Guild Wars 2

Heijincks.9267:

Fernling.1729:

NCsoft stock has significantly dropped since the release of GW2, that tells me that something isn’t doing too well.

NCSoft isn’t only about GW2. About the time when GW2 was released, City of Heroes was shut down and that had some serious backlash.

So you think that CoH’s revenue was a big enough loss to counter the massive amounts of money that GW2 made at release?

If anything CoH was shut down to help revenue, not to hurt it.

But, I agree as a publisher of games, and not the developer, GW2 is just a small part of the entire NCSoft company and as such NCSoft’s ability to be worth less than half of what it was a year and a half ago, may not have anything to do with GW2.

The gaming industry in general is down.

clay.7849:

Jski.6180:

clay.7849:

Heijincks.9267:

clay.7849:

Behellagh.1468:

Gab Superstar.4059:

Commercially it is doing well.

But it had to sacrifice manifesto, the credibility of the developers, and the experience of the players to achieve it.

This is getting old. How did they sacrifice the manifesto?

Have you read it?

Whether they sacrificed the manifesto or not depends on the person. The topic at hand whether or not they did is the grind. Some people might consider getting exotics itself a grind (and a gear treadmill at that), and from the very start even before ascended the manifesto was broken already.

Well, here is my take on the grind thing. I get that you don’t need anything that is “grind-able” and that it doesn’t gate content – so that’s fine. Although, there is a lot of repetition to get items that is built into the game, which is kind of what a grind is.

Really, I could care less about the grind thing.

My take on the manifesto is that this game is nothing like GW1, and they clearly said if you loved GW1 you would love GW2. I think we can safely assume that when they wrote that they meant it. However, what they ended up with has alienated pretty much every GW1 player I know.

Yes YOUR take is this but not every one thinks the same way as you do. Most of the players who loved GW1 DO like GW2 but most player of GW1 often would stop playing GW1 for long bits of time waiting for expansion to add in new content so from the very start the GW1 player base was a non consistent group.

You may be right for a lot of people, but I can safely say that I am right when it comes to competitive PvP players.

Well when was the last time PvP from GW1 was big? When GW1 was out having a big PvP group there where not that many major PvP games out there. Now with GW2 there is a lot of PvP games all for free. You also now have a steaming community “MLG” etc.. would GW1 PvP hold any thing to that?

Aeonblade.8709:

Us video gamers will be a dying breed eventually at this rate! And the reason us mid to late 20s use those words is because we freaking INVENTED them.

This did make laugh, as I’m 42 and I distinctly remember playing Space Invaders in 1978 and 1979, which would make someone in their late twenties (lets say 29 for arguments sake)…erm…not born by 6 years.

And I remember playing Elite on a Spectrum in 1984, making someone who was 29, erm, zero years old and probably still not born. So you mid to late twenty year olds must be very clever….

clay.7849:

My take on the manifesto is that this game is nothing like GW1, and they clearly said if you loved GW1 you would love GW2. I think we can safely assume that when they wrote that they meant it. However, what they ended up with has alienated pretty much every GW1 player I know.

All the GW1 players I know think GW2 is so much better.

Karizee.8076:

clay.7849:

My take on the manifesto is that this game is nothing like GW1, and they clearly said if you loved GW1 you would love GW2. I think we can safely assume that when they wrote that they meant it. However, what they ended up with has alienated pretty much every GW1 player I know.

All the GW1 players I know think GW2 is so much better.

I don’t doubt that. Although, I do doubt that they played competitive PvP.

Jski.6180:

clay.7849:

Jski.6180:

clay.7849:

Heijincks.9267:

clay.7849:

Behellagh.1468:

Gab Superstar.4059:

Commercially it is doing well.

But it had to sacrifice manifesto, the credibility of the developers, and the experience of the players to achieve it.

This is getting old. How did they sacrifice the manifesto?

Have you read it?

Whether they sacrificed the manifesto or not depends on the person. The topic at hand whether or not they did is the grind. Some people might consider getting exotics itself a grind (and a gear treadmill at that), and from the very start even before ascended the manifesto was broken already.

