Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxBat
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Feedback:John_Stumme
John Stumme, Design Lead of the Live Team, put these thoughts up on his user page. It's a good idea to read that to know where Anet is coming from now. Short version is that theoretically, anything that could show up in a GW1 expansion is fair game.
|
Oh boy, what a ride! How did I miss this thread, and Stumme's opinion in particular. Well, it explains a lot - so basically they've settled for selling
mechanical content now (as opposed to aesthetics), in smaller bits & pieces and higher cumulative price tag.
To me, that's basically
a stealthy subscription fee - no longer the solid game content is limited to base game and it's expansions, in fact solid game content is being developed for microtransactions specifically.
Micros before used to be aesthetic devices and harmless account functionalities (with exception of PvP unlock packs & BMP). As I see it now, rather than a boxed/digital expansion we'll see quarterly updates with cumulative 45$ price tag if you want it all.
Very uncool way to advertise your new game, Anet, even before it's released. I appreciate the honesty, though - so now you realise subscriptions in one way or another are strictly necessary to meet the publisher's wishes and fund your own growth, AAA+ MMO game developer company?
I disagree with Stumme on two points, basically:
a) solid game content, regardless of distribution method is a fair game
b) solid game content offers no substantial advantage but more variety & choices, as in previous games
First off, comparing original gw's business model with traditional p2p games is a pretty stupid thing to do, simply because
no sane p2p developer would offer solid game content in his cash shop.
Secondly, these p2p businesses charge for account (not game) functionality and in-game aesthetics,
and little else.
Thirdly, it's pretty naive & stupid for any (apparently enlightened) game developer to say that more choices and higher adaptability don't give an advantage. They do, when you have a 'skill deck' or 'profession deck' the player who doesn't have access to all of them is going to get soundly beaten, because
the game itself is always balanced around the choice to pick any skill or any profession in question at any given time.
Back in GW it was 'fair game', because
the content was packed in actual game expansions, and playing this kind of silly game now that 'boxed expansions' are basically 'big microtransactions' doesn't quite change the reality of gamers. Gamers never needed/wanted microtransactions, it was shoved down their throats as a means to monetise on the business more.
Traditional game content on the other hand, in form of boxed expansions, requires the developer not only to produce a high-quality product, but to price it reasonably well,
let alone make sure the product is highly accessible (that's why it's boxed in the first place, rather than limited to credit card owners).
For any and all merit in this discussion, the ridiculous claim that microtransactions offer developers (or rather, give them incentive to) release more content (in total) or produce a higher quality content, is blatantly false.
Microtransactions are an invention of greed, not the creative force behind games. If you let greed seep into your game design principles, it will inevitably mean: less boxed/traditional content, more microtransactions, higher cumulative price of the product (or, to be exact,
service),
divided/partitioned/unequal community base and quite possibly -
a drop in content quality.
Dear Stumme, game industry isn't just
business - it's a big, social phenomenon, and in reality the gamers equally
own every bit of your game - especially true for MMOs (but not limited to: see "user generated content" which is basically the lifeblood of any other game out there), where
the "game" is in fact created by the players, for players ... if you make the service
uncomfortable and the online world uninteresting,
the people will just leave,
looking for a more creative & innovative social hub. Please don't forget that.
You are here to
serve (literally),
and the "game" is not your sole creation. You don't own it, you don't rent it -
all you do is create the "environment" for the players to interact with each other, and bringing in the solid-content microtransactions is possibly one of the most fatal and irreversible mistakes you'll ever make, as a MMO game developer company.
If you trifle with the community and purposefully distort the "world" by post-purchase real money transfers, it will bite on you hard, believe it or not. There is a very good reason why
the quality of service should be universal for all participants after initial purchase (purchase ---> access to whole online service) and why you shouldn't have players with unequal purchasing power/ability (especially drastically unequal) running all over the place, and I suppose you know it (basically a big "+" for p2p MMO devs who settled on monthly fee alone and offer expansions digitally, free of any additional charge - it's the ultimate way to run this 'thing' without silly compromises, either on MMO's quality, or at the cost of final customer's satisfaction).
In any case, I'm not going to stop people from supporting
a destructive and greed-oriented game design, which basically undermines the foundation of what made computer games (and MMOs in particular) great works of art, living manifestos of the creative force behind humanity.