thinking about buying it...
just 1 question for ppl that already bought.
aren't you guys scared of getting hacked and getting your credit card ripped off?
is it possible if u purchase stuff through ncsoft?
New In-Game Store Item - Limited Edition Wintersday Costume Pack
My New Name
Gli
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Burst Cancel
Sorry, that's not a fundamental difference. The fact is that Anet is still providing you additional content for additional money; whether that content is worth the amount of money they are asking is a question for the individual, and that question is one of value, period - not "gaming value" or whatever other arbitrary "type" of value. If the costumes don't have value commensurate to their cost, people won't buy them, it's really that simple.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Burst Cancel
Let me put it this way: if you honestly think that buying a painting or movie is fundamentally different from buying a video game, you aren't thinking about your purchases correctly.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Burst Cancel
There's a reason chess sets with ivory chessmen cost more than ones with plastic chessmen.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Burst Cancel
If you enjoy the grinding itself, you aren't really playing for the shinies. As I stated in the other microtransaction thread, if I wanted Obsidian armor, it would be a much better use of my time to work 10 minutes of overtime and buy that armor with real money - but that's because I don't enjoy grinding. If all you actually want is the shinies, buying is a lot better than grinding.
And if you do enjoy grinding, be thankful that other people are subsidizing your playtime by buying costume packs and storage panes. |
I'm really going to take a few steps back from this conversation. You're making so little sense, it's creeping me out.
Burst Cancel
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Premium Unleaded
Except Factions is fundamentally different than the BMP or the costumes in that the extra content includes new skills, and therefore has a direct effect on a core aspect of the whole game.
|
In short, you're missing the forest for the trees. Like Gil, you need to sit down and think about what it is you're actually spending money on when you buy something.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gli
That really doesn't help.
|
-Sonata-
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Pelorin Eshmar
thinking about buying it...
just 1 question for ppl that already bought. aren't you guys scared of getting hacked and getting your credit card ripped off? is it possible if u purchase stuff through ncsoft? |
Even if my GW account were to be hacked, that info is not tied into my paypal in any form.
Barb
Whats with all this outrageous pricing these days, lets compare the content of the purchase:
1. $10 for two costumes, do not affect gameplay
2. $10 for torchlight, that is on sale from $20 to $10 now, which will last you 30-X amount of hours, 30 being minimum to finish the game, it has lots of content, comes with a free editor to expand the game, etc.
Seriously, be realistic. These costumes should cost at max $2. Better yet, they should make it a reward for beating a really hard quest chain in the game. People pay for the game and all its expansions. Thats good enough, we shouldn't have to pay for small new content like this, it should be done standard to keep interest and make people feel like what they paid is worth something. Do you really think alot of effort went into this, and that they had a whole crew of people working on it? If they did, like Runic Games did (Spent about a year making the game, used efforts of the whole company, charged only $20), then it would be worth $10 for their effort (well still I find that overpriced lol).
as someone said, TF2- free to play, just buy the game. Just recently they've added loads of new updates such as maps and weapons in the game completely free.
Why can't arenanet do the same? Especially storage panes, absolutely neccessary, 100% should've been made a free update since they didn't calculate how little space they gave you the first time, yet you have to pay. These game-altering updates need to be free to make it fair, stuff like costumes can cost like $2 or something since it doesn't give an advantage, but it does make you stand out.
1. $10 for two costumes, do not affect gameplay
2. $10 for torchlight, that is on sale from $20 to $10 now, which will last you 30-X amount of hours, 30 being minimum to finish the game, it has lots of content, comes with a free editor to expand the game, etc.
Seriously, be realistic. These costumes should cost at max $2. Better yet, they should make it a reward for beating a really hard quest chain in the game. People pay for the game and all its expansions. Thats good enough, we shouldn't have to pay for small new content like this, it should be done standard to keep interest and make people feel like what they paid is worth something. Do you really think alot of effort went into this, and that they had a whole crew of people working on it? If they did, like Runic Games did (Spent about a year making the game, used efforts of the whole company, charged only $20), then it would be worth $10 for their effort (well still I find that overpriced lol).
as someone said, TF2- free to play, just buy the game. Just recently they've added loads of new updates such as maps and weapons in the game completely free.
Why can't arenanet do the same? Especially storage panes, absolutely neccessary, 100% should've been made a free update since they didn't calculate how little space they gave you the first time, yet you have to pay. These game-altering updates need to be free to make it fair, stuff like costumes can cost like $2 or something since it doesn't give an advantage, but it does make you stand out.
