Guild Wars 2

GW2 suffer from the same disease as other games nowadays: sparkles on a simple shoebox.

While the game is astonishing in many ways (graphics, animations, details, combat mechanics, to name some), most time was used to put a lot of sparkling things, and the story was a bit left out (aka rushed missions and dungeons).

GW1 was uglier but I was the one to shape Tyrian history! In GW2? I felt I was just a witness and skipped most dialogues without losing any detail… So yeah lore wise GW1 was far better than GW2…

Iason Evan.3806:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Guild-Wars-2-Years/first#post4360502

This was posted about a month ago by a good friend of mine. It’s totally relevant to this discussion.

I think it’s about time someone did a proper count of GW2 stats, so here we go:

Item/Release/Added over 2 years/Total

Skills: 952/9/961
Traits: 480/40/520
Sigils: 58/6/64
Runes: 61/8/69
Stat Combos: 18/7/25
Armor skins: 1432*
Weapon skins: 1573*
Outfits: 3/7/10

Included are racial skills, auxiliary skillbar skills (like transforms, conjures, kits, tomes and banners), sequence skills (like chains) and pet skills. In GW1 you have to equip your chain skills and pet skills on your skillbar in order to use them, so I counted those separately.

GW2 started with 952 skills, and over 2 years they’ve added a grand total of 9 new skills, while GW1 started with kitten skills and over 2 years they’ve added a total of 680 new skills.

However, skills isn’t the only customization option in GW2, you have to include traits too (traits didn’t offer any extra special abilities in GW1), there is a total of 520 traits now, out of which 40 added over the last 2 years, game started with 480 traits.

There are a total of 64 Sigils in the game, out of which 6 (I think) were added over the last 2 years. Sigils include only Superior versions.

There are a total of 69 Runes in the game, out of which 8 (I think) were added over the last 2 years. Runes include only Superior versions.

There are a total of 25 different stat combinations, out of which 7 were added over the last 2 years. They include only 3-stat combos + celestial

There are a total of 1432 armor skins in the game, including 449 Light, 439 Medium, 434 Heavy and 110 Back slot items. I won’t count how many of these were included after release but they are many of these.

There are a total of 1573 weapon skins in the game, but these don’t include Torch, Warhorn and Trident skins because for some reason they do not exist on the wiki (yet). I won’t count how many of these were included after release, but they are many of these.

There are also 10 outfits out of which 7 were added over the last 2 years. At release there were more town clothing options but Anet decided to make them tonics for reasons unknown.

Vayne.8563:

Take the NPE.

Colin came straight out and said why it exists. People choose not to listen or not to believe. Listening to what someone says (and seeing that it’s probably reasonable) isn’t making assumptions. It’s believing something someone is saying.

Group 1: They dumbed down the game because they think we’re idiots.
Group 2: They altered the game based on tests that they ran that said it kept people playing longer.

I’m having trouble picturing a meeting where devs say to each other, you know, our players are idiots, let’s make the game dumber. It’s not likely to have happened. People who are offended by the NPE are simply taking offense at something that was a logical business decision.

More like: someone at Anet pulls out some data that shows GW2 has only a 20% conversion rate (ie: 80% stop playing the game at or before level X), so the objective becomes: how can we make this higher?

What are some likely reasons why the conversion rate sucks?

1) the game is too hard/confusing
2) the gameplay just isn’t fun/differentiated/interesting enough
3) some of the mechanics/art is a major turnoff

Anet primarily chose #1, which is why the NPE was all about dumbing the game down a lot. They couldn’t possibly have data that this is the major reason as that data only becomes available after the changes are made so it was an educated guess on their part (possibly combined with some anecdotal data from paid testers).

Given that my personal experience of the NPE involved close to zero confusion, you can understand why players in general were a bit shocked at the extent to which the NPE was dumbed-down.

Personally, the closest I came to giving up the game during my NPE was discovering downed state for the first time (I still hate it), and the inflexibility of the UI (I hate not being able to rearrange especially the combat-related frames, i still dislike the GW2 UI for this reason).

I haven’t even logged on in weeks now when I used to always play. There’s honestly nothing left to do anymore at this point. I could run around wvw or something; repeating the same thing I been doing 1000 more times but I’ve used every combat style and build possible at this point, even the broken ones, and feel bored of the same old mechanics. Still wondering when the whole “adding new weapons to every class” and the eventual “all weapons for all classes” thing is going to happen.

Anet never talks about future plans due to company policy, which is unfortunate, but at the same time it makes me feel like there isn’t really any in development.

scerevisiae.1972:

Vayne.8563:

Take the NPE.

Colin came straight out and said why it exists. People choose not to listen or not to believe. Listening to what someone says (and seeing that it’s probably reasonable) isn’t making assumptions. It’s believing something someone is saying.

Group 1: They dumbed down the game because they think we’re idiots.
Group 2: They altered the game based on tests that they ran that said it kept people playing longer.

I’m having trouble picturing a meeting where devs say to each other, you know, our players are idiots, let’s make the game dumber. It’s not likely to have happened. People who are offended by the NPE are simply taking offense at something that was a logical business decision.

More like: someone at Anet pulls out some data that shows GW2 has only a 20% conversion rate (ie: 80% stop playing the game at or before level X), so the objective becomes: how can we make this higher?

What are some likely reasons why the conversion rate sucks?

1) the game is too hard/confusing
2) the gameplay just isn’t fun/differentiated/interesting enough
3) some of the mechanics/art is a major turnoff

Anet primarily chose #1, which is why the NPE was all about dumbing the game down a lot. They couldn’t possibly have data that this is the major reason as that data only becomes available after the changes are made so it was an educated guess on their part (possibly combined with some anecdotal data from paid testers).

Given that my personal experience of the NPE involved close to zero confusion, you can understand why players in general were a bit shocked at the extent to which the NPE was dumbed-down.

Personally, the closest I came to giving up the game during my NPE was discovering downed state for the first time (I still hate it), and the inflexibility of the UI (I hate not being able to rearrange especially the combat-related frames, i still dislike the GW2 UI for this reason).

Anet didn’t just “decide”. And I don’t believe any company would. They test. That’s what they said they did. That’s what’s logical to do.

The forum goers are saying it’s bad because A or B or C. Anet is saying we tested several solutions and this solution provided the best results.

Why is that so hard for people to accept?

GW2 started with more content than most other MMOs did (and with less bugs). But since then not much has happend. We have a few more skills and traits, a few more pvp maps and some reoccuring events. On the other hand we have a bunch of negative changes like the NPE and the megaserver-mess. All in all I have to say this game is by no means more enjoyable than it was 2 years ago. If ANET does not have something big coming soon I’m afraid GW2 will not make it another 2 years.

Vayne.8563:

scerevisiae.1972:

Vayne.8563:

Take the NPE.

Colin came straight out and said why it exists. People choose not to listen or not to believe. Listening to what someone says (and seeing that it’s probably reasonable) isn’t making assumptions. It’s believing something someone is saying.

Group 1: They dumbed down the game because they think we’re idiots.
Group 2: They altered the game based on tests that they ran that said it kept people playing longer.

I’m having trouble picturing a meeting where devs say to each other, you know, our players are idiots, let’s make the game dumber. It’s not likely to have happened. People who are offended by the NPE are simply taking offense at something that was a logical business decision.

More like: someone at Anet pulls out some data that shows GW2 has only a 20% conversion rate (ie: 80% stop playing the game at or before level X), so the objective becomes: how can we make this higher?

What are some likely reasons why the conversion rate sucks?

1) the game is too hard/confusing
2) the gameplay just isn’t fun/differentiated/interesting enough
3) some of the mechanics/art is a major turnoff

Anet primarily chose #1, which is why the NPE was all about dumbing the game down a lot. They couldn’t possibly have data that this is the major reason as that data only becomes available after the changes are made so it was an educated guess on their part (possibly combined with some anecdotal data from paid testers).

