Wealth == How many accounts you own. Should this continue? - Guild Wars Guru archive powered by Guild Wars Legacy

Test Me

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: Sep 2008

E/

14 Jul 2009 at 18:08 - 121

Quote:

Originally Posted by esthetic

Considering the business structure of Guild Wars of no monthly fees..They need a source of income to keep the game going.

Offer incentive to buy additional accounts = People buy additional accounts = ANet gets additional revenue = ANet Rent gets paid and ANet employees get paid = Keeps Guild Wars going for all of us.

You should stop worrying about ANet's income and business model. Their model was very clearly stated from the start: "free to pay we'll release campaigns every 6 months".

They *intentionally failed* in the second part. And I doubt any business model based on people buying more than one copies of GW is viable.

This is not a valid argument. And to be honest, no part is currently happy the way I see it: players are stuck to this abandoned ship and ANet is not making any substantial money...

So even if they want to admit it or not, they failed their own business model and this sets a precedent that if they launch GW2 with the same model they will probably fail again. But again, they intentionally chose to fail. They could have a parallel team keeping development up and if not releasing every six months then once every year (as I remember factions was developed in parallel by a second team).

They obviously did not want to do that, though they most likely could afford it.

Mordakai

Grotto Attendant

Join Date: Aug 2005

Kyhlo

W/

14 Jul 2009 at 18:24 - 122

Quote:

Originally Posted by Test Me

You should stop worrying about ANet's income and business model. Their model was very clearly stated from the start: "free to pay we'll release campaigns every 6 months".

They *intentionally failed* in the second part. And I doubt any business model based on people buying more than one copies of GW is viable.

This is not a valid argument. And to be honest, no part is currently happy the way I see it: players are stuck to this abandoned ship and ANet is not making any substantial money...

So even if they want to admit it or not, they failed their own business model and this sets a precedent that if they launch GW2 with the same model they will probably fail again. But again, they intentionally chose to fail. They could have a parallel team keeping development up and if not releasing every six months then once every year (as I remember factions was developed in parallel by a second team).

They obviously did not want to do that, though they most likely could afford it.

First off, I wouldn't go so far as saying Anet "failed". They decided to make GW2 instead of turning out endless Chapters, bloating the skill list, and having to reinvent the wheel (and then some!) with every new Chapter.

They did have two teams, but Factions arrived 6 months late (it came a full year after Prophecy). That's why Sorrow's Furnace came out: a free update to tie people over until Factions.

Nightfall actually came out 6 months after Factions, so they made that deadline. And sometime before the next expansion would have come out (Utopia), they decided to go to GW2 instead.

Obviously, GW2 will not have exactly the same business model as GW, but as long as it's free to play, with paid content coming every once and awhile, it should be fine.

April 2005: Prophecy
April 2006: Factions
October 2006: Nightfall
March 2007: GW2 announced
August 2007: Eye of the North expansion

Daesu

Furnace Stoker

Join Date: Oct 2008

14 Jul 2009 at 18:38 - 123

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ebony Shadowheart

Collector's editions are sort of intended to give players something limited and slightly more advantageous because they spent the extra cash. It's a marketing tactic that basically every company has used at some point, that's why no one QQs about it. People that wanted a Kunni either bought the CE or saved up gold and bought it in game.

The topic of the thread is whether or not having more than one account makes you more wealthy in game. Honestly, for some people yes, for other people no. It depends on how you play and what you care about. If you only care about accumulating in game wealth because you have nothing better to do with your life, hooray for you. Honestly not everyone 'abuses' the system through the use of multiple accounts and I use the term loosely because I honestly don't care if someone has 10 accounts to farm zkeys or just 1.

Do I think its stupid to continuously buy accounts just to get virtual money that does nothing for you? Yeah, but hey, to each their own.

The OP's intention was to show that people are buying "Wealth" in-game through RL money, in this case extra accounts. My intention was to show that buying "Wealth" in-game through RL money has already been happening way back in Factions Collector's Edition, even without buying extra accounts and through legit means too.

Personally I buy 1 cheap account just for the extra storage. But I am not dumb either, and I know the other side "benefits" I can get with an extra account and all these finally get factored into my decision to buy an extra account. I am sure that is also the case for many people with extra accounts.

Tullzinski

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Mar 2006

Trying to stay out of Ryuk's Death Note

N/R

14 Jul 2009 at 18:56 - 124

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghost Omel

i have a very important question....WHY DO YOU CARE.. Dont give me this economy business. How does it affect you as a gamer.. Are you jelaous? Are you in need of a flashy sword that is no different than a short sword? Or is it the fact that your pricey items all of the sudden lost their value...

How does the guy next to you with 10 accounts affect how you play in your Instance?

What he said.

Lots of ppl with the OPs' type of complaint lately. Keep your nose OUT of other peoples games, get the F%$# over yourselves and let ppl enjoy the game how they want to!