Well, here is my take on the grind thing. I get that you don’t need anything that is “grind-able” and that it doesn’t gate content – so that’s fine. Although, there is a lot of repetition to get items that is built into the game, which is kind of what a grind is.

Really, I could care less about the grind thing.

My take on the manifesto is that this game is nothing like GW1, and they clearly said if you loved GW1 you would love GW2. I think we can safely assume that when they wrote that they meant it. However, what they ended up with has alienated pretty much every GW1 player I know.

Yes YOUR take is this but not every one thinks the same way as you do. Most of the players who loved GW1 DO like GW2 but most player of GW1 often would stop playing GW1 for long bits of time waiting for expansion to add in new content so from the very start the GW1 player base was a non consistent group.

You may be right for a lot of people, but I can safely say that I am right when it comes to competitive PvP players.

Well when was the last time PvP from GW1 was big? When GW1 was out having a big PvP group there where not that many major PvP games out there. Now with GW2 there is a lot of PvP games all for free. You also now have a steaming community “MLG” etc.. would GW1 PvP hold any thing to that?

That is circumventing the argument. I said that the manifesto, as it relates to the PvP community and their ability to find the things they loved about GW1 in GW2, did not uphold its end of the bargain.

This is a fact. sPvP in this game is a joke.

I could care less about the grinding. I can see it from both views. Similarly, the PvE in GW2 is rather good, although the combat has been a bit of a sour point for some.

clay.7849:

Jski.6180:

clay.7849:

Jski.6180:

clay.7849:

Heijincks.9267:

clay.7849:

Behellagh.1468:

Gab Superstar.4059:

Commercially it is doing well.

But it had to sacrifice manifesto, the credibility of the developers, and the experience of the players to achieve it.

This is getting old. How did they sacrifice the manifesto?

Have you read it?

Whether they sacrificed the manifesto or not depends on the person. The topic at hand whether or not they did is the grind. Some people might consider getting exotics itself a grind (and a gear treadmill at that), and from the very start even before ascended the manifesto was broken already.

Well, here is my take on the grind thing. I get that you don’t need anything that is “grind-able” and that it doesn’t gate content – so that’s fine. Although, there is a lot of repetition to get items that is built into the game, which is kind of what a grind is.

Really, I could care less about the grind thing.

My take on the manifesto is that this game is nothing like GW1, and they clearly said if you loved GW1 you would love GW2. I think we can safely assume that when they wrote that they meant it. However, what they ended up with has alienated pretty much every GW1 player I know.

Yes YOUR take is this but not every one thinks the same way as you do. Most of the players who loved GW1 DO like GW2 but most player of GW1 often would stop playing GW1 for long bits of time waiting for expansion to add in new content so from the very start the GW1 player base was a non consistent group.

You may be right for a lot of people, but I can safely say that I am right when it comes to competitive PvP players.

Well when was the last time PvP from GW1 was big? When GW1 was out having a big PvP group there where not that many major PvP games out there. Now with GW2 there is a lot of PvP games all for free. You also now have a steaming community “MLG” etc.. would GW1 PvP hold any thing to that?

That is circumventing the argument. I said that the manifesto, as it relates to the PvP community and their ability to find the things they loved about GW1 in GW2, did not uphold its end of the bargain.

This is a fact. sPvP in this game is a joke.

I could care less about the grinding. I can see it from both views. Similarly, the PvE in GW2 is rather good, although the combat has been a bit of a sour point for some.

Compared to what PvP games we have now GW1 PvP was a joke. I am saying that your missing context to your views. Just because you may remember something the way it was dose not mean it was the truth of what was going on (i am calling this the “good old days” trap) at the time GW1 PvP was big because there was no major PvP game out during its time. If GW1 PvP was truly grate it would of been part of the streaming community even to this day. Can you find some one streaming GW1 PvP any more are there ppl even playing it? GW2 may not have the best PvP content in compassion to other current PvP games but its still being worked on so it can hit the standers of streaming (MLG etc..).

