First off, I would appreciate it if you dont bother flaming this idea, I already understand at least 75% of you wont like it. And thats exactly what Im counting on.
I propose pay to play districts that could only be accessed by accounts who pay a small monthly fee (5$-?) or a one time fee (20$-?). These accounts would gain no benefit save the right to enter a district where 1) An appeal function is available 2) Harassment situations are quickly taken care of, and 3) players are expected to basically behave. These players would still have access to all the normal zones, of course.
This is an effort to avoid all the immature gamers who are making GW much less enjoyable for alot of us. Like I said, Im sure a huge percent of the population will not be for this, because they wont do it. Frankly, I dont care about those people, its those who would pay for this Im looking to hear from.
If you woulnt pay for this, well then it would in no way affect you, so I really cant see why you would argue against it. I would certainly like to hear arguments on how it would affect you if you think it would though.
Aaaagh casts -<(FLAME SHIELD)>- .
Ok, post away...
Pay to Play Districts!
Aaaaagh
FloridaFringe
I saw the thread that inspired this idea for you and I must second it. I would gladly pay a small fee for restricted districts. I'm sure that there're might be plenty of legitimate reasons to go against this idea but on the surface I'm all for it.
While I like the idea of an online game without monthly charges it seems too easy for parents to purchase the game for $50 just to keep their children out of their hair. The problem is that they then up being in ours. This game is so great on so many levels but the maturity aspect, or lack thereof, leaves a lot to be desired.
While I like the idea of an online game without monthly charges it seems too easy for parents to purchase the game for $50 just to keep their children out of their hair. The problem is that they then up being in ours. This game is so great on so many levels but the maturity aspect, or lack thereof, leaves a lot to be desired.
Rhombus
what the.... NO! Guild wars was meant to be free, and it will stay free! (I hope 
) Yeye I know, it will still be free for the rest, but you know why I didn't pick WoW over this game??? exactly, im dutch.
) Yeye I know, it will still be free for the rest, but you know why I didn't pick WoW over this game??? exactly, im dutch.
Aaaaagh
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rhombus
what the.... NO! Guild wars was meant to be free, and it will stay free! (I hope
) Yeye I know, it will still be free for the rest, but you know why I didn't pick WoW over this game??? exactly, im dutch. |
Gun Giddy
I think that your concerns can be addressed in a way that can benifit everyone, not just a few that choose to pay $5 a month or whatever. I wouldn't want to see something like this implimented just for the fact that the monthly paying group will recieve priority over the non-monthly paying group.
Marc Grahamsworth
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Aaaaagh
If you woulnt pay for this, well then it would in no way affect you, so I really cant see why you would argue against it. I would certainly like to hear arguments on how it would affect you if you think it would though.
Aaaagh casts -<(FLAME SHIELD)>- . Ok, post away... |
If it was financially viable in the long run however, I guess it's plausible - although how would you interact with the non-paying community (e.g. a paying guild vs a non-paying guild) unless you're suggesting an apartheid (which would basically segregate Guild Wars into two games)?
FloridaFringe
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gun Giddy
I think that your concerns can be addressed in a way that can benifit everyone, not just a few that choose to pay $5 a month or whatever. I wouldn't want to see something like this implimented just for the fact that the monthly paying group will recieve priority over the non-monthly paying group.
|
It benefits everyone since the developer / producer makes more money, we get our slightly more mature crowd to associate with and those playing in the free districts get a company with greater financial support working on the game.
FloridaFringe
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Marc Grahamsworth
Actually, it does affect other gamers since development time will be taken away from other avenues to implement this new functionality.
If it was financially viable in the long run however, I guess it's plausible - although how would you interact with the non-paying community (e.g. a paying guild vs a non-paying guild) unless you're suggesting an apartheid (which would basically segregate Guild Wars into two games)? |
Also, it wouldn't be two different games as much as two different game rooms with two different types of gaming crowds.
