User talk:Regina Buenaobra/Archive Product Information/Apr 2009

Archives by Topic
Random Chatter Wiki Topics Game Related Topics Community & Website Product Information Misplaced Topics, Etc.

New storage options coming

Hi Regina. While I'm excited about the upcoming additions, I have to say I'm very disappointed that the storage upgrades are going to be priced the same as a character slot. I have already invested over $300 in character slots on my main account and have 3 additional accounts as well. The idea of investing an additional $30 per account to maximize the storage potential (assuming I get the promotional free tab on each account) is something I'm just not willing (or able at this time) to do. For that price I could get 3 additional accounts, with a minimum of 4 character slots plus storage, as well as the additional XTH rewards. I would suggest that your marketing/sales department rethink the cost of this additional storage (20 slots as opposed to 45/character slot) and revise it. I think they are shooting themselves in the foot. -- Wyn 14:13, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

You also pay for being able to access such storage from every character. With mule characters, it's a hell to use them to store stuff. In the same way city center shop are more expensive than shops in the outskirts, being ale to access something easily is more expensive than spending more time switching characters and having to remember were is everything. MithTalk 14:44, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

I have absolutely no problem accessing my mule accounts any time I wish, I will not be investing that kind of money just for convenience, when the benefits are so low. -- Wyn 14:52, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Yup, that's why some people go to outskirts shops and some people to center shops. Each case is different. If you prefer mule characters, you'll go with that... mules will also have the equipment bag, so people could combine both things to maximize storage... although it will get filled eventually too... MithTalk 15:06, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Okay - I missed the chat session, can someone please detail the planned storage changes and pricing structure? --Matilda Da Hun 15:16, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

See Fourth Anniversary content update -- Wyn 15:17, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with Anet charging $10 for the storage tabs, it's their choice, but I don't think this is the ideal price tag. I could actually see them making more of a profit from the storage tabs if they lowered the price. I think a lot more people would be willing to pay $20 for all the tabs instead of $40. With the price at $10 they might not buy any at all, or they would just buy an extra character slot for $10. --Draikin 18:10, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

I think Wyn has a great point. You would be better off purchasing an extra account, so the price of an extra storage slot is inconsistent with the value of the extra slot.-- Shew 19:39, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Though, I am extremely excited about the Zaishen Menagerie!-- Shew 20:12, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Wyn, with the price invested in 4 tabs, one could get character slots or even an extra account. I can see the point for charging for the extra slots but the price seems a bit on the high side. With the times and the economy the way it is, handing over $40 for 4 tabs is not economical when I could take that $40 and probably get 2 prophecies accounts and have a lot more space with a very slight inconvenience of transfering things. Like I said, I can understand the reason for charging for the extra storage tabs but marketing probably should take a second look at the price invested.--BabyJ 23:55, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, more price for a commodity is normal. But it's true that for some people it may be a bit off. Maybe that's the 'minimum' price they can have for stuff in the online shop. If they changed tab size to be of 30 or 40 slots, then it won't be so much of a problem for some people. MithTalk 01:51, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

The price for something so small is out of this world, compared to a whole character slot or full campagin prices and content. If you really don't want to bother with smaller transactions, why not sell them in packs of 2 tabs for $9,99 - it would be a viable alternative to buying a mule character slot, and I think many more people would buy it then. I doubt the cost of server resources usage for a single account that buys 2 tabs is significantly higher than for one that buys just 1 tab. And logically, 1 full character slot seems to require a lot more data space, and uses more processing power with all the relogs required to mule items on him. I suppose your should cover the cost of the very server upgrade that allowed the changes first, and for that I think counting on the very few players who will buy all 4 of them (and causing a massive outrage observable now on different forums) is a much worse option than doing a much more fair price (like $10 for 2 tabs) and having many more players actually buy them. Or maybe those grossly overpriced tabs are there to TEST the playerbase - how far can the prices for tiny upgrades be pushed, and to collect a lot of data on players spending beavior. And I'm very afraid if players pass the test and buy them, it may change the business model of GW2 into a horror.--Yawg 03:38, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

AS I've already mentioned over on Linseys page along with Poke, I personally feel that the price of the tabs is currently twice as much as it should be. With the use of GWx2 or 2 comps etc... the burden of switching through accounts isnt that high, Also with enough mules on your main account it is very easy to switch things across your chars as you can keep your storage relatively empty. Paying 100% of the cost of a new character, for less than 50% of the benefits of said charcter is in my oppinion completly disproportionate to the perceived gain one makes from the convenience of having tabs. I don't mean this to be a moan, all I'm trying to get across is I understand how hard the team has been working on these updates, to have them wasted due to unrealistic pricing and marketing would be a great shame. In short the prices of the tabs need halved or, as Yawg said, if you want the min price to be $9.99, have the tabs sell in packs of 2. I would like to point out at this juncture that this really isnt an issue to me as i have over 30 mule characters, however I know many people who do have storage problems who are saddened by this turn of events. Further to this, I also think that in the future when working on the content update, perhaps it would be an idea to inform the player base what content we can be expecting to be given and what content we will be expected to buy; initially the account storage was advertised as something being worked on for the april update, which was 100% true, however the statement neglected to inform us that we wouldnt be getting account storge for free, which again has angered/disapointed alot of players. Actually I haven't seen people this miffed about anets weird math since the "4+4=6" debates. -- Salome 04:21, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Even $20 for 4 new tabs is still too much. Getting another account (only $29.99) gives 220 slots + material storage (2 tabs = 40 and 4 characters x45 = 180, 220 slots total + material storage) vs only 80 slots for these new upgrades, even purchasing 2 extra character slots is cheaper than $20 for 4 new tabs. I would say an appropriate price would be $10 for all 4 new tabs Joe Canadian 13:19, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

[1] Pika Fan 05:36, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Wyn: In determining the price point for the storage panes, we discussed what people in various departments thought would be a balance between making enough to cover our costs, keeping the price low enough that it doesn't alienate a large number of players, and setting a price that was commensurate with the amount of work and resources we put into developing this feature. We have to charge a minimum of $5 USD in order to recoup the base costs of a transaction. We understand that not everyone will be happy with the $9.99 price tag, and we're aware that people are advocating for simply purchasing additional accounts to achieve similar results as an alternative to purchasing storage panes. There was a consensus on the $9.99 figure as balancing out all of the considerations I mentioned above, so this is why it was chosen. Again, I know that knowing why we chose the figure may not necessarily make anyone happier about it. --Regina Buenaobra 20:04, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

If the base costs for a transaction is that high then the $10 price tag makes some sense but I think that already alienates a large number of players. I just don't see a lot of people paying that amount, especially seeing how the alternatives give a lot more value for money. It may end up being a missed opportunity for Anet, seeing how once people opt for the alternatives they're unlikely to buy storage tabs in the future even if Anet lowers the price. --Draikin 20:31, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

I understand your opinions, and similar opinions of others here and on the forums. The business team was aware of these considerations in making the decision. They've done their research into different prices, and they ran these figures by several other departments. --Regina Buenaobra 23:17, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

If marketing would rather people continue to buy campaign's for more storage rather than storage tabs which took the amount of work and resources it took to make them, so be it. With the pricing and the economy the way it is, it would be safe to say that it does in fact alienate a large number of the players. I can purchase the guild wars game of the year edition from amazon for $16.42 shipped and get 220 slots, why would I pay $39.96 for 80 slots? It just doesn't make sense. Anyone with a lick of common sense can see which is the better deal. When and if I ever need more storage I'll just buy another game. --BabyJ 02:54, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