Restore Ursan! No More Nerfs! Buy all the accounts you want! Farm until you pass out! Abuse XTH! Solo God Builds! Unstoppable Hero Builds! If you don't like it don't use it! Keep the F%#K out of my fun!

esthetic

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Apr 2008

Fantasy Island

[Qtie]

R/Mo

14 Jul 2009 at 19:04 - 125

Quote:

Originally Posted by Test Me

You should stop worrying about ANet's income and business model. Their model was very clearly stated from the start: "free to pay we'll release campaigns every 6 months".

They *intentionally failed* in the second part. And I doubt any business model based on people buying more than one copies of GW is viable.

This is not a valid argument. And to be honest, no part is currently happy the way I see it: players are stuck to this abandoned ship and ANet is not making any substantial money...

So even if they want to admit it or not, they failed their own business model and this sets a precedent that if they launch GW2 with the same model they will probably fail again. But again, they intentionally chose to fail. They could have a parallel team keeping development up and if not releasing every six months then once every year (as I remember factions was developed in parallel by a second team).

They obviously did not want to do that, though they most likely could afford it.

*sigh* You quote me yet you don't get me. Where did I say I am concerned about ANet? or its business model? Where do I say that the business model is based on sale of additional copies? What do you know about viable business models for games such as Guild Wars? What "argument" are you refering to that I make?

To clarify my position on the "business model" of ANet. ANet is a for profit corporation. The corporation in its bylaws has a goal and directive of increasing the value of the company, not make you gamers happy, fortunately for us sometimes these results coincide. ANet does things like make up XTH reward pts and Nicholas for a reason, to sell more accounts, to make money. That is my only point. with regard to the business of ANet.

My post was addressing the logic, or the lack there of it, of those who benefit from, yet complain about, others who buy additional accounts getting more shiney pixels than they.

MMSDome

Raged Out

Join Date: Sep 2005

14 Jul 2009 at 19:09 - 126

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tramp

We need some Obama style justice around here and only make it so people have 1 account... 2 accounts max if they can prove a need. Just my opinon.

loldumb

So you want communism and have them tell you how much of something you can have and you want to give away your freedom to have more? Just because you may not have multiple accounts doesn't mean you should go ahead and try and take away those who have more than 1.

I personally have 2 accounts but I don't even remember my 2nd acct's pw.

DarkGanni

Forge Runner

Join Date: Mar 2006

Malta

[CuTe]

E/

14 Jul 2009 at 19:16 - 127

Yes it should, I paid REAL money to buy my 2 accounts. I have the right to use them both as if I own only one.

Aleta

Frost Gate Guardian

Join Date: Jan 2006

California

TTP

R/E

14 Jul 2009 at 19:19 - 128

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tramp

We need some Obama style justice around here and only make it so people have 1 account... 2 accounts max if they can prove a need. Just my opinon.

/shudders in fear at any changes related in any way to THAT---

I have 3 accounts because back in the day you couldn't buy a toon at a time.

And at least for now it's still a free country and if I want 50 accounts I'll buy them.

therangereminem

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Jan 2007

R/Mo

14 Jul 2009 at 19:22 - 129

xth is dead so yeah gg and travler gifst in abotu 6months wont be worth more then 1.5k to 2k each

Mordakai

Grotto Attendant

Join Date: Aug 2005

Kyhlo

W/

14 Jul 2009 at 20:23 - 130

Even if ArenaNet thought it would be a good idea to limit accounts, how could they?

How could they prove it's not your sister's or wife's account?

esthetic

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Apr 2008

Fantasy Island

[Qtie]

R/Mo

14 Jul 2009 at 20:29 - 131

*facepalm*
ANet wants to limit how many copies of the game you can own to 1? Sort of like McDonalds saying that you are limited to buying a meal from them to once a week. Cause its bad for your health and they want a good public image.

Like how many times do you need to hear this. "ANet is not trying to make the perfect game, they are trying to make the most money possible." Sometimes and I stress sometimes these goals may coincide but they do not equate.

Daesu

Furnace Stoker

Join Date: Oct 2008

14 Jul 2009 at 20:33 - 132

And even if ANet declares themselves to be the ONLY legal entity that can sell us in-game gold for their own game, which they have invented, created, and owned, they have every right to do so.

Currently they are only selling SOME in-game advantage through accounts but they dont allow gold sellers. I dont see that as a big deal. ANet owns their own game and their servers, gold sellers dont. ANet has a legal claim to GW, gold sellers, on the other hand, are just benefiting off their work.

I dont see why ANet wouldn't have the right to earn our money off their own creation.