EDIT: please don't misconstrued my commenting on this issue as fighting to get a charge implemented as I could easily continue playing as it. However, it's an interesting idea that's worth considering.
Also, if such a thing were to be implemented everyone should be allowed to upgrade or downgrade their account as they wish.
Arica Stormbane
Since I yesterday probably spend more time cursing stupid leavers, map-painters and other idiots I'd really appreciate an idiot-free zone. But all the MMORPGs with monthly fees have proven that idiots don't stay away just because there is a fee 
And, as said before: Guild Wars was meant to be free of any fees and not only should it stay this way, I'd also bet all my real life money that Anet won't introduce any monthly-paid features.
But how about an ingame money fee to enter districts - just like FoW or the Underworld? Maybe 1k, maybe 5k... That's of course also no way to make sure that no idiots visit these districts, but I think there would be far less who spoil the game.
Just imagine someone paying 1k to enter the district and start the Elona Reach mission - if he warps back to town during the mission he spent 1k for nothing and has to spend another 1000 to enter the same district again or he just goes to a non paid district. I think that would make a lot of people rather stay with the group to the end instead of dropping out as soon as the first teammate dies...
And, as said before: Guild Wars was meant to be free of any fees and not only should it stay this way, I'd also bet all my real life money that Anet won't introduce any monthly-paid features.
But how about an ingame money fee to enter districts - just like FoW or the Underworld? Maybe 1k, maybe 5k... That's of course also no way to make sure that no idiots visit these districts, but I think there would be far less who spoil the game.
Just imagine someone paying 1k to enter the district and start the Elona Reach mission - if he warps back to town during the mission he spent 1k for nothing and has to spend another 1000 to enter the same district again or he just goes to a non paid district. I think that would make a lot of people rather stay with the group to the end instead of dropping out as soon as the first teammate dies...
EmperorTippy
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arica Stormbane
Since I yesterday probably spend more time cursing stupid leavers, map-painters and other idiots I'd really appreciate an idiot-free zone. But all the MMORPGs with monthly fees have proven that idiots don't stay away just because there is a fee
And, as said before: Guild Wars was meant to be free of any fees and not only should it stay this way, I'd also bet all my real life money that Anet won't introduce any monthly-paid features. But how about an ingame money fee to enter districts - just like FoW or the Underworld? Maybe 1k, maybe 5k... That's of course also no way to make sure that no idiots visit these districts, but I think there would be far less who spoil the game. Just imagine someone paying 1k to enter the district and start the Elona Reach mission - if he warps back to town during the mission he spent 1k for nothing and has to spend another 1000 to enter the same district again or he just goes to a non paid district. I think that would make a lot of people rather stay with the group to the end instead of dropping out as soon as the first teammate dies... |
Studio Ghibli
Oh, ha ha.
For a minute, I thought my right to relatively decent gameplay came standard with the box. Didn't realize I had to purchase extra to secure it.
For a minute, I thought my right to relatively decent gameplay came standard with the box. Didn't realize I had to purchase extra to secure it.
theclam
No. If you find someone annoying, then just ignore him or switch districts. This game is entirely instanced, so it's easy to stop people who bother you. Plus, I don't want to be forced to pay a monthly fee in order to find mature players. Let's not stratify the player base.
Arica Stormbane
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by theclam
No. If you find someone annoying, then just ignore him or switch districts. This game is entirely instanced, so it's easy to stop people who bother you. Plus, I don't want to be forced to pay a monthly fee in order to find mature players. Let's not stratify the player base.
|
My ignore list is FULL with leavers - and I can't add anymore... I add people who leave a mission at the first sign of trouble and those idiots that don't use the trade channel but instead spam the normal chat... As you all know there's a limit to the ignore list and even if you ignore someone you're not safe from him being in a group you join. But I really think that most of these people wouldn't join a paid district. - Well, on second thought maybe this wouldn't prevent chat spammers from entering the districts, but I still believe that leavers wouldn't join a paid team or (the other way around) wouldn't leave if they first paid to be in this team...
