Boycott the Storage Update!

I hope you dorks do boycott the fee. I really do, because once all you freeloaders dry up and blow way the people like me that are willing to pay for addons or content can better influence the direction on the game.

You have one group that doesnt want to pay for anything no matter how small and you have one group that would be willing to pay a price for certain things. Who do you think the company is going to listen to? So go ahead and complain, I'll still be here when you dorks get priced out.

In what sense is it "optional"?

Is it optional in the sense that exactly nothing will happen if I purchase it? That nothing will happen if I *do* purchase it?

Or is it more optional in a similar sense that say an overpowered skill is optional, and that we don't have to use it if we don't like it?

The problem is that one of the above is faulty.

Now here's the funny thing: Yes, you will be "disadvantaged", in a sense, if you don't buy it because you'll be able to carry less stuff. But the other side is that most of the "stuff" in this game is optional, unless you're hoarding mass loads of consumables.

/dontcare
$10 usd i can afford,
dont have a credit card so i dont really care.
those who buy it want it
those who dont buy it either cant, or dont want it, or a sulking that we didnt just get given it,

get over it,

read the whole post I bought a lot of stuffs from their online store FYI but this situation is different. I even wear guild wars t-shirt (size is too big lol, don't know how to return, :P)

btw, I keep forgetting, a question to all those players who think they are responsible to "fund for the development of GW2".

Do you have NCsoft or ArenaNet shares/stocks?

I'll be saying thank you to ANet for the free pane, and get back to working on gw2.

I did. I'm still recovering from it. I still can't get over this little gem:

I believe you'll find the majority of MMOs change this little thing called a monthly subscription which covers updates among other things. Many other programs charge for updates, often by switching up a version number and ceasing support of previous versions. Anti virus software in particular tends to require subscriptions for continuing updates. At any rate ANet aren't charging for an update - the update is the ability to buy extra storage tabs if desired.

To me the storage pane purchase situation seems directly comparable with the selling of character slots, so beyond arguing over the price I don't see what the big deal is. There is no paradigm shift taking place here.

If I know how the Stock Exchange works, I think you can't really buy ArenaNet Stocks because it's a Private company. But, ArenaNet IS a subsidiary of NCSoft, which is a PUBLIC company, meaning one can buy NCSoft stocks. Now, personally, I may just invest in it, but I won't because I don't know how the Stock Market really works. >_>

As for the extra storage? First people complain that there isn't enough storage space, yet when extra storage space is offered, people complain about the price?! What the flying monkeys! Seriously, people? SERIOUSLY?! Good GOD! The people on this planet need to GROW THE FLYING MONKEY UP!!!

I simply continue to play as before.

immortius
suit yourself, that was my opinion. and happy recovering.

JupiterStarWarrior
when have i ever say i want to pay for extra storage? some other lemmings maybe but not me.
BTW: it means we are not responsible for arena net's financial situation unless you are afraid you stock value drops.

Redvex
off course we continue playing, we PAID for it already.

I'm sorry...I didn't buy onto a game where micro transactions determined what I do or don't have in the game. That was supposed to be skill. If this is the route of GW2 it is simply another reason on the list of reasons I'm not buying it.

Another thing people are forgetting...many people bought character slots specifically for extra storage (a much more valid option). Now we are thrown the ability to buy extra storage directly. Again...you people need to stop thinking of this in terms of "optional convience" and more in terms of "optional way to get around a game shortcoming". Sort of like how everybody should have UAX from the beginning and not have to purchase it...the option shouldn't exist. Saying it is optional so we shouldn't QQ is a stupid and bad argument.

From Regina's wiki talkpage:

I myself wanted an option to buy more xunlai panes as a last resort if there's no free storage update, and I WOULD buy those if they were fairly priced.
$5 per pane would be expensive but bearable, and if they went with selling them 2 for $10 I WOULD buy a pair as I could really use them. And they would make more money this way (2 for $10).

But after seeing where they're going I immediately changed my mind - I won't support them changing the business model and giving us less and less and less for the same price. This has to stop now. Bring back fair pricing, deliver better value for the prices you charge.

