IDEA for Arenanet: how properly select the future of GW2:

[Lich King.1524]

Today we have 0 influence to future developmens/features, but everyone has some wishes.

Forum is not OK to rise it, because most of the people never post anything on forums and also Arenanet read it rarely.

 

I offer a way how to influence to Arenanet's plans.

And do it for all players, even if they never login to the forum.

 

Idea:

 

**You buy GEMS as usual, and at same you vote for future features (it's Option 3. )**

Then Arenanet knows your wishes clearly. You receive your GEMS as usual.

 

**Another way is to even increase a push to Arenanet: You prepurchase these features (it's Option 2.)**

And you still will receive your GEMS after development.

But Arenanet will have obligation to deliver the feature, otherwise they will refund and pay a "fine" +50% to your GEMS, so you will win in both cases!

 

*I edited text to make it shorter*

[Randulf.7614]

Seems overly complicated to me.

[Ameepa.6793]

Yeah looks very simple..

[MikeG.6389]

Things tend to go to the pre-purchase phase when they are almost finished and have a clear deadline. You want to pay for features that Anet might not even have PLANS for, let alone any actual progress on them? Why not throw money at homeless people?

Anet are smarter than letting themselves be painted into a corner by being mandated by their players to develop something that may not work out in the end.

[Lich King.1524]

> @"MikeG.6389" said:

> Things tend to go to the pre-purchase phase when they are almost finished and have a clear deadline. You want to pay for features that Anet might not even have PLANS for, let alone any actual progress on them? Why not throw money at homeless people?

> Anet are smarter than letting themselves be painted into a corner by being mandated by their players to develop something that may not work out in the end.

 

No, no,

May be I have to explain it better:

 

Today you have 0 influence to future developmens/features,

I offer a way how to influence to Arenanet's plans.

And do it for all players.

Forum is not OK, because most of the people never post anything on forums.

 

**Idea:**

 

**You buy GEMS as usual, and at same you vote for future features (it's option B. )**

Then Arenanet knows your wish clearly. You receive your GEMS as usual.

 

**Another way is to even increase a push to Arenanet: You prepurchase these features (it's Option A.)**

And you still will receive your GEMS anyway.

But Arenanet will have obligation to deliver the feature, otherwise they will refund and pay a "fine" +50% to your GEMS, so you will win in both cases.

[MikeG.6389]

> @"Lich King.1524" said:

> > @"MikeG.6389" said:

> > Things tend to go to the pre-purchase phase when they are almost finished and have a clear deadline. You want to pay for features that Anet might not even have PLANS for, let alone any actual progress on them? Why not throw money at homeless people?

> > Anet are smarter than letting themselves be painted into a corner by being mandated by their players to develop something that may not work out in the end.

>

> No, no,

> May be I have to explain it better:

>

> Today you have 0 influence to future developmens/features,

> I offer a way how to influence to Arenanet's plans.

> And do it for all players.

> Forum is not OK, because most of the people never post anything on forums.

 

I think you are mistaken there. ANet is in constant communication with their players. This doesn't have to happen in clearly defined ways like a forum. They do play their own game. I'm sure they have deep statistics about what players like and dislike, want or don't want. You do have influence on the future of the game. You are just not being asked directly.

 

>

> **Idea:**

>

> **You buy GEMS as usual, and at same you vote for future features (it's option B. )**

> Then Arenanet knows your wish clearly. You receive your GEMS as usual.

 

As above. They don't need to poll people this way.

 

>

> **Another way is to even increase a push to Arenanet: You prepurchase these features (it's Option A.)**

> And you still will receive your GEMS anyway.

> But Arenanet will have obligation to deliver the feature, otherwise they will refund and pay a "fine" +50% to your GEMS, so you will win in both cases.