Test Me

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: Sep 2008

E/

14 Jul 2009 at 20:50 - 133

I would go as far as saying they failed (though I am taking it a bit to the extreme), since they just dumped their business model when they figured it doesn't really work or not the way they wanted. I still believe they could've done two more expansions before GW2 or so. Instead (supposition) they chose to fire the second team and keep only one team working on GW2? Or did they merge the two teams?

Quote:

Originally Posted by esthetic

"ANet is not trying to make the perfect game, they are trying to make the most money possible."

Which is exactly where the schizophrenic behavior of ANet shows. If they were in only for the money they would have released another expansion or two in between GW and GW2. To cash in. But they didn't. So.... how does that integrate into the bigger picture? The ways of ANet are a mystery to us all

esthetic

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Apr 2008

Fantasy Island

[Qtie]

R/Mo

14 Jul 2009 at 20:59 - 134

Quote:

Originally Posted by Test Me

*snip*If they were in only for the money they would have released another expansion or two in between GW and GW2. To cash in. *snip*

How do you know this? I would guess it would cost more money to develop, produce, advertise, and distribute a new expansion than they would bring in. That the game would become too hard for them to maintain on the skeleton krewe they got working now. I believe it was a cost/benefit analysis which led them to the decision of not making more expansions.

Ebony Shadowheart

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: Sep 2006

USA

SSW

E/

14 Jul 2009 at 21:00 - 135

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

Personally I buy 1 cheap account just for the extra storage. But I am not dumb either, and I know the other side "benefits" I can get with an extra account and all these finally get factored into my decision to buy an extra account. I am sure that is also the case for many people with extra accounts.

I think the point went beyond just have 2 or 3 accounts though. There are several people on these boards that have admitted that they have 6, 12, 15+ accounts that they bought them just to reap the rewards from XTH. I can imagine how many people in game have done similar that don't participate here.

I see nothing wrong with having 2 or even 3 accounts if you use them, for things other than to just gather 'wealth'. Beyond that though, it just seems a bit much. Just personal opinion though.

Test Me

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: Sep 2008

E/

14 Jul 2009 at 21:02 - 136

Quote:

Originally Posted by esthetic

How do you know this? I would guess it would cost more money to develop, advertise, and distribute a new expansion than they would bring in. That the game would be come too hard for them to maintain on the skeleton krewe they got working now. I believe it was a cost/benefit analysis which led them to the decision of not making more expansions.

Yes we don't have the real data so we can only make suppositions. But I don't believe GW is in a such bad shape that would not be able to sell an expansion profitably. I think that would underestimate the success of GW. Don't you?

However for some reason they chose not to cash in. Probably they're banking on GW2 being so awesome that would make more money than any expansion they would have added + much more.

Scythe O F Glory

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: May 2008

New Jersey

League of Elite [LoE]

D/

14 Jul 2009 at 21:05 - 137

It should continue, because the more accounts bought, the more money ArenaNet makes. The more money ArenaNet makes, the better GW2 and/or future updates will be.

Angelica

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: Jan 2006

Aussie land

Me/E

14 Jul 2009 at 23:41 - 138

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trub

I'm with you on the good time and the beer part..

But bear in mind:
1.) Alot of players with multiple accounts, have had them waaaaay before addition slots were made available. (me included)

2.) Some players have multiple guilds they PvP/PvE with...so for more 'fun' with their GvG buddies, they created more accounts.

3.) It's their money, and I don't sweat it.

4.) ANet may acually use those liquid funds to create one helava kick arse game! (GW2)

^^I agree! Who cares about how players spend their real money ..... not me!
One thing I must add tho, I don't drink beer I like red wine!

BulletStopper

Frost Gate Guardian

Join Date: Nov 2005

Staring At my computer

Knights an Heroes

Mo/

14 Jul 2009 at 23:54 - 139

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mireles

If its not ok, for them because it inflates the economy making effort yield less value for players that play the game. As ArenaNet used to stated years ago.

Why is it that no "whine thread" author understands what inflation is?

Inflation is a rise in the general level of prices of goods and services in an economy over a period of time. When the general price level rises, each unit of currency buys fewer goods and services; consequently, inflation is also a decline in the real value of money—a loss of purchasing power in the internal medium of exchange and unit of account in the economy.

Since the cost of goods and services in GW is dropping, with the exception of rare minis, this ISN'T inflation.

Nerel

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Jun 2008

Australia, what you want my home address?

[CAT]

Mo/

15 Jul 2009 at 01:54 - 140

Quote:

Originally Posted by jray14

This. Some of us don't enjoy farming or trading.

Also, it's not just about playing Barbie with that money. You can buy consumables, lockpicks, weapons for heroes, etc.

Oh, and you all seem to be talking about XTH as if it exists... we've gone 2 months now, closing in on a 3rd, with it out of commission ya know.

