have no problem with paying for expansions but then I expect that with that I paid for all the content until the next expansion. Or if I'm a new player I expect that when I buy the game + expansions that I have all the areas of the game available to me.

>

> I understand the cash shop and needing to make money that way, also because there is no sub. However, I do not think this is something that should be monetized on top of the expansion box price, nor do I think they need to.

 

>pays 30 euros for the box

>expects the expansion content plus 2 years worth of free content

>mfw

[Gehenna.3625]

> @"zealex.9410" said:

> > @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> > I'm sure that if EA did something like this with a game, people would be screaming all over social media that EA were nickle and diming players again by charging them full price for an expansion but not giving them the full expansion and charging players extra for parts of it they cut out or released separately.

> >

> > The point for me is not the cost, but the fact that they charge for it at all. Especially new players who never played this game are in a way punished for not hearing or being interested in the game sooner. It's just the principle of the thing. I generally feel that ArenaNet have been relatively fair in their monetization of the game, but there are a few things that I find unfortunate and this is one of them.

> >

> > Again, I did buy them as the cost overall for buying them wasn't too bad but to be honest, you can get either of the expansions for less than a full LS season. The typical issue that I find unfortunate in games with cash shops is where they make the game tedious to create a need or wish for alleviation which they then sell at their cash shop. Locking story content with daily zones behind an added cost when you have bought a core game and the expansions already is just not right to me.

> >

> > Most sub games do free DLC, so it's right to say that they have to make their money somewhere, but they already do. There is the option of not charging extra for the LS chapters and make slightly less profit. I don't think it's one of the biggest money makers in the cash shop and there currently is enough on sale there I would've thought.

> >

> > If they can sell unbreakable lockpicks for the price of an expansion etc. well, you get my point. I think it's an odd thing to do but I accepted it because well I have little choice really. In retrospect I could've skipped season 2 because it doesn't bring you new zones and there's a lot of blah blah in that story but season 3 and 4 do bring new zones so you kinda have to buy them if you missed them for whatever reason. Yes GW2, at least compared to other games, has a relatively reasonable cash shop, but that doesn't mean they're saints and it doesn't mean that they never ride the borders of what's reasonable.

> >

> > Some of you staunch defenders may not want to hear it but I think charging for expansions and then for LS on top of that for people who missed it is just a bit of a weird thing.

>

> Eso has paid dlc, wow asks you for a sub, ff14 asks you for a sub, bdo doesnt ask for money but with how overpiced/p2w their cashshop is they are better off not asking for more.

>

> Theres no such thing as "free dlc in sub based mmos" u pay a sub, u play the content. U dont pay a sub u arent getting to play the content.

>

> Anet is giving u a 2-3 sometimes 4 month grace period to get the episode for free even if you login with a f2p acount and or u dont own expansions u can still bank it.

>

> Both Pof and hot come at a lower price point and buying them with the lw in a bundle comes around the price of your normal mmo expansion.

>

> I give anet alot of kitten for questionable desicions and or bad moves but LOL at monetosation practices they are prob 1 of the best or the best available.

 

Your reasoning is incorrect for two reasons:

First of all I do not mind paying for content but I do mind it being charged separately from the expansions and core game.

Secondly, since most players get it for free as they would be logging in for that, they aren't charging for content across the board but just new and returning players. Your point would only be valid if everybody had to pay for the LS patches. And as you know that's not the case, so that argument fails completely.

 

 

 

[Gehenna.3625]

> @"zealex.9410" said:

> > @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> > > @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> > > > The point for me is ... the fact that they charge for it at all.

> > > How do you suggest they earn enough money to keep delivering living world content, features, & other changes?

> > >

> > > I grant you that it's odd that there is content that is part of the expansion and yet sold separately. I think we'd see a bigger and more steady influx of players into the new maps _after_ they are no longer new. All the same, ANet still has to earn enough to keep NCSOFT from wanting to micromanage (or cancel) and to keep pushing out content in the manner to which we have become accustomed.