Given that my personal experience of the NPE involved close to zero confusion, you can understand why players in general were a bit shocked at the extent to which the NPE was dumbed-down.

Personally, the closest I came to giving up the game during my NPE was discovering downed state for the first time (I still hate it), and the inflexibility of the UI (I hate not being able to rearrange especially the combat-related frames, i still dislike the GW2 UI for this reason).

Anet didn’t just “decide”. And I don’t believe any company would. They test. That’s what they said they did. That’s what’s logical to do.

The forum goers are saying it’s bad because A or B or C. Anet is saying we tested several solutions and this solution provided the best results.

Why is that so hard for people to accept?

Testing, testing. One, two, three, four. Check! Mostly because some of the NPE changes are just plain cringe-worthy. The MMO equivalent of Mozart deciding that maybe the emperor was right and that taking out a few notes would make it better – and sadly, taking out some really good notes, notes that made the composition unique and special.

Say! Did they ever sort out which NPE changes were intended and which ones were bugs?

As balance to the Mozart comparison, see also: Living Story, especially when it was temporary – did tests tell them temporary content was a good idea? Also, (queue thunder) the Trait System Revamp – did tests tell them that was a good idea? I, personally, would include megasuffer, the server merge in disguise, but perhaps if I had a stronger, faster, better PC megasuffer wouldn’t be so bad.

In the end also this boils down to monetization.

GW1 was a true B2P game being monetization by selling the game and that also means releasing regular expansions.

GW2 is mainly monetized with the cash-shop what means releasing thing to keep people busy (LS) and taking elements out of the game to put them in the cash-shop.

Compare for example GW1’s cash-shop to GW2’s cash-shop with how much has been added and is in the cash-shop (vs in the game). Then GW2 wins easy.

Of course it just depends on what you prefer. I prefer the true B2P game thats in fact one of the reasons to go for GW2 as it was promoted as a B2P game and had also that name from GW1.

The strange thing is that even in current promotions of the game they are still pointing so much towards having no subscription. Like if they are having this special great payment-model. And with GW1 (B2P) they did have this special great payment model but with GW2 it’s similar to the many F2P games that most MMO’s have. Nothing special about it.

Devata.6589:

In the end also this boils down to monetization.

GW1 was a true B2P game being monetization by selling the game and that also means releasing regular expansions.

GW2 is mainly monetized with the cash-shop what means releasing thing to keep people busy (LS) and taking elements out of the game to put them in the cash-shop.

Compare for example GW1’s cash-shop to GW2’s cash-shop with how much has been added and is in the cash-shop (vs in the game). Then GW2 wins easy.

Of course it just depends on what you prefer. I prefer the true B2P game thats in fact one of the reasons to go for GW2 as it was promoted as a B2P game and had also that name from GW1.

i dont have a problem with gw2 monetization in theory, I mean they could take all the money from cash shop, and focus it on creating new free content.

But the reality is, the further we get away from initial purchase, the more this game resembles an f2p game, which is natural, because the cash shop is the only means of new revenue from players after initial purchase.

if profit was tied to creating new interesting content people want to buy, thats what we would be getting

phys.7689:

Devata.6589:

In the end also this boils down to monetization.

GW1 was a true B2P game being monetization by selling the game and that also means releasing regular expansions.

GW2 is mainly monetized with the cash-shop what means releasing thing to keep people busy (LS) and taking elements out of the game to put them in the cash-shop.

Compare for example GW1’s cash-shop to GW2’s cash-shop with how much has been added and is in the cash-shop (vs in the game). Then GW2 wins easy.

Of course it just depends on what you prefer. I prefer the true B2P game thats in fact one of the reasons to go for GW2 as it was promoted as a B2P game and had also that name from GW1.

i dont have a problem with gw2 monetization in theory, I mean they could take all the money from cash shop, and focus it on creating new free content.

But the reality is, the further we get away from initial purchase, the more this game resembles an f2p game, which is natural, because the cash shop is the only means of new revenue from players after initial purchase.

if profit was tied to creating new interesting content people want to buy, thats what we would be getting

“i dont have a problem with gw2 monetization in theory, I mean they could take all the money from cash shop, and focus it on creating new free content.”

No they can’t really do that ‘freely’ because as you say yourself

“the further we get away from initial purchase, the more this game resembles an f2p game, which is natural, because the cash shop is the only means of new revenue from players after initial purchase.”

So what their main focus has to be with this form of monetization is getting people to buy gems. Whether they like that them-self or not. If the cash-shop is there main source of income (and that it is at the moment) they have to focus on that. Not focus on just being able to sell the game people like while of course they still need to try and provide a game people like. But you can easily so how the two (getting people to buy gems, creating a game people like) conflicts with each other.

And again like you say yourself “if profit was tied to creating new interesting content people want to buy, thats what we would be getting”.

Basically you seem to be saying the same as I and seem to b in agreement. Only your first line “i don’t have a problem with gw2 monetization in theory” in then a little strange. Because imho you should have a problem with it reading the rest of your post.

Haven’t we already established that GW1 was the only game on the mmo market running with the B2P model with no subscription and a small cash shop? It was a CORPG that positioned itself in the MMO market at a specific time when there weren’t many F2P games. One of the earliest interviews with one of the Anet heads talked about this being a very peculiar marketing strategy at the time to not charge a subscription if that tells you anything about the era. The argument for GW2 to run with that model seems to be because it worked then, it can work now. I really don’t see that as true. How many other MMOs can we look to today that use that model successfully? There really aren’t any. The arguments for this will likely be either it’s because it’s no longer tenable given the payment model landscape in the MMO market, operating costs for GW2 far exceed that of GW1 or all companies are simply greedier than they were 10 years ago and don’t have the guts to run with that model. You can choose what you want to believe but there is probably a little truth in all of these things and more than people want to consider to inform their understanding of MMOs as a business.

Devata, I should point out that I’ve seen how passionately you argue your position in support of the GW1 payment model and your ideal MMO business. I admire your idealism. All I can say is if you can pitch that to any MMO company as a business model today and get that to work, you might just have the next big thing on your hands.

Vayne.8563:

Scipio.3204:

Vayne.8563:

You don’t think you can pick apart Guild Wars 1 the same way? How about the stupid Black Tide Den mission, where your character, for no reason whatsoever, is suddenly looking for Rinkhail monitors for the bonus, running away from the guy you’re supposed to be follow (which is an important plot point) to do something that you’re never given any reason at all to do.

I never go into any MMO expecting “great writing”. Therefore I’m never disappointed.

Guild Wars 1 could have been a lot better. Guild Wars 2 could be a lot better. But there are some pretty cool things in Guild Wars 2, as there were in Guild Wars 1. If you want to ignore those things, go right ahead.

They’re still in the game.

How is that any better with living story achievements? Why would you let Duke Barradin’s ghost to get stronger normally? I don’t see any difference.

Also GW1 had his fair share of cool things as well, if not more than GW2.

I’m not saying, nor did I ever say Guild Wars 2 was better. If you can find where I did say that, by all means produce some evidence. I’d love to see it.

All I said, again and again, was that people are overestimating Guild Wars 1. Both games have strong and weak points. Particularly with regard to writing, both games are roughly equivalent. Both of the games are the same. That WAS my point.

I was responding to people who keep claiming the Guild Wars 1 writing was so much better.

I really enjoyed GW1’s writing.

GW2’s books were amazing too. I loved everyone one of them. Edge of Destiny was the weakest for sure but in the other two books Dougal Keane and Cobiah Marriner were so good.