KZaske
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Pelorin Eshmar
thinking about buying it...
just 1 question for ppl that already bought. aren't you guys scared of getting hacked and getting your credit card ripped off? is it possible if u purchase stuff through ncsoft? |
tazer
people, seriously. what ANet is doing is a joke? so what should I call what Blizzard is doing? by having about $100mln monthly from subscribtion fees, they recently added pets for real money. don't you think it's just Greed with capital G?
come on, ANet is just trying to survive in nowadays not-so-stable economy and you blame them for it? grow up or at least stop whining about that. $10, $20 or even $30 a year is that much? in developed countries it is like a dinner in good restaurant, big deal.
I hope that GW2 will have such microtransactions from the beginning, it just gives more hope and chances for better game development in long term. because lack of money resources put GW1 in current situation.
come on, ANet is just trying to survive in nowadays not-so-stable economy and you blame them for it? grow up or at least stop whining about that. $10, $20 or even $30 a year is that much? in developed countries it is like a dinner in good restaurant, big deal.
I hope that GW2 will have such microtransactions from the beginning, it just gives more hope and chances for better game development in long term. because lack of money resources put GW1 in current situation.
Premium Unleaded
@Burst Cancel
If you can't see the distinction between access to skills (that amongst other things, work in PvP) and access to some skins for weapons, then frankly, I don't even need to make any further contribution to backup my viewpoint.
If you can't see the distinction between access to skills (that amongst other things, work in PvP) and access to some skins for weapons, then frankly, I don't even need to make any further contribution to backup my viewpoint.
Barb
they have made Aion what it is for all their marketing needs, GW1 is what it is today because of activity, if it was still active they wouldn't make these kind of things, just as some one said earlier, this is just their way of making more money off of a dying game.
thedarkmarine
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gli
Quote:
|
Utility is utility. Some people just can't seem to convert these things to base value.
Mokeiro
Yo man, i wanna more bucks, i'm hungry!!! (NCsoft stock holder)
Don't worry dude!, i have an idea to make BIG DOLLAR!! (NCsoft executive)
How?
We hire this guy and make him do shiny things, and then we'll sell in the online store for FAT DOLLAR!!!
And this wouldn't piss off our loyal players who supported GW?
Don't worry dude, our customers are like this one, they would buy anything we sell, coz they are supporting us, lol
Professor K
Just bought both costumes. Very nice.
Gli
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by thedarkmarine
Burst, your wisdom is falling on deaf ears.
Utility is utility. Some people just can't seem to convert these things to base value. |
If you think they're the same on a practical level within the context of the game these forums are about, go make a fresh account and add nothing except the costume pack and you'll see how they are not similar at all. Have fun playing!
Or just buy a painting and post some more nonsense on artlovers.com.
My New Name
well i really hate anets idea of fun new content as $$$ maker...
but then again as ppl said after 5years of playing paying 10$ isnt so bad...
then again paying 10$ for a visual is just dumb...
still undecided -_-
but then again as ppl said after 5years of playing paying 10$ isnt so bad...
then again paying 10$ for a visual is just dumb...
still undecided -_-
Arkantos
I don't see why people are hating on ANet for this. We all know that tons of fanboys are going to pay $10 for this, especially because it's limited edition. It's like this in every game. They found a way to make money, it's what a business does.
thedarkmarine
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gli
I don't know why you and Burst are so intent on dragging the simple practical question of whether or not a GW campaign is fundamentally the same as a costume pack, into a greater abstracted discussion of consumerism, but I'll hazard a guess: you don't have anything meaningful to say.
|
That, or it's really you who have nothing meaningful to say?
w00t!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gli
I don't know why you and Burst are so intent on dragging the simple practical question of whether or not a GW campaign is fundamentally the same as a costume pack, into a greater abstracted discussion of consumerism, but I'll hazard a guess: you don't have anything meaningful to say.
If you think they're the same on a practical level within the context of the game these forums are about, go make a fresh account and add nothing except the costume pack and you'll see how they are not similar at all. Have fun playing! Or just buy a painting and post some more nonsense on artlovers.com. |
Now, given that, all entertainment dollars compete with each other. You might decide to buy Guild Wars costumes, go to a movie, buy some food if you're hungry, or whatever you want given finite funds and what satisfies you most at that particular moment.