I understand the whole cost and expected ROI on producing the extra storage system. I think we must also assume that before the development team actually began coding it, the necessary research was done to determine if a feature which would be priced at $10 would have an accepted demand. Coding and testing is much hard work, and very "few" companies actually produce something that is not expected to sale well. So, assuming ANet has this kind of information, even though many people won't buy extra storage (either because they disagree, don't understand or simply can't afford), Anet will still profit from the feature and have a good ROI. If the result is a very low demand, then they might consider other alternatives. We will just have to wait and see. --Nekki 22:08, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

If the customers don't respond to the price then they'll drop it. It's too pricey for me, considering a new account gives more etc and so on. 000.00.00.00 07:06, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, I said somewhere that if they chipped in a free tab, I'll got them all, so I did it. I'll slap me with a leather belt later, so sorry for the 'betrayal', but at April was my Birthday and I had a few extra cash to spend in trinkets, and since I love 'completion' I completed the chest. The micropayment things are a different story, tho. They are a hoop I'm definitely not hopping through. MithTalk 16:29, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

GW2 2010-2011?

from Joystig Bad news for folks who've been hotly anticipating NCsoft's upcoming sequel to their subscription-free MMO -- according to a new release schedule buried within an investor finance briefing, the release window for Guild Wars 2 is now a remarkably vague 2010 - 2011. Considering the last tentative launch period for the game we heard was "second half 2008", this 730-day window is more than a little disheartening.

Though they did just suffer a few layoffs and are apparently skipping out of E3, NCsoft isn't exactly economically plagued -- their latest title, Aion, sold like hotcakes in Korea during Q4, bringing in a hefty year-end chunk of change. So, if it's not for financial reasons, what's causing this major delay? Is the Guild Wars 2 dev team taking time off to work on their needlepoint? Are they training for the winter olympics? Are they following in the footsteps of their former colleague and becoming idiosyncratic millionaire cosmonauts? We may never know.???????'' --Silverleaf Don't assume, Know! 07:45, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Isn't this the same news already "leaked" earlier this year from the something or other report? Vili >8< 07:50, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

And what was the answer then? Many in-game still await GW2 THIS Year (2009)? --Silverleaf Don't assume, Know! 07:53, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

This? I'm kind of surprised this gaming magazine is so late to the party :p Oh, and the "finance briefing" was probably this. Vili >8< 07:56, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Thx Auron. This? doesn't say 2010-2011. But the rumours aren't discouraged by it either. I will inform fellow players. --Silverleaf Don't assume, Know! 08:09, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

I' might sound strange but I'm scared that It will be just another wow clone as they seem to drop every aspect that made GW GW :/ Its good news for me really.Lilondra *panda* 08:42, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

But one of the better things from GW1 is still here. GW2 is SUBSCRIPTION-FREE. – Mar Master 09:20, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Even though I want GW2 to be all it can be I can't help but feel disappointed when I read this. --Silverleaf Don't assume, Know! 09:30, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't know why you are surprised or disappointed Silverleaf, any major online game is going to require a minimum 4-5 years for development if it's going to contain the kind of quality we are all hoping for/expecting. That is pretty much an industry standard. To expect it any sooner, would just guarantee a buggy, incomplete product, which I'm sure none of us (including ArenaNet) want. -- Wyn 10:37, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

"a buggy, incomplete product" why does that sound so familiar? hmmmm --adrin 12:53, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Why are we discussing Tabula Rasa, now? Vili >8< 12:57, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

<3 --adrin 13:08, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

@Wyn, as ever because what was promised in 2008-2009 was not fullfilled & went silent, undisclosed or "leaked" by third party's. Why not a simple official clear statement to all (potential)players GW2 in 2011. --Silverleaf Don't assume, Know! 14:40, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

@Auron ... LOL. --Silverleaf Don't assume, Know! 14:41, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

..Auron? That's Vili. His userpage is still messed up from April 1st. -- Brains12 \ talk 14:44, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

lolz, I thought P saw ghosts ^^ |Cyan LightLive!| 14:48, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Stupid and weird topic for me: GW2 will be finished when it will be finished. It is possible to make it finished in 2011. But still NDA, NDA and NDA and NDA. Boro 15:49, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

I still don't see where this 08-09 "promise" came from in the minds of so many players, the letter to fans is clear, they never made any promise about a release date, why are people freaked out about them breaking some promise that they never made in the first place? Seriously, y'all sound like my girlfriend. (Satanael 16:43, 8 April 2009 (UTC))

I don't know why the NDA argument keeps coming up. The NDA will say that Regina can't tell us anything without proper permission, but there has to be someone at NCSoft or ArenaNet that is able to give permission. I really wish we could go find that person and make them let Regina tell us something. Sadie2k 19:51, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

But there already is an official response, and it's been linked to in this topic twice already (here, I'll do it a third time). The release date is and always was "when it's done". Why are we brining this topic back again? — Poki#3 20:33, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

There is a new kid on the block. I think marketing will be focusing more on AION now, and I don't think, from a marketing perspective, that releasing 2 big games so close to together is part of their plans, probably wait some time after AION hits US markets and cools down a bit. so 2011 does make sense from that perspective. I could be hopefully wrong though. --Nekki 20:49, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

"Gifting" Account goodies

I was wondering if you can gift someone extra storage slots or expansion packs. Some people do not have credit cards, or just can't afford it and perhaps as a gift I could buy it for them. I dont want to ask their account information but would rather keep it was a surprise. I dont really see any options for it at the moment, but do you think there will be in the future? --adrin 08:19, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

That's a really good idea. I asked our marketing department about this around Christmas time last year, and they said they would keep it in consideration. Since we have some new optional purchases in the store, I'll bring it up again to see what the position is on it now. --Regina Buenaobra 18:02, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

I really like this idea and would be a feature I would use. Keep up the great work ANet, good feedbacks, bad feedbacks, are all good cause we see you are working like crazy and really care about the game and community. --Nekki 22:11, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

I would also like this. I am kind of strange and paranoid about connecting my main account to the online store, so being able to gift things from my other account would be ideal. Another similiar thing that would be good would be selling keys in actual shops (on cards) or even online shops (It was hard to find one, but I got my BMP key from an online store). Basically physical cards let you capture the computer-illiterate relative buying gifts segment. The cards could be used to gift specific things as keys or even just be gift certificates for the gw online store. (I wouldn't like the second option so much but it'd be good marketing sense.) purple llama 01:17, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Very nice idea. But i would like to mention there is already a pre paid credit card option. For a small amount you can by a pre paid credit card with let's say 25 dollar on it. When all spend it van't be used further more. Maybe that's an option too. In the Europe they can be bought almost anywhere [2] Didis 22:11, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

I think a serial number/code available to buy from the store would do the trick. You buy it and get the code, then give the code to the one you want to deliver the gift (i know my english is horrible XD)Kioga 16:58, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Offline shopping?