Another thing you can do with all that 'imaginary' money accrued from the use of multiple accounts is drive up prices on desirable commodities in the game, no different than the armbrace dupers causing rare minipets to skyrocket out side of any farmer's reach. Now we have a massive influx of money, that isn't tied to time/skill, so people can still farm and earn incredible amounts of wealth in addition to their money 'earned' by playing the game, via the XTH, and the the price on 'desirable' skins goes up accordingly.

If there is no way of earning similar incomes by just playing the game, you're only recourse is to buy more accounts, buy gold online, or concede that having pretty stuff 'doesn't matter' and is indeed the domain of people who BUY gold.

I remember when Anet was quite against RMT, lots of jaw flapping about keeping the game fair and accessible. So much has changed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by esthetic

Considering the business structure of Guild Wars of no monthly fees..They need a source of income to keep the game going.

Offer incentive to buy additional accounts = People buy additional accounts = ANet gets additional revenue = ANet rent gets paid and ANet employees get paid = Keeps Guild Wars going for all of us.

Yes, so the source of income for Anet essentially boils down to selling gold in the online store? And you think this is a good thing?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tullzinski

What he said.

Lots of ppl with the OPs' type of complaint lately. Keep your nose OUT of other peoples games, get the F%$# over yourselves and let ppl enjoy the game how they want to!

Restore Ursan! No More Nerfs! Buy all the accounts you want! Farm until you pass out! Abuse XTH! Solo God Builds! Unstoppable Hero Builds! If you don't like it don't use it! Keep the F%#K out of my fun!

You... are being sarcastic, right? Please tell me that you're being sarcastic...

Mordakai

Grotto Attendant

Join Date: Aug 2005

Kyhlo

W/

15 Jul 2009 at 14:35 - 141

Just to be clear, right now with XTH closed and 1st year minipets practically worthless, the ONLY benefit of multiple accounts is more Traveler Gifts.

And with the work required (have to unlock the area on the new account, farm for the required item), if someone feels that is the best use of their time and money, who is it for us to judge?

And again: Let's suppose Anet would want to limit accounts, is there any practical way to do this?

Akaraxle

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Jan 2006

Italy

E/

15 Jul 2009 at 15:14 - 142

ANet is f**king smart to have planned this, I had never seen it coming. Hats off to them.

nkuvu

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Dec 2005

15 Jul 2009 at 15:34 - 143

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mordakai

And again: Let's suppose Anet would want to limit accounts, is there any practical way to do this?

No. You could restrict by IP address, but lots of people have dynamic IP addresses, others may use proxies. You could limit the number of accounts tied to a credit card/name at one, but you don't need to enter accurate information -- you could buy the game for cash at your local game store and ArenaNet would have no way to verify the information.

But on top of that, there's no way they'd do this retroactively. If they suddenly limited me to one game account, then I'd expect a refund for the other two copies of the game I have. Including all of the added things like any character slots or unlock packs I may have purchased. I wouldn't expect a refund, of course, if I did something to violate the user agreement, but if they arbitrarily changed the number of accounts I can have, I can't see a way they'd be able to refuse a refund.

So this whole thread is pointless. You (this is a generic "you," by the way) may as well complain that some people can spend more time in game and therefore can acquire more game wealth. I work full time, but there are plenty of players who don't.

This:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mireles

Obtaining anything in the game should be how you play... not how much cash you have to blow on accounts...

could easily have said "Obtaining anything in game should be how you play... not how much time you have to farm..." instead.

"Cry me a river, child of angst!" --Olias

Daesu

Furnace Stoker

Join Date: Oct 2008

15 Jul 2009 at 15:57 - 144

Right, there is no effective way to check if someone is buying more than 1 account for XTH or otherwise. The only thing ANet can do now is to remove XTH, Gifts, Birthday presents, NF treasure chest, zquests, all kunnavang, all magazine minis, skill unlock packs, etc. from the game if you want to be strict about it so that people with multiple accounts/characters cannot benefit. This way, people would not buy new accounts, or new character slots, or gain benefit through RL money by buying Factions Collector's edition, or by buying extra copies of those magazines, etc.

The point I am trying to make is, you are years too late! This game has always been giving SOME amount of advantage to people who have spent RL money on it. Not as much of an advantage compared to many other games but strictly speaking it does give SOME advantage. Wake up and smell the coffee!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mordakai

Just to be clear, right now with XTH closed and 1st year minipets practically worthless, the ONLY benefit of multiple accounts is more Traveler Gifts.

First year minipets wasn't worthless shortly after they were released. Do you know how much Kuunavang was worth when Factions Collector's Edition first came out? Strictly speaking all these did translate into in-game gold through RL money.

The community generally let it slide because they themselves benefited from all these. If you check the poll, most people here have more than one account.

Equating ANet's actions with the gold sellers doesn't make sense because ANet owns this game, they created it, and we use their servers everytime we logon. ANet also created the game's TOS. Gold sellers, on the other hand, are trying to benefit through ANet's work, translating it to RL money for themselves. Buying gold indirectly from ANet is still different from buying gold from online vendors because that would be a TOS issue, not a "game economy purity" issue as OP (and some of you) keep referring to.