Vayne.8563:

This is for all the people who claim the game is dying.

Star Wars The Old Republic ended up laying off a significant portion of their staff six months or so after launch. TSW ended up laying off a third of their staff, due to disappointing sales.

Anet, on the other hand, is hiring. Here’s the link to their website, which I got by following the shifting news on top of the main Guild Wars 2 page.

http://www.arena.net/

If Guild Wars 2 is doing so badly and the game is dying, why is Anet hiring?

You can’t really make conclusions on if a game is dying based only on company profit/losses.

SWTOR is probably the most expensive game ever made but that doesn’t necessarily make it the best game ever made. Clearly if the company incurs such a huge expense, they would need a significantly higher revenue to make a profit. So for an example, if SWTOR and GW2 is taking in around the same amount of revenue (ie. both games performing around the same), SWTOR would still need to lay off staff because the revenue is not enough to make up for that huge investment in the beginning.

Another example would be D3. D3 was a huge flop in the eyes of gamers but it was a huge financial success. Also, I remember blizzard hiring a few months back even though the game was “dying”.

Jski.6180:

clay.7849:

Jski.6180:

clay.7849:

Jski.6180:

clay.7849:

Heijincks.9267:

clay.7849:

Behellagh.1468:

Gab Superstar.4059:

Commercially it is doing well.

But it had to sacrifice manifesto, the credibility of the developers, and the experience of the players to achieve it.

This is getting old. How did they sacrifice the manifesto?

Have you read it?

Whether they sacrificed the manifesto or not depends on the person. The topic at hand whether or not they did is the grind. Some people might consider getting exotics itself a grind (and a gear treadmill at that), and from the very start even before ascended the manifesto was broken already.

Well, here is my take on the grind thing. I get that you don’t need anything that is “grind-able” and that it doesn’t gate content – so that’s fine. Although, there is a lot of repetition to get items that is built into the game, which is kind of what a grind is.

Really, I could care less about the grind thing.

My take on the manifesto is that this game is nothing like GW1, and they clearly said if you loved GW1 you would love GW2. I think we can safely assume that when they wrote that they meant it. However, what they ended up with has alienated pretty much every GW1 player I know.

Yes YOUR take is this but not every one thinks the same way as you do. Most of the players who loved GW1 DO like GW2 but most player of GW1 often would stop playing GW1 for long bits of time waiting for expansion to add in new content so from the very start the GW1 player base was a non consistent group.

You may be right for a lot of people, but I can safely say that I am right when it comes to competitive PvP players.

Well when was the last time PvP from GW1 was big? When GW1 was out having a big PvP group there where not that many major PvP games out there. Now with GW2 there is a lot of PvP games all for free. You also now have a steaming community “MLG” etc.. would GW1 PvP hold any thing to that?

That is circumventing the argument. I said that the manifesto, as it relates to the PvP community and their ability to find the things they loved about GW1 in GW2, did not uphold its end of the bargain.

This is a fact. sPvP in this game is a joke.

I could care less about the grinding. I can see it from both views. Similarly, the PvE in GW2 is rather good, although the combat has been a bit of a sour point for some.

Compared to what PvP games we have now GW1 PvP was a joke. I am saying that your missing context to your views. Just because you may remember something the way it was dose not mean it was the truth of what was going on (i am calling this the “good old days” trap) at the time GW1 PvP was big because there was no major PvP game out during its time. If GW1 PvP was truly grate it would of been part of the streaming community even to this day. Can you find some one streaming GW1 PvP any more are there ppl even playing it? GW2 may not have the best PvP content in compassion to other current PvP games but its still being worked on so it can hit the standers of streaming (MLG etc..).

Again, you seem to be missing the point that what you are saying, whether true or not, has nothing to do with the question of the manifesto.

Also, I highly doubt you played competitive PvP in GW1.

clay.7849:

Jski.6180:

clay.7849:

Jski.6180:

clay.7849:

Jski.6180:

clay.7849:

Heijincks.9267:

clay.7849:

Behellagh.1468:

Gab Superstar.4059:

Commercially it is doing well.