→ moved from User_talk:Linsey_Murdock

Is there any chance for ANet to release some of in-game shop content as "box version" to buy it "offline" in normal computer game shops? Not everyone has access to credit cards or online payments. I'd gladly buy this way something like: char slots + storage slots + BMP "all-in-one" pack. Lex Luxor 23:29, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

The problem with that is a limited number of possible unlock keys. If they added game cards or something, the chance someone could guess an unlock key could become quite huge. ~Shard 00:12, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Yet every GW campaign bought in store also has a unlock key. Are those getting hijacked too? --Arduinna 00:22, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

No. That is not what is going on. I'm not sure if there is any chance we will offer this stuff in brick-and-mortar stores. That isn't really my area. - Linsey talk 00:26, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

But you can only buy those once per account. If Anet sold online store items in real stores, they would need hundreds of millions of keys for character slots and pvp unlock packs.

EDIT: Well that's something to consider anyway. That's the problem with blizzard's old games. ~Shard 00:30, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Since NCSoft already sells game cards for their other games, what about making those cards valid for purchases from the in-game store. That would solve the credit card dilemma.--Pyron Sy 01:15, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

This isn't really my area, so it is hard for me to weigh in on it. - Linsey talk 03:33, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Then who should I ask about this? Can you direct me to the right person? And btw to other ppl: I know online shop offering BMP keys for sale so I think it shouldn't be a problem with "a number" of possible keys. (Yes, I could buy BMP key in this online shop as it doesn't require credit card - payment could be made at my local bank - but I dont know if this shop is valid source - thats another my question to answer - if there is "any official list" of shops authorised to sale BMP [or/and maybe slots also] alone) Lex Luxor 05:25, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

I would direct your questions regarding the online store to Community Relations. -- Wyn 17:41, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

I've raised the idea with marketing, and they'll take it into consideration. We don't have current plans to do this, but it might be something for them to think about for the future. --Regina Buenaobra 22:50, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Payment options

The online store has been lacking payment options for several years now. It doesn't even have PayPal support which any online store should have. I would want to have the BMP but I can't due to not having a Credit/Debit card or being able to buy a PaySafe card. ~~Brodly 16:19, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't mind personally but I do think Paypal should be an option if possible for the online store --Stu 17:24, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Correct me if I'm wrong but login at PlayNC site and you can add all the GuildWars campaigns/expansion, Kits, ExtraCharacters and BMP to your account(s) through Paypal. I heard the same will be possible with the "April Big Update" stuff. But more payment options would be nice. PayPal is a big improvement, but iDeal would even be nicer for me personally.NexceveN 17:58, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

My only problem is that I don't have access to online payment, thus I am unable to buy the storage. Boro 18:24, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Just going to copy and paste what I wrote on Linsey's talk page for a similar question:

"Can't you just buy a disposable credit card, something that does work in the in-game store? What I mean by disposable is that it's more or less exactly the same as the pre-paid gift cards most stores offer. I know the ones I've seen weren't top-up-able but still act just like a credit card when used online; apart from the fact that you pay when you get it as well as the fact that you don't incur the usual fees and interest that a normal credit card would charge. --Kakarot "

Wouldn't that be an option for people that don't have access/don't want to use a credit card? --Kakarot 18:29, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

I suggested the same a while back when someone asked on Gaile's page. Apparently some people have problems using them with the game store. They seem to get flagged a lot for suspicious activity. They will work, but they might require some interaction with support. I'm also not a fan of them for small purchases since you do have to pay for the card as well. What I would like to see more FastCards. They already have one for Prophecies. --Dunyas 20:32, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

The reason that there's no PayPal option in the in-game store has to do with PayPal requirements that purchases be through a website, and the in-game store doesn't count as a web interface / website. You can use PayPal to make purchases through the NCsoft website, though. I've already suggested that we (marketing) might want to consider releasing some of the add-ons, such as the BMP, via brick and mortar stores. We don't have plans to do it right now, but I've made them aware that there are customers who would like to be able to make purchases in regular stores for whatever reason (no access to credit/debit cards, for instance). --Regina Buenaobra 23:12, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely!! I for one, if could simply walk into a shop, lay down some cash on the counter, and be handed one of those "scratchy cards" with a product code, would definately buy the BMP (so want to experience those), some storage slots (heck, who am I kidding, would buy all the slots I can! :D), and prob an extra char slot (love to go visit pre-sear again). The sooner something like that could be done, the sooner could complete my collection of GW products. -- 220.253.64.241 05:45, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Petition To Stop Micropayment

Dear ArenaNet staff,

I started playing Guild Wars for two reasons. First of all, it wasn't like World of Warcraft (i.e. requiring extensive grinding). Second of all, it didn’t have monthly payments. I’ve been playing Guild Wars on and off for over 2 years now, and I’ve enjoyed the experience immensely. However, I’ve found myself deeply disturbed by this recent trend towards micropayment that the game seems to be following.

Over the last two years, I’ve watched as most of my friends have abandoned Guild Wars and moved on to playing other games. Although the circumstances of their departure were different, their reasons were always the same: there was never anything NEW in Guild Wars. Updates were small, and often featured only mediocre content. I, however, kept playing the game out of the hope that you were planning some big, exciting addition to the game. Imagine my horror when I discovered that this addition was yet another way to nickel-and-dime your loyal players to death. Now I feel like you’re asking me to purchase Guild Wars all over again, simply to gain access to new content. If you want to make money, you SHOULD be releasing a new campaign, not charging $10 for a makeover!

Well, I’m here to say “Enough.” Enough with the bonus mission packs. Enough with the PVP unlock packs. Enough with the extra character slots, extra storage slots and makeover credits. Enough with taking our hard-earned money for content you SHOULD be providing for free! This is the kind of behavior I’d expect from a two-bit flash-based MMORPG, not from one with millions of subscribers.

I petition you to make all the micropayment content in the NCSoft and In-Game Stores available for free. You can turn them into in-game gold sinks if you wish, just stop charging real-world money. If you do so, I will continue to play and enjoy Guild Wars. However, if you choose to continue with this micropayment nonsense, I will abandon Guild Wars permanently. Although the loss of one player may seem insignificant to you, consider there are many, many others who feel as I do. Guild Wars is a great game: don’t kill it off my alienating your players.

Blade of Gwen 03:00, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I have an alternative suggestion, you leave guild wars and let the rest of us continue playing in peace. There is nothing requiring real world money that is vital to game play. Their new campaign is called Guild Wars 2 and you can happily purchase it when it is finished. The items they have provided are available for those who wish to continue supporting ArenaNet's efforts, rather than demanding that ArenaNet support their addictions. They could simply leave the game as is and not provide any further content since they have announced their intentions of not releasing any more additional GW campaigns to focus their time and resources on Guild Wars 2 development. Instead they spend serious time and resources to providing things that the players have asked for. Someone has to pay for that. They chose a different business model, one that didn't charge monthly fees. Let's consider the numbers.... if they had gone with a subscription based model like WoW, a player who had been playing the game since the beginning would have paid $720 in monthly subscription fees if they were still playing. They are asking people to pay $10-15 one time for something they want. I don't see a comparison here. -- Wyn 03:12, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I have to second Wyn's comments on this. Further to what Wyn said I would like to reiterate that GW is still free to play. Nothing that is being charged for is needed. Extra storage is provided for free through the the new equipement bags and extra promotion storage pane. If you need more beyond that, then thats a luxury and imho you should have to pay for it. Secondly the character feature change and name change facility is once again great and a fab thing to offer people, but once again it is not needed for peoples enjoyment of the game. I will admit I still think that the storage panes are too expensive, however I think the pet unlocks and makeover credits and name changes are perfectly priced as they should only be used occasionally by players. Blade if GW starts adding things such as special armour skins or weapons that one can only get for a set fee, then I will become annoyed as that shouldn't be what guild wars is about; however they aren't doing that, they are charging people money for unneeded utility services whcih are just nice extras for people to mess about with. I personally commend the balance anet and the live team has reached with the update and im extremly happy about all the changes made. -- Salome 03:32, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

How is him leaving an alternative suggestion if he already suggested it?