There are two things that matter; the quantity of your funds available and an individual's desires. Based on this, someone who makes a bunch of money may not buy the Costume Pack (they could care less), while someone else making significantly less would (they live for shiny stuff).
While you may or may not agree with the conclusions that Burst is making, his arguments are based on sound theories of economics.
Gli
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by w00t!
Let me jump in on this one. Basic economics states that people are driven to do things that give them satisfaction.
Now, given that, all entertainment dollars compete with each other. You might decide to buy Guild Wars costumes, go to a movie, buy some food if you're hungry, or whatever you want given finite funds and what satisfies you most at that particular moment. There are two things that matter; the quantity of your funds available and an individual's desires. Based on this, someone who makes a bunch of money may not buy the Costume Pack (they could care less), while someone else making significantly less would (they live for shiny stuff). While you may or may not agree with the conclusions that Burst is making, his arguments are based on sound theories of economics. |
You're pulling back a nonsensical distance into arguments that don't address that actual issue on any level. Money, competing interests and consumer satisfaction never even entered the picture tangentially.
Sheesh, I feel like I'm trapped in a Kafka novel!
thedarkmarine
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gli
I don't agree or disagree with anything. You people do realize that this was only ever about what one can, on a practical level, do with a copy of a GW campaign and the costume pack?
You're pulling back a nonsensical distance into arguments that don't address that actual issue on any level. Money, competing interest and consumer satisfaction never even entered the picture tangentially. Sheehs, I feel like I'm trapped in a Kafka novel! |
By saying that these things are just tangential, you've demonstrated that you don't even know the core of the issue you're dealing with.
Gli
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by thedarkmarine
And how do you evaluate what you can do with a campaign and costume pack? Customer satisfaction, or in other words, utility. Economics has defined all these things in a very pure way, and those of use who understand this find the holes in your logic very amusing.
By saying that these things are just tangential, you've demonstrated that you don't even know the core of the issue you're dealing with. |
Pray tell, what issue am I dealing with? Because I thought what I was doing when I first got involved here, was pointing out that a GW campaign is more than just 'content' and therefore not the same as the costume pack. I wasn't referring to economic principles, I was pointing out a practical issue. God forbid I ever find out what will happen if I post that an apple is not an orange.
So, once more, here's the only point I've ever tried to make in a conversation dominated by people who seem to have their heads so far up their own asses, they can see the fillings in their teeth: a GW campaign is not just content.
thedarkmarine
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gli
For crying out loud, you people are relentless. You're burying yourself deeper and deeper into an argument that I'm not even having. 'My logic'? 'The issue I'm dealing with'?
Pray tell, what issue am I dealing with? Because I thought what I was doing when I first got involved here, was pointing out that a GW campaign is more than just 'content' and therefore not the same as the costume pack. I wasn't referring to economic principles, I was pointing out a practical issue. God forbid I ever find out what will happen if I post that an apple is not an orange. So, once more, here's the only point I've ever tried to make in a conversation dominated by people who seem to have their heads so far up their own asses, they can see the fillings in their teeth: a GW campaign is not just content. |
Content is content is content. "More than content" is just content++ is just content. If you want people to take you seriously, replace the word "content" with "utility."
And to call us relentless, your glass house still ok?
Esprit
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arkantos
I don't see why people are hating on ANet for this.
|
Dystopiax
Let's all give anet 10$ for a costume so they can provide us with a 5k ping server for christmas 
Arkantos
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Esprit
It's because they can.
|
Esprit
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arkantos
Well, of course. I'd like to hear some valid reasons as to why they're opposed of a business making money, though.
|
People do not understand the concept of an evolving business model. Look at Blockbuster 10 years ago. All they had to do was rent/sell movies from a store to be successful. With the creation of Netflix's successful online, ship-to-you, movie rental system, Blockbuster had to change its business model to compete against it (creating its own online, ship-to-you, movie/game rental model).
With companies having to compete against so many different games out there, micro-transactions and in-game purchases is a valid evolution in the business model. It only affects the game cosmetically and you can easily see why Anet chose to charge for this cosmetic change. High-end armor costs more, but looks better, and high-end weapons typically look better and cost more AND people pay for it, so why not apply that desire to generating revenue?
Since I see sense in charging for this limited item (if a bit expensive for my taste) I have no valid reason for getting the costumes for free.