But it had to sacrifice manifesto, the credibility of the developers, and the experience of the players to achieve it.

This is getting old. How did they sacrifice the manifesto?

Have you read it?

Whether they sacrificed the manifesto or not depends on the person. The topic at hand whether or not they did is the grind. Some people might consider getting exotics itself a grind (and a gear treadmill at that), and from the very start even before ascended the manifesto was broken already.

Well, here is my take on the grind thing. I get that you don’t need anything that is “grind-able” and that it doesn’t gate content – so that’s fine. Although, there is a lot of repetition to get items that is built into the game, which is kind of what a grind is.

Really, I could care less about the grind thing.

My take on the manifesto is that this game is nothing like GW1, and they clearly said if you loved GW1 you would love GW2. I think we can safely assume that when they wrote that they meant it. However, what they ended up with has alienated pretty much every GW1 player I know.

Yes YOUR take is this but not every one thinks the same way as you do. Most of the players who loved GW1 DO like GW2 but most player of GW1 often would stop playing GW1 for long bits of time waiting for expansion to add in new content so from the very start the GW1 player base was a non consistent group.

You may be right for a lot of people, but I can safely say that I am right when it comes to competitive PvP players.

Well when was the last time PvP from GW1 was big? When GW1 was out having a big PvP group there where not that many major PvP games out there. Now with GW2 there is a lot of PvP games all for free. You also now have a steaming community “MLG” etc.. would GW1 PvP hold any thing to that?

That is circumventing the argument. I said that the manifesto, as it relates to the PvP community and their ability to find the things they loved about GW1 in GW2, did not uphold its end of the bargain.

This is a fact. sPvP in this game is a joke.

I could care less about the grinding. I can see it from both views. Similarly, the PvE in GW2 is rather good, although the combat has been a bit of a sour point for some.

Compared to what PvP games we have now GW1 PvP was a joke. I am saying that your missing context to your views. Just because you may remember something the way it was dose not mean it was the truth of what was going on (i am calling this the “good old days” trap) at the time GW1 PvP was big because there was no major PvP game out during its time. If GW1 PvP was truly grate it would of been part of the streaming community even to this day. Can you find some one streaming GW1 PvP any more are there ppl even playing it? GW2 may not have the best PvP content in compassion to other current PvP games but its still being worked on so it can hit the standers of streaming (MLG etc..).

Again, you seem to be missing the point that what you are saying, whether true or not, has nothing to do with the question of the manifesto.

Also, I highly doubt you played competitive PvP in GW1.

And you see to miss the problems with your own views. The idea of Rome was not build in a day need to want to play pvp in GW2 for there to be at the same level as GW1 BUT there so many other games to play that have pvp and nothing but pvp so more ppl would want to play though games over something new. Your still thinking of it as the “good old days” its a very bad mind set to get into because you will never find any thing better then what it use to be and that a very ant-progress looking view point.

Major point if this game was only going to be what it is today then it would be a dieing game this is true for all games (once a game is put out and no changes are made to it then its peak will just be on the date that it was put out) but this is an online game and we are getting monthly updates so you cant say if its doing well or badly from point to point because it changes and adapted to what going on in the gaming world.

Xia.3485:

clay.7849:

Show me where I generalized the entire playerbase please?

Still arguing with the world? Just re-read most of your posts for the answer.

Do you have another doomsday theory for us today? Predictions on the next expansions timing and sales outlook perhaps?

If no one argued with the world, it would still be flat.
Any ways, rule of thumb, everything dies.

..that’s all I have /tired..

I think there are a lot of mis-steps and just a failure to produce on the part of the developers that is really starting to take it’s toll on the game.

Dailies are, in theory, a good addition to the game, however the current mix of dailies encourages players to grind out their dailies in the starting zones, due to those zones, (and Diessa Plateau, thanks to the Living Story) being the only areas of the game with proper Dynamic Event density. People I play with bemoan that the game is getting very boring as a result, but no one wants to do the dailies in other zones, because they are afraid they won’t be able to complete them in the time they have to play.