I need the storage but I will boycott absurd prices - I will have to struggle with a full chest but I did that for years... now while money is no problem for me, I'm boycotting it only for a principle of better future.

The choice is up to you, think of it as an intelligence TEST - if you get ripped-off you fail it, if the community fails and shows support to blatantly horrible deals - we will surely get more of them in the future... and even worse ones... and GW2 may be entirely based on rip-off deals from the base design... and it will be too late then.

The time is now. Open your eyes. Don't get owned.

Given that $5 is the actual cost of these panes for Anet, how can you justify your "absurd" prices now?

Was it mentioned at all previously that a portion of this "mega April update" would include a price?

Actually, $5 is how much an online transaction costs, so the panes themselves cost more on top of that.

Still, this implies that selling multiple panes together might be viable, perhaps 2 panes for $15. Assuming $5 for a transaction, selling 2 together at $15 results in the same amount of money after the transaction cost as selling 2 separately at $10 each.

So if i understand it correctly if they make it $5 they could better give it for free ?

Well, it would be the same as giving it away for free, except instead of only losing money with each purchase, they'ld lose it all straight away. :P

Adding extra storage costs some amount, say $x. These involves implementation costs, and server costs, and probably overheads on backups and other things.

Additionally, there is a $5 overhead when selling things via the online store (at least how Regina describes it) - probably a fee involved with the interaction with the credit card companies in validating your details, transferring funds, etc.

So if they sold it at $5 they'ld lose $x with every purchase - which is the same as if they gave it away for free, and thus just as untenable. At $10, then they end up with $5 to offset the storage cost and make some profit.

By selling two panes for $15, they'ld end up with $10 to offset 2x $x, which is the same as before.

Assuming the transaction overhead doesn't scale with the price of the transaction though.

Wow you're very knowledgable, how do you know the ACTUAL COST per 1 pane?

I'm absolutely 100% sure their cost it's far less than $5 per pane. Unit costs are no more than a couple cents.

The main cost they have to cover is the cost of the server upgrade that allowed all the storage updates we're getting. There's also a cost that comes from processing the small transaction, that's exactly why I suggest selling packs of 2 panes for $10 - for pure fairness and good marketing, and MORE pure profit.

Simple analysis:
Think about how many people will spend $30 or $40 on panes at $10 per one.
Now think about how many people who aren't going to buy any of them at current riddic prices would spend $10 or $20 on them if they were sold 2-for-$10 instead.

I bet there are many more people in the 2nd group. And I'm almost sure the actual unit costs difference between: selling 1 pane for $10 and selling 2 panes for $10 are negligible (but they will never confirm this, as companies never want to talk about their real costs)

Well, they could have $10 for 1, $15 for 2, $20 for 3 and $25 for 4, pane packs available for purchase if it's the transaction cost that is the problem...

If they're losing $5 per online transaction and you can get 2 for $15, then that's -$5 and that ends up to be $10 which would be their profit for 2 currently as I understand, but yet it saves the consumer $5 in the end as well.

That sound about logical, hmm?

Then again, that all is based on false logic and quick-to-jump presumptions.

So you know better than the Anet team and Regina?

Do you even read the posts in this thread?

Anet Monday briefing, 13/04/2009, 8:00:
Mike O'brien: ok guys, big news, I decided we're going to give away the additional extra storage for FREE, as our reasonable customers expect.
James (from the finance department): Wait, but, but...
Mike O'brien: yes James, it means we'll make a loss on it so this means...
James: we're not getting paid this month?
Linsey, Regina, Martin: WHAT??!!??
James: ok ok let's calm down, what about $5 a pane?
Mike: well you'd all get half your salary but I'm afraid we'd break the trust of our customers who expect us to deliver everything completely free
Regina: I can already see the thread on Guru...
Linsey: I <3 this game but, hmmm...
Martin: I just moved to Seattle!
Mike: well I'm sorry guys, we can't afford to loose our customer's trust, read the threads on Guru and you'll understand what I mean
Linsey, Regina, Martin: GURU??!!??