I don’t know why GW2’s story has come across as_ so weak. Maybe it’s the biconics that are just messing things up or maybe its the disconnect between the characters in the books and the game… or maybe all that’s just my opinion.

nightwulf.1986:

Haven’t we already established that GW1 was the only game on the mmo market running with the B2P model with no subscription and a small cash shop? It was a CORPG that positioned itself in the MMO market at a specific time when there weren’t many F2P games. One of the earliest interviews with one of the Anet heads talked about this being a very peculiar marketing strategy at the time to not charge a subscription if that tells you anything about the era. The argument for GW2 to run with that model seems to be because it worked then, it can work now. I really don’t see that as true. How many other MMOs can we look to today that use that model successfully? There really aren’t any. The arguments for this will likely be either it’s because it’s no longer tenable given the payment model landscape in the MMO market, operating costs for GW2 far exceed that of GW1 or all companies are simply greedier than they were 10 years ago and don’t have the guts to run with that model. You can choose what you want to believe but there is probably a little truth in all of these things and more than people want to consider to inform their understanding of MMOs as a business.

Devata, I should point out that I’ve seen how passionately you argue your position in support of the GW1 payment model and your ideal MMO business. I admire your idealism. All I can say is if you can pitch that to any MMO company as a business model today and get that to work, you might just have the next big thing on your hands.

“It was a CORPG that positioned itself in the MMO market at a specific time when there weren’t many F2P games.” First of all, back then there where many F2P games. But then again I don’t see how that is relevant as GW1 was B2P not F2P.

Yes it was not P2P but let me tell you something about that ‘time’. GW2 was released after WoW. Since WoW there have been no mmo’s that where successful with P2P. WoW was the last one to be really successful with it. There are some new mmo’s that use it but we still have to see if they will get successful.

But to come back on your “there weren’t many F2P games”. You of course prefer to the idea that GW1 was pretty unique with there B2P model. And thats true, but that hasn’t changed a bit. They would still be pretty unique with the B2P model today. However they act as if they are unique but with the current model thats more F2P then B2P they are not unique. So no, in that way times did not change to much.

“How many other MMOs can we look to today that use that model successfully?” Just as many other MMO’s as where successfull with that model back when GW1 was released. Now of course if you think it would not work we can simply look at the numbers.
Here are some numbers: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/NcSoft-earnings-1Q-14/page/3#post4029793
And here a small comparison to GW1 https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/NcSoft-earnings-1Q-14/page/3#post4029793

If that is anything to go on GW2 with a B2P model would have earned more money by now! So yes with the information we have we can say the B2P model would work great also today.

“operating costs for GW2 far exceed that of GW1” So does the number of players. It’s just a game on a bigger scale. So irrelevant.

“companies are simply greedier than they were 10 years ago and don’t have the guts to run with that model.” Well maybe and likely and I think this is the only think that has truth to it in your story, but thats not a good argument to not ask for something that is better.

You see, if people don’t buy cash-shop crap but are willing to buy the game an real expansions (not talking about DLC crap) then companies will get afraid of other models and come to like the B2P model.

“All I can say is if you can pitch that to any MMO company as a business model today and get that to work, you might just have the next big thing on your hands.”

I guess that is what I am sort of doing here.

I never played GW1. Maybe thats my problem because I still love this game. I would rather play this game than anything else out there and I have tried just about all of them including QueueAge. I simply refuse to play a game that is sub par visually to this one. I WvW and have only run 1 dungeon in my time here. Have leveled many 80s.

I think new content will eventually come to this game. Dont think creating a 2667 post about it is going to speed the process up any. I figure most of you people complaining play the game differently from me but feel the same way I do about it or the passionate pleas for new content would not be here.

I would continue to urge patience on the matter. Nothing as good as this game will simply fall away. Find new ways to play the game. Create new characters. Play some PvP or WvW in the meantime. Maybe even indulge in some RP.

The alternative is to go somewhere else and come back later which Im sure a few will do. But you will hate it. The other stuff out there looks way worse than this game. You will hate your characters clunky look and animations. I know I did which was something I did not expect. I have gotten so spoiled by the sheer beauty of this game that I simply cannot play another game not up to these standards.

I hope you will all stay but understand it if you go. To each their own I suppose. I do think that should you venture out to do something different that you will be more disappointed by what you find than you are here with the state of this game. But thats ok…. you can come back lol.

Peace.

Devata.6589:

phys.7689:

Devata.6589:

In the end also this boils down to monetization.

GW1 was a true B2P game being monetization by selling the game and that also means releasing regular expansions.

GW2 is mainly monetized with the cash-shop what means releasing thing to keep people busy (LS) and taking elements out of the game to put them in the cash-shop.

Compare for example GW1’s cash-shop to GW2’s cash-shop with how much has been added and is in the cash-shop (vs in the game). Then GW2 wins easy.

Of course it just depends on what you prefer. I prefer the true B2P game thats in fact one of the reasons to go for GW2 as it was promoted as a B2P game and had also that name from GW1.

i dont have a problem with gw2 monetization in theory, I mean they could take all the money from cash shop, and focus it on creating new free content.

But the reality is, the further we get away from initial purchase, the more this game resembles an f2p game, which is natural, because the cash shop is the only means of new revenue from players after initial purchase.

if profit was tied to creating new interesting content people want to buy, thats what we would be getting

“i dont have a problem with gw2 monetization in theory, I mean they could take all the money from cash shop, and focus it on creating new free content.”

No they can’t really do that ‘freely’ because as you say yourself

“the further we get away from initial purchase, the more this game resembles an f2p game, which is natural, because the cash shop is the only means of new revenue from players after initial purchase.”

So what their main focus has to be with this form of monetization is getting people to buy gems. Whether they like that them-self or not. If the cash-shop is there main source of income (and that it is at the moment) they have to focus on that. Not focus on just being able to sell the game people like while of course they still need to try and provide a game people like. But you can easily so how the two (getting people to buy gems, creating a game people like) conflicts with each other.

And again like you say yourself “if profit was tied to creating new interesting content people want to buy, thats what we would be getting”.

Basically you seem to be saying the same as I and seem to b in agreement. Only your first line “i don’t have a problem with gw2 monetization in theory” in then a little strange. Because imho you should have a problem with it reading the rest of your post.

i am agreeing with what you say, but im am saying in theory, it could work out, however, one would have to work against the natural tendencies of a company or any one trying to earn money.

Basically its highly unlikely, because it would have to be a moral stance, or idealistic method of making a game, when as a business the best answer is to do what takes the least resources to make the most money.

Sturmruger.3920:

I never played GW1. Maybe thats my problem because I still love this game. I would rather play this game than anything else out there and I have tried just about all of them including QueueAge. I simply refuse to play a game that is sub par visually to this one. I WvW and have only run 1 dungeon in my time here. Have leveled many 80s.

I think new content will eventually come to this game. Dont think creating a 2667 post about it is going to speed the process up any. I figure most of you people complaining play the game differently from me but feel the same way I do about it or the passionate pleas for new content would not be here.

I would continue to urge patience on the matter. Nothing as good as this game will simply fall away. Find new ways to play the game. Create new characters. Play some PvP or WvW in the meantime. Maybe even indulge in some RP.

The alternative is to go somewhere else and come back later which Im sure a few will do. But you will hate it. The other stuff out there looks way worse than this game. You will hate your characters clunky look and animations. I know I did which was something I did not expect. I have gotten so spoiled by the sheer beauty of this game that I simply cannot play another game not up to these standards.

I hope you will all stay but understand it if you go. To each their own I suppose. I do think that should you venture out to do something different that you will be more disappointed by what you find than you are here with the state of this game. But thats ok…. you can come back lol.

Peace.

out of curiosity, when did you start playing actively?

Sturmruger.3920:

I never played GW1. Maybe thats my problem because I still love this game. I would rather play this game than anything else out there and I have tried just about all of them including QueueAge. I simply refuse to play a game that is sub par visually to this one. I WvW and have only run 1 dungeon in my time here. Have leveled many 80s.

I think new content will eventually come to this game. Dont think creating a 2667 post about it is going to speed the process up any. I figure most of you people complaining play the game differently from me but feel the same way I do about it or the passionate pleas for new content would not be here.

I would continue to urge patience on the matter. Nothing as good as this game will simply fall away. Find new ways to play the game. Create new characters. Play some PvP or WvW in the meantime. Maybe even indulge in some RP.