> > >

> > > They tried no expansions and 100% free DLC, and it turned out, that wasn't enough.

> > >

> >

> > I would think that the rest they sell in the cash shop plus the sales of the box games/expansions is enough. I have no problem with paying for expansions but then I expect that with that I paid for all the content until the next expansion. Or if I'm a new player I expect that when I buy the game + expansions that I have all the areas of the game available to me.

> >

> > I understand the cash shop and needing to make money that way, also because there is no sub. However, I do not think this is something that should be monetized on top of the expansion box price, nor do I think they need to.

>

> >pays 30 euros for the box

> >expects the expansion content plus 2 years worth of free content

> >mfw

 

People who play get exactly that. Why should a new or returning player not get that?

[zealex.9410]

> @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> > @"zealex.9410" said:

> > > @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> > > I'm sure that if EA did something like this with a game, people would be screaming all over social media that EA were nickle and diming players again by charging them full price for an expansion but not giving them the full expansion and charging players extra for parts of it they cut out or released separately.

> > >

> > > The point for me is not the cost, but the fact that they charge for it at all. Especially new players who never played this game are in a way punished for not hearing or being interested in the game sooner. It's just the principle of the thing. I generally feel that ArenaNet have been relatively fair in their monetization of the game, but there are a few things that I find unfortunate and this is one of them.

> > >

> > > Again, I did buy them as the cost overall for buying them wasn't too bad but to be honest, you can get either of the expansions for less than a full LS season. The typical issue that I find unfortunate in games with cash shops is where they make the game tedious to create a need or wish for alleviation which they then sell at their cash shop. Locking story content with daily zones behind an added cost when you have bought a core game and the expansions already is just not right to me.

> > >

> > > Most sub games do free DLC, so it's right to say that they have to make their money somewhere, but they already do. There is the option of not charging extra for the LS chapters and make slightly less profit. I don't think it's one of the biggest money makers in the cash shop and there currently is enough on sale there I would've thought.

> > >

> > > If they can sell unbreakable lockpicks for the price of an expansion etc. well, you get my point. I think it's an odd thing to do but I accepted it because well I have little choice really. In retrospect I could've skipped season 2 because it doesn't bring you new zones and there's a lot of blah blah in that story but season 3 and 4 do bring new zones so you kinda have to buy them if you missed them for whatever reason. Yes GW2, at least compared to other games, has a relatively reasonable cash shop, but that doesn't mean they're saints and it doesn't mean that they never ride the borders of what's reasonable.

> > >

> > > Some of you staunch defenders may not want to hear it but I think charging for expansions and then for LS on top of that for people who missed it is just a bit of a weird thing.

> >

> > Eso has paid dlc, wow asks you for a sub, ff14 asks you for a sub, bdo doesnt ask for money but with how overpiced/p2w their cashshop is they are better off not asking for more.

> >

> > Theres no such thing as "free dlc in sub based mmos" u pay a sub, u play the content. U dont pay a sub u arent getting to play the content.

> >

> > Anet is giving u a 2-3 sometimes 4 month grace period to get the episode for free even if you login with a f2p acount and or u dont own expansions u can still bank it.

> >

> > Both Pof and hot come at a lower price point and buying them with the lw in a bundle comes around the price of your normal mmo expansion.

> >

> > I give anet alot of kitten for questionable desicions and or bad moves but LOL at monetosation practices they are prob 1 of the best or the best available.

>

> Your reasoning is incorrect for two reasons:

> First of all I do not mind paying for content but I do mind it being charged separately from the expansions and core game.

> Secondly, since most players get it for free as they would be logging in for that, they aren't charging for content across the board but just new and returning players. Your point would only be valid if everybody had to pay for the LS patches. And as you know that's not the case, so that argument fails completely.

>

>

>

 

WOW post expac launch content is charged seperately (hell the base expac doesnt come with sub so u need to pay upfront the sub to play the expac u just bought), same with ff14 ones as well as the ESO Dlcs.