Yeah, we don't really have enough information to draw any real conclusions, but if it moves this thread out of "ZOMG microtransaction conspiracy!!1!" territory...

immortius, you make false claims.

An online transaction does not cost 5$.

There are many games that offer more payment options than NCSoft/ArenaNet and sell stuff for 1-2$. Just check Navy Field or Silk Road. They are not going bankrupt because of that.

ANet made claims all the time that server and bandwidth costs are not that high, but a tiny bit of extra storage costs them... yeah. I am pretty aware that a "tiny bit more" scales with the numbers of players considerably.


They are really pushing their players with this price.
I personally think it is a very bad trend that they charge for storage at all...

Even if we give in and buy some storage, the price is still a slap in the face.

Not my claims if you paid any attention.

They're CERTAINLY NOT losing anything on $5 transactions (GoTY update is a loss?), they're just making less profit than on $10 ones. The actual processing cost may be just $1 or less, but it does make a difference in thousands of transactions, 10-20% is a very significant difference.

And now back to actual costs.

Shouldn't be hard to compare from just logical point of view - what costs them more - an extra character slot or 2 Xunlai panes? How much more data is there to be stored in a whole character file?
Should be obvious: A lot more.
Not only it's MORE pure universal storage slots, but you can imagine a character is a lot more (heroes, progression tracking, quests, maps, titles, skills, ... item storage may be far from the most data consuming thing among all the data that needs to be saved).

And in case you haven't thought about it - all those annoying RELOGS required to move things between mules are not only an inconvenience for us, they also put an extra stress on the servers, it's a moment when a lot of data needs to be sent and processed (SHIFT+F10 to see).

And now think about COSTS of running a whole new account... that you can buy for $19,99 (PvP-only, using only official prices for comparison, I'm not even getting to those awesome discount boxes from markets) ... that includes 4 (FOUR) character slots! At least 5 files (4chars+1account file) to be stored and backed up on the servers. Would you think they're LOSING money here?

I did read all posts in this thread, ALL.
And you're making sh** up.

I agree that storage is a bit tight but If I need more I'd either call up some friend who has stopped playing asking to use their account as a mule or Just buy more accounts for about the same price.
Wich i would also be able to use for silly economic destroying predictions X)

10$ per panel isn't low enough to compete with the alternatives.

I do not mind this update being paid for but after reading posts in this thread I also realized that we indeed get storage update for a price of a whole new chapter. If I could choose I would prefer to get a new campaign than having more storage space. Anyway I think that the prices will be going down with time and the basic value is for the launch of the update. So there is no need to panic yet. It is like with movies or cds when they are out you pay 18-25 euros and after one year 5-10. Same with the prices for campaigns. People who would like to get storage cheaper just need to be patient and wait.

This "pay by far too much for more storage tabs" crap is trying to make some money between GW1 and GW2.

And, what is worse, I also see it as a test how much money people are willing to pay for something that should not be optional, but standard.

If we pay 10$ for just a storage tab, I just shiver when I imagine what else can be sold for that or even more money...!



Next step:
ANet GW2 fund?
Donate 10-100$, receive a surprise minipet on release? :>
So that ANet can hire some more workers to finally meet project deadlines, ideally without too much crunch?

So do you know how they're managing data migration and backup? Do you know which data storage (actual disk storage) provider Anet is using in its various server centres? Can you tell us the bandwidth they're going to buy each month for that?

The truth is: you know nothing, all your posts are pure invention, speculation at best. Your "logic" of knowing what a char slot or an account requires in terms of actual programming and data storage is falacious, because it's based on understanding how we do with it. It's not because we see a "slot" in char inventory and Xunlai chests that they mean the same to the servers.

I, too, have no idea why this $5 cost is high, but I can find plenty of "convincing" explanations: because Xunlai chest slots have a much higher cost than char inventory slots (due to data redudancy to avoid loosing data and keeping log); because it required re-organising quite a lot of stuff in their database; because it requires moving a few data centres to new providers; because the server load becomes higher (again ,we have no idea of what's happening on the server side, I'm speculating too).