The alternative is to go somewhere else and come back later which Im sure a few will do. But you will hate it. The other stuff out there looks way worse than this game. You will hate your characters clunky look and animations. I know I did which was something I did not expect. I have gotten so spoiled by the sheer beauty of this game that I simply cannot play another game not up to these standards.

I hope you will all stay but understand it if you go. To each their own I suppose. I do think that should you venture out to do something different that you will be more disappointed by what you find than you are here with the state of this game. But thats ok…. you can come back lol.

Peace.

People will continue to complain until Anet announces their plans for new content and even beyond that. This entire thread was started because there is an underlying assumption that Anet will leave the rest of Tyria unexplored or untouched. They think that it will be the year 2020 before we meet Palawa Joko again. Although to be fair, it was 7 years before WOW players got to tussle with Arthas in Wrath of the Lich King, so there is some precedent for stories to come out much later than a game releases. The reality is, no one really knows what Anet’s timetables are for the near future outside of the living story and it’s killing them. People deal with this stress and disappointment in different ways. This thread is one of them.

Compared to GW1 GW2 is a bad joke. At the first anniversary the first expansion with major content, a new continent, 2 new classes, more pvp modes and a kittenload of new skills came out. And 1 Year later the next expansion came out.
In GW2 we have the same kitten, after 2 years with only 2 small new areas, no new classes, no real overworked pvp, barely new skills and a dumbed down new character experience.
After 2 years we took several steps behind the release of GW2. And many people already spend enough money into the gemshop for at least 2 expansions. But the only thing they get are some crippling so called “featuere patches” , some boring shop skins and a much worse server stability. So actually people are paying to get scammed.

pessimist.7294:

Compared to GW1 GW2 is a bad joke. At the first anniversary the first expansion with major content, a new continent, 2 new classes, more pvp modes and a kittenload of new skills came out. And 1 Year later the next expansion came out.
In GW2 we have the same kitten, after 2 years with only 2 small new areas, no new classes, no real overworked pvp, barely new skills and a dumbed down new character experience.
After 2 years we took several steps behind the release of GW2. And many people already spend enough money into the gemshop for at least 2 expansions. But the only thing they get are some crippling so called “featuere patches” , some boring shop skins and a much worse server stability. So actually people are paying to get scammed.

Of all the things you’ve said, only thing I’d challenge you on is server stability. The difference between a true MMO and what was essentially a lobby game are myriad. Having 150 people on the screen at one time casting and moving while casting is a completely different set of issues than having 8 guys in your party, or even 12. Or even 24.

Because graphics are better, and because more people are on your screen, you can’t really compare the two games.

It’s like saying my bicycle gets much better gas mileage than my car. Well yeah. Different situation altogether.

Devata.6589:

“It was a CORPG that positioned itself in the MMO market at a specific time when there weren’t many F2P games.” First of all, back then there where many F2P games. But then again I don’t see how that is relevant as GW1 was B2P not F2P.

Yes it was not P2P but let me tell you something about that ‘time’. GW2 was released after WoW. Since WoW there have been no mmo’s that where successful with P2P. WoW was the last one to be really successful with it. There are some new mmo’s that use it but we still have to see if they will get successful.

But to come back on your “there weren’t many F2P games”. You of course prefer to the idea that GW1 was pretty unique with there B2P model. And thats true, but that hasn’t changed a bit. They would still be pretty unique with the B2P model today. However they act as if they are unique but with the current model thats more F2P then B2P they are not unique. So no, in that way times did not change to much.

“How many other MMOs can we look to today that use that model successfully?” Just as many other MMO’s as where successfull with that model back when GW1 was released. Now of course if you think it would not work we can simply look at the numbers.
Here are some numbers: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/NcSoft-earnings-1Q-14/page/3#post4029793
And here a small comparison to GW1 https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/NcSoft-earnings-1Q-14/page/3#post4029793

If that is anything to go on GW2 with a B2P model would have earned more money by now! So yes with the information we have we can say the B2P model would work great also today.

“operating costs for GW2 far exceed that of GW1” So does the number of players. It’s just a game on a bigger scale. So irrelevant.

“companies are simply greedier than they were 10 years ago and don’t have the guts to run with that model.” Well maybe and likely and I think this is the only think that has truth to it in your story, but thats not a good argument to not ask for something that is better.

You see, if people don’t buy cash-shop crap but are willing to buy the game an real expansions (not talking about DLC crap) then companies will get afraid of other models and come to like the B2P model.

“All I can say is if you can pitch that to any MMO company as a business model today and get that to work, you might just have the next big thing on your hands.”

I guess that is what I am sort of doing here.

I think you should read this http://articles.latimes.com/2004/may/14/business/fi-game14

All of the interviews and articles around the time Guild Wars 1 launched paint a very clear picture that the norm and expectation for MMOs was a subscription model. The landscape and expectations for payment models was changing just as GW1 was launching. I still feel that my assessment of Anet’s business strategy is accurate in that it was one that involved good timing to make the most of their B2P model. In interviews and reviews of the Guild Wars 1 launch, it was being compared to any and all offerings for MMOGs on the market because of its unique payment model and method of content delivery.

Player expectations have changed, Business expectations have changed, the market has changed, everything is different. You can see in the article from 2004 that I linked that companies were already poised to get in on the microtransaction model because, eerily enough, of the player generated RMT of items and goods in MMOs. Indeed, Anet was not ignored by the industry at large as "Many in the industry will be watching “Guild Wars,” which is the first title from Strain’s Seattle-based ArenaNet." And after all was said and done, the current payment model used by Guild Wars 2 is the result of history.

phys.7689:

Sturmruger.3920:

I never played GW1. Maybe thats my problem because I still love this game. I would rather play this game than anything else out there and I have tried just about all of them including QueueAge. I simply refuse to play a game that is sub par visually to this one. I WvW and have only run 1 dungeon in my time here. Have leveled many 80s.

I think new content will eventually come to this game. Dont think creating a 2667 post about it is going to speed the process up any. I figure most of you people complaining play the game differently from me but feel the same way I do about it or the passionate pleas for new content would not be here.

I would continue to urge patience on the matter. Nothing as good as this game will simply fall away. Find new ways to play the game. Create new characters. Play some PvP or WvW in the meantime. Maybe even indulge in some RP.

The alternative is to go somewhere else and come back later which Im sure a few will do. But you will hate it. The other stuff out there looks way worse than this game. You will hate your characters clunky look and animations. I know I did which was something I did not expect. I have gotten so spoiled by the sheer beauty of this game that I simply cannot play another game not up to these standards.

I hope you will all stay but understand it if you go. To each their own I suppose. I do think that should you venture out to do something different that you will be more disappointed by what you find than you are here with the state of this game. But thats ok…. you can come back lol.

Peace.

out of curiosity, when did you start playing actively?

I got the game for Christmas the year it was released. However I could not play the game until the following January due to an insufficient computer. Been playing ever since.

Vayne.8563:

pessimist.7294:

Compared to GW1 GW2 is a bad joke. At the first anniversary the first expansion with major content, a new continent, 2 new classes, more pvp modes and a kittenload of new skills came out. And 1 Year later the next expansion came out.
In GW2 we have the same kitten, after 2 years with only 2 small new areas, no new classes, no real overworked pvp, barely new skills and a dumbed down new character experience.
After 2 years we took several steps behind the release of GW2. And many people already spend enough money into the gemshop for at least 2 expansions. But the only thing they get are some crippling so called “featuere patches” , some boring shop skins and a much worse server stability. So actually people are paying to get scammed.

Of all the things you’ve said, only thing I’d challenge you on is server stability. The difference between a true MMO and what was essentially a lobby game are myriad. Having 150 people on the screen at one time casting and moving while casting is a completely different set of issues than having 8 guys in your party, or even 12. Or even 24.

Because graphics are better, and because more people are on your screen, you can’t really compare the two games.

It’s like saying my bicycle gets much better gas mileage than my car. Well yeah. Different situation altogether.