 

Players who stick around and get the updates for free contribute in retention metrics for anet to show to investors and ncsoft. They're also way more likely to buy stuff of off the gemstore during these time periods. Period that new or returning players werent there for.

 

A number of them are also content creators who actively advertise the game for anet over different platforms.

[Pifil.5193]

> @"zealex.9410" said:

> > @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> > > @"zealex.9410" said:

> > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> > > > I'm sure that if EA did something like this with a game, people would be screaming all over social media that EA were nickle and diming players again by charging them full price for an expansion but not giving them the full expansion and charging players extra for parts of it they cut out or released separately.

> > > >

> > > > The point for me is not the cost, but the fact that they charge for it at all. Especially new players who never played this game are in a way punished for not hearing or being interested in the game sooner. It's just the principle of the thing. I generally feel that ArenaNet have been relatively fair in their monetization of the game, but there are a few things that I find unfortunate and this is one of them.

> > > >

> > > > Again, I did buy them as the cost overall for buying them wasn't too bad but to be honest, you can get either of the expansions for less than a full LS season. The typical issue that I find unfortunate in games with cash shops is where they make the game tedious to create a need or wish for alleviation which they then sell at their cash shop. Locking story content with daily zones behind an added cost when you have bought a core game and the expansions already is just not right to me.

> > > >

> > > > Most sub games do free DLC, so it's right to say that they have to make their money somewhere, but they already do. There is the option of not charging extra for the LS chapters and make slightly less profit. I don't think it's one of the biggest money makers in the cash shop and there currently is enough on sale there I would've thought.

> > > >

> > > > If they can sell unbreakable lockpicks for the price of an expansion etc. well, you get my point. I think it's an odd thing to do but I accepted it because well I have little choice really. In retrospect I could've skipped season 2 because it doesn't bring you new zones and there's a lot of blah blah in that story but season 3 and 4 do bring new zones so you kinda have to buy them if you missed them for whatever reason. Yes GW2, at least compared to other games, has a relatively reasonable cash shop, but that doesn't mean they're saints and it doesn't mean that they never ride the borders of what's reasonable.

> > > >

> > > > Some of you staunch defenders may not want to hear it but I think charging for expansions and then for LS on top of that for people who missed it is just a bit of a weird thing.

> > >

> > > Eso has paid dlc, wow asks you for a sub, ff14 asks you for a sub, bdo doesnt ask for money but with how overpiced/p2w their cashshop is they are better off not asking for more.

> > >

> > > Theres no such thing as "free dlc in sub based mmos" u pay a sub, u play the content. U dont pay a sub u arent getting to play the content.

> > >

> > > Anet is giving u a 2-3 sometimes 4 month grace period to get the episode for free even if you login with a f2p acount and or u dont own expansions u can still bank it.

> > >

> > > Both Pof and hot come at a lower price point and buying them with the lw in a bundle comes around the price of your normal mmo expansion.

> > >

> > > I give anet alot of kitten for questionable desicions and or bad moves but LOL at monetosation practices they are prob 1 of the best or the best available.

> >

> > Your reasoning is incorrect for two reasons:

> > First of all I do not mind paying for content but I do mind it being charged separately from the expansions and core game.

> > Secondly, since most players get it for free as they would be logging in for that, they aren't charging for content across the board but just new and returning players. Your point would only be valid if everybody had to pay for the LS patches. And as you know that's not the case, so that argument fails completely.

> >

> >

> >

>

> WOW post expac launch expansions are charged seperately, same with ff14 ones as well as the ESO Dlcs.

 

Actually you only have to buy the last expansion in WoW all previous expansions are given for free.

[zealex.9410]

> @"Pifil.5193" said:

> > @"zealex.9410" said:

> > > @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> > > > @"zealex.9410" said:

> > > > > @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> > > > > I'm sure that if EA did something like this with a game, people would be screaming all over social media that EA were nickle and diming players again by charging them full price for an expansion but not giving them the full expansion and charging players extra for parts of it they cut out or released separately.