 

How is this not letting themselves be painted into a corner? You want them to tie their hands because you think you know what's best for the game? They are not stupid to let that happen. I'm sorry, but this is an idiotic idea. Besides, having to pay for any content beyond buying the game (and/or expansion) itself has never been Anet's policy. They aren't going to change that, not even now. Also, we have no idea what their financial situation is. Nor should we be concerned. They are a business, they have professionals on payroll to figure these things out. If they end up needing to generate money in a fashion unorthodox to them based on their history, this won't be it, I'm sure.

[Vayne.8563]

Honestly I don't trust players more than I trust Anet. I've seen a plethora of ideas that I wouldn't want in the game. This suggestion seems like those that spend money in the gem shop get votes on what they want, but if they're not the majority it still might not be better for the game.

 

For years, all you saw on the forums were people asking for harder content, more challenging content, and stuff like raids. HoT comes out, with raids and more challenging content and it was pretty bad for the game over all. Listening to the playerbase is fine, if someone is parsing that information and deciding if the playerbase is right or wrong. Just listening, or just going by a vote isn't how I'd run my company and I don't think Anet should run their company that way either.

 

Can it work in certain circumstances for certain products? Within a limited framework, sure. Like the company could offer a multiple choice and let people vote on the choices they offered. But honestly, I just think it's a bad idea over all.

[AlexxxDelta.1806]

If you really want to have a say on how Anet runs things, become a NCsoft investor. It's a publicly traded company after all. All the other suggestions offered recently, this included, are just consumers inexplicably offering themselves to be exploited by a multi-billion corporation.

[Orion Templar.4589]

I play GW2 (a lot) because I find it fun and I think the dev team has a good vision of where to take the game, and a business model to support it I can work with. I would prefer to leave that roadmap in their hands, knowing they hear and consider our feedback in the forums. I would not want gem purchases to sway or dictate their direction since then it becomes a bad form of the golden rule: "he who has the gold makes the rules"

[GDchiaScrub.3241]

This would probably turn into a plutocracy (a society being influenced by a minority of wealthy people). You already see what happens in the mobile market when monetization plays too huge of a role where the games' market options cater to the "whales" (that minority of people who throw money at the game).

 

It'd be nice if we could fund certain game modes, but the reality is if you average all players' ideas they'd be C- at best. Not saying there aren't a few diamonds to find on these forums...just never expect special attention from ANET on every idea.

 

 

D:

[Biff.5312]

I think this idea that products should be developed in accordance with fan demands is destroying the movie industry, and could only have the same kind of detrimental effects in gaming. Trying to please everyone is impossible. Second-guessing is destructive. Let them develop the game in a way that makes sense to them, and either support it by playing or don't.

[KelyNeli.4516]

First of all its their game and we have zero power over their business decisions.

They should take some ideas from us and let us vote for certain things, just like Riot games does, but thats about it. They are not obligated to do anything, if you really want to pressure them, you may want to start playing a different game so it will motivate them to do something.

[MoriMoriMori.5349]

> @"Vayne.8563" said:

>This suggestion seems like those that spend money in the gem shop get votes on what they want, but if they're not the majority it still might not be better for the game.

I woulnd't say that listening to majority is any better. That assumes that majority have decent understanding of the situation (knows what is better strategy for developing a game, in a long run), what is almost never the case. Majority tends to be easily swayed by vocal minorities, and tends to succumb to instant-gratification issues, without thinking much about consequences (even unable to think of those due to lack of field-specific knowledge/experience, or just because they don't care that much).

 

The more or less decent system would be something like the one used by Eve Online, where they have a sort of players' council, members of which are elected based on their significant deeds and exploits in the game (usually it's some prominent figures known within community for doing things majority incapable of doing, like fleet commanders, alliance leaders / representatives, reknown pvp players, forum activists who were able to push some important changes through to developers etc). They present their agenda to their voters, like, list of things they intend to stay for, and why they are the ones who could make this happen.

 

Developers still don't listen to everything CSM (it's called CSM) say, but their opinions are taken in considerations more readily than whining on forums.

