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

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

Storage update concept fundamentally flawed?

→ moved from User talk:Linsey Murdock

Unless I'm missing something, there is very little incentive to purchasing storage tabs. Compare Purchasing Factions from Amazon.com (~$15, cheaper at other places)

• 2 tabs, 1 normal tab + 1 free 4th anniversary tab (40 slots)
• 4 characters, each have 50 inventory slots (200 slots)
• 5 Gift of the Traveler per week
• More Zaishen Keys from predicting MAT outcome

Purchasing Extra storage tab from online store ($10)

• 1 extra tab (20 slots)

It's pretty clear that purchasing mule account(240 slots + extra benefits) would be more beneficial. I know the live team put a lot effort into the update, but unfortunately, it could have used a bit more planning.

Yup, you've indeed missed the countless threads about this very subject on this Wiki, the other Wiki and Guru. The official explanation is you are paying for the convenience of having an easy to reach storage. --Arduinna 18:21, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Linsey != marketing. Please move along to another Talk page. --Ravious 19:16, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

If players decide that they get more value from having extra characters, then more power to 'em. If players decide to place more importance on convenience, and purchase extra storage, then that is great. We're just giving another option. We understand that not everyone will choose to purchase a storage add-on. :-) --Regina Buenaobra 22:31, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

You know, I finally realized why I like the storage panes more. It's not JUST convenience. It's remembering what the heck I have. When I mule things on an inactive character, I tend to forget I have them. Especially as a on-and-off player.

Now if only I could access the bags and equipment and heroes of all my characters from any of them . . . I can't even remember which heroes each of my characters uses, let alone wether they need more runes of cowbell or could even use a strategic shield of destabbination. ^_^ --Star Weaver 22:54, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Aw, I'll sure pay 40€ to gain access to the bags of a character while logged in as another. And also get 10 characters to work as mules, XD. But it would be even lovelier to be able to create 'Xunlai Warehouse Workers'. Imagine it. A character that can only appear an move inside the the Xunlai Headquarters (you know, the warehouse seen in Kaineng) a new outpost accesible from Kaineng and the Battle Isles. Always has the same clothing (Xunlai Jumpsuit, XD), so we can only choose the face, hair, height and skin tone, or not even that, XD. A level 20 character that never fight, but only stores. Using all slots a normal character has only to store. 45 slots for misc items. 27 weapon slots (the ones for the character and all 27 heroes), 27 offhand item slots. 27 slots for each one of the 5 armor slots, plus 20 equipment slots. All only for storage, XD. All they would be able to do is open the Xunlai chest, put and take items, and trade. But won't be able to leave the outpost like PvP characters can't leave PvP areas. Other character would be ale to enter the outpost to trade, though. That would be quite funny, XD MithTalk 04:44, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

@Star Weaver - that's precisely why I maintain a spreadsheet keeping track of what's on my heroes and what I have. The downside is I have to remember to keep it updated. However with it, I can tell you what weapon Zenmai on my necromancer have or what rune set up Koss on my ritualist have. – Barinthus 06:16, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I screenshot my mules and write notes of important items, otherwise it's 'offhand inscriptions mule' or 'tomes/dyes mule'. Takes a bit of management. 000.00.00.00 08:44, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Hehe, if the Xunlai Agent PCs were locked in the Master Warehouse of Awesome, they should be able to open all your other character's chests and move stuff around. Agh, I think I just had a flashback to WoW banks. Anyway, it would be awesome if there were a bunch of chests that allowed you into everyone's bags and stuff in there. They could make you play sudoku to get to the boxes! Wait, no.

Also, I found out that if you alt-enter windowificate the game and make it take up most of the screen, you can plant a text editor on top of it but the game will still recieve mouse hover events and display tooltips for stuff while behind the editor window. Great for writing down your stores/runes/w/e. Also, the "Silence Audio When Game Is In Background" option actually works in this case. --Star Weaver 18:16, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Characters ≠ Equipment

Hi there,

Could you please take the time to let me know why we can't spend euroes (etc.) to buy Guild Wars gold (to use on weapons and armor) but can spend euroes (etc.) to buy different hair styles, etc.?