Well, on top if it being absolutely terrible logic. Y'know, "if you don't like something, leave" never holds water. -Auron 03:39, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

"If this disturbes you then walk away" Drogo Boffin 03:40, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

So what would your advice be exactly Auron? Personally I don't see the logic in the following train of thought, which basically the OP said "I like this game and I got new content which I like. However I'm gonna moan about the content, issue ultimatums and leave, even though everything they told us they were going to add in this update has been added for free, but because they've added extra options which you have to pay for I want to sulk about it.". Please point out the logic Auron as at the moment its escaping me. -- Salome 03:58, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I think he is referring to the lack of logical thinking of Blade not you. Drogo Boffin 04:00, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm referring to the poor logic in "if you don't like it, leave." I am referring to nothing else, nor am I indicating my support of the OP, since like you, Salome, I think his arguments are ridiculous as well. -Auron 04:03, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Auron hates everybody equally Drogo Boffin 04:04, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

LOL he might do at that, but Auron is also one of the most logical users I know, thus why I was wondering if he could see something I had missed in the OP's message. As although our points of view differ alot, he always tends to have sound reasoning to base his views upon. -- Salome 04:09, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh I know all to well how Auron is. Been knowin him for a long time. Drogo Boffin 04:17, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Can We petition to stop idiotic topics on this page? Wild 04:21, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I'll sign that one. Even though the idiots are what keep most of us occupied. Drogo Boffin 04:25, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

"They are asking people to pay $10-15 one time for something they want." You are comparing WoW's monthly fees to that and that alone.... Lets do some real comparisons then.

So it's $720 for WoW in monthly fees and then the inital costs for the three chapters being $40 each so that brings the total to $840. In WoW you get 50 character slots so to equal that in Guild Wars you need to purchase Prophecies, Factions, and Nightfall and that totals 8 character slots (since for some reason 4+4=6 and 6+4+8......) Thats $150 dollars right there. You then need to purchase additional character slots and since one account is limited to only have 26 characters, so that leaves 18 character slots that to be purchased, meaning another $180 bringing the total to $330 so far. Since 26 character slots is still less than WoW's base 50 free character slots, you'll then need to purchase Another set of Prophecies, Factions, and Nightfall which then gives you another 8 character slots that you'd have for Guild Wars and that adds another $150 dollars to your total spent. So now you have 34 character slots and have spent $480. Since 34 character slots is still less than 50 you would need to purechase 16 more character slots for your second account which brings your total spent on Guild Wars to $640. Now with WoW you can take on anyone your level and they won't have more skills than you and you will both have access to almost the same armors and weapons (or comparable versions there of) even if they don't own the other expansions, or have expantions you do not.

With Guild Wars you need all the chapters and expansion to stay competitive so that means getting Eye of the North for your two accounts so that your characters can all be competitive. That adds another $80 to your total bringing it to $720.... So, thus far you spent $720 and many many transactions just to catch up with WoW on character slots and skills availible, just so that your chracters can be competitive at their level. That still does not get you all the content in Guild Wars, if you missed out on the Bonus Mission Pack promotion then that would add another $10 per account for another $20 added to your total. That can bring you up to $740. There is also the 1 Million Edition Upgrade to unlock more weapon skins for your account, and that costs $5 so for both accounts thats another $10 to make it so that your account has full access to everything thus far. Your Guild Wars total is now $750 after even more transactions. Now, $750 for Guild Wars, after many transaction, is less than the $840 for WoW so far. However it does Not cost Real World Cash to change your character's facial features and hair in WoW, but in Guild Wars it costs $10 for every five times you change your characters, so if you wanted to change all 50 you are looking at another $100 and yet more transactions.

Furthermore, should you decide you want to change your characters gender and name, in WoW it would only cost you an additional $15, but in Guild Wars it would cost you an additional $25. So if you are someone who likes to change their character's name and gender often then you end up spending much more money on Guild Wars than you would WoW to do the same thing. If you love to change your character's appearance then you will be spending a great deal more on Guild Wars than you would on WoW as there is NO COST on WoW to change your character's facial features and hair style. Not to mention WoW also offers for free an Aution House and in game Mailing that you can even send items to others with. WoW even has mounts and an extensive system for item crafting for those that enjoy those features as well.

So while WoW is a little bit more expencive than Guild Wars, about 10.75% more so, you could very easily surpass that and make Guild Wars cost far more than WoW if you frequently use features such as the Hair Stylist or if you end up purchasing any of the Skill or Pet unlock packs. Imagine how much more you'd spend if you wanted to try and get as much storage space on Guild Wars as you get on WoW (for no additional real money cost), you can't get as much space as on WoW even if you purchase all the extra storage tabs for your accounts, but you sure would spend a lot more money just trying to catch up to WoW and you'd end up making Guild Wars out to be the more expencive of the two.

All that aside, just compairing the features and massive amount of content that WoW has over Guild Wars, even if you don't buy the extras on Guild Wars, WoW is still well worth the 10.75% more in cost, as WoW gives so much more than Guild Wars has to offer. 68.52.189.88 05:20, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

World of Warcraft gives you a top of 50 characters because you NEED them if your jumping servers a lot. Say I have a level 60, 70, or 80 on one server, and all my friends are playing on another. It's start a new characater or pay $25 to transfer. What if you have friends across multiple severs? You'll need many more characters or $25 every time you want to play on a different Server. Guild Wars is one united server, so the most you could EVER need is 20 slots, 10 for ever PvE profession, and 10 for every PvP profession. At $50 for each campaign, and $40 for Eye of the North, and $120 for the 12 character slots your still short, your going to be looking at $310 for one of every type of character, unless you STILL need more for storage. Let's throw in every other extra. For all the unlock packs, storage tabs, Bonus Mission Pack, and the like, you'll be paying around $430, give or take a little, depending on how well I remembered the prices. that leaves you 200 character appearance changes, 25 name changes, or 25 gender changes before you'll equal the cost of World of Warcraft. — Jon Lupen 05:43, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

First off: IP above me, your math is extremely terrible. No one ever needs 50 Character slots. It's impractical since the money you used to buy all the character slots you don't need could have gone to another account, which has more benefits like XTH income and cheaper price per storage slot value. The most you'll ever NEED to spend on a GW account is $250, and it stays active until shit happens. Secondly: the "If you hate it, leave it" argument is terrible. Mind the hyperbole: I hate my life, so I am going to leave it and not bother with it anymore. --Riddle 05:52, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I did some calculations of my own, using myself as the example. I have bought all three games and EotN at around original price, so that's around $200-$220 (bought one collectors edition). I bought the GotY upgrade, the GW:EN Bonus preview event, and 6 additional character slots. That comes out to around $75 (if i remember correctly) totaling $275-$300. I will probably never buy a gender change, an appearance change, or a name change (I like my characters as they are). I might end up buying additional storage, but not any time soon. That would be a maximum of $40 more. Altogether coming out to $275-$340 (if i buy the extra storage). Compare that to WoW's $840 for all the games. I am very satisfied with Guild Wars and see no reason to want too much more in a video game. Guild Wars is much cheaper than WoW, and I find it to be a much better game. Gold Chocobo 05:59, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

While I know the "If you hate it just leave" argument never works, even though it makes no sense to continue to play a game you hate imo, I used it because the OP is making the ultimatum that if they don't change it he's going to leave... I'm just saying.... so leave already. -- Wyn 07:45, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Let me clear up a few things.