FotM and Ascended gear were head-scratchers, seeming like something developers might add to an aging game, not very early in the game’s life. FotM also sucked people out of the game world, which is actually the most stunning, compelling part of the game. The original Difficulty Level system split the community and made it frustrating for most. They finally reformed the way difficulty works for grouping, but they also nerfed the rewards from FotM to the point that most are avoiding an otherwise fun, well designed portion of the game.

Many people put off dungeons as something they would do once their guilds/friends were leveled up and looking for a change of pace. At just that same time, Arenanet decided to make AC, the “tutorial dungeon” a lot more difficult and very obviously now tuned for level 80s in full exotic gear, rather than level 30s as originally intended.

The list goes on and on. Even when they accept they have made a mistake, they often fix things in a very passive-aggressive manner, as they did with Orr. They finally rebalanced mob density in the zones to make Orr more accessible, but they also made Temples a lot more difficult and some very vulnerable to griefing/idiots who can ruin the event for everyone. They also nerfed drops in the zone, so even though it’s less frustrating, it’s also pretty pointless.

I love the game and I’ll say again this game has the potential for $1Billion+ in revenue over it’s lifetime, but it’s not going to happen if Arenanet doesn’t get back on track. The Black Lion Chest skins lottery and removing the Sprite Chests, a much needed incentive to go back out into the world, after just two days, are just among the latest points of evidence that something is just not right with the ongoing development of the game.

cesmode.4257:

Vayne.8563:

This is for all the people who claim the game is dying.

Star Wars The Old Republic ended up laying off a significant portion of their staff six months or so after launch. TSW ended up laying off a third of their staff, due to disappointing sales.

Anet, on the other hand, is hiring. Here’s the link to their website, which I got by following the shifting news on top of the main Guild Wars 2 page.

http://www.arena.net/

If Guild Wars 2 is doing so badly and the game is dying, why is Anet hiring?

I dont think the game is dying. While I still hold it to be a great MMO and one with a lot of potential, the developers continue to go against what they touted this game to be, which is turning a lot of people off(myself included). Maybe Ill be back some day, if arenanet gets their crap together.

Go on any MMO/online gaming website or forum. GW2 gets a lot of criticism. Theres a reason.

But no, it isnt dying.

I haven’t been to a gaming forum where any game didn’t get a lot of criticism. I think it’s human nature to criticize. On general gaming forums, you have the problem of people from other games posting. If you love WoW, for some reason, you’re almost obligated to hate other MMOs. Have you see the hate WoW gets.

The amount of hate a game gets on forums has zero to do with a game’s health. Unless you think WoW is unhealthy.

Palador.2170:

I’m going to pass on reading the entire thread, and simply give you my answer as I see it.

Is GW2 doing well? No.

Both GW2 and Arena Net are very successful at the moment. However, that’s not the same as doing WELL. ANet is stuck with NCSoft, well known for killing games. GW2 has a list of problems that are not being correctly addressed, for whatever reason. Both GW2 and ANet as a whole are pushing forward, using momentum to keep things going and growing.

This is like a person using caffeine and energy drinks to keep themselves going. It works, and it can work pretty darned well. However, what you’re avoiding keeps building up, and eventually you can’t keep going anymore and you crash. I don’t think it’ll happen this year, but sometime in the next 2 or so, the GW2 team will take a look at the game and say something along the lines of “My god, how did it get like this?” When that day comes, it won’t be pretty.

Maybe you’re confusing NCsoft with another company. Aion has been one of the most played MMOs of all time, next to Lineage, both of which are still running. I can’t think of a single game that NCsoft killed.

Speculation runs rampant. GW2 has said how many units they have sold. With no monthly fee, they will claim them all as active subs. No game online will tell you they are doing bad, they will say all is going well and they have great things coming in the near future. Even if they are going to shut down the next day. That’s the nature of mmo’s etc. Basically it comes down to a simple truth, if you like the game. Play. If not go away. Sounds trite, but it’s the simple truth we all must face, ask ourselves and answer. I enjoy it, sure lately there are lots of issues, but I think they are growing pains. The game is popular. When ESOL comes out, we’ll see some drop off in players. And then some will,. return and life goes on.

clay.7849:

Behellagh.1468:

Gab Superstar.4059:

Commercially it is doing well.