Gli
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by thedarkmarine
Is it so hard to to accept the fact that "learned" people think your point is absurd under any ounce of inspection? No additional amount of colorful rhetoric is going to make your silly point any more acceptable. Neither is calling arguments irrelevant because you can't seem to understand it.
|
What I consider silly, is to bombard that simple, commonsensical notion with economic rhethoric that has no bearing on it whatsoever. Economic theory does not address the specifics you can do with the Guild Wars software after you've logged on to your account.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by thedarkmarine
Content is content is content. "More than content" is just content++ is just content. If you want people to take you seriously, replace the word "content" with "utility."
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by thedarkmarine
And to call us relentless, your glass house still ok?
|
Pistachio
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Burst Cancel
...There is nothing fundamentally different between Factions, the Bonus Mission Pack, or this costume pack....
|
You are just being difficult, but perhaps you're the one that's too dense to realize it.
thedarkmarine
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gli
Oh my, that's a mighty big horn you're blowing! Imagine, little ole me having to deal with learned people. Wait till I tell the folks back home. So, my point that in the real world where real people play Guild Wars, a campaign is more than just content, as opposed to a custome pack which is just content, is silly?
|
Quote:
| What I consider silly, is to bombard that simple, commonsensical notion with economic rhethoric that has no bearing on it whatsoever. Economic theory does not address the specifics you can do with the Guild Wars software after you've logged on to your account. |
Quote:
| In this specific case, and a specific case is all I ever injected into this conversation, "more than content" happens to be "a service packaged with some content". I'm not going to replace it with anything. Especially not "utility". "Utility" is your addition to the conversation, which up to the point where you injected it, had nothing to do whatsoever with such a broad concept. |
Quote:
| Don't you learned people use verbs in your sentences? |
Reverend Dr
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arkantos
Well, of course. I'd like to hear some valid reasons as to why they're opposed of a business making money, though.
|
thedarkmarine
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Pistachio
That is a truly absurd statement. Of course they are different. As was mentioned earlier - the campaigns, and mission pack are additions to gameplay, and the costume pack is essentially just another skin. The look of your armor has no bearing on how the game is played and is fundamentally different than new dungeons, skills, classes, etc - which are additions and changes to actual game mechanics.
You are just being difficult, but perhaps you're the one that's too dense to realize it. |
thedarkmarine
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Reverend Dr
Because this business model is questionable and it is very possible that another business model would be more successful not just in revenue generated, but in player satisfaction and ultimately game support. The fact that so many people are upset by it being put into place goes a ways to questioning that avenue for revenue.
|
In the end, I'm all for what the market decides, and will voice my opinion with the ripple of my individual purchasing power within the tsunami of mass market opinion.
Kaleban
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by thedarkmarine
No, you're not looking deep enough. In the end, it all boils down to how much a person enjoys what they've spend their money on. It's about the raw enjoyment, or formally, utility, one gains. That's why there's no fundamental difference. They may give enjoyment in different ways, but in the end, it's fundamentally the same thing.
|
Here's a quick test. If ANet were to put out a standalone 5 mission campaign, with new skills and everything, and charged $9.99, and was not connected to GW in any way, you could play it.
If they just put out a Costume pack for $9.99 that was not connected to the game for $9.99, it might as well not exist, because you can't play costumes. They're a cosmetic enhancement, not gameplay addition
A pretty simple and obvious observation if you ask me. Why people argue this point is beyond me.
thedarkmarine
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kaleban
This is the kind of argument that can justify ANYTHING, such as punching babies and stealing their candy because it gives you more marginal utility on your investment.
|
Quote:
|
Here's a quick test. If ANet were to put out a standalone 5 mission campaign, with new skills and everything, and charged $9.99, and was not connected to GW in any way, you could play it. If they just put out a Costume pack for $9.99 that was not connected to the game for $9.99, it might as well not exist, because you can't play costumes. They're a cosmetic enhancement, not gameplay addition |
Again, it all comes down to the utility of the content. The context of the content is just high level irrelevancy.
Quote:
| A pretty simple and obvious observation if you ask me. Why people argue this point is beyond me. |
Kaleban
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by thedarkmarine
SNIP
|
Let me know how that works for you. If it does, then I'll eat my hat.
w00t!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kaleban
This is the kind of argument that can justify ANYTHING, such as punching babies and stealing their candy because it gives you more marginal utility on your investment.
|
The funny thing is, I don't necessarily disagree with Gil's conclusion, it's just that his (her?) argument was false.