1. It was not my intention to issue an ultimatum (hence why I said "I petition", not "I demand"). I merely wanted to draw ArenaNet's attention to the fact that their behavior is alienating players, including myself and many of my friends. I am not deluded enough to think that I can coerce or force ArenaNet into following any demands I make.

2. I don't hate Guild Wars; on the contrary, I like it very much. It is my affection for the game that leads me to offer suggestions to ArenaNet, and infom them that their behaviour is, in my view, inappropriate.

3. Comparisons to WOW's pricing, while good for providing context, are not relavent to my original statement. I enjoy Guild Wars because it is DIFFERENT from WOW. Unfortunately, these recent micropayment products represent Guild Wars shifting to a WOW mindset, which is a matter of great concern to me.

I find it dissapointing that my attempt to bring a serious and civilized complaint to ArenaNet's attention has been met with outright hostility and name-calling from the users here. It would seem my efforts have been in vain.

Blade of Gwen 08:42, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

You can't have it both ways. The reason Guild Wars can stay free is they chose to make optional add-ons pay. You can play the game fully and completely without any additional investment beyond the actual game prices. Not a single add-on is actually required to play the game; they are merely for convenience and appearance (literally). And this isn't a "new mindset" for them. Character slots, unlock packs, upgrades like GotY... this is just more of the same, at the same price point they've set for their other optional add-ons. I am going to say the word optional a few more times, because the things they're offering are optional, optionally bought by people who want some additional optional fluff or some optional convenience like extra optional storage and optional time-saving things like the optional pet unlock pack, which are, um, optional. Xylia 08:54, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

At least the GotY and BMP included actual content. What I find particularly aggravating is the fact that I'm required to drop $40 just to get full Zaishen storage. Given that my other options for gaining more storage are either to buy extra character slots for mules or purchase the game again to gain a storage account, I find it mystifying that ArenaNet would not provide a free alternative.

I understand they need to generate revenue, but surely there are better ways to do it. Even in-game advertisements would be preferable to all this nickel-and-dime nonsense.

Blade of Gwen 09:11, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

If you have a full account and have purchased no additional character slots, you should have 8 character slots (360 inventory slots), 4 storage panes (80 inventory slots), plus the free promotional storage pane (20 inventory slots), and the Material storage. If 460 inventory slots are not enough for you, I would suggest visiting a Merchant in any town or outpost. I don't mean to sound hostile and I don't believe I've called you any names, I just have a hard time understanding the mindset of people who get thousands of hours of entertainment for pennies per hour and then complain that they have to pay for options. And absolutely NO to in game advertisements that would affect EVERYONE. The payment for optional utilities only affects those users who choose to use them. -- Wyn 09:24, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

/unsigned. I encourage companies to adopt this kind of micropayment system. In the current market companies who don't adopt the micropayment system are getting pretty systematically shafted, if actual content is released under a micropayment system, players get shafted. When unnecessary cosmetic and convenience content (makeovers and storage) are released under a micropayment system, I can continue playing for free without the stuff I don't care about while other people who do care about it effectively subsidise my gaming, so please Arenanet, continue to follow this trend of giving me actual content for free and charging other people for things I don't care about. To everyone else, decide if it's worth it at that price and either buy it or not. They aren't going to give it to you for free, stop being ridiculous. If it's priced too high and you don't buy it, they will be forced to lower the cost if enough people think the price is too high. If you work full-time it really is chump change so I can assure you Arenanet will make money off of it. I work full-time, so the amount of money isn't really an issue, I just don't want to spend real money to clean up a few cosmetic mistakes I made earlier, so I'm not going to. I also realise if I buy more storage all I am going to do is keep more crap I don't need, so I'm not going to do that either. More power to the people who did buy this stuff, I love my cottontail tonics and baby ravens, most amazing update ever. Misery 10:23, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

imho the OP is right, it should be like you can obtain those also but with some work like you do with unlocks, if ur lazy, rich and just wanna get it fast then you can purchase the unlock pack, but if you dont wanna spend on it or want to achieve it rather than buying then you can, since you cant trade zcoins, it would be a proper way to obtain these features ingame while eliminating limitless name/looks changes and/or trading of this stuff.. you cant buy it, you gotta do something for it, makeover could cost 10, extreme makeover 30, name change 50 and storage 10 gold coins... - Wuhy 13:14, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

also, i vote for account-wide zquests - Wuhy 13:16, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

All I want to know is if they lied to us about GW2, and if it won't be like GW was, having micropaid features too, like the ones they added to GW. I want to start forgetting about GW2 as soon as possible if they are going to do so. I don't mind paying for features that are paid an unlocked once, but I won't pay every time I want to use a part of the game. MithTalk 18:09, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

@Wuhy, I believe they can't do it that way. When these changes take place (Name change, cosmetic change etc.) there is actually a cost to ANet (i think it's around $5, though I'm not sure (it will be higher if I'm wrong)), so obviously to enable people to get it for free is just plain bad business. ANet have to give these features a cost which will enable them to re-coup their money, but also discourage people from doing it to often (server stress and all that I believe), so I'd say thier price is correct, they're gaining profit, it's not to expensive, but it's high enough to discourage users from doing it because of minor mistakes (truthfully if you miss-type a name you can just delete a character when you make it instead of buying a name change as some people fail to see). I also agree with (The Wise) Misery on everything he said. ~PheNaxKian Talk 18:29, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

[Clap] [Clap] [Clap] I never thought Arenanet would go down this road in the way it has. Micro-payments are something I avoid in other MMOs, it's like subscriptions, Guild Wars originally showed it was unnecessary. I'm glad you have it so it's on un-necessary options like the Make-Over, once you start putting it on something important, like being able to play a part of the game however.... 000.00.00.00 18:43, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

People...if you want Guild Wars 2 campaign to be done correctly,no crying then. ANet needs money for new campaign and I am happy they made these new upgrades,they will keep money in company and it is promising that GW2 will be something great.Thanks for all you done for us ANet!!Btw...no one is forcing you to buy these items from store,be happy that Guild Wars and Guild Wars 2 don't have any monthly fees,that's the best thing we could ever get.Black Metalll 18:44, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh, enough of that non-sense. If Arenanet is professional all production costs for Guild Wars 2 would have been secured before they started work on it. 000.00.00.00 18:48, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Nonsense. A lot of companies start a project with the money they currently have, trying to get other companies/people to invest in their product. It is a standard business practice, and I see no reason why ANet wouldn't use it as well. Otherwise, they would have to wait many more years before they could have started on Guild Wars 2, and this would mean less people are interested in it due to the longer down time between games... Gold Chocobo 21:06, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