Sir Maddox
While I do see the merits of this idea, I'd ask that you explain more how those who possibly can't afford a monthly fee, but consider themselves compitent, mature players will not be abandoned with those that this very system attempts to striate away from? I wouldn't be able to afford these districts, which means there are even less compitent people for me to actually play with, which in the end, lessens my experience because I'm not paying as much, thus, coming back to the basic of Guild Wars and "Free to play."
Calimar
Not sure you'd get more maturity. What's 5$ a month for a kid living at home?Especially if parents don't want him to bug them, they'll pay the bill and worry not. Also, like the collector's edition, it would start another petty "me's paying you not, u stupid noob"... or whatever. Getting the exact opposite result. And then the first immature monkey getting in the pay-districts would claim he found the almighty godly sword of planetary devastation there, and tadah! two gazillion monkeys in there. "but it's the same area!" - but you're _paying_, dawg. No, isolation is an ineffective way of dealing with this problem, me thinks.
I'd rather use something like a "Consensus"-driven access: take 100 players (dev/a-net selected, doesn't take more than 2 hours). Let no one access the district if they don't have an invitation approved by at least 5 other members of the consensus district. Let the invitation be removed if at least 10 people vote so. Let no one invite more than one person a day. That would make it more like you want it... but it would still create a difference between A-series and B-series players, which I'd rather avoid.
I consider myself mature enough
and I make use of one very fine feature the devs have added to GW: "ignore list". Not to mention that the fact GW is instanced is enough to avoid most immature behaviours. What are you going to do, steal my kills or drops? Good luck. You can't even drop stuff in town!! 
I haven't read the thread that brought you to this idea - can someone sum up the reason? I might get more insight. Actually I'd seriously like to know what kind of abusive behaviour might trigger such a harsh decision - 5$ a month means you buy the game again every year, AND you still have 2 chapters a year to buy. Not much, I know... but still much more than the ignore list.
Just my .02 - but seriously: why?
Calimar
Sidenote: I think Rhombus was trying to be funny, not trollish.
A different idea on your same lines: a "consensus
I'd rather use something like a "Consensus"-driven access: take 100 players (dev/a-net selected, doesn't take more than 2 hours). Let no one access the district if they don't have an invitation approved by at least 5 other members of the consensus district. Let the invitation be removed if at least 10 people vote so. Let no one invite more than one person a day. That would make it more like you want it... but it would still create a difference between A-series and B-series players, which I'd rather avoid.
I consider myself mature enough
and I make use of one very fine feature the devs have added to GW: "ignore list". Not to mention that the fact GW is instanced is enough to avoid most immature behaviours. What are you going to do, steal my kills or drops? Good luck. You can't even drop stuff in town!! I haven't read the thread that brought you to this idea - can someone sum up the reason? I might get more insight. Actually I'd seriously like to know what kind of abusive behaviour might trigger such a harsh decision - 5$ a month means you buy the game again every year, AND you still have 2 chapters a year to buy. Not much, I know... but still much more than the ignore list.
Just my .02 - but seriously: why?
Calimar
Sidenote: I think Rhombus was trying to be funny, not trollish.
A different idea on your same lines: a "consensus
EmperorTippy
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by theclam
No. If you find someone annoying, then just ignore him or switch districts. This game is entirely instanced, so it's easy to stop people who bother you. Plus, I don't want to be forced to pay a monthly fee in order to find mature players. Let's not stratify the player base.
|
Aaaaagh
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sir Maddox
While I do see the merits of this idea, I'd ask that you explain more how those who possibly can't afford a monthly fee, but consider themselves compitent, mature players will not be abandoned with those that this very system attempts to striate away from? I wouldn't be able to afford these districts, which means there are even less compitent people for me to actually play with, which in the end, lessens my experience because I'm not paying as much, thus, coming back to the basic of Guild Wars and "Free to play."
|
I am just really tired of the immature community, so much that I would gladly PAY for a better shot at a decent one. I feel many are with me.