And of course ANet would try to convince all of us that it is good for the game's economy not to buy gold from online vendors and in many ways they are right, we dont want to open a flood gate. But if ask them about benefits gained through multiple accounts, they would say they have control over it and will monitor the situation.

esthetic

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Apr 2008

Fantasy Island

[Qtie]

R/Mo

15 Jul 2009 at 16:43 - 145

Really, I just don't get you people demanding ANet not to offer incentives to people to buy additional accounts to increase their revenue. Its so shortsighted and moronic. More money ANet makes allows them to keep the game quality up and keep it going. I mean are you paying them a monthly fee? And who the F*@# cares that someone gave their money to ANet to buy additional accounts so that they can get shiney pixels? You get the benefit of ANet using their RL money to keep the game up. Basiclly, you are saying you would rather sacrafice the game or quality of the game over playing with others that spent RL money to get shinier pixels. (moronic)

Unless you are contributing to ANet by giving them your RL money, I dont think you have a leg to stand on to complain...

Where does it say in the EULA, that ANet promises to not to offer incentives to people that buy additional accounts? Where does it say they will sacrafice additional revenue so you can be happy? Who do you think ANet is? Some sort of game company fairy? they are a business formed to make money.

I am on the side of those that have bought additional accounts based on ANet's incentives(XTH predictions) only to have ANet take it away(or not fix in a timely fashion). Those people spent RL money for something they are not getting. They have the valid beef.

Nerel

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Jun 2008

Australia, what you want my home address?

[CAT]

Mo/

15 Jul 2009 at 17:04 - 146

What, they still have their extra accounts don't they? That is after all what they paid money for... extra accounts, not a free cash influx every month.

Anet is free to change or even remove the XTH anytime they choose (I don't think they will) and no-one can call foul, you bought extra accounts and oh look, you still have those accounts.

Maybe Anet will shift to just selling gold in the online store, or better yet, purchase tokens that can't be traded to other players, but can be redeemed for rare skinned weapons.

They've milked the people purchasing accounts for the XTH dry, time to move on to other means of making cash... that is what it's all about, after all, right? Cash flow for Anet?

esthetic

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Apr 2008

Fantasy Island

[Qtie]

R/Mo

15 Jul 2009 at 17:19 - 147

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nerel

What, they still have their extra accounts don't they? That is after all what they paid money for... extra accounts, not a free cash influx every month.

Anet is free to change or even remove the XTH anytime they choose (I don't think they will) and no-one can call foul, you bought extra accounts and oh look, you still have those accounts.

Maybe Anet will shift to just selling gold in the online store, or better yet, purchase tokens that can't be traded to other players, but can be redeemed for rare skinned weapons.

They've milked the people purchasing accounts for the XTH dry, time to move on to other means of making cash... that is what it's all about, after all, right? Cash flow for Anet?

I disagree that they can take out XTH without exposure to liability for one reason. I would argue that ANet marketed additional accounts as though they were selling in game gold for RL $. Additional accounts have no other value component as they cannot be sold or transferred to a third party. Just as if a third party sold in game gold for RL $ and they fail to deliver the in game gold would be in default of contract, Anet would also be in default.

Nerel

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Jun 2008

Australia, what you want my home address?

[CAT]

Mo/

15 Jul 2009 at 17:32 - 148

There is no exposure to liability for NCsoft/Anet here... they originally sold a game with six professions but only four character slots and very limited storage options, as a result many people bought extra accounts to allow them to play all the character professions. Anet later added purchasable character slots and expanded storage availability... were those people ripped off by unfair business practices from NCsoft?

I don't even see where the XTH is advertised as a feature on any GW box, and even if it is, they DO have the right to change or remove elements of the game, there is no legal recourse against them for doing what they have every right to do.

Bad fan publicity and being smacked around on the forums is all they face.

Much like nerfing popular skills.

Join the Ursan class action now!

esthetic

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Apr 2008

Fantasy Island

[Qtie]

R/Mo

15 Jul 2009 at 17:45 - 149

Well, the law of virtual space and virtual goods is new and evolving. A third party can be sued for agreeing to yet failing to deliver virtual goods for real life money. ANet/NCsoft can be sued if they sold virtual goods for real life money and they do not deliver. For example if they sold you extra storage slot for real life money and they do not deliver it they are in breach. I would argue that the sale of additional accounts to current account holders as sale of virtual goods for real life money, like additional storage, face lifts, unlock packs, ect..

Once again, just because its not on the box they are off the hook is not true. They did advertise XTH in the game as well as on websites and other forms of media.