So, Arenanet could very well be in the position where it can't afford to finish Guild Wars 2 if it follows what 'a lot' of companies do? Awesome. 000.00.00.00 21:26, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Ok all of you "Micro payment" haters. You need to get over this. These options did not exist until a couple of days ago. So for those of you who refuse to pay for what is available for purchase, good for you that you understand the value of money. The only thing that you can't do through the game and have to pay for is develop customized faces for characters, and it's $10 for 5 of those not a biggie (if you want to count the name change w/e $15 for that), so really nothing has changed for you. No one is being "alienated," as everything can be done in game without paying real life money. Giving people, who put more into the game than you people are willing to, options to make a payment to get something quicker is not a bad thing. They don't have anything more than you, this isn't maple story. They are simply supporting the company who upkeeps this game and is developing the next as well as others. As reward for this support they are granted a few minor things quickly with minimal effort. If you can't understand that quit being so selfish. The only thing you should be complaining about is the value of these things, because no they are not free. Storage Tabs($10) vs character slots($10) vs accounts (<=$30 ) for example.~>Sins WDB 21:51, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Unlike the one that started the section, I don't refuse to pay. I'm willing to pay for new features and new content. But I will definitely NOT pay fees, no matter how do you present them. If I pay, it will be for each part of the game. ONCE. Not every time I want to use a part of the game, and not for extensions of time that grant me temporary access to part of the game. They already added many features they said they will never add, so let's assume they add the Xunlai Marketplace, and instead paying a single fee of 40..100$ to have access to it, you have to pay 10$ for a certain number of uses of the services available there or 10$ every month to have access to it. Will it be reasonable? For other games, maybe. For GW, which was sold as non-fee game NOT. NEVER. They say there were not turning GW into a game with fees. How I am supposed to believe it now? There are no alternatives. There isn't a pack that is more expensive but grants you unlimited access to the stylists without having to pay each time you want to use it or anything like that. MithTalk 00:26, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

You guys have a scary grasp of reality. Firstly, @000.00.00.00, I hear every project in the world finishes on time and on budget, how amazing is that? I also hear companies don't like money and are very altruistic! What a wonderful world. Secondly, when people are all "There is no other way to do these things! You are denying people content!" No they aren't, only ONE feature requires payment, there is no other way to get a cross campaign hair/face mix, everything else can be done by deleting and recreating a character, I've done that 2 or 3 times now, you pay for cross-campaign look once and you have it forever, it's like buying divine aura or something, but only for one character. If you won't pay fees, don't, I assure you ArenaNet won't cry at night about it and eventually your hand will be forced when every company starts adopting it, it's the way the industry is heading, sorry. By then you will hopefully (for you) earn enough money that you really don't care about a micropayment for something you want. I used to be heavily against monthly fees, but I used to also not work full time. I do now and I played WAR for a few months, it was a terrible game, but I certainly didn't notice a few pennies going out the door each month. Gamers have been shafting game companies for years now, I paid ~120 euros for ~2000 hours of entertainment, lolwut? Even ignoring how common piracy is we shafted them pretty good. What do I want? Multiple subscription services that recognise people play more than one game at a time (unless you play a MMORPG grindfest) and enable this and micropayment systems like ArenaNet has adopted where you only have to pay for things that aren't real content allowing you to opt out. Be glad they are charging for bullshit and that the M.O.X. story arc, the BMP (well... technically...) and Sorrow's Furnace were all free. They didn't have to do that at all. Misery 06:42, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Misery: Gamers have been shafting game companies for years? [plays the world's smallest violin and laughs so hard it hurts] 000.00.00.00 06:56, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Funny how we now demand games with thousands of hours of playtime for the same price as we paid for games with 10-30 hours of playtime in the past while everything else in the world got more expensive. I played through Sonic the Hedgehog hundreds of times and don't recall ever complaining about repetitive gameplay. Misery 07:49, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I know, Sonic owns Guild Wars ^_^ Anywoo... as technology grows and as exposure grows consumers demand more and more (more shiny, flashy stuff), supply and demand style stuff I would imagine. Gamers no longer are just thrilled with the new grimmick or the new flashy graphics, shock horror that people are now desiring content hand over fist. However does gets the costumers. Developers either step up, like how Guild Wars originally did and succeed or don't and burn. If developers can't keep up with costumer demand they fail, that's how it goes doesn't it? Something like that, I'm actually tempted to fire up Sonic now actually. Wanna come play? 000.00.00.00 09:04, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

successful troll is successful. nice going. now I remember why I quit the GW wiki community as a registered user.--96.225.150.180 09:14, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Blade of Gwen: The majority of people here, on the forums, and in the non-English speaking player community are okay with the new purchasable features. Having said that, I've noted your opinion and I will let the team know about them. You're not the only one who has this view. --Regina Buenaobra 19:21, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Ms Regina Buenaobra, players, wherever they may be, being okay with the new purchasable features (gods know whats in their mind) is not a good enough reason to justify ArenaNet wanting to introduce micro-transaction into the game. Why? 1)Because we already paid for the game. 2) You just sounded like you say the "minority opinion" whom are also you loyal customer don't matter to ArenaNet anymore. I am not saying that ArenaNet Cannot sell things on their In-game store, I have stated many many times, repeatedly, saying that I support the in-game store by purchasing expansion packs (like eotn) and mission packs (bonus mission packs) and character slots (so many i lost counts), game of the year and etc, all that can be purchase through the in-game store (with the skills/runes packs in exception because i am already uax-ed when the pack is out, otherwise I would have purchase those also). What I already paid for should be MARK AS ALREADY PURCHASED like the rest of the stuffs I purchased. But now, Arena Net made this one time update and expect me the player to pay for the service every 5/6th time I want to change my character's hairstyle/name/sex is just not fair, even worse, there isn't even any new hairstyles and facial features that comes with this purchase, its combining stuffs I've already paid for. If I want to purchase this service I should be able to enjoy it in the game whenever I want to like the rest of the stuffs I've already purchased from the in-game store, when I purchased it, it should be marked as already purchased like the rest of the packs I already purchased. That is the problem. PS: I've also stated many times, that if this "update" is made into an expansion pack, eg: the makeover pack, with the ability to change sex, hairstyle, and facial features and comes with a whole new sets of hairstyle and miscellaneous and is marked as already purchased once you buy it, I would be the first in line to purchased it through the in game store, 3 sets in all. And I think this Makeover pack as I've describe it could easily sell for USD15.00 - USD19.99 Pumpkin pie

The majority rules. The minority doesn't get you the most profit, the majority does. Basic economics. Mini Me 11:50, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Unless you're in ArenaNet's marketing department, I don't think you're in a position to even have an opinion on how things should be sold, nor for what price. I'm sure they've done their research. Besides, all of these are (as has been said hundreds of times over) optional and don't add any additional gameplay. We were happy to pay for an extreme makeover for one of our characters, as we were to buy one additional slot of Xunlai storage each at our house. Also, Regina never implied that they don't care about the player base in the minority opinion, so don't put words in her mouth. It is simply impossible to cater to both the majority and minority population of anything in offering the same product. It doesn't matter what they did, there would be someone, somewhere that would be the minority. --★KOKUOU★ 11:52, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