But it had to sacrifice manifesto, the credibility of the developers, and the experience of the players to achieve it.

This is getting old. How did they sacrifice the manifesto?

Have you read it?

Sure, posted the entire thing in text. Generally people refer to the grinding bit, taking it entirely out of context. Anyone who has even a rudimentary grasp of English can hear what is being said there. It doesn’t say anything at all about vertical progression. It’s talking about fun things to do at low level without having to grind to get to the good stuff. That’s ALL it’s talking about. Some of the other stuff is marketspeak for sure.

We take everything you love about Guild Wars 1 and place it into a persistent world. Well, yeah, but since different people love different things, you obviously have to wonder what he’s really talking about. Most of the stuff from Guild Wars 1 that I loved is in here. The few things that aren’t…they’re small enough. So the question is, who are they talking to or about. The art is in there, that’s true. The no monthly fee is there, that’s true. The branching personal story is there, that’s true.

Most of the confusion comes from the idea that Collin is talking about dynamic events and Ree it talking about personal story. A clarification of it was released after to explain the confusion caused by editing.

Vayne.8563:

Palador.2170:

I’m going to pass on reading the entire thread, and simply give you my answer as I see it.

Is GW2 doing well? No.

Both GW2 and Arena Net are very successful at the moment. However, that’s not the same as doing WELL. ANet is stuck with NCSoft, well known for killing games. GW2 has a list of problems that are not being correctly addressed, for whatever reason. Both GW2 and ANet as a whole are pushing forward, using momentum to keep things going and growing.

This is like a person using caffeine and energy drinks to keep themselves going. It works, and it can work pretty darned well. However, what you’re avoiding keeps building up, and eventually you can’t keep going anymore and you crash. I don’t think it’ll happen this year, but sometime in the next 2 or so, the GW2 team will take a look at the game and say something along the lines of “My god, how did it get like this?” When that day comes, it won’t be pretty.

Maybe you’re confusing NCsoft with another company. Aion has been one of the most played MMOs of all time, next to Lineage, both of which are still running. I can’t think of a single game that NCsoft killed.

Be prepared for the CoH rant.

Information without proper context is often useless.

Why is ArenaNet hiring? Is it because ArenaNet wants to expand? They’re certainly trying out new things, and it shows in their recent patches. Maybe the game failed expectations and NCSoft has allowed ANet to hire developers to help to salvage the game’s assets. * cough * sPvP and WvW * cough * In which case, the game was dying and they’re doing the best to halt the process.

Anyway, and arbitrary link is about as valid as saying something along the lines of, “the game is dying because almost all my guildies have left and aren’t coming back,” except the latter has more context.

One thing that strikes me as odd about everyone here talking about the game dying. Most of the arguments are under the mindset of a subscription based MMO.

If you view GW2 more like a traditional game, say Battlefield 3, what happens then? You want a certain level of concurrent players to keep the matches interesting. You also want word of mouth to bring in new players. You want to please players from the previous iteration of your game, but you also want to draw in players from other franchises (cough CoD). People buy your game and they play for a time and then they put it on the shelf and move on. Does that mean your game is dying?

What happens when you release a content patch? You draw back players who put your game on the shelf for a while. They try the new features, have fun with it and inevitably move on somewhere else.

What happens when you release an expansion pack? Much the same as with a content patch except now there’s a financial cost involved (obstacle) but you have much more features and content (incentive). If players felt their initial investment was well spent they will be inclined to buy your expansion. How many here feel they didn’t get their 60$ worth yet?

Now back to guild wars 2. There isn’t really a gear treadmill or progression. I know some will argue that point but in all honesty do you really need ascended gear to run the content (other than fractals)? Is content really balanced around gear tiers? Not that I can tell. So that makes GW2 much like other online games like BF3. There is no “mountain of work” waiting for returning players. No grinding dungeons to catch up on the gear treadmill. There is no real obstacle for returning players like in other MMOs. As such the loss of concurrent players isn’t necessarily a forecast for future sales (aka expansions).