I've always respected that you can't buy Guild Wars cash, which would only be used on expensive skins, and would grant no advantage in actual game play, but I don't get why you can come so close with different hair styles etc.

Basically I don't get why you can use real life money to change the appearance of some aspects of your character but not others. If you have the time I'd be most grateful for any response, thank you. --> A F K When Needed 19:16, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

A_F_K_When_Needed: The only answer that I'm able to give you is that it isn't part of the business plan. There are certain types of purchasable items that align with our business plans, and some that don't. --Regina Buenaobra 22:33, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Because a makeover pack gives you something you get in-game anyway, and is tailored for older developed characters that are just boring looking the same after all these years, but nobody wants to remake them and start over. Plus, in the usual case, you would only make over each character ONCE if you just really hate their looks. That's $20 for a character of each profession.

Allowing the purchase of in-game gold will completely tailor to those who can afford to buy it (over and over and over and over and over... you get the point), leaving behind those who can't. Hello to buying off all ectos from the trader and buying every consumable title there is day 1. I would sit in ToA for a while that day and watch the titles tick just for the hell of it, and then quit the game, as I'm not planning to spend any more money on GW1. It would make gold completely worthless, and I command the GW team for the way they handled the economy so far, as plain old gold is still just as valuable as ectoes. This idea is taking "unfair" to a whole new level. Not gonna happen, sorry. Rose Of Kali 19:35, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't think I was very clear on the idea at hand.

I was here to question the distinction...

For the record, I said I would (ahem, not do, would) spend the cash on cosmetic purposes, which you can already spend euroes (etc.) on. I didn't say Me Want Buy Gold, merely that I personally consider them one and the same, which you and Gaile do not appear to agree with me on.

You're spending RL money on cosmetic purposes, in so far as that and no futher, they are one and the same. --> A F K When Needed 20:13, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

The character change is an occasional use with a very limited purpose. Most people will not buy more than 1 of those. Gold that can be used for anything you could possible desire and purchased with the only limit being your wallet is quite different. Gold is not only used for character appearance, but for titles, HoM trophies, buying runs through the game, buying skills and skill tomes for each character - those are not purely cosmetic changes. If there was an upgrade to switch your armor from standard to elite or to switch your weapon skin, then that more like what you speak of. But again, gold by itself can be used for many other things, a lot of which can give you an advantage in GW1 gameplay, or in GW2 inheritance. So I still disagree with you, it's not the same type of thing. Rose Of Kali 22:07, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

First, clearly there is a huge difference between ANet selling gold and selling cosmetic items (or game content itself for that matter). Second, there would be an even larger difference between ANet selling in game gold for real world currency and a third party doing so. Finally, no reasonable person should believe that anyone cannot see the differences, and that the op is doing anything but making a thinly veiled complaint over being allowed to pay to have use of an additional feature in the game. -- Inspired to ____ 13:59, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Good question actually. If we can pay cash for cosmetics (face), why not also for cosmetics (rest of you). Well, you can't buy GW gold for obvious reasons, as that would break the in-game economy in favor of rich people who have nothing better to spend their money on. Being able to buy armors / weapons in such a way would also bias the economy in favor of rich people. However, haircuts are independent of the economy. You already have a choice at character creation, and while you have more options when you pay for it, these options are still all from styles available to those who don't pay. The only difference is that you have more ways to combine them. Because hairstyle is not a prestige item, it does not affect gameplay (like elite armor might influence who gets invited or not). -- Alaris 14:34, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

My main character wears Krytan armor since its creation and never had problems to get into parties, but that doesn't matter. Gold is used to get stuff. But hairstyles cannot be bought. Paying for those changes is the only way to get them. You can pay to get the imp and some other /bonus items too, and they definitely give some advantage, but you cannot get those items in any other way. But gold can be acquired in-game in many multiple ways, and that's why they can't sell it for cash like they can't sell for gold items such as Consumables or Prestige weapon and armor. If they did so, that would be worse than the 'pay per use' feature, it would be... well... turning GW into a red light district. MithTalk 14:55, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