I'll stop here. You can call Regina a liar if you want, and I have no doubt that a certain part of the $10 pricetag is purely for profit (profit which will be reinvested into GW1 and GW2 development anyway), but this thread is getting more ridiculous by the minute (the reason why I wrote the funny Monday briefing discussion).

To see a "trend" you need to show me a series of actions that consistently support a change in the GW business model. Someone needs to explain to me how an extra Xunlai chest pane is game-altering (maybe that's the bit that's missing here to convince people that there's indeed a "trend"). Or else it's just empty words (a "conspiracy theory").

Let me quote Regina again:
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/User_...gina_Buenaobra

Although it's perfectly possible, I don't think it is. As someone said earlier in this thread, the fire imp game package was much of a test than this.

As my funny Monday morning session story was trying to say, do you think these guys do this amazing job without hoping to get a good pay? Do you think the economic crysis has no impact on Anet and NCsoft (who lost TR but gained 2 Anet guys at their helm, look at how Martin was moved from NCsoft Europe to Anet, while other were laid off)? It's easy to sit in your chair and judge their business decision, but your ass (and mine) are not on the line if they fail. They're risking their job, not just the risk of loosing an argument on a Guru thread.

It's a very sticky situation, Fril, but I don't fully agree with ANet putting a cost on this.

Here they go prepping up, getting us hyped about a "huge April update" and hinting a bit at increased storage. Now it's on its way - but it's coming with a pricetag. Yet another move that many consider an ANet-style slap in the face.

Given how fragmented and distraught some of their longtime supporters have already become, this most certainly isn't helping. Paychecks are one thing, a trusting playerbase is another. While you'd still see some largely negative feedback if we were known far earlier about the price, I think it's safe to say that the effect on the players would be much more different.

As I stated eariler: Needing money is something I fully understand, but there are many more things you can sell that *won't* disadvantage the player if he chooses not to purchase them. As is this is just another addition that hurts more than harms.

Hopefully I *am* missing a quote or saying from Regina stating that this next update would *not* be free. But I'm still not finding much, sadly.

Fril, I am not responsible for the bad working conditions in the games industry. There are several articles about that in the blogosphere, mostly about the EA spouse incident and the latest statements of IGDA director Mike Capps. Shocking and disgusting, crunch being the norm and so on.

But this is no excuse for overcharging. Or for selling stuff that should be standard, not optional.

They are going to milk guys who still play GW. Basically, they milk their dedicated fans, those who still play GW actively. This is true for most fee free micro-transaction games, a few pay the bills for the rest.

I think they shoot themselves in the foot with this storage tab sale. Unfortunately, I fear there is a chance that they really get away with it. it only needs a few people to buy storage tabs. Makes me fear for the future.


If the future of GW2 is micro-transactions, OK. Then this is their new model.
It is up to the customer to decide if they want to support such a model at all, of course.

I personally already spent quite a lot of money on micro-payment in Guild Wars and other games, and I am not too happy about it. It was my choice, of course.

But selling a mere storage tab for 10$ is the WORST rip-off in terms of micro-payments that I have seen so far. Not even Sony's infamous Station can beat that.

The update has many more things, although I do agree that the storage is the biggest part. But let's not forget that we'll get for free a pet zoo, an equipment pack and the very interesting daily quests!

Oh boy, believe me, I perfectly know that, trust in online environment is a scarce and fragile resource. Anyway, I don't think Guru represents "correctly" the GW community, that's mainly why I'm not scared and I think all the fears expressed here are (like it often happens on Guru, a quite active forum) just emotion of the moment. As someone already said, GW and Anet had to change, I believe they're still sticking to their ideals.

Same question as to DreamWind (not answered yet?): what kind of game advantage does the Xunlai chest panes give you?

I know what you're saying (it was already discussed in a thread by pumpkin_pie about how Anet expressed in a French interview that synching is not a problem they intend to look at). But if you look at the last 4 years, the main 2 reasons why the population has shrunk is: 1) because GW1 is designed that way, play it then leave it aside, only to come back; 2) the PvP exodus.

The law of the market will speak. If Anet made the bad decision, we'll suffer, but they'll suffer even more. Isn't that enough for you to "trust" them?