Daesu

Furnace Stoker

Join Date: Oct 2008

15 Jul 2009 at 17:51 - 150

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nerel

There is no exposure to liability for NCsoft/Anet here... they originally sold a game with six professions but only four character slots and very limited storage options, as a result many people bought extra accounts to allow them to play all the character professions. Anet later added purchasable character slots and expanded storage availability... were those people ripped off by unfair business practices from NCsoft?

What unfair business practices are you talking about? ANet owns the game and servers so they have every right to sell us accounts and even add benefits to increase their profits. In other words, they are free to milk their own hard work. What business law have they violated?

They are free to add new features to their game as and when they see fit. The box didn't mention about zquests or nick's gifts either.

Mordakai

Grotto Attendant

Join Date: Aug 2005

Kyhlo

W/

15 Jul 2009 at 20:34 - 151

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

First year minipets wasn't worthless shortly after they were released. Do you know how much Kuunavang was worth when Factions Collector's Edition first came out? Strictly speaking all these did translate into in-game gold through RL money.

I know, that's why I said "right now".

(actually, has Kuunivang's price gone UP or DOWN since Factions?

I bought mine for 100k + 7 ectos (of course, ectos were worth more back then, too).

Daesu

Furnace Stoker

Join Date: Oct 2008

15 Jul 2009 at 21:13 - 152

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mordakai

I bought mine for 100k + 7 ectos (of course, ectos were worth more back then, too).

And that, is a lot of gold to be gained by buying the collector's edition even thought it costs more, so the OP (and others) who compares ANet to gold sellers really doesn't know that ANet has already been translating RL money to gold indirectly since many years ago.

Nerel

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Jun 2008

Australia, what you want my home address?

[CAT]

Mo/

16 Jul 2009 at 07:47 - 153

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

What unfair business practices are you talking about? ANet owns the game and servers so they have every right to sell us accounts and even add benefits to increase their profits. In other words, they are free to milk their own hard work. What business law have they violated?

They are free to add new features to their game as and when they see fit. The box didn't mention about zquests or nick's gifts either.

That was my point, Anet DIDN'T engage in any unfair business practices, they made changes to the game AS THEY ARE ENTITLED to. Just because someone feels disadvantaged by the changes, or that they had spent money that they might not have if they had of known about the later changes to the game is largely irrelevant.

When something begins with "Were" and ends with a question mark, it's a good bet that it is a question being asked, not a statement of fact or opinion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by esthetic

Well, the law of virtual space and virtual goods is new and evolving. A third party can be sued for agreeing to yet failing to deliver virtual goods for real life money. ANet/NCsoft can be sued if they sold virtual goods for real life money and they do not deliver. For example if they sold you extra storage slot for real life money and they do not deliver it they are in breach. I would argue that the sale of additional accounts to current account holders as sale of virtual goods for real life money, like additional storage, face lifts, unlock packs, ect..

Once again, just because its not on the box they are off the hook is not true. They did advertise XTH in the game as well as on websites and other forms of media.

Yes, an interesting and evolving area of law, you're right, and one that WOULDN'T apply to the Xunlai tournament house, which isn't a virtual item, isn't something that you can OWN or POSSESS but a small FEATURE of the game, one that ArenaNet is free to alter or remove at their discretion, at best it is a service provided as part of the game experience, a service which they DIDN'T sell, nor agree to any contract ensuring that they would continue to provide it.

There is ABSOLUTELY no legal recourse against ArenaNet if they choose to alter the mechanics of some small part of the game. They have every right to do so.

The whole argument of 'virtual goods' having value is largely bunk here, anyway, as the EULA ensures that you DO NOT OWN your equipment, pretty skinned weapons and virtual gold... those Virtual Goods reside SOLELY on ArenaNet's servers, are the sole property of ArenaNet, and by paying for the game ArenaNet gives you the right to play with THEIR stuff, a right that they can REVOKE at will. But again, the XTH is a game FEATURE, a service they provide as part of the game experience, not a virtual item or asset.

esthetic

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Apr 2008

Fantasy Island

[Qtie]

R/Mo

16 Jul 2009 at 12:24 - 154

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nerel

*snip* There is ABSOLUTELY no legal recourse against ArenaNet if they choose to alter the mechanics of some small part of the game. They have every right to do so.

The whole argument of 'virtual goods' having value is largely bunk here, anyway, as the EULA ensures that you DO NOT OWN your equipment, pretty skinned weapons and virtual gold... those Virtual Goods reside SOLELY on ArenaNet's servers, are the sole property of ArenaNet, and by paying for the game ArenaNet gives you the right to play with THEIR stuff, a right that they can REVOKE at will. But again, the XTH is a game FEATURE, a service they provide as part of the game experience, not a virtual item or asset.