You pay RL money for it because you can't buy it in game. if they made it so u could buy guild halls with RL cash but not buy GW gold with RL cash then you have a point, but since it was never available before, they can charge for new features. Same thing with the name changing. You can't pay 105 ectos and get a new name. I do have to say though, Rose's statement of Allowing the purchase of in-game gold will completely tailor to those who can afford to buy it (over and over and over and over and over... you get the point), leaving behind those who can't. Hello to buying off all ectos from the trader and buying every consumable title there is day 1. is not true. The economy was alot less broken back in 2005-2006 before anet cracked down on RMT. Sure, there were bots, but the market was still ok. --adrin 07:44, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Anet doesn't allow RMT because they don't make a profit on it. It has nothing to do with how easy it is to get gold/items or any of the other crap mentioned above. Other games like Archlord offer RMT, but they run it themselves. ~Shard 07:50, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

But ArchLord is a horrible game. Mediggo 09:07, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

And yet you're posting on Guild Wars' wiki, using badness as a point for not playign a game. ~Shard 21:29, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

OK,guys, the reason that u cant buy gw gold is that when u buy they dont get any money and they dont want to make a buy money thing in the store cuz it would completely ruin the economy and everyone would have like so much money that a crap gold weopn would cost like 900k.--144.132.145.245 07:59, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

A missed opportunity?

Hello Regina, I was just wondering why you guys didnt send out a GW newsletter with the new content? I hav several friends who play gw but dont troll the wiki and guru, who would have loved a little happy b-day events and some look at what you can do/get now. I also understand that everyone busted their chops to the the update out, so if it was a time issue I can see why there wasnt a newsleter sent. Siadina 11:43, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

A newsletter was sent out, called: Guild Wars Newsletter: 4th Anniversary Update. It arrived last night around 10pm ;) Seems they could have sent it before the event, though. Probably a work prioritizing issue. After all, they did have an awful lot on their plate the last month(s). --Ralmon the Gen-- 15:21, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Is it too much to ask your friends to read the login announcments? Or check www.GuildWars.com for update notes? — Poki#3 15:36, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

No, but some people that uninstalled GW might have been enticed to check out all the cool new stuff. --Arduinna 15:50, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

What you aint got friends that dont play anymore????O.o 64.39.135.32 15:52, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

If they don't play, then they're no friends of mine.  ;) Rose Of Kali 18:19, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

i never got said news letter. Zesbeer 18:24, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I'd sign up for the news letter, but the link provided in the confirmation email doesn't work. [shrugs] 000.00.00.00 21:42, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

ohhhh I found it..went to my spam folder last night I think the Charr rerouted it *grin*Siadina 23:20, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Whoever does the Newletter, he's quite lazy. I only got GW newsletters twice since they created it. One for HM, one for Eye of the north. And bring back the Scribe! MithTalk 01:16, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Aye, it's heavily underused at the moment. And really, the newsletter should be sent out as things are finalized and put on the webpage, not a week or two after the fact. Unless it's supposed to be an "old news" kind of letter :)

That's like sending out birthday invitations a couple of weeks after you had your party ... doh!

- Kherec 09:41, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

another missed opportunity is not using the longin announcements well like they could put a link to the new updates that would help a lot of nubs. . . they also fail to use the Imperial Herald she could be promoting the extra storage pane in game, or other promotions or upcoming events like winters day and stuff like that even player made events.-- Zesbeer 10:12, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh I agree on the Imperial Herald, he just stands in GToB looking like a lemon, and when you 'talk' to him, he just says he's your point of contact for new information.. Um.. If you ain't gonna use him, replace him with sommat more useful Anon-e-mouse 11:10, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

My GW newsletter was actually routed to my spam folder in my mailbox as well. >_< --Regina Buenaobra 22:24, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Releasing a SDK? and PVP/PVE ratio clarification

Will there ever be plans to open up the Guild Wars (1 or 2) API and release a developer's kit so the community can write addon programs/plugins for Guild Wars? In Wow, there are lots of third party addons that take advantage of this and enhance the playing experience. I think my favorite "damage meter" addon is the prime example of how nice an addon can be to playing wow.