What you can't definitely pretend is people to believe in future words when someone says they will stick to a business model, and then change that later. When NCSoft introduced NCoins, some people were worried about GW using something like that, and they quickly said GW won't use something like that... and here you are, something like that. They may have all the right in the world to do so, but by doing they will be lying to customers, and once a lie is laid, there is nothing stopping other from coming, and trust is lost. Some players may care more or less, some players may not care at all but the change is obviously there, they have crossed a line they drew themselves as if it was not there. Now, no matter how many times they say they will stick to 'pay once' with GW2, I can't believe that unless they give us 'pay once' alternatives. Once you cross a line, crossing it again is a matter of time. Want to cross a line? Ok, but don't take stuff with you to the other side, were some people can't go, or at least put similar stuff in both sides of the line. Which will be the next feature they will keep away from some players by making it 'pay per use'? Is all I can think when I remember this. MithTalk 12:30, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Sub-petition - I'd like to propose another petition, which would be to add a "pay once get unlimited uses" option. It would be great if those who already paid for changes could get a rebate on the new option. I don't plan personally to use these micro-payment options enough to be worth the while (given that I'm planning for GW2), however I think it's worth mentionning and getting support for. This option would (a) be more consistent with the marketing scheme we love about GW, and (2) provide a precedent for what we want in future games. I for one would often pay for such options in a game I plan to play for a long time. I would add that option to anything that does not create a security issue... so yes to appearance changes, no to name changes. Thanks for listening. -- Alaris 15:25, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

If they wan't to come out with a make-over "package" they will do it when the money from the 5 charge system starts waning. That way they can bring in as much money as possible by introducing infinite charges for 2* the 5 charge price or whatever. Like I said before if you really feel like you need to change your characters appearance constantly, budget 10 bucks out of your paycheck. I would agree they should set up an infinite use purchase for the stylist, but they will make their money first. They are a business first and foremost, that comes before everything as it should for a business. The customers are always right unless it cuts into long-term profits. They have it set up so in the long run they can make more money. Prices for things are high and value is low. Based on demand, they can change that ratio over time to maximize what they make and be more appealing to the poorer portion of the game community.~>Sins WDB 19:21, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm very patient. I don't mind to wait a lot until something like that is done, as long as it is done. I also strongly believe in 'exclusivity over time' as opposed as plain exclusivity. So I think that those that pay more or pay in advance, or following certain conditions have the right to get exclusive stuff, but also that after enough time has passed, new exclusive stuff should be created, and the old made available to everyone with (this has been seen with all technologies, such as cars, TVs, mobile phones... and the BMP pack or the 2005 and 2008 GW updates packs). MithTalk 23:30, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Models

If you ask really nicely (plz,plz,plz,plz,plz,PLZ) could you possibly get some models from gw? The afflicted would be great for a zombie game and you can have the shiroken for a sci-fi game! Im thinking of using theese models in valve's hammer editor, in the source sdk pack, so plz is there any chance anet could be nice and give out some models (my email is on my page)--Simpaklimp 22:53, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

They aren't going to give you their models for free, and if you rip + recreate them yourself it needs to be for non-profit + you need Anet's permission afaik. DarkNecrid 23:11, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

No way i was going to use it for a profitable thing, but more for a cool thing for my friends and me.--Simpaklimp 09:25, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

There aren't any plans for us to release models. Sorry. :-( --Regina Buenaobra 22:56, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Extra storage vs Extra character slot

They both cost the same but with the extra storage slot you get a whole new character and you get more storage! (20+5+10+10) So whats the point of the xunlai upgrade??--Simpaklimp 22:56, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Convenience. DarkNecrid 23:11, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

The loose justication is convenience, though lets see how that goes. 000.00.00.00 23:42, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

I can't add any other character slots to my account, it was well worth the $40 I paid IMHO. Pkohler01 03:22, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

You can buy another account for $30 or less and get 4 character slots, better value there. Plus you would get more monthly reward points.~>Sins WDB 05:47, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Superior Identification Kit - Cost for convenience: +25%

Additional Storage Tab - Cost for convenience: +125%

Guess I'll buy more character slots if I need more storage. Xelonir 10:59, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Actually, you can buy 3 Game of the Year editions [3] for less than the price of 4 storage tabs. At 4 characters per game plus the 2 storage tabs plus the free extra tab would be 720 slots and thats not counting the equipment packs. Plus you get 3 extra accounts for zkeys. Tough choice there, 80 slots for $40 or 720 for less than $40, I know which one I would choose.--BabyJ 02:12, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Then by all means, buy those instead. It's only a ripp-off if you're forced into it, and seeing as everything is completely optional (redundant even) and there are other (cheaper) options availible to you, i'd say all in all that Anet has been kind enough. They gave you every possible choice you can make at buying something you don't really need anyway. 145.94.74.23 07:42, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

We know that the new purchasable features give players many more options for how they want to organize their storage. We think that the extra storage panes give players more convenience and flexibility, but we also totally understand that it others may not agree with this. That's why this is an optional purchase. :-) --Regina Buenaobra 22:54, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Just Wondering

→ moved from User talk:Linsey Murdock

Hi there all, i was wondering if using a picture of a skill icon that has nothing to do with guildwars without permissions is against copyright, because i was watching a game of online pool and i noticed that one of the random user icons is the same as Putrid Explosion. i screenshotted it here. the pictures used for avatars on users cannot be chosen and is random. here is a screen shot: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v358/robotnorris/putrid.jpg thanks --Robot 13:43, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't think he can use it without proper credit to Anet/NCs, and I don't see how he could possibly give that credit in an avatar image, other than in the image itself. But that's just what I think. Rose Of Kali 17:43, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

This is something for community to answer! - Linsey talk 18:10, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Moved ~ Kurd 18:25, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

thing is, its not a user using this, its the website itself, when you log onto it it will select a random avatar and this happens to be one of them. --Robot 18:53, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure it's not worth the resources to even email them about it, let alone whine about copyrights. Of course they'd just remove it if you mailed them... but I don't see what there's to be too upset about. Vael Victus 23:57, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Using it for commercial purposes is against the Terms of Use. And the site should attribute the image to us. I'll forward this on to legal and if they think it's appropriate, they'll pursue it. What was the address of the website? Thanks. --Regina Buenaobra 22:28, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

It's http://www.gamezer.com/billiards/ --MageMontu 14:13, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Video containing GW extracts

I just spotted this video also posted here. It's a fan-made video that is supposed to show the next WoW expansion, but it actually includes a lot of GW and LotR (and other stuff I didn't recognize). I think it's a great compliment that someone would try to pass off GW as an expansion to WoW, but others might not see it that way. -- Alaris 21:42, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

what is your point?75.165.115.205 23:50, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't even see the point of the video. They should try to show concept art or something like that, not video footage of completely unrelated games. It makes no sense. MithTalk 00:11, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

...sort of looks like those videos from the 1930's-40's....documentry on Nazis in the very begining with the globe. O_O -- WoB (contribs) 00:13, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't really have a point, except perhaps that I was a bit annoyed that nowhere did it say where the bits came from... especially that the video claims to show WoW concepts for the expansion. -- Alaris 22:29, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

the guy says its a fake video and was something he made. also what dose this have to do with regina? or guild wars? yea maybe he violated a few copy right laws? 75.165.115.205 22:57, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Interesting. I saw A LOT of guild wars in there. The funniest, and most noteable thing was the flaming statue of Balthazar. And yes, congrats to GW for being passed off as a WOW expansion :-P 24.127.208.181 17:33, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, a lot of it was also taken right out of movie clips ANet released as promotion for the 4 games. Well, Regina knows about it now, and if it's a big deal, then that info will get passed on to the relevant ppl. -- Alaris 19:17, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Additional Storage vs File Size