I meant the server stability since the patch, since the feature patch I and many others have far more disconnects, every dungeon run we have now at least 1 guy who gets kicked out by the server.

nightwulf.1986:

Devata.6589:

“It was a CORPG that positioned itself in the MMO market at a specific time when there weren’t many F2P games.” First of all, back then there where many F2P games. But then again I don’t see how that is relevant as GW1 was B2P not F2P.

Yes it was not P2P but let me tell you something about that ‘time’. GW2 was released after WoW. Since WoW there have been no mmo’s that where successful with P2P. WoW was the last one to be really successful with it. There are some new mmo’s that use it but we still have to see if they will get successful.

But to come back on your “there weren’t many F2P games”. You of course prefer to the idea that GW1 was pretty unique with there B2P model. And thats true, but that hasn’t changed a bit. They would still be pretty unique with the B2P model today. However they act as if they are unique but with the current model thats more F2P then B2P they are not unique. So no, in that way times did not change to much.

“How many other MMOs can we look to today that use that model successfully?” Just as many other MMO’s as where successfull with that model back when GW1 was released. Now of course if you think it would not work we can simply look at the numbers.
Here are some numbers: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/NcSoft-earnings-1Q-14/page/3#post4029793
And here a small comparison to GW1 https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/NcSoft-earnings-1Q-14/page/3#post4029793

If that is anything to go on GW2 with a B2P model would have earned more money by now! So yes with the information we have we can say the B2P model would work great also today.

“operating costs for GW2 far exceed that of GW1” So does the number of players. It’s just a game on a bigger scale. So irrelevant.

“companies are simply greedier than they were 10 years ago and don’t have the guts to run with that model.” Well maybe and likely and I think this is the only think that has truth to it in your story, but thats not a good argument to not ask for something that is better.

You see, if people don’t buy cash-shop crap but are willing to buy the game an real expansions (not talking about DLC crap) then companies will get afraid of other models and come to like the B2P model.

“All I can say is if you can pitch that to any MMO company as a business model today and get that to work, you might just have the next big thing on your hands.”

I guess that is what I am sort of doing here.

I think you should read this http://articles.latimes.com/2004/may/14/business/fi-game14

All of the interviews and articles around the time Guild Wars 1 launched paint a very clear picture that the norm and expectation for MMOs was a subscription model. The landscape and expectations for payment models was changing just as GW1 was launching. I still feel that my assessment of Anet’s business strategy is accurate in that it was one that involved good timing to make the most of their B2P model. In interviews and reviews of the Guild Wars 1 launch, it was being compared to any and all offerings for MMOGs on the market because of its unique payment model and method of content delivery.

Player expectations have changed, Business expectations have changed, the market has changed, everything is different. You can see in the article from 2004 that I linked that companies were already poised to get in on the microtransaction model because, eerily enough, of the player generated RMT of items and goods in MMOs. Indeed, Anet was not ignored by the industry at large as "Many in the industry will be watching “Guild Wars,” which is the first title from Strain’s Seattle-based ArenaNet." And after all was said and done, the current payment model used by Guild Wars 2 is the result of history.

I am really not sure what you are trying to say here. Back when P2P was the standard (sort of) GW did not go with the P2P but with B2P. Now that F2P is the standard GW2 should not be able to go with B2P but with a more F2P model just like the rest?

Devata.6589:

I am really not sure what you are trying to say here. Back when P2P was the standard (sort of) GW did not go with the P2P but with B2P. Not that F2P is the standard GW2 should not be able to go with B2P but with a more F2P model just like the rest?

I wanted to try and offer supporting evidence of the why Guild Wars 1 was as successful as it was using a B2P model in comparison to the P2P options of its era. F2P options were received differently at the time by the MMO audience at large and held a different market share than it does now. I think I hear you saying that GW2 would have made more money today if they went with an identical payment model to when GW1 launched. I just don’t know. I think GW2 using the GW1 B2P model wouldn’t be the same game we’re looking at right now and at that point, any number of things could influence it’s success or failure as a result.

Having said that, I think we’re moving further away from the subject of the thread with this particular argument. I’m pretty sure everyone just wants to know two things. Will Anet fulfill its goal to deliver expansion level content through the living story and if not, when will it deliver expansion level content? The answer only time will tell. They keep referring to big projects in the background but have never confirmed or denied whether or not anything they’ve released thus far is one of those big projects.

Thuggernaut.1250:

GW1 was a successful experiment that should have been continued, GW2 was a promising experiment at first that had great potential, but failed and ended up like every other generic mmo.

(1) GW1 combat played out much more tactically because of the dual-profession balancing act and the wide variety of skills to mix and match. GW1 put the emphasis on careful skill choice and thoughtful building. GW2 is a button-mashing, cooldown spamming, dodge-rolling, bump-and-grind that plays about as deep as a pizza pan.

(2) Anet wasn’t afraid of split balancing in GW1. fun, unbalanced skills for pve and more carefully refined skills for pvp. the “one size fits all” balancing philosophy of GW2 ends up butchering both pvp and pve and forces everyone into meta builds.

(3) GW1 eliminated the concept of “gear” by capping stats and item upgrades and strictly defining the roles of each profession. GW2’s poorly delineated profession roles allow every class to have a good heal and support role, which forces everyone into a zerker gear set to compete on DPS. in GW2, DPS is king, bottom line. they eliminated the “trinity” of mmos, and replaced it with a unity: all DPS, all the time.

(4) I don’t think I even need to mention how superior the writing and content in GW1 was compared to GW2. it simply goes without saying. in order to make another “me too” MMO, they had to throw in additional races, and instead of making one race with one solid, compelling story (GW1), they made five races with mediocre, forgettable stories.

(5) Cash shop business model. ’Nuff said. Quantity over quality (of cash shop items), and as long as that brings in the dough, real content (continents, professions, storylines) can go to hell. China is the perfect market for this type of business, and we can see that philosophy infecting the original (American/European) version of the game. NCsoft is just following the money here, and Anet pretty much has to oblige.

GW1 stands tall as a memorable game that did something different from the stagnant mmo market and succeeded. GW2 might make more money, but it will not be remembered because it succumbed to the same dumbed-down trends as every other modern mmo.

/threadwin
So much.

Harper.4173:

A living breathing world? It doesn’t work. It wasn’t even an experiment – they had NO idea what they were doing.

Orr is perpetually stuck. So are many other areas. Unless you go all-in 100% you’re not going to do it. And even if you do the fact that players can’t go back to experience past events is a deal breaker for people who haven’t been with the game at launch.

How is it that part of the world can change but other parts can’t? It was a mess. The whole concept is a mess and will remain one.

People didn’t like it because :

1) It forces you to play on Anet’s terms – which is problematic.
2) It doesn’t add to the game.

Yes – common sense is right – yes taking away content is extremely easy to spot out as a bad idea if you’re making a game. That’s not how you improve the situation when your player base has already asked for more content over and over again this being one of the most common complaints that we see on the forums.

Old content gets abandoned? Sure great – let’s take it out of the game for good.

Old content gets abandoned only if :

1)There are no new players coming in.
2)There are no decent rewards tied to it.

But even so – removing it makes no sense. Hell – why not remove all the old dungeons by now? after all they’re pretty old content.

LA is one thing – the dungeons I mentioned are another thing.

One type of content was clearly temporary and story related – which I can understand – but the dungeons – why’d they have to take those out of the game? What was the logic?

I understand you’re trying to defend Anet- I did too for a good while – but like I said – I’d rather they’d made the game right the first time.

And while these “experiments” can be debated over – there are other blatant quality of life things that should have come with the game and didn’t.

I still want your opinion on some things because I feel you’re only addressing some points and just “ignoring” others. So please – your thoughts on :

-Lack of trait templates.
-Lack of LFG tool at launch.
-Lack of trait respect on the go at launch.
-Addition of ascended gear.
-Fractal reset and the subsequent “fractal leaderboards”.
-New legendary weapons and new legendary types coming in 2013

Please address these in any order you see fit. These aren’t just fluff – they’re huge mistakes by a company that should know better.