You call it an "excuse", they call it a "reason". You call it "overcharge", they call it "fair price".

At the beginning of this thread, I was all for $5, not so much for $10. After reeading Regina, I thought this is fair. You may disagree, but I think it's a fair pricetag for the convenience of storage common to all your chars (in addition to pet zoo and equipment pack which are free).

They may "milk" players you know. A thought I had yesterday: many people mock the players that buy plenty of accounts for XTH, but we (we don't do that) may still be able to play the game thanks to the money they're putting in buying Anet products. The notion of "milking" is all relative, look at one of my previous posts where I list the dates of the various products they were selling. There hasn't been so many over the 4 years. Compare that to Activision Blizzard getting 48 monthly community payments and now for more or less 10 million accounts ... and they're making much much much more profit than Anet. Milking?

I don't think they do, although it's possible. I think they're smart, it'll bring some money and then they may adapt if it's not so good (which would mean that we'll be discussing this possible great news in the future). Or not.

Indeed, but stop being so obsessed with this "microtransaction" thing. As I said, anyway, it's been forecast years ago that this was the strongest viable solution for online gaming companies. And Anet is far, far, far away from some of the shark companies that indeed milk their clients. I believe we'll have with GW2 a somewhat similar deal to what we've got with GW1, maybe a little more due the awesomeness of the game .

Maybe that's a product that Anet should not have sold that way, or not at all. But given how small the GW1 team is (and Linsey's dedication to the community, she producted the most requested feature on forums, let's not forget that!), I bet they couldn't do better :/.

Did anyone of you ever think about costs beyond data storage? Like, salaries? I estimate those about 100k.

QFT

There are Prophecies accounts available for as low as $15. Sometimes even lower. With four character slots (each capable of holding 45 items) and two storage tabs, one account can hold 220 items. FTW in my book.

Fril: Stop making sh** up FFS. You do that all the time. I never called Regina a liar or anything else at all.

Use some damn logic. I don't NEED to know how they manage data migration or programming to know that a character slot costs them more resources than xunlai tab (or 2 of them), when we're talking about cost per unit.
The biggest cost comes from the very server upgrade they did that allowed the storage increase, but it could be covered with money from other sales just aswell - boycott this miserable ripoff deal and buy a slot instead - they get the same money and you got more storage.

And THIS is the first major TEST, fire imp package was nothing compared to this, as that one was given for free to many many players, this one has no free option and is a greatly more demanded one.

There is a clear TREND.

It started when they began selling Unlocks for lame people and GoTY upgrade - it's clearly selling ingame advantages - infinite spawnable weapons (imbalanced in Presearing - main but not only reason for ppl buying them), and instant-gratification UAX.

Advantage from selling Unlocks later became even more apparent since addition of Zaishen Keys -> a player who spends a lot of $$$ on the skill/stuff unlocks instead of unlocking by spending faction can start spending his first faction on ZKeys and if he then plays as much as a player who earns his UAX, the lame RMT player will get OVER 2 MILLION GOLD ADVANTAGE.

Nightfall release was allright and following the good old business model, even better - it even gave away 1 extra char slot for Preordering.

Now a HUGE MILESTONE in this was GW:EN release - it's a not a standalone game but just an expansion, yet it COSTS MORE than a standalone campagin - it doesn't include even 1 character slot or a xunlai tab, which a full campagin added to your account gave. Thats $20.. no wait, $30 (counting a tab as $10) LESS value included, compared to any campagin. Amount of content may be comparable, quality lower (half armors being reskins, dungeons 3-5 times reuse of the same maps, HoM unfinished till today), but I had to spend $20 MORE for that (I had to buy 2 slots separately, yes, I had to, because the sheer amount of new items released at that time was impossible to be stored). Outrageous, I raged about this on forums alot back then, but no storage upgrades were added to GW:EN to compensante the lack of char slots.

Next stop: the BMP sold in game store - clear sign microtransactions are taking over GW - 4 missions - amount of content FAR SMALLER than 1/4 of GW:EN being sold for $10, and using a cheap lame trick known from F2P games - it offers a major advantage of being able to spawn almost infinite amounts of free perfect weapons with awesome skins with 2x higher resolution textures than ones found normally ingame.