> > > > >

> > > > > The point for me is not the cost, but the fact that they charge for it at all. Especially new players who never played this game are in a way punished for not hearing or being interested in the game sooner. It's just the principle of the thing. I generally feel that ArenaNet have been relatively fair in their monetization of the game, but there are a few things that I find unfortunate and this is one of them.

> > > > >

> > > > > Again, I did buy them as the cost overall for buying them wasn't too bad but to be honest, you can get either of the expansions for less than a full LS season. The typical issue that I find unfortunate in games with cash shops is where they make the game tedious to create a need or wish for alleviation which they then sell at their cash shop. Locking story content with daily zones behind an added cost when you have bought a core game and the expansions already is just not right to me.

> > > > >

> > > > > Most sub games do free DLC, so it's right to say that they have to make their money somewhere, but they already do. There is the option of not charging extra for the LS chapters and make slightly less profit. I don't think it's one of the biggest money makers in the cash shop and there currently is enough on sale there I would've thought.

> > > > >

> > > > > If they can sell unbreakable lockpicks for the price of an expansion etc. well, you get my point. I think it's an odd thing to do but I accepted it because well I have little choice really. In retrospect I could've skipped season 2 because it doesn't bring you new zones and there's a lot of blah blah in that story but season 3 and 4 do bring new zones so you kinda have to buy them if you missed them for whatever reason. Yes GW2, at least compared to other games, has a relatively reasonable cash shop, but that doesn't mean they're saints and it doesn't mean that they never ride the borders of what's reasonable.

> > > > >

> > > > > Some of you staunch defenders may not want to hear it but I think charging for expansions and then for LS on top of that for people who missed it is just a bit of a weird thing.

> > > >

> > > > Eso has paid dlc, wow asks you for a sub, ff14 asks you for a sub, bdo doesnt ask for money but with how overpiced/p2w their cashshop is they are better off not asking for more.

> > > >

> > > > Theres no such thing as "free dlc in sub based mmos" u pay a sub, u play the content. U dont pay a sub u arent getting to play the content.

> > > >

> > > > Anet is giving u a 2-3 sometimes 4 month grace period to get the episode for free even if you login with a f2p acount and or u dont own expansions u can still bank it.

> > > >

> > > > Both Pof and hot come at a lower price point and buying them with the lw in a bundle comes around the price of your normal mmo expansion.

> > > >

> > > > I give anet alot of kitten for questionable desicions and or bad moves but LOL at monetosation practices they are prob 1 of the best or the best available.

> > >

> > > Your reasoning is incorrect for two reasons:

> > > First of all I do not mind paying for content but I do mind it being charged separately from the expansions and core game.

> > > Secondly, since most players get it for free as they would be logging in for that, they aren't charging for content across the board but just new and returning players. Your point would only be valid if everybody had to pay for the LS patches. And as you know that's not the case, so that argument fails completely.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

> > WOW post expac launch expansions are charged seperately, same with ff14 ones as well as the ESO Dlcs.

>

> Actually you only have to buy the last expansion in WoW all previous expansions are given for free.

 

I edited, i meant content. Still if you are a player who sticks around over the expansions in wow u have to buy each one while a new players just has to pay for the newest+first sub or previously new expac plus for the battlechest.

 

For post expqc content they both have to pay sub hence pay for new content.

[Evil.1580]

The card I use when I see quality content in GW2:

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

[Dami.5046]

I was told during a break to at least log in for the season updates which I did for the most part. I still had to pay for a couple I missed and had to fully pay for my Second account. It didn't worry me one bit - I see it as supporting the company who makes the game I enjoy playing .

Personally I like what they did. Games like Aion may have free updates but their cash shops are really something. And then they took half the game away to focus on the higher levels. When I tried Wow and hit 20 to continue I had to pay. You can't escape some form of payment.

I certainly don't want a Cash shop in this game that reflects on the fact expansions like living world are free for everyone and to have items in the shop like Aion does.

Living world is a one off payment, it's not like you have to pay each month for it.

[Ghostrider.6879]

Just curious, were you having trouble logging in or simply chose not to do so?