They’re huge omissions or intentional deception of the player base. Were you not here when these things happened?

See, this post is straight to the point.
However your mistake was believing you can hold a genuine argument of facts with vayne. You ought knowing better~

Anyhow, +1 big juicy upvote and a big thumbs up to these two and many other posters (in particular to phys, Tachenon, Vergil, Vix, and Scipio) for many a great insight I had the fun of reading.

I’d also like to add that Anet have a running history of removing content – in GW they removed TA (4v4 pvp) and HB (single player 4v4v with heroes), replacing them with a sealed deck 4v4 pvp mode called Codex Arena. And we all know how that one ended.

So in a way, the precedent for removing content was made years ago.

And this is an update to how the game is during its latest year.
http://www.teamquitter.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=35325

the link doesnt seem to work from here, wierd.
anyway, this thread on team quitter: Update 9/26/2014 – kitten da Syncerz

scerevisiae.1972:

All I hope is that the whole living story approach is discarded entirely. It’s not a story, nor it is good quality content. It’s just a vehicle for driving gem sales and I hate it.

I second that!

ProtoGunner.4953:

scerevisiae.1972:

All I hope is that the whole living story approach is discarded entirely. It’s not a story, nor it is good quality content. It’s just a vehicle for driving gem sales and I hate it.

I second that!

You really think they would abandon this lucrative gemsale machine just because the players are not happy with it? We are only at season 2, expect at least 10 seasons more.

pessimist.7294:

ProtoGunner.4953:

scerevisiae.1972:

All I hope is that the whole living story approach is discarded entirely. It’s not a story, nor it is good quality content. It’s just a vehicle for driving gem sales and I hate it.

I second that!

You really think they would abandon this lucrative gemsale machine just because SOME players are not happy with it? We are only at season 2, expect at least 10 seasons more.

FTFY. There are people who like it and people who don’t. There certainly seems to be plenty of speculation by players that makes me think at least a reasonable percentage of people do like it.

The gemstore is a good idea, and since you can also pay with IG money, I’m not against it at all. The only thing I’m against is that every but one armors released during these two years came in the gemstore. Some skins have their place their, while other don’t. They should go half way in between, but not put everything in the gemstore…

VergilDeZaniah.3295:

The gemstore is a good idea, and since you can also pay with IG money, I’m not against it at all. The only thing I’m against is that every but one armors released during these two years came in the gemstore. Some skins have their place their, while other don’t. They should go half way in between, but not put everything in the gemstore…

The fact that you can buy it with in game gold means that the only way to earn them in game is by grinding gold. What I would not see as a fun way of playing that game. And the fact that all or most or best looking things are added in the cash-shop is what you get when you focus your income on a cash-shop. When you place to many in the world so you can earn them directly in game by working for them there would not be enough reason to buy them from the cash-shop.

So you first say you like it and then explain why it’s bad. Think about it.. maybe you do not like it… You might like the idea on paper but then if you pay attention and see what it does to the game you do not like it.

Devata.6589:

VergilDeZaniah.3295:

The gemstore is a good idea, and since you can also pay with IG money, I’m not against it at all. The only thing I’m against is that every but one armors released during these two years came in the gemstore. Some skins have their place their, while other don’t. They should go half way in between, but not put everything in the gemstore…

The fact that you can buy it with in game gold means that the only way to earn them in game is by grinding gold. What I would not see as a fun way of playing that game. And the fact that all or most or best looking things are added in the cash-shop is what you get when you focus your income on a cash-shop. When you place to many in the world so you can earn them directly in game by working for them there would not be enough reason to buy them from the cash-shop.

So you first say you like it and then explain why it’s bad. Think about it.. maybe you do not like it… You might like the idea on paper but then if you pay attention and see what it does to the game you do not like it.

At first I didn’t like the idea at all. But in the end, I end up tolerating it. However I do agree it is far too focused on by the devs. I’m sure they will not stop spending time putting efforts and ressources in the store. Remember when they said it would be all about buying some buffs and some goodies like Chef costume and Pirate costume? That was a good idea. But now it’s just “Give that character an armor and a weapo nand let’s add them to the cash shop!”, that’s not a good idea.

A bit (like in GW1) = okay, too much (as it is now) = not okay.

ANet deals in absolutes: either it’s IG (one not so beautiful armor) or in GS (more beautiful skins), either they remain silent or they announce things that do not make it. They really should learn to sit in between opposite sides.

They prefer to spend more time making sweeping overhauls without proper communication and testing to existing systems that nobody had a problem with.

VergilDeZaniah.3295:

The gemstore is a good idea, and since you can also pay with IG money, I’m not against it at all. The only thing I’m against is that every but one armors released during these two years came in the gemstore. Some skins have their place their, while other don’t. They should go half way in between, but not put everything in the gemstore…

Actually they release more armor than 1 set through ingame. I’ve counted the weapons & armors released through gemstore/ingame not long ago
here are the numbers

On weapons:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Why-GW2-just-isn-t-working/page/10#post4447295

On armors:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Why-GW2-just-isn-t-working/page/9#post4442387

Scipio.3204:

VergilDeZaniah.3295:

The gemstore is a good idea, and since you can also pay with IG money, I’m not against it at all. The only thing I’m against is that every but one armors released during these two years came in the gemstore. Some skins have their place their, while other don’t. They should go half way in between, but not put everything in the gemstore…

Actually they release more armor than 1 set through ingame. I’ve counted the weapons & armors released through gemstore/ingame not long ago
here are the numbers

On weapons:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Why-GW2-just-isn-t-working/page/10#post4447295

On armors:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Why-GW2-just-isn-t-working/page/9#post4442387

Thanks. When I said one armor I was talking about something that didn’t need AP grinding, and complete sets, not just a piece of armor or something. As I do count outfits as armors (even though I despise them), that’s still 3 IG sets vs 14 GS sets…

Vayne.8563:

8 years ago, Anet provided more content to a lobby game. So noted.

I’m not sure what you’re calling a “lobby game”. The original Guild Wars was a fully-fleshed MMO. Granted it had three separate storylines that didn’t really intermingle (although they tried to force this somewhat with the advent of heroes in Nighfall).

At any rate, here’s my list of things they lost with the release of GW2:

• leveling and story mode are solo efforts apart from zergfest random events.
• skill diversity is significantly diminished because they abandoned the hybridization system and made half your skill bar weapon-dependent, meaning you’re forced to build around your weapons rather than your preferred playstyle.
• by extension of my second point, the number of viable builds has been diminished to near-zero by comparison.
• until you encounter a veteran/champion unit, you don’t even have to use the reactive combat mechanics that were added in an effort to break away from the “tank ’n spank” style of play. And even then, most of them just hit hard enough to force you to use a healing skill every so often.
• story mode involves too much “go here, talk to this guy” and not enough “we’re in trouble, get your weapon ready and start blasting things”. Yes, the lore is interesting, but I prefer aggressive negotiations.
• endgame PvE content was relegated to “farm this 3 times a day for a month to get your BiS gear, then go farm gold to get your weapons” within months.
• capturing skills was infinitely more fun than “go stand here to get a skill point, go 11111111 this guy for 30 seconds to get a skill point, go help this guy for a skill point”.
• DERVISHES WERE BLOODY AMAZING. WTB my effing Dervish. And Ritualists. They were fun too. Bring back the expac profs…please…
• profession system kinda sucks in the sequel…they legitimately removed one of the six original classes because its role was too heavily defined as support (Monk), and it didn’t have much application outside that apart from a handful of viable smite builds. So they said “let’s give them a pseudo-paladin with half the monk skills we want to use but have no place for”.
• living story is pretty stagnant. You should have developed one storyline to its conclusion like you did with Prophecies before moving on to other branches.