DrSLUGFly
This is a brilliant idea. At an absolute minimum of 200 people paying 5 bucks a month, that's 1000 bucks a month. Surely that will be enough of a salary to take care of someone whose job it is to play policeman in the district... that's the only extra that's really needed. Pay a small fee and the devs make extra money (that benefits EVERYONE) and the pay-play district gets tighter monitoring for bots, abusers and other violations/harrassments.
Great idea...
although I could never use it... payment options severely limited
Great idea...
although I could never use it... payment options severely limited
Marc Grahamsworth
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by EmperorTippy
That ingore list isn't long enough. It needs to be able to hold at least 1000 people. Perferably more.
|
Shadow_Avenger
I would have to disagree, pay to play. Why, there are not that many infantiles on the server, and you dont have to listern / team with them.
Personally I would not pay for a district, and I very very much doubt anybody else would. If anything Just for a guild and have guild only chat enabled 24/7 problem solveed, with no extra fee.
If i was going to pay a monthly fee, then I'd be playing a really MMORPG not GW.
Personally I would not pay for a district, and I very very much doubt anybody else would. If anything Just for a guild and have guild only chat enabled 24/7 problem solveed, with no extra fee.
If i was going to pay a monthly fee, then I'd be playing a really MMORPG not GW.
Vorkronor
I think it is entirely possible to minimize griefer impact by ourselves! We just need to have the power to take the fun of griefing be it in the cities or in the missions.
It would be enough to have a one-click-adds-to-ignore-list function with the addition of a much more sophisticated ignore list (separate window, not a part of the friends list). That's in the cities.
IF YOU IGNORE THEM, THEY WILL STOP. Feeding the trolls does not take us anywhere and many people do that by "policing" the situation! And I think there are many times more players, that behave, than those, that do not, so we don't need the police!
The wilderness is another story. I've seen too many flowers, satan symbols, genitals and other rubbish drawn on the minimap. And I usually warn the group, what consequences there will be (me leaving the group).
The solution to this problem would be the ability to discern who is drawing what, either having the ability to switch minimap output by certain players off (checkboxes in the party window) or by color coding the minimap drawings (could colide with the color of the minimap background).
If you add a vote-and-kick-out system in the missions, then you are perfectly in charge of the situation and you could kick players, that do not behave back to the city.
It would be enough to have a one-click-adds-to-ignore-list function with the addition of a much more sophisticated ignore list (separate window, not a part of the friends list). That's in the cities.
IF YOU IGNORE THEM, THEY WILL STOP. Feeding the trolls does not take us anywhere and many people do that by "policing" the situation! And I think there are many times more players, that behave, than those, that do not, so we don't need the police!
The wilderness is another story. I've seen too many flowers, satan symbols, genitals and other rubbish drawn on the minimap. And I usually warn the group, what consequences there will be (me leaving the group).
The solution to this problem would be the ability to discern who is drawing what, either having the ability to switch minimap output by certain players off (checkboxes in the party window) or by color coding the minimap drawings (could colide with the color of the minimap background).
If you add a vote-and-kick-out system in the missions, then you are perfectly in charge of the situation and you could kick players, that do not behave back to the city.
shady_knife
dw, the little kids will soon be left behind or get bored. give it a month or two an the maturity will rise, i garentee it.
momo2oo2
What about implementing a system that penalizes leavers by keeping them in cities/outpost for 10~30 minutes? That should avoid leavers most of the time. Ok, that penalizes also if *you* want to leave a Grady Bunch, but since there will be [almost] no "bad" leavers the problem is not that big.
Also, if someone must leave (phone, emergency, etc) theres no problem, because if they REALLY needs to leave, they will be AFK for those 10~30 minutes (the amount should be probed).
Just an idea... If its too hard, make it happen the 3rd~5th time someone leaves a party in less than 1~3 days.
About the monthly fee for policed districts, i agree in some points and disagree in anothers. There will be brats that get the monthly 5 and keep pi****g we all.
