Some of you are either not reading all the way through, or something. Who knows.
I write in the original post that, yes, Guild Wars already has micropayments. I'd also figure that my intent would be clear considering the thread is called 'The Future of Guild Wars Micropayments'. The point is that it's got only a few things offered. There are whole games based off of the concept of micropayments, and some of them make much more money than Guild Wars - Maple Story comes to mind. The point of the thread is essentially a brainstorm, while the first part of the post is a justification of why I feel this is the inevitable conclusion ArenaNet itself must reach.
Micropayments are NOT monthly payments. I am NOT advocating monthly payments.
I AM asking for suggestions for ArenaNet to jumpstart what seems to be a stalled process - that is, expanding on somewhat minor features that players want and will pay for.
You are free to disagree - but I thought I made myself fairly clear as to what the point of the thread was.
As for a monopoly on free gaming - I really beg to differ. Runescape gets joked about a lot - it has 9 million free players, 850,000 of which pay. Maple Story has 50 million players, and has generated 200 million USD in revenue, through micropayments alone (although GW micropayments should be NOTHING like Maple Story micropayments). Guild Wars is sitting at about 3 million copies, which at $50 brings in about $150 million USD - before boxes and manuals, giving a cut to retailers, etc. What I'm talking about here is a lot more financial freedom for ArenaNet, which hopefully amounts to more polished games and better support. The cost is charged to those who want to pay for vanity options or small trifles.
R