Edit: removing content like they did was probably the biggest mistake they’ve made so far. If you’re that uncertain as to what direction you’re taking this amalgamation of good intentions and poor execution, then you should just stick to releasing more expansions for the original.

MassIneffective.2364:

Vayne.8563:

8 years ago, Anet provided more content to a lobby game. So noted.

I’m not sure what you’re calling a “lobby game”. The original Guild Wars was a fully-fleshed MMO. Granted it had three separate storylines that didn’t really intermingle (although they tried to force this somewhat with the advent of heroes in Nighfall).

I really hate to defend Vayne here but he is correct. Guild Wars, by A-Net’s own description, is not a MMORPG but a CoRPG. In order to really be called an MMO you need the Massive part and the biggest party you could have in GW was 12 for DoA. GW limited your party size in every aspect of the game and also you had to leave an instance and come back to it in order to respawn enimies

Galphar.3901:

In order to really be called an MMO you need the Massive part

waves at you from Spamadan district 99

In all honesty, I can see what you mean by that. It never felt disconnected to me, though. Party size was kind of annoying at various points in the game, but it never really served to distract from the immersive elements of gameplay that GW2 seems to lack more often than I’d like. The two ends of the spectrum are hardcapped party sizes like in the original and the 80-man zergfests that world bosses have become. They need to balance it somehow. Right now, GW2 has both extremes but doesn’t really apply them meaningfully or attempt to incorporate them into a single, universal party system that can span both dungeons and large-scale open world content.

Mini-rant: Dungeons also need to be more relevant to the story, akin to the missions in the original, IMO. The paths should be a choice that determines how your presence affects the outcome of an important conflict, rather than “you can choose one of three NPC guilds that determine what transmog set you can farm and what NPCs show up in your personal story”. I’m getting away from myself here…story mode was a big letdown, but meh. It shouldn’t have been a purely solo gameplay element, and I’ll leave it at that.

GW1 never felt disjointed or disconnected because of the instancing and party system. It was immersive enough that those elements didn’t degrade the experience. GW2 seems disjointed and disconnected because instances are either idiotically simple story missions or ridiculously boring content that’s been there since release (or soon after in the case of fractals) and hasn’t evolved in any way since then. Dynamic events are sometimes interesting, and progressive events are a nice touch, but they’re not challenging in any way unless you’re the only person in the zone (which is never the case, they’re always zergfests).

scerevisiae.1972:

joshc.3129:

The double professions and large amount of skills in GW1 is what also kept the game really unbalanced and the double professions and the large number of skills that came with it is also what made a lot players shy away from the game because it was to overwhelming for them (hints* why Anet dumb down GW2).

GW1 was more balanced than GW2 for the simple fact that for any given build, there was enough depth in the game to come up with a build that countered it. As for dumbing down, well I think most people would say they went way too far in the other direction.

For GW2, the same applies. In my opinion GW2 is more balance than GW1 skills. There were over 70+ skills that people did not use because they were poor or were just not favorable to use when compared to other skills. Nearly all of the skills in GW2, have uses that make them worthwhile to put on your utility bar depending on your playstyle. Those that aren’t worthwhile are corrected to resolve their deficiency bringing them more into balance and are not forgotten or ignored like many skills in GW1.

MassIneffective.2364:

Galphar.3901:

In order to really be called an MMO you need the Massive part

waves at you from Spamadan district 99

In all honesty, I can see where you’re coming from. It never felt disconnected to me, though. Party size was kind of annoying at various points in the game, but it never really served to distract from the immersive elements of gameplay that GW2 seems to lack more often than I’d like. The two ends of the spectrum are hardcapped party sizes like in the original and the 80-man zergfests that world bosses have become. They need to balance it somehow. Right now, GW2 has both extremes but doesn’t really apply them meaningfully or attempt to incorporate them into a single, universal party system that can span both dungeons and large-scale open world content.

Mini-rant: Dungeons also need to be more relevant to the story, akin to the missions in the original, IMO. The paths should be a choice that determines how your presence affects the outcome of an important conflict, rather than “you can choose one of three NPC guilds that determine what transmog set you can farm and what NPCs show up in your personal story”. I’m getting away from myself here…story mode was a big letdown, but meh. It shouldn’t have been a purely solo gameplay element, and I’ll leave it at that.

GW1 never felt disjointed or disconnected because of the instancing and party system. It was immersive enough that those elements didn’t degrade the experience. GW2 seems disjointed and disconnected because instances are either idiotically simple story missions or ridiculously boring content that’s been there since release (or soon after in the case of fractals) and hasn’t evolved in any way since then. Dynamic events are sometimes interesting, and progressive events are a nice touch, but they’re not challenging in any way unless you’re the only person in the zone (which is never the case, they’re always zergfests).

I don’t think anyone is really knocking GW1 for its instanced design. I think they were just trying to point out that the party limitations in GW1 were a design choice that had different considerations than say designing an event that allows for 150 people to participate. What others were trying to say that GW1, being a CORPG with instances, meant that designing content for it was largely less complex because of the limited ways in which players were allowed to interact with the content. This is not to excuse GW2 for whatever shortcomings it has in content design but to put into perspective that GW1 content was not equal in scope to GW2.

I mentioned earlier that I agree that GW1 had a stronger sense of narrative with how it in essence barred you from progressing without experiencing the story. You had to work to avoid the narrative there. GW2 attempted to move away from that structure for a number of reasons. There were limitations to that game structure so they opted to move towards an open world and to allow freedom. And as we all know, freedom can mean a lot of things and it also can mean the freedom to miss out on important things which is what we have now with regard to narrative.

Esmee.1067:

snip

I would probably be more excited if they just started off with a few classes and added more every few months. Same as for dungeons. At least then it would feel like the game is evolving and they would add new stuff on a regular basis. Instead they went with the living story route.

MassIneffective.2364:

Galphar.3901:

In order to really be called an MMO you need the Massive part

waves at you from Spamadan district 99

In all honesty, I can see where you’re coming from. It never felt disconnected to me, though. Party size was kind of annoying at various points in the game, but it never really served to distract from the immersive elements of gameplay that GW2 seems to lack more often than I’d like. The two ends of the spectrum are hardcapped party sizes like in the original and the 80-man zergfests that world bosses have become. They need to balance it somehow. Right now, GW2 has both extremes but doesn’t really apply them meaningfully or attempt to incorporate them into a single, universal party system that can span both dungeons and large-scale open world content.

Mini-rant: Dungeons also need to be more relevant to the story, akin to the missions in the original, IMO. The paths should be a choice that determines how your presence affects the outcome of an important conflict, rather than “you can choose one of three NPC guilds that determine what transmog set you can farm and what NPCs show up in your personal story”. I’m getting away from myself here…story mode was a big letdown, but meh. It shouldn’t have been a purely solo gameplay element, and I’ll leave it at that.

GW1 never felt disjointed or disconnected because of the instancing and party system. It was immersive enough that those elements didn’t degrade the experience. GW2 seems disjointed and disconnected because instances are either idiotically simple story missions or ridiculously boring content that’s been there since release (or soon after in the case of fractals) and hasn’t evolved in any way since then. Dynamic events are sometimes interesting, and progressive events are a nice touch, but they’re not challenging in any way unless you’re the only person in the zone (which is never the case, they’re always zergfests).

Anet has said quite clearly that Guild Wars 1 was not an MMORPG, because even if you wanted to count Spamadan, you couldn’t actually play there, which is why it was a lobby. You couldn’t fight. You couldn’t use skills.

You got your party together to play…in what some would call a lobby. Sure you could sell there, or even participate in Mad King Says.

But if Anet tells us it’s not an MMO, why should we believe you?

MMOs are about a persistent world. It’s a world where things happen even if a player isn’t there. Guild Wars 1 didn’t have a persistent world, the entire game was instanced, except for cities which were lobbies.

In other words, once you got your party together to play, and entered the game world itself, you had zero chance of running into anyone who wasn’t already in your party.