So, the best solution IMO is a better ignore system: faster (one-click AND with message *You are being ignored* ala IRC style), in another window, and that avoids them partying with you.
Also, if someone must leave (phone, emergency, etc) theres no problem, because if they REALLY needs to leave, they will be AFK for those 10~30 minutes (the amount should be probed).
Just an idea... If its too hard, make it happen the 3rd~5th time someone leaves a party in less than 1~3 days.
About the monthly fee for policed districts, i agree in some points and disagree in anothers. There will be brats that get the monthly 5 and keep pi****g we all.
So, the best solution IMO is a better ignore system: faster (one-click AND with message *You are being ignored* ala IRC style), in another window, and that avoids them partying with you.
RTSFirebat
I tend to turn a blind eye to most of the cheeky little kids you find in places like lion's arch and ascalon city.
However I find it much harder to turn a blind eye when I'm at the Temple of Ages and someone is being racist towards Europe or Korea simply on the fact that the US server doesn't have the Favour of the god...
However I find it much harder to turn a blind eye when I'm at the Temple of Ages and someone is being racist towards Europe or Korea simply on the fact that the US server doesn't have the Favour of the god...
Vorkronor
Leaver penalization would encourage the immature kids to tease you in-mission. And you could choose to be teased until the end of the mission/quests or to leave to be stuck in the city for some time. Ouch.
Imagine someone begins drawing flowers on the miniman in the middle of a mission. You don't know who that is and the troll does not reveal itself. So what can you do apart from leaving?
I have left a few groups. I agree, that not all players caused the grief, but all were hit by my leave, but in most situations I whispered the mature players, that were in the mission with me to join me and try again. And guess what, there were no flowers (or worse things) the next time.
Imagine someone begins drawing flowers on the miniman in the middle of a mission. You don't know who that is and the troll does not reveal itself. So what can you do apart from leaving?
I have left a few groups. I agree, that not all players caused the grief, but all were hit by my leave, but in most situations I whispered the mature players, that were in the mission with me to join me and try again. And guess what, there were no flowers (or worse things) the next time.
Vorkronor
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by RTSFirebat
...
However I find it much harder to turn a blind eye when I'm at the Temple of Ages and someone is being racist towards Europe or Korea simply on the fact that the US server doesn't have the Favour of the god... |
This specific offense violates point 3, that says:
You may not use sexually explicit, harmful, threatening, abusive, defamatory, obscene, hateful, racially or ethnically offensive language.
Prince Daniel
i dont like the idea, just because there is a fee does not mean that there will be no offensive people playing, far from it. I dont even think it would be worth the money, im not going to pay money just so i can avoid the rare offensive language. I think if you were going to have pay to play districts they should be at least new towns which only people who pay can visit. The game was made to be a no monthly charges so it would be stupid to implement them.
Theus
It wont happen.
Why?
Lawsuits.
Why?
Lawsuits.
Tengoku No Yushosha
Well, how would YOU have people pay? Credit Card? Cash? Check? Some other source of money spending? Making it impossible for MOST people who already play to play any longer. Yes yes, flaming and all that stuff, but with paying, it would leave the World of Guildwars lonely....and soon, it will crumble because nobody will even bother with it... Can you live with that?
franning
How about you loose exp everytime you quit a party that's doing quest.
Calimar
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by franning
How about you loose exp everytime you quit a party that's doing quest.
|
Guys, we had a similar problem with a mud I played - solution? ignore them. They'll be forced to grow up or group between themselves. You're with jerks? Drop out. This is a GAME you don't HAVE to stand other people's BS. I take enough at work, when I play, I either play with smarts, or I quit.
Disclaimer: I ask first, then warn, warn again, then quit. Being bad players (as in inexperienced or plain unable) is not a term for quitting. Being insulting jerks is.
IMNERHO!
A.
drowningfish999
Well, it's hard to determine whether a mission is actually out doing a quest or just exploring/farming. If you mean mission, a group could simply be going out for the bonus, and therefore would leave early. Plus with all the random crashes and disconnects, this just wouldn't work out.