[Ashen.2907]

> @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> I'm sure that if EA did something like this with a game, people would be screaming all over social media that EA were nickle and diming players again by charging them full price for an expansion but not giving them the full expansion and charging players extra for parts of it they cut out or released separately.

>

> The point for me is not the cost, but the fact that they charge for it at all. Especially new players who never played this game are in a way punished for not hearing or being interested in the game sooner. It's just the principle of the thing. I generally feel that ArenaNet have been relatively fair in their monetization of the game, but there are a few things that I find unfortunate and this is one of them.

>

> Again, I did buy them as the cost overall for buying them wasn't too bad but to be honest, you can get either of the expansions for less than a full LS season. The typical issue that I find unfortunate in games with cash shops is where they make the game tedious to create a need or wish for alleviation which they then sell at their cash shop. Locking story content with daily zones behind an added cost when you have bought a core game and the expansions already is just not right to me.

>

> Most sub games do free DLC, so it's right to say that they have to make their money somewhere, but they already do. There is the option of not charging extra for the LS chapters and make slightly less profit. I don't think it's one of the biggest money makers in the cash shop and there currently is enough on sale there I would've thought.

>

> If they can sell unbreakable lockpicks for the price of an expansion etc. well, you get my point. I think it's an odd thing to do but I accepted it because well I have little choice really. In retrospect I could've skipped season 2 because it doesn't bring you new zones and there's a lot of blah blah in that story but season 3 and 4 do bring new zones so you kinda have to buy them if you missed them for whatever reason. Yes GW2, at least compared to other games, has a relatively reasonable cash shop, but that doesn't mean they're saints and it doesn't mean that they never ride the borders of what's reasonable.

>

> Some of you staunch defenders may not want to hear it but I think charging for expansions and then for LS on top of that for people who missed it is just a bit of a weird thing.

 

Not getting stuff that one has not paid for is not being, "punished."

[zealex.9410]

> @"juhna.4980" said:

> Do not misunderstand. I have spent many times the base cost of this game over the years. I want to spend that money on what I want. Not on the story.

 

Op, may i ask how does this arguement works? U want to spend the money on what u want, thats fine. U dont want to spend it on story, thats also fine dont spend it.

 

Why should story become completely free because of it? I want to spend my money on what i want, i dont want to spend it on expansions. Should expansions be free?

[Danikat.8537]

> @"zealex.9410" said:

> > @"Danikat.8537" said:

> > I still think changing the terminology could help a lot. Living Story is unique to GW2 and therefore unfamiliar to most people. All they can tell is it's 'the story' which sounds like it should be part of the expansion. If they said something like "Our latest DLC - A Star To Guide Us - is now available. As always it will be free for players who log in during the promotional period and then available in the gem store for 200 gems" I think a lot more people would understand what it actually is and therefore understand why they're being asked to pay for it.

> >

> > The way I see it I play 2 MMOs. One releases an update every 4 months which I have to pay between £8 and £20 for (depending on the size of the update and if they choose to call it a DLC or an expansion pack which will later become a DLC), or I can pay £108 a year to get them "free". The other releases an update every 3 months which I can get for free if I log in within 3 months, or pay £2 to buy later (and a bigger update every 2-3 years I have to pay £25 for). I don't even have to add it up to work out which of those is a better deal for me. But I guess that perception is very dependant on which other games you play.

>

> Its not unique it has a diff name but in essence its a paid dlc with an extremly generous "free aquisition" period

 

That's exactly what I said. They're doing the same thing other games do but have a unique name for it, which makes it sound like something weird and different so new players don't immediately understand what it is and why they have to pay for it. If they used the same name everyone else does it would be immediately clear.

 

Imagine going to a restaurant, choosing a meal and being asked if you want to pay extra for 1 item to be brought to the table earlier. Your first reaction would probably be to wonder why on earth that should cost extra. But if they ask if you want a starter you immediately understand the system. Same here. Ask players to pay extra for the "Living Story" and they're wondering why they story isn't part of the expansion they're already paying for. Ask them to buy additional DLC and they get it.