Would you be willing to pay a subscription for GW2?

[Deleted]

Yes we all know GW2 is B2P but would you pay for a subscription if the game was P2P? Just think if it was like WoW with content patches etc.
Personally I wouldn't mind but do think it is great a game with this polish and just everything will be B2P.

[Wynnyelle]

Sure. I wouldn't mind it at all as long as it was entertaining and worth the while. I stopped paying for WoW because it wasn't fun, and I'd do the same with GW2. It's not really a huge amount of money. Nonetheless, I'm really glad that it's B2P. Let's me have a little bit of extra cash to save up each month. =)

[Cherrybat]

Arenanet should just shut up and take my money already.

On a serious note though, i voted for the last option, i was thinking about this the other day, why not just have a sub fee of something like $5? It's less than a pack of smokes and a steady flow of 5 dolla bills for them, i wouldn't mind AT ALL to pay a fee like that.. I think a sub fee, in a way, calms people, at least what goes through my brain is "Oh i'm giving them money to make the game even more epic even faster and BETTER". Which is why i'll prolly buy a bunch of cosmetic stuff from their store just so they make more money off me (That is if the game is as good as i expect it to be, which i think it will.. for me anyway)

[Blufossa]

If they give us more content for the monthly fee, then yes. A lot of games just aren't worth $15 a month, plus initial fee, plus expansions! But with GW2, looking at the graphics, game play, and just overall awesome, I would be willing to shell out some dough for them.

Like another guy in that funny SWTOR thread: "When they mentioned WvWvW, structured PvP, etc, I started throwing money at my monitor!"

[Smitzelplix]

I wouldn't really like paying a sub fee for GW2 since GW1 used a different model. I will say though that GW2 would be more worthwhile than the current state of WoW, not really a huge fan of how Cata turned out and not so sure if the next expac is going to be that much of an improvement.

[Eorayn]

No. The thing that impresses me the most about GW2 is that it's subscriptions free. I don't wanna pay a number every month, it makes me feel like I have to play an amount of time.

[Durzlla]

I wouldn't be happy about it due to having low funds, but would do it nonetheless

[Deleted]

No, because it's the whole point of Guild Wars to be B2P without a monthly fee. The developers themselves say that it's not needed. I am more than willing to pay for account service stuff, as long as it's reasonable. but a monthly fee is out of the question. In my opinion this should be the standard for the future of MMOs.

[akura]

I don't think they would ever do that, but GW was different enough from most MMOs that I think it would be worth it

[jvbastel]

I would pay it, but a subscription fee is against everything Arenanet stands for, and I love them for it. Before GW2 was revealed and expansions for GW stopped, I was against subs as a whole. I saw no need to pay a sub for a game that is no better than one I play without monthly fees. Because gw1 stopped getting frequent updates, I eventually quit and didn't find another mmo worth playing that didn't have a sub fee.

[Anthoren]

I know GW2 will never have a subscription but if they did I would not mind only because Arenanet seem to be making a game that truly is worth paying for each month because they have put a lot of time and effort into the critical areas of an MMO's success.

[Merendel]

Honestly I think the monthly fees, while needed in the MMO market's infancy, are detrimental to the game and the players these days. It shifts the focus from makeing each bit of content as fun as possible to keep people paying for the content as long as possible. Dev's still have to add the content and make it good enough to keep people comeing back but there is a totaly different design paradime. They dont put in content you beat once and never need to do agian, customers will just beat it and then wonder why they are paying 15 a month for the next however long it takes between content patches. No instead they add in grinds. you beat the end boss but you need to kill him 10 more times before he randomly gives you that item you missed. You have to grind these dailys for a week to unlock the next round of dailies, so you can spend another week unlocking more dailys till you get access to the vendors a month after you start. Thus we have the gear tredmill we all know and loath. It allows devs to rest on their laurals and feed us the same content for months because we keep paying for it only to be feed another small batch of content a few months later.

ON the other hand you have the B2P model. you still have the box sale revenue P2P has but you no longer have that steady flow of extra cash just so people can play the game they payed for already. There is still the server fees and ongoing development fees so you need to produce expansions with plenty of content to get your customers to pay more money. This content not only needs to be a significant quantity but also of high enough quality that customers will pay for it. IF they dont produce good content folks wont buy it and they loose money. There is no reason to produce grindy content just to keep folks loging in every day. If they dont log in because they've played the game to death and consumed content faster than you can produce it thats OK its a bit less in operating cost and the next expansion is just around the corner to bring them back. At the end of the day they have an incentive to produce quality content on a fast cycle and no incentive to produce repetitive grinds just to keep folks paying. That is good for the gamer's.

Also if you look at say wow's patch cycle if they were useing a B2P model and we payed all of the monthly fee's when the patch released we are basicly paying for a full expansion every patch but are not recieveing an expansion's worth of content. Are we really getting our money's worth? Rift is a bit better pushing new content every month but wow is just a snails pace at releasing content.

[Smitzelplix]

Thus we have the gear tredmill we all know and loath

I might be a little crazy or abnormal but I personally don't mind the gear treadmill, I actually kinda like it. I like the system that GW2 will be using as well, but I think both styles have their place at least in my opinion and it is the whole reason why I'm going to be playing GW2 alongside another MMO to get my fix with both ways of doing things.

[Brewski]

no, subscription based games are DONE

[Duchessa]

Whats the differents when we have to pay for an example 15 euro/month or the full 60 euro after 4 months for an expansion?

[Deleted]

I wouldn't mind to pay 15 euro's a month for this game. But they'll never go with a subscription based system. Which is a good thing.

[Deleted]

If it was subscription I would probably pay it. I would'nt like it but I would pay it. With it being free is just awesomeness.

[Deleted]

Whats the differents when we have to pay for an example 15 euro/month or the full 60 euro after 4 months for an expansion?

You don't have to buy the expansion to keep playing the game, but you need to pay the subscription to play the game. So, the content in the expansion has to be good enough so that people will buy it.

[Dezerte]

I voted no.

The Free-2-play model they use is the reason why I'm buying it.

[Durzlla]

I voted no.

The Free-2-play model they use is the reason why I'm buying it.

it's not free to play, it's buy to play... just making sure you knew lol