Another question: In a recent interview about the 4th anniversary update, you mentioned that the GW player base is split 90%PVE/10%PVP. Can you please clarify how you arrived at that answer? For example if a player spends his time 30%PVE/70%PVP, what would he be counted as? Also, did the tally include inactive accounts, the ones who haven't logged in once in the past 30days? --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Colorme (talk).

Colorme: There are no plans that I know of to release any sort of full API for GW so that people can create any sort of add-on content for GW1. For GW2, I can't discuss our plans one way or the other. Sorry!

I can't disclose our internal metrics or methods. Those are confidential. --Regina Buenaobra 22:22, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

For me there are several things with and against releasing of such a program. Pros: It would be an easy way to gain a pool of endless amounts of content for GW. Cons: Many stupid players would use it to just make stupid pointless anime-maps or weird characters/weapons, unfitting gw. . There are also many issues that would arise if arenanet planned such a release. The first issue is: How people would test their maps? of course they can't use their guild wars characters. should they use a test dummy And there is a problem about detecting whether the user of the SDK has an ingame account, or just aquired the program to play guild wars freely on his computer. (although it could end in the user buying gw) And how could they add the new maps in-game? of course the problem is that these kind of maps have enormous data size, and they can't be sent via noemal mailing. if it was only a 4mb/map it would instantly fill the devs already busy mailboxes, possibly breaking down the communication between them and the players. Boro 17:14, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

"The first issue is: How people would test their maps?" set up a custom npc that can read the folder where your user-map information is? If you made a map each player in the party would have to have the map on their HDD?

"And there is a problem about detecting whether the user of the SDK has an ingame account, or just aquired the program to play guild wars freely on his computer." Intergate the tools into the gw.exe, so you can only access it through logging in to your account maybe? No resources have to be online but it would require the player to have an account rather than just the software (like with standard modding where you just need the tools and the software whether you own it or not)

There will always be stuff that's created by players that's not GW-ish, you get that with any kind of modding, yet you also get some really detailed, beautifully crafted modded content as well.

As much as I would LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOVE to mod Guild Wars ([sighs] New quests, new explorables... NEW MISSIONS ^_^ [sighs]) I just don't see them being able to do it. Linsey has already said, don't quote me, that their tools aren't exactly user friendly (to which I say pfft!) but it would require a lot of work to allow users to be able to test their stuff, work I just don't see Arenanet putting into it to let their modding community have a crack at it.

And, I heard something similar, a larger spread towards PvE over PvP, yet PvP (as I believe) being the smaller to manage (less maps etc and so on) requires less amount of work than PvE (have you seen all the stuff they had to do for PvE??????) 000.00.00.00 19:01, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

I recall City of Heroes have one of those... and it seems it has been quite abusively exploited. MithTalk 20:28, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

GW runs on a external server. It's not made for people to make mods like that. No MMO-type game has user maps. This isn't Half-Life. I believe some amount of client-side plugins could be made possible, since there already are a few 3rd party plugins (mainly using textmod, but not always) but that would still require work that I'd rather see be put to use elsewhere. Nevertheless I'm hoping that GW2 will have more client customization. — Poki#3 00:31, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Plug-ins doesn't mean new content, what ever people would make their weapons look like is only effect how they see it themselves. You can not and never will be able to change how other people see your armor/weapons. You can already customize your GUI ingame to a large degree, to either fit your play style or mimic what ever game you are used to play. Reason why grind-o-rama has native support for addons is because they have hordes of people willing to pay 15$ a month for features that slightly correct design flaws of developers. Biz 06:42, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Only benefit I really seeing is keeping those who know coding programs busy and in-game cash gaining as they could make and sell add-ons for in-game gold. This would be interesting, especially for my roleplaying side (and since my girlfriend is currently majoring programming ^_^) but it doesn't really effect me. Would be nice to have such a tool given out for GW1 add-ons once GW2 comes out - for a cost of course. :P -- Azazel The Assassin\talk 08:16, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) The GW interface isn't really designed for addons, unlike the WoW/WAR/RoM interfaces which are built from the ground up using a scripting language (Lua) which is what the addons are also written in. Thus I doubt you're going to see UI mods for GW now or anytime in the future. Texmod is something completely different than addons; texmod simply changes existing textures to look different but can't actually affect UI functionality. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 09:11, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Anet and Ncsoft

what exactly is your guys rolls? are you guys a subsidiary of ncsoft? or do they own you? i am just wondering what exactly the situation there is.-- Zesbeer 01:40, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Acording to ArenaNet's website "ArenaNet is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Korea-based NCsoft Corporation." — Poki#3 (talk) 01:45, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh ok i was also kind of wondering what that meant for there games and what kinds of stuff ncsoft decides for anet and what anet decides for anet-- Zesbeer 07:00, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