Vayne.8563:

Anet has said quite clearly that Guild Wars 1 was not an MMORPG, because even if you wanted to count Spamadan, you couldn’t actually play there, which is why it was a lobby. You couldn’t fight. You couldn’t use skills.

You got your party together to play…in what some would call a lobby. Sure you could sell there, or even participate in Mad King Says.

But if Anet tells us it’s not an MMO, why should we believe you?

MMOs are about a persistent world. It’s a world where things happen even if a player isn’t there. Guild Wars 1 didn’t have a persistent world, the entire game was instanced, except for cities which were lobbies.

In other words, once you got your party together to play, and entered the game world itself, you had zero chance of running into anyone who wasn’t already in your party.

…I think you missed the part where I agreed with the assertion that GW1 was not technically a MMO in my second post. Regardless of what it was, I could avoid other players when I wanted to, and find as many players as I could fit on my friends list when I wanted to…just like in any MMO. Some of the PvE endgame wasn’t soloable even with heroes, which forced you into group play. I had no problem with that, because the challenge was welcome.

Anywho, regardless of how you classify GW1, I sometimes forgot it wasn’t a true MMO. I think that’s an accomplishment on ANet’s part.

VergilDeZaniah.3295:

Thanks. When I said one armor I was talking about something that didn’t need AP grinding, and complete sets, not just a piece of armor or something. As I do count outfits as armors (even though I despise them), that’s still 3 IG sets vs 14 GS sets…

12 ingame sets, actually: Radiant, Hellfire, Illustrious (ascended) and Glorious all have a version for each armor weight.

Hyper Cutter.9376:

VergilDeZaniah.3295:

Thanks. When I said one armor I was talking about something that didn’t need AP grinding, and complete sets, not just a piece of armor or something. As I do count outfits as armors (even though I despise them), that’s still 3 IG sets vs 14 GS sets…

12 ingame sets, actually: Radiant, Hellfire, Illustrious (ascended) and Glorious all have a version for each armor weight.

More or less irrelevant since only one armor weight applies to each character.

Doggie.3184:

I haven’t even logged on in weeks now when I used to always play. There’s honestly nothing left to do anymore at this point. I could run around wvw or something; repeating the same thing I been doing 1000 more times but I’ve used every combat style and build possible at this point, even the broken ones, and feel bored of the same old mechanics. Still wondering when the whole “adding new weapons to every class” and the eventual “all weapons for all classes” thing is going to happen.

Anet never talks about future plans due to company policy, which is unfortunate, but at the same time it makes me feel like there isn’t really any in development.

Therein lies the problem. GW1’s skill system allowed for an infinite degree of expansion since abilities were tied to attributes (some skills required melee/dagger/bow/other specific weapon, but that was a comparatively small number to the current state of GW2). Since 80% of your abilities are currently tied to your weapon choice, expansion is severely limited to what weapons they choose to add…which is a very, VERY small number by comparison when you consider that there are only so many weapon types you can add before they start to overlap.

MassIneffective.2364:

Doggie.3184:

I haven’t even logged on in weeks now when I used to always play. There’s honestly nothing left to do anymore at this point. I could run around wvw or something; repeating the same thing I been doing 1000 more times but I’ve used every combat style and build possible at this point, even the broken ones, and feel bored of the same old mechanics. Still wondering when the whole “adding new weapons to every class” and the eventual “all weapons for all classes” thing is going to happen.

Anet never talks about future plans due to company policy, which is unfortunate, but at the same time it makes me feel like there isn’t really any in development.

Therein lies the problem. GW1’s skill system allowed for an infinite degree of expansion since abilities were tied to attributes (some skills required melee/dagger/bow/other specific weapon, but that was a comparatively small number to the current state of GW2). Since 80% of your abilities are currently tied to your weapon choice, expansion is severely limited to what weapons they choose to add…which is a very, VERY small number by comparison when you consider that there are only so many weapon types you can add before they start to overlap.

Absolutely intentional on the part of the devs. Do you know why Guild Wars 1 remained a niche game, good as it was, for pretty much it’s entire existence?

Because it required people to think to play it. Those who are more hard core about how they play games think in terms of going to a site and getting builds. But I’m sure a huge percentage of players tried Guild Wars 1 and walked away because they couldn’t figure out what to do with builds at all. They didn’t know or understand how to play the game.

Guild Wars 1 suited people like me, who love to think and play with skill sets and try to figure out how to build a better mouse trap, but I can assure you, I’m not any kind of majority. For players like me, the game worked. It even worked for my friends who were more casual, because I could always give them the builds I worked out.

But for a lot of people, that game was completely overwhelming. Hell there were people who played and were overwhelmed by Guild Wars 2, so just imagine how much magnified that problem was in Guild Wars 1?

The idea of tying skills to weapons, combined with forcing everyone to take a healing skill, means everyone basically has at least a usable build. That’s why the open world is so easy. To not chase people off who just want to run around and kill stuff and feel like they’re doing something relatively challenging. And for some people, parts of the open world are challenging.

Vayne.8563:

Absolutely intentional on the part of the devs. Do you know why Guild Wars 1 remained a niche game, good as it was, for pretty much it’s entire existence?

Because it required people to think to play it. Those who are more hard core about how they play games think in terms of going to a site and getting builds. But I’m sure a huge percentage of players tried Guild Wars 1 and walked away because they couldn’t figure out what to do with builds at all. They didn’t know or understand how to play the game.

Guild Wars 1 suited people like me, who love to think and play with skill sets and try to figure out how to build a better mouse trap, but I can assure you, I’m not any kind of majority. For players like me, the game worked. It even worked for my friends who were more casual, because I could always give them the builds I worked out.

But for a lot of people, that game was completely overwhelming. Hell there were people who played and were overwhelmed by Guild Wars 2, so just imagine how much magnified that problem was in Guild Wars 1?

The idea of tying skills to weapons, combined with forcing everyone to take a healing skill, means everyone basically has at least a usable build. That’s why the open world is so easy. To not chase people off who just want to run around and kill stuff and feel like they’re doing something relatively challenging. And for some people, parts of the open world are challenging.

I’m one of those players as well. Finding synergy in weird places was one of the best parts of that game. While I agree that reverting fully to the old skill system won’t work with GW2, I feel that it should contain niche gameplay elements that people like us can still delve into the way we did in GW1. I just haven’t seen anything that really caters to the players like us that aren’t satisfied by meta builds and catch-all content.

Do you think ANet would ever compromise by giving us some high-end PvE endgame with the option to build like we did in the original, where you can mix and match weapon skills to create more specialized builds? With some commonsense limitations like requiring a 1h/offhand setup to equip shield or focus abilities and you can’t equip ranged attacks without a ranged weapon.

Vayne.8563:

Because it required people to think to play it.

Nah, it was mostly the strong focus on pvp and being, as a pioneer of esports (see GWWC), way ahead of its time (its peak pvp period is dated quite a few years before streaming and twitch became the norm). But that is all the more reason to love it and give it the credit it rightfully deserves.

Vayne.8563:

They didn’t know or understand how to play the game.

Yet dumbing the game down in terms of build-making apparently wasn’t enough to fix that. (see NPE)
What you don’t understand is there will always be players who won’t know or understand how to play, and bad builds will always be a thing in such games (to varying degrees). But searching for the lowest common denominator to fix that issue instead of implementing proper tutorials and making the game as intuitive and engaging as possible is a fool’s errand, and not something that ensures game longievity. It is actually quite the opposite.

Vayne.8563:

Guild Wars 1 suited people like me, who love to think

Made me chuckle for real. Aren’t we humble!
#locking self into first-person view
#zaithan managerie

Vayne.8563:

The idea of tying skills to weapons, combined with forcing everyone to take a healing skill, means everyone basically has at least a usable build. That’s why the open world is so easy.

I seriously question your ability to think, if you actually believe any of that. And worse, if you believe it is actually still believe dumbing down games is the way to go cuz ‘popularity’ and ‘accessibility’.