The gem store is also a source of income. Players with less time to devote to GW2 can buy boosts or skins to keep up with their friends. Players more devoted to the game can buy fun toys and now boosts for their guilds / friends (bonfires). Collecters have pets and town clothes and there’s even gambling (which I know isn’t popular as most rng isn’t).

Under this perspective, how is the game “dying”?

@Xia

So, you think that a game without a subscription model can’t die? What would you count as a metric that would mean this game is dying or not?

the game is doing very well and i love it.

@Clay (I left out your response because the post is just too kitten long with it)

There was a thread on these forums, asking if Guild Wars 2 went pay to play would you still play. One of the most common responses to this was, if it was pay to play I wouldn’t have bought it in the first place. I find it naive to believe that everyone is willing to pay a monthly fee to play ANY game. That’s why MMOs in general, pay to play particularly, remain niche. Even WoW only has a relatively small percentage of all gamers, though it has a huge percentage of MMO gamers. Many many people will not pay a month fee to a game for a lot of reasons. Sometimes it’s principle, sometimes it’s financial. But at least anecdotally we see that many people are not willing to pay a monthly fee. That gives a game like Guild Wars 2 an audience of indeterminate size that WoW will never see. That means the pay to play model will get people that would never consider WoW and for those people, it’s not even competition. How many of these people exist? I don’t know. But I suspect it’s more than you give credit for.

You also say some people really like this game. You also say a lot of people don’t. How come the one that disagrees with you is only some and the ones that agree with you are many. Maybe that’s your own bias talking. It seems to me most people who play the game like it….and some don’t. The rating on meta critic and sites like that seem to show most people do like it, even after the people tried to sabotage it by giving it zeros after the ascended gear release.

I think you are like most people. You believe something, so you believe most people feel as you do. This is human nature. The more obvious you think something is, the more you’re sure you have the numbers. But it’s not true in every case, because there are people who feel just as strongly who are opposite you. They all can’t be right.

I think you find things to say that support your argument, most of which are guesses, too weak to be even speculation. Dismissing the buy to play model, for example, makes absolutely zero sense, until you can figure out what percentage of people would play an MMO but would never consider paying a monthly fee. And you have no evidence either way of how big a market that is.

Vayne.8563:

@Clay (I left out your response because the post is just too kitten long with it)

There was a thread on these forums, asking if Guild Wars 2 went pay to play would you still play. One of the most common responses to this was, if it was pay to play I wouldn’t have bought it in the first place. I find it naive to believe that everyone is willing to pay a monthly fee to play ANY game. That’s why MMOs in general, pay to play particularly, remain niche. Even WoW only has a relatively small percentage of all gamers, though it has a huge percentage of MMO gamers. Many many people will not pay a month fee to a game for a lot of reasons. Sometimes it’s principle, sometimes it’s financial. But at least anecdotally we see that many people are not willing to pay a monthly fee. That gives a game like Guild Wars 2 an audience of indeterminate size that WoW will never see. That means the pay to play model will get people that would never consider WoW and for those people, it’s not even competition. How many of these people exist? I don’t know. But I suspect it’s more than you give credit for.

You also say some people really like this game. You also say a lot of people don’t. How come the one that disagrees with you is only some and the ones that agree with you are many. Maybe that’s your own bias talking. It seems to me most people who play the game like it….and some don’t. The rating on meta critic and sites like that seem to show most people do like it, even after the people tried to sabotage it by giving it zeros after the ascended gear release.

I think you are like most people. You believe something, so you believe most people feel as you do. This is human nature. The more obvious you think something is, the more you’re sure you have the numbers. But it’s not true in every case, because there are people who feel just as strongly who are opposite you. They all can’t be right.

I think you find things to say that support your argument, most of which are guesses, too weak to be even speculation. Dismissing the buy to play model, for example, makes absolutely zero sense, until you can figure out what percentage of people would play an MMO but would never consider paying a monthly fee. And you have no evidence either way of how big a market that is.