Mat Thirteen
To me, it just seems like this whole thing is a little rough around the edges. I dont think enough people would be willing to pay. Like you said, there are a ton of noobs, and you can count those people out obviously. Then, we have people like me, who are entirely satisfied with our districs. I just doubt many people would be like, "Yeah, ill pay 20 dollars or 5 dollars a month for 1 more district that has very few people in it due to underuse." I mean, how many times have you gone to a town and looked through every district and there is hardly anyone there? Theres no way you could even form a party in those districts.. just seems a lil farfetched to me. ^_^
RogueFoxx
This game would have to undergo ALOT of MAJOR improvements to even consider competing in the pay to play market. World of Warcraft is by far a superior game with far superior gameplay, I know from experience, and EQ2 is as well from what I hear. I don't think that taking a step into that market would be a wise decision whatsoever at this point.
Like others have said, if you don't like who you are partied up with, either ignore them or leave the party... simple as that.
Like others have said, if you don't like who you are partied up with, either ignore them or leave the party... simple as that.
Alathys Tylderaan
You idea has good intentions, but i feel the actual implementation and how you describe this would segreate the game and will only cause more problems.
The only real way to remove this problem is something more along the lines of a policeman, a moderator, or whatever you might wish to call it. Someone who gives up their time to keep the peace in the district. GW is my first online RPG, so I dont know if others do this also, but with the way GW operates, this may be unfeasible for Anet to do.
The only real way to remove this problem is something more along the lines of a policeman, a moderator, or whatever you might wish to call it. Someone who gives up their time to keep the peace in the district. GW is my first online RPG, so I dont know if others do this also, but with the way GW operates, this may be unfeasible for Anet to do.
RTSFirebat
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by RogueFoxx
This game would have to undergo ALOT of MAJOR improvements to even consider competing in the pay to play market. World of Warcraft is by far a superior game with far superior gameplay, I know from experience, and EQ2 is as well from what I hear. I don't think that taking a step into that market would be a wise decision whatsoever at this point.
Like others have said, if you don't like who you are partied up with, either ignore them or leave the party... simple as that. |
sixdartbart
Quote:
| So, the best solution IMO is a better ignore system: faster (one-click AND with message *You are being ignored* ala IRC style), in another window, and that avoids them partying with you. |
RogueFoxx
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by RTSFirebat
Superior, I think not.
|
Guild Master
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Aaaaagh
First off, I would appreciate it if you dont bother flaming this idea, I already understand at least 75% of you wont like it. And thats exactly what Im counting on.
I propose pay to play districts that could only be accessed by accounts who pay a small monthly fee (5$-?) or a one time fee (20$-?). These accounts would gain no benefit save the right to enter a district where 1) An appeal function is available 2) Harassment situations are quickly taken care of, and 3) players are expected to basically behave. These players would still have access to all the normal zones, of course. This is an effort to avoid all the immature gamers who are making GW much less enjoyable for alot of us. Like I said, Im sure a huge percent of the population will not be for this, because they wont do it. Frankly, I dont care about those people, its those who would pay for this Im looking to hear from. If you woulnt pay for this, well then it would in no way affect you, so I really cant see why you would argue against it. I would certainly like to hear arguments on how it would affect you if you think it would though. Aaaagh casts -<(FLAME SHIELD)>- . Ok, post away... |
Garrett
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Calimar
I'd rather use something like a "Consensus"-driven access: take 100 players (dev/a-net selected, doesn't take more than 2 hours). Let no one access the district if they don't have an invitation approved by at least 5 other members of the consensus district. Let the invitation be removed if at least 10 people vote so. Let no one invite more than one person a day. That would make it more like you want it... but it would still create a difference between A-series and B-series players, which I'd rather avoid.
|
I personally have seen that voting usually is innacurate in games due to lazy votes by players. Many people will vote one way or another without really ever knowing much about the the issue they are voting on.