 

 

[Stand The Wall.6987]

what is this, a democracy?

[AlexPlay.8436]

Arenanet has huge problem with communications to players.

As any other gaming company,

We are whining on forums and always have no idea if anyone read it.

I know how it works in business:

Most probably if Arenanet will even notice a demand, they always have questions:

OK, may be it's a nice feature, we also have plenty of own ideas and plans.

We need to prioritize our limited resources properly to maximize our business.

So how important this particular feature is? May be just vocal minority on forums need it?

May be it's a waste of time?

Who will use it in reality and who will be happy when it will be implemented?

1% of players, 50%, or 99% of players?

How many users will stay in the game more and buy more gems if we will do it?

No answers...

 

Why not make this demand clearly visible to Arenanet?

Not loud screams/whining on forums, but real demand from ALL players.

Joining voting to Gems purchase is a way how to filter fake demand from the real.

 

Arenanet still will make own business decisions, but real demand will be way more clear.

 

[Teratus.2859]

Not a good idea imo..

 

People's financial situations differ from person to person, country to country and this would only give those who had money to burn or those who just recklessly spend too much influence over the direction of the game.

That would cause a divide among the players.

 

Something similar happened back in Living World 1 where we got to vote for Ellen or Gnashblade which would result in what new Fractal got added to the game among some other benefits and there are still players to this day who feel they were cheated out of the fractal content they wanted because other people wanted cheaper waypoint travel.

 

Giving all players power over the direction of Gw2 content is risky.. and adding a financial element to that would very likely reuslt in many angry fans who would again feel like they are missing out on the content they want because they cant or don't want to invest tons of money into the gem store.

 

Better if Anet sticks to telling the story they want to tell and us either accepting or criticizing it depending on how much we enjoy it.

[Lich King.1524]

> @"Teratus.2859" said:

..

> Giving all players power over the direction of Gw2 content is risky...

 

Why do you think players will have this power?

Arenanet will make anyway own business decisions. They are smart guys.

We are talking about different thing here: how to make the real demand visible to Arenanet (how to collect proper feedback from players).

 

[Westenev.5289]

Wouldn't the same result be achieved by buying stocks in the company? Sounds like a money sink either way though...

[Vayne.8563]

> @"MoriMoriMori.5349" said:

> > @"Vayne.8563" said:

> >This suggestion seems like those that spend money in the gem shop get votes on what they want, but if they're not the majority it still might not be better for the game.

> I woulnd't say that listening to majority is any better. That assumes that majority have decent understanding of the situation (knows what is better strategy for developing a game, in a long run), what is almost never the case. Majority tends to be easily swayed by vocal minorities, and tends to succumb to instant-gratification issues, without thinking much about consequences (even unable to think of those due to lack of field-specific knowledge/experience, or just because they don't care that much).

>

> The more or less decent system would be something like the one used by Eve Online, where they have a sort of players' council, members of which are elected based on their significant deeds and exploits in the game (usually it's some prominent figures known within community for doing things majority incapable of doing, like fleet commanders, alliance leaders / representatives, reknown pvp players, forum activists who were able to push some important changes through to developers etc). They present their agenda to their voters, like, list of things they intend to stay for, and why they are the ones who could make this happen.

>

> Developers still don't listen to everything CSM (it's called CSM) say, but their opinions are taken in considerations more readily than whining on forums.

>

>

 

Sure, but if the suggestion is buying gems gives you a say, it's no better or worse than the forums and if people are doing it while spending money they might get the feeling they have to be listened to, even if it would be bad for the game.

[Obtena.7952]

I don't get it ... why is everyone assuming the current business model doesn't work for Anet? All these ideas about how to get Anet money and how to change everything so it's 'better'

 

I can assure you, if the business model needs to change, it will be priority one for Anet to do that above everything else.

[zealex.9410]

Id rather them make a feature or a pieces of contemt for a price for me to buy.