Every time to you try to dismiss someone, the exact same thing you say can be applied to your post. Also, show me the numbers that definitively say that more people agree with you than me? Oh, that’s right, they don’t exist. Your opinion is no more valid than mine, no matter how hard you try to make it sound that way.

I just want to know what there is this big supposition that Buy to Play models can’t die?

That is all I asked and you couldn’t answer my simple question, because, I think, you don’t think there is an answer. So, let’s try again without all the rhetoric this time:

What is the threshold at which you would call a B2P game dying or dead?

clay.7849:

Vayne.8563:

@Clay (I left out your response because the post is just too kitten long with it)

There was a thread on these forums, asking if Guild Wars 2 went pay to play would you still play. One of the most common responses to this was, if it was pay to play I wouldn’t have bought it in the first place. I find it naive to believe that everyone is willing to pay a monthly fee to play ANY game. That’s why MMOs in general, pay to play particularly, remain niche. Even WoW only has a relatively small percentage of all gamers, though it has a huge percentage of MMO gamers. Many many people will not pay a month fee to a game for a lot of reasons. Sometimes it’s principle, sometimes it’s financial. But at least anecdotally we see that many people are not willing to pay a monthly fee. That gives a game like Guild Wars 2 an audience of indeterminate size that WoW will never see. That means the pay to play model will get people that would never consider WoW and for those people, it’s not even competition. How many of these people exist? I don’t know. But I suspect it’s more than you give credit for.

You also say some people really like this game. You also say a lot of people don’t. How come the one that disagrees with you is only some and the ones that agree with you are many. Maybe that’s your own bias talking. It seems to me most people who play the game like it….and some don’t. The rating on meta critic and sites like that seem to show most people do like it, even after the people tried to sabotage it by giving it zeros after the ascended gear release.

I think you are like most people. You believe something, so you believe most people feel as you do. This is human nature. The more obvious you think something is, the more you’re sure you have the numbers. But it’s not true in every case, because there are people who feel just as strongly who are opposite you. They all can’t be right.

I think you find things to say that support your argument, most of which are guesses, too weak to be even speculation. Dismissing the buy to play model, for example, makes absolutely zero sense, until you can figure out what percentage of people would play an MMO but would never consider paying a monthly fee. And you have no evidence either way of how big a market that is.

Every time to you try to dismiss someone, the exact same thing you say can be applied to your post. Also, show me the numbers that definitively say that more people agree with you than me? Oh, that’s right, they don’t exist. Your opinion is no more valid than mine, no matter how hard you try to make it sound that way.

I just want to know what there is this big supposition that Buy to Play models can’t die?

That is all I asked and you couldn’t answer my simple question, because, I think, you don’t think there is an answer. So, let’s try again without all the rhetoric this time:

What is the threshold at which you would call a B2P game dying or dead?

What I said was buy to play was a factor, you said it’s not. How can you dismiss something so obvious. It’s obvious to anyone who has read forums anywhere, including this one, that a percentage of people would NEVER pay a month fee for a game. We don’t know what the percentage is..we DO know it exists. Just search for the thread in these forums if you don’t believe me and count the answers that says I’d never pay a month fee for ANY game. Then come back and tell me it doesn’t matter.

You who already claim that forums can be used to get such information.

I don’t think the presence subs is a good basis for argument. There are too many problems with that premise. First of all, MMOs are in competition for people’s time. If people aren’t willing to give the game their time (much less their money), then it can’t rightfully factor them into their playerbase. And then there’s the issue with knowing the relative sizes of the ones willing to pay subs and the ones who aren’t, and more importantly how loyal the latter group will be.

clay.7849:

Heijincks.9267:

Fernling.1729:

NCsoft stock has significantly dropped since the release of GW2, that tells me that something isn’t doing too well.

NCSoft isn’t only about GW2. About the time when GW2 was released, City of Heroes was shut down and that had some serious backlash.

So you think that CoH’s revenue was a big enough loss to counter the massive amounts of money