It means GW2 is coming out in 2012 instead of 2010 because NC wants to make money off Aion before GW2 tanks. ~Shard 07:52, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Shard: O_o. ... o_O. ...

Zes: I don't know, NCSoft appears to be rather loose on the reigns; I've always gotten the impression that . . . whoever's in charge here (Linsey for GW1?) and Positron over at NCNC Paragon Studios have pretty much had most of the final say on what goes on in their products and where they're going with new content. --Star Weaver 16:48, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Linsey is not in charge. Her boss(es) are. They don't even decide when to sell the game. Trust me, GW2 got pushed in favor of Aion, which is much closer to launch. ~Shard 21:30, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

And Aion apparently already has Currency Services popping up which means it's going to be the next EQ2/runescape/Lineage or whatever... so "milk it" they shall. NcSoft and everyone else for that matter. Anet had the resources to have "a GuildWars2" ready by 2010, think about it... They cranked out Factions & NF so quick some people actually complained they were too soon. Furthermore, giving that Positron guy free Reigns would have been the stupidest thing they did since they gave Statesman complete free reign(BUDGET); I don't think they'd repeat that error again. Last I saw, CoX's sales were tanking compared to other studios in a bear market (protip: bear market = good for game sales). TL;DR--> The facts support Shard, They gotta be padding out their sales schedule --ilr 08:49, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Factions and Nightfall where created quicker mainly because they where additions to an existing game, not a new game altogether. — Poki#3 (talk) 09:03, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I believe you meant to say: "stand-alones built on the same game Engine". If you'd read the Dev's own comments on why WHY they decided to make GW2 instead, you'd see where they mentioned that the Chapter-based process forced them to rebuild almost from scratch every time and that's not how they wanted to handle new chapters. --ilr 18:42, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I used the word "addition" and not "expansion". Yeah, new story, maps, classes, skills, but the fundamentals (not just the engine) are the same. And I can't find that quote (it was probably in PC Gamer) but I think they where refering to something slightly different then I think you're thinking... — Poki#3 (talk) 23:05, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

i am not asking about gw2 i am simply asking about how ncsoft effects anet. and i am sure regina can give the best answer out there with out attacks on ncsoft or arena net.-- Zesbeer 21:57, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I just told you how it affects anet. NC, with the exception of support, doesn't work directly on the game itself. It's just a publisher. ~Shard 22:02, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

On the other hand....gw2 could be near to completion and just testing and tweaking the game is now priority, pushing the release (unconfirmed imo) due to AION could give the developers more time to polish the game more and more and working already on developing content for the next gw2 expansions/updates. As i remember there were two groups of developers , one for tyria and the other for cantha in gw1. Maybe that's the case too. I believe the multi campaign story board for gw2 is already developed, so i think they are already building for the next campaigns/updates. But we will never know the exact status and release date. That's imo the descission of ncsoft looking at the release calender/timeline. Development costs of AION and some nice profit has to be earned first. Every reasable company won't have there own brands interfere with eachother. In dutch that is called "broeder moord", english: "killing you're own brother". I'm still playing gw1 with lots of fun, so waiting for a quality game is something i don't find a problem... just crossed fingers that all the legal issues and hard economic times won't kill development. Didis 22:04, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Zesbeer: ArenaNet is a wholly-owned subsidiary of NCsoft. They aren't involved the day-to-day running of the studio or the day-to-day development of GW1 or GW2. They don't control design decisions. Like the other studios within NCsoft, such as Paragon, we develop the game, and they publish. They also provide customer and other types of support infrastructures for the games in the organization. For example, all games published by NCsoft lean on NCsoft to provide customer support. --Regina Buenaobra 21:43, 11 June 2009 (UTC)