I agree that not every Guild Wars dollar spent provides the same perceived value, at least for me. I just bought a new GW mule account for $15, which seems to a better deal than $10 spent buying another pane or and additional character. But that's just me, and no one is forcing me to spend my money on Guild Wars. Just bought a new Ska compilation on Amazon instead of GW Costumes. Perhaps if they'd been a bit cheaper...
So it's reasonable to make the argument that $10 is too much for a costume, a pane, or a character in that it isn't priced properly.
It's fair to state that a micro-transaction model may dilute the GW brand.
But people simply stamping their foot and proclaiming it loudly doesn't make it so. Even though you and I seem to land on opposite sides of several threads, I respect your opinion. Many others seem to completely fail at deductive reasoning. Must be Outcome-based Education at work.
Kaleban
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by w00t!
Must be Outcome-based Education at work.
|
True, even though we may disagree, at least there's some form of spirited debate going on, rather than just clapping our hands over our ears and holding our breath until we're blue in the face lol.
Gli
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by thedarkmarine
Common sense says heavier things falls faster as well, but lets not bring physics into that simple notion! In other words, it is silly to disregard established means designed to address the issue had hand.
Utility is the economist's term for content, or service packaged with content, or whatever else. It is the purest way to address value, illustrating the fact that there's no fundamental difference between the things at hand. I'm trying to teach you an embarrassingly simple notion by equating words. |
I'm just saying, and I think this must be the 8th or 9th time that I'm repeating myself, that I simply, in a practical, gameplay sense, reject the notion that a GW campaign is the same as the costume pack. What each of them represents economically has no bearing on that point. Which is why, if you hadn't noticed, I'm not engaging in conversation about that.
Also, at the point where I made my original observation, the topic of conversation was about concrete stuff, not economic theory. You dragged that into the conversation by the hairs, regardless of any bearing it had on anything whatsoever. (Which I can assure you, it had and still has none.)
At no point have I attempted to discuss anything other than my original point, nor have I at any point tried to counter anything you're posting, nor have I tried to introduce any kind of claim of my own regarding the economic significance of anything at all. All I'm doing is dismissing your inapplicable wisdom, again and again. You're basically having an argument with yourself here, rainman-style.
I'm pointing out that apples aren't oranges, and you're trying to lambast me about how they're both fruit. I don't care that they're both fruit. I have no interest beyond the point that apples aren't oranges.
Gli
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by w00t!
The funny thing is, I don't necessarily disagree with Gil's conclusion, it's just that his (her?) argument was false.
|
All I've pointed out is that:
The costume pack is to guild wars as a bottle of wood polish is to chess.
I'd really like to hear what you think I've concluded, or what arguments I brought forward leading me there.
thedarkmarine
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kaleban
Prove me wrong then. Uninstall Guild Wars, and then only go play the Costume Pack.
Let me know how that works for you. If it does, then I'll eat my hat. |
The entire Gaia Online and Solia community has already done so. Unlike you, I am able to understand how others value content, even if I don't agree with them.
thedarkmarine
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gli
You're not teaching me anything.
|
Quote:
| I'm just saying, and I think this must be the 8th or 9th time that I'm repeating myself, that I simply, in a practical, gameplay sense, reject the notion that a GW campaign is the same as the costume pack. What each of them represents economically has no bearing on that point. Which is why, if you hadn't noticed, I'm not engaging in conversation about that. |
No. What you're "just saying" is wrong. Lets look at what you initially posted:
Quote:
| There's a fundamental difference. The campaigns are games, the bonus mission pack adds gaming content. The costume pack has no 'gaming value' whatsoever and is therefore in no way equivalent. |
Quote:
| Also, at the point where I made my original observation, the topic of conversation was about concrete stuff, not economic theory. You dragged that into the conversation by the hairs, regardless of any bearing it had on anything whatsoever. (Which I can assure you, it had and still has none.) |
But don't let physics stop you from thinking heavier things fall faster.
Quote:
| At no point have I attempted to discuss anything other than my original point, nor have I at any point tried to counter anything you're posting, nor have I tried to introduce any kind of claim of my own regarding the economic significance of anything at all. All I'm doing is dismissing your inapplicable wisdom, again and again. You're basically having an argument with yourself here, rainman-style. |
Quote:
| I'm pointing out that apples aren't oranges, and you're trying to lambast me about how they're both fruit. I don't care that they're both fruit. I have no interest beyond the point that apples aren't oranges. |