My post proposed the following argument. If ANet sold you additional storage, extra character slot, a skill unlock pack or a face lift for real money, $9.99, but they fail to deliver would this be considered breach and ANet liable? Extra, slots, storage or change in appearance or skill available is just "Virtual Goods"

Many on this site, as I, have equated ANet marketing XTH Rewards to existing account holders as incentive to buy additional accounts a vehicle to sell ingame gold "Virtual Goods" for real money.

The fact they used this indirect method does not change the fact that the person who bought the addtional account was induced to buy the account, for XTH rewards = ZKeys = "in game gold" = "Virtual Goods".

The argument that the marketing of by ANet and purchase by an existing account holder of addtional accounts is a RMT for "virtual goods" is further supported by the fact that the additional account has no other value to the person who bought the account but the "Virtual Good" of "in game gold" that was offered by ANet. And that ANet changed the EULA to allow a person to own more than one account.

I think this though is a moot point. ANet will not take down XTH for one HUGE economic reason. By conservative estimate taken from the guru poll, over half of the accounts sold were additional accounts. ANet will not want to discourage this behaviour of purchasing additional accounts, HALF OF THE ACCOUNTS SOLD were additional accounts. To take out XTH would decrease the incentive to purchase addtional accounts, and if GW2 will be of similar structure, people will not have an incentive to buy multiple copies of GW2.

-Sonata-

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Nov 2007

Pretty Hate Machines [NIN]

Me/

16 Jul 2009 at 14:35 - 155

Quote:

Originally Posted by esthetic

My post proposed the following argument. If ANet sold you additional storage, extra character slot, a skill unlock pack or a face lift for real money, $9.99, but they fail to deliver would this be considered breach and ANet liable? Extra, slots, storage or change in appearance or skill available is just "Virtual Goods"

Many on this site, as I, have equated ANet marketing XTH Rewards to existing account holders as incentive to buy additional accounts a vehicle to sell ingame gold "Virtual Goods" for real money.

The fact they used this indirect method does not change the fact that the person who bought the addtional account was induced to buy the account, for XTH rewards = ZKeys = "in game gold" = "Virtual Goods".

The argument that the marketing of by ANet and purchase by an existing account holder of addtional accounts is a RMT for "virtual goods" is further supported by the fact that the additional account has no other value to the person who bought the account but the "Virtual Good" of "in game gold" that was offered by ANet. And that ANet changed the EULA to allow a person to own more than one account.

Nothing short of a conspiracy theory. This is where people need to start kicking their own ass because of greed over fake game money.

You can't compare XTH with the online store. It's not, in any way, the same premise. Why? The XTH was free to participate in. It was not an additional paid service like storage, or extra character slots. Like in many other games, where over time additional features are sometimes added & sometimes taken away, the XTH fits that description. If the XTH came with an additional cost; A purchase made of $9.99 to participate in it, then you'd be right. Then it becomes a direct service transaction that is no longer being delivered. You'd be right if the comparison was paying for Storage, then 6 months later they take away the added storage without refund.

But that's not the case, is it? No, it's not.

Anet didn't hold a gun to anyones head to go out and purchase 3, 4, 5+ accounts. There wasn't any incentive by them to market it as such. It was never marketed as such. No where was it written that in order to participate in the XTH, users must buy a half dozen account to participate in.

However, all some people saw was 'fake dollar signs' in their own eyes. Some people made the choice, on their own, to go buy up accounts because they wanted their imaginary bling and their stacks of ecto in storage, to spam in the GToB.

Fril Estelin

So Serious...

Join Date: Jan 2007

London

Nerfs Are [WHAK]

E/

16 Jul 2009 at 14:46 - 156

Quote:

Originally Posted by -Sonata-

Nothing short of a conspiracy theory. This is where people need to start kicking their own ass because of greed over fake game money.

You can't compare XTH with the online store. It's not, in any way, the same premise. Why? The XTH was free to participate in. It was not an additional paid service like storage, or extra character slots. Like in many other games, where over time additional features are sometimes added & sometimes taken away, the XTH fits that description. If the XTH came with an additional cost; A purchase made of $9.99 to participate in it, then you'd be right. Then it becomes a direct service transaction that is no longer being delivered. You'd be right if the comparison was paying for Storage, then 6 months later they take away the added storage without refund.

But that's not the case, is it? No, it's not.

Anet didn't hold a gun to anyones head to go out and purchase 3, 4, 5+ accounts. There wasn't any incentive by them to market it as such. It was never marketed as such. No where was it written that in order to participate in the XTH, users must buy a half dozen account to participate in.

However, all some people saw was 'fake dollar signs' in their own eyes. Some people made the choice, on their own, to go buy up accounts because they wanted their imaginary bling and their stacks of ecto in storage, to spam in the GToB.

I think you're completely correct.

On the other hand, I also think that Anet knew the potential for "greedy" people to exploit this opportunity, which benefits them and GW2 (and thus it benefits us!). I don't believe they're short-sighted.

But as you said, no one was forced in any way. And no one bought an "XTH product". The game is still advertised the sane and correct way: buy the box, play the game! It's not Anet's fault if people wanted the box to play "another game".

People are blowing this problem out of proportion, for a collection of unrelated reasons.

esthetic

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Apr 2008

Fantasy Island

[Qtie]

R/Mo

16 Jul 2009 at 15:12 - 157

Quote:

Originally Posted by -Sonata-

*snip*You can't compare XTH with the online store. It's not, in any way, the same premise. Why? The XTH was free to participate in. It was not an additional paid service like storage, or extra character slots. Like in many other games, where over time additional features are sometimes added & sometimes taken away, the XTH fits that description. If the XTH came with an additional cost; A purchase made of $9.99 to participate in it, then you'd be right. Then it becomes a direct service transaction that is no longer being delivered. You'd be right if the comparison was paying for Storage, then 6 months later they take away the added storage without refund.

But that's not the case, is it? No, it's not.

Anet didn't hold a gun to anyones head to go out and purchase 3, 4, 5+ accounts. There wasn't any incentive by them to market it as such. It was never marketed as such. No where was it written that in order to participate in the XTH, users must buy a half dozen account to participate in. *snip*

And here in lies the disagreement. I see the offering of XTH reward pts. for each account, and removing the restriction of one account per player as active intentional marketing to current account holders to purchase additional accounts. I see it as ANet getting into the business of the sale of in game gold for real money. Whether or not, the marketing was intentional, ANet did induce current account holders to purchase additional accounts for XTH reward pts., and that is all that is needed.

But that is beside the point. OVER HALF of the accounts are additional accounts. ANet would be smart to encourage this behavior not discourage. So they will get XTH reward pts on line as soon as they can and offer more incentives to get you to buy additional accounts.

-Sonata-

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Nov 2007

Pretty Hate Machines [NIN]

Me/

16 Jul 2009 at 17:43 - 158

Quote:

Originally Posted by esthetic

And here in lies the disagreement. I see the offering of XTH reward pts. for each account, and removing the restriction of one account per player as active intentional marketing to current account holders to purchase additional accounts. I see it as ANet getting into the business of the sale of in game gold for real money. Whether or not, the marketing was intentional, ANet did induce current account holders to purchase additional accounts for XTH reward pts., and that is all that is needed.

But that is beside the point. OVER HALF of the accounts are additional accounts. ANet would be smart to encourage this behavior not discourage. So they will get XTH reward pts on line as soon as they can and offer more incentives to get you to buy additional accounts.

You're right - this is exactly where we disagree because I see it as players inducing it on themselves. There's a selection of players, in every game, who want to be rich no matter what it takes and because of that greed they make stupid decisions with real money. Then, when they get busted on those bad decisions, they blame the game maker.

"I got banned for buying gold from an RMT site. It's not may fault <insert game name> makes it so hard to save money"

"I got banned for buying <insert weapon name> from a site. How's that fair? The drop rate is so stupid it'd take me years"

It's the same vicious cycle that has gone on for years. It's never the players fault; Always the games fault as though they should be holding our hands as we cross the street.

Anet doesn't have to encourage, or discourage anything. They shouldn't have to. They're not babysitters. If we weren't talking about the XTH right now, it'd be another excuse pulled out of the book that it's Anets fault for players being greedy and not the players themselves. This is just another circumstance where it's up to the individual to start taking some responsibility for once in their lives and stop blaming the "evil corporation" for lack of self control and making poor purchasing choices.

Short of halting any and all economic princple in this game, or any game for that matter, peoples greed to be virtually wealthy will constantly lay blame on the developer because, like I said, if we weren't talking about XTH, there would be something else to find an excuse for.

esthetic

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Apr 2008

Fantasy Island

[Qtie]

R/Mo

16 Jul 2009 at 18:10 - 159

-Sonata- point well taken. But I really have to see ANet as being manipulative and thoughtful in doing what they do. They wanted to increase revenue and at the same time reduce third party RMT for in game gold. Offereing incentives to buy additional accounts so the player base does not give third parties money for ANets product. They decided to offer incentives to buy addtional accounts in part so that players dont go and buy from the third party gold farmers. To say now that its the buyer fault for buying additional accounts and ANet is not responsible for keeping up the XTH reward system is shortsighted.

And I believe that their actions accomplished their goals. RMT from gold farmers seems to be down dramaticly. (this is only an observation of the local trade chat in game)

Daesu

Furnace Stoker

Join Date: Oct 2008

16 Jul 2009 at 18:52 - 160

Quote:

Originally Posted by esthetic

And I believe that their actions accomplished their goals. RMT from gold farmers seems to be down dramaticly. (this is only an observation of the local trade chat in game)

And that is the way it should be done, rather than spending unending resources policing the game, the better solution would be: Just reduce the incentive for people to buy gold.