I've seen a lot of people who are defending the cost, the few that are anyway, of the account storage upgrade by saying that ANet would more servers because of it. Those players/fans obviously have not been around that long due those players missing some key information here. ANet has revealed in the past that a player's account with everything unlocked (meaning all the campaigns, skills, titles and everything that goes with titles, and full inventory) on all characters with all character slots unlocked and in use only comes too 56KB. So adding just four more storage slots isn't going to make them need additional servers. Also, Jeff Strain and others have stated multiple times in interviews that people would be surprised at how cheap it is to run an Online Game, particularly Guild Wars.
Also, people have suggested that the reason it's $9.99 was that could be the cheapest ANet could put it in the store for some reason. Those players seem to have forgotten the $5 bonus weapon package as well.
What it all comes down to it that Guild Wars is not free to play as they like to claim. Games like Rappelz let you play the full game without any cost or initial buying cost unlike Guild Wars. Both due offer added advantages if you purchase from their online store though. So in the end, Guild Wars costs more money and charges outlandish prices for the basic necessities like storage. We should also expect the same things with guild Wars 2, though probably to a much more drastic level. 66.90.104.89 05:17, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Your "basic necessities like storage" are free. Extended storage has a premium. If you want to talk about Rappelz, basic mounts were free. Better mounts had a premium. You seem to perceive the "basics" as "everything that the company has available to players", and that's really not the case at all. Raine - talk 05:41, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

As a person who played Rappelz, firstly that game is completly subpar when compared to GW, secondly Rappelz has a whole host of costs, as in you have to buy with real money a whole host of things that are necessary to the game. GW is asking you pay $9.99 for a storage tab, but you seem to be forgetting that you already have 4 tabs + material tab, not to mention the number of characters you can have, which most players have 8 at the very least. With the addition of equipment bags that will mean each character has 65 slots of storage each, thus across an account you have a normal minimum of 470 slots of storage. I really don't think one can complain anymore about lack of storage and I dont think you can say GW costs more money as you have no need to buy the extra storage. As I've already said above I think the cost of the storage tabs is about twice as much as it should be, but I don't accuse anet of trying to rip players off, as they really don't. Just in this instane I think they've priced NONE-NECESARY storage tabs to high. It's nohing I will be upset about, I will just be sticking to buying character slots myself. With their 3 times bigger storage, ability to play the game, ability to get minipets and if bought in a new account, ability to make extra Zaishen Predicitons. -- Salome 13:13, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Here is some math: $50 for each campaign, $40 for Eye of the North, and $40 for four more storage tabs brings you to $230 for your entire account, before you factor in unlock packs and such. Now, considering Guild Wars has been out for close to 48 months now, that brings Guild Wars to a cost of around $4.70 a month. That's already cheaper than any other MMO out there, and cheaper than X-Box live to boot. Now, I've bought all 3 campaigns, Eye of the North, 4 character slots, all unlock packs, the Bonus Mission Pack and they Game of the Year weapon pack. This takes me to a grand total of $315 for my account and $6.56 for the almost 48 months I've been playing. That's a reasonable cost I would say. — Jon Lupen 16:35, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

I see the 8.99€ price more like something about marketing or accounting. Maybe they can't sell it for less. We haven't seen the update, anyways. Maybe in the final release there would be 2 slots for that price, or they increase the tab size to 40 slots instead of 20, or they release the 8.99€, and if no one gets them, after some time they change the price of the content of the product to be more stuff. We can't say for now. MithTalk 17:18, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

I think my per month cost is higher than WoW's, but then I have 2 accounts with every campign on them and an extra 22 char slots + various add ons. -- Salome 22:44, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

I think that per month cost analysis is largely irrelevant for GW. The simple fact of the matter is that a chapter of the game can now be purchased for about $25 on sale. You can play that chapter as much or as little as you want and investing any more money in the game for other chapters or add-on's is completely optional. That fact defeats any argument for a per month cost analysis and I applaud aNet for offering these $10 storage expansion panes. Pkohler01 18:19, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

If Anet's using a regular database, each character would be the same size empty as it would full, and whenever they do something like this, they have to add it to all characters anyway. 56 kb (which sounds a little high actually) times 1.6 million registered accounts times an average of 6 characters per account = nearly ten million characters, times 56kb would be 534 GB. If the added storage takes up only 1kb per character and 4kb per account, that's still an estimated 25 gb they need on their data servers. They keep a lot of stuff in the backups too. ~Shard 18:31, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Cost per month and cost per hour played are just ways myself and a few others look at things and whether or not it was worth it. For example, say I bought Mirror's Edge at $50 and played for 10 hours, that's $5 an hour, and Guild Wars at $270-ish for my account and 2600+ hours is about 10 cents. I used the cost per month analysis to show that even if your infesting int oheavily your account, your still paying 50%+ less than a standard MMO, as people complained about it costing too much. — Jon Lupen 22:40, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

ArenaNet is a business, not a charity. Business means making money. If you think a product/service is overpriced, don't buy it. The sales figures will dictate any necessary changes. Simple. 218.214.126.215 07:33, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for sharing your feelings. We've taken the feedback onboard and it'll be relayed to the right department. --Regina Buenaobra

Steam FAQ

Here are some questions I've seen repeated in several sites. Many players would like them to be answered:

• Will NCSoft-account players be able to login through Steam? And vice-versa?
• Do NCSoft-accounts and accounts purchased though Steam play together or are they separated in any way?
• Do both methods share support? (Support though Steam being redirected to Anet or anything like that)

Those are all for now MithTalk 00:22, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

AFAIK you can add your GW key to Steam, at least it's like this for every other Steam game I've seen and it'll be on there, so yeah. As is, you can already add GW to Steam through the "Add Non-Steam Product" function if you don't want to buy it/add your CD Key through Steam. Yes they still play with each other, that's a given, and Support would be directed towards NCSoft for anything not Steam related. Steam is only a digital distribution model, it is not a completely different server infrastructure or anything like that. DarkNecrid 00:34, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

LOL,consol, sv_cheats 1, impulse 101 !! shooting shiro with a bazooka. HAHAHAHAHA!!!--Simpaklimp 08:59, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

K sorry, got over exited. But i was just on steams website and they sold guildwars there, u might not have to add non-steam game.--Simpaklimp 11:03, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Tbh, I'd prefer an airboat (impulse 102 iirc) or gravity gun to the bazooka anyway. But then, thats just me. I prefer to pwn in style. Ashes Of Doom 12:57, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I've been receiving these questions as well. I've been compiling a list to send along to the people in charge of Steam integreation. If you think any more should be added, please let me know. Thanks! --Regina Buenaobra 18:39, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I have a couple of questions too:

• Is it likely for Valve to add Guildwars keys to the games that can be activated by CD key?
• If not, could they just enable the steam://preload/29570 function to allow you to add it to Steam, as you need to buy an account to play, anyway?

That's all I want to know — Ebañy Salmonderiel 20:49, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Okay, here's my Q: Will there be Steam Achievements for Guild Wars? --Arduinna 21:35, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Guild Wars isn't integrated with Steamworks, so no. Steamworks is what makes Steam Achievements and Steam Stats work. DarkNecrid 02:22, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

You learn something new every day. --Arduinna 16:51, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

You need a Steam account to play GW from Steam, so you are not able to use your NCsoft credentials to login to Steam.

By default, GW isn't setup to load from the Steam client, so you have to enable this in the Steam client.

Steamworks is not supported.

If you have a support question related to Steam specifically, you should send it to Steam. If you have a support question related to GW and Steam, you can send a ticket to our Customer Support team and they will try to help you out. --Regina Buenaobra