Then a longer break, but they came back with the Fire Imp thing, it was pretty minor because a lot of people just got it for free, but still it was selling a significant game advantage for $$ (especially in Pre again, where it's absurdly overpowered and can tank and kill charr all by itself).

And now THIS - a big test for the community, very obvious hardcore ripoff test of how much desperate players can be and how much can they overpay. Overpricing started in GW:EN and here gets to it's maximum power... but if the community fails the test and buys the xunlai panes, this TREND will continue and may get to even more outlandish dimensions.

Oh, and don't miss the Zaishen Menegerie Pets unlock for $9,99 - it's like straight away pulled from a F2P mmo.

That word does not mean what you think it means.

I'd buy it if I could get word from Regina or Linsey or another staff member that this isn't a test run for making Guild Wars 2 a micro-transaction centered game. After all, if you think about it, it could be considered an investment for the future. NCSoft and ANet are kind of struggling at the moment. I mean, what if Aion flops? Then where would we be?

Quote Wars, go (sigh):

What do you mean by "GW community"? As in like the playerbase as a whole, or in regards to the beliefs of the online community?

If the first, then that's because forums will never, never, ever represent the playerbase. Forums only represent themselves.

If the latter, I'd have to disagree. There's a reason Guru is most popular, and that's because it has possibly the most broadest online community in terms of beliefs and viewpoints.

More storage, obviously. Carrying more junkies and having less hassle. The disadvantage is having less storage, more clutter to deal with, more hassle. Similar to the unlock packs (which I *really* disagree with), there's both pros/cons to purchasing them: the advantage to purchasing the unlock pack is having all tools for PvP at your disposal (as it should be). The disadvantage - especially as a new player - is that you're stuck with a very limited subset of skills and have to go through a very, very large time investment to be PvP "capable".

The difference in storage, though (and something I pointed to earlier), is that there's nothing you really "need" in Guild Wars. All you really "need" is a max equipment and some cash for skills and you're set. Everything else is strictly "want".

But as evidenced, that's not going to make a lick of difference. More storage has been a highly demanded feature for years, but now that it's finally around the corner ANet suddenly stops us and says "by the way, $10 bucks".

Not. Cool. At. All.

Again, huge difference between "hey we're gonna give you guys new storage much farther down the road" and "hey we're gonna give you guys new storage much farther down the road - but just so you know, it may come with a pricetag".

While I still disagree with required a purchase for a minor convenience, I'm really disappointed in how this is coming out.

ANet screwed up a whole lot more than highend PvP (just ask, well, me). I don't think we need to go into that, though.

All of this concerns - as I've stated numerous times in numerous threads - not the majority, but a minority. As long as the game is still easy to pick up and get into, it's going to be successful. As long as the casual player can still hit stuff and win, they won't care about anything else.

But that does *not* mean you can't disregard the long-time players. It's the feedback provided by these customers that bring in *more* longterm customers.

No. A bad decision is a bad decision. I don't want ANet to lose money, I want incentives to give them my money that don't give advantages. I want to be able to purchase add-ons that don't change the mechanic of my gameplay or make things easier on me. I don't want to be trying to manage a ton of items thinking how easier it'd be if I dished out 10 more bucks, that's just not healthy for your playerbase.

Well, considering they have over 100 employees, I'm sure that each get paid more than $10,000 per year.

Yeah, 10$ for a tab is no longer micro, rather macro?

There is a Wikipedia article on that if we really want to split beans.


Posting #514 by Yawgmoth and #517 by Bryant are excellent summaries. I have nothing more to add.

It is a sad development. Actions speak louder than words, their original business model did not survive. Many people doubted that it will work, but it worked. No idea how well, but it worked. But obviously it is no longer good enough?

Let's see what we can *optionally* buy in the GW2 shop. There will for sure give some incentives to buy this, or that, some more of that... well, the model is not new, and it works.

Even if that's true, trying to make salaries by selling Xunlai tabs?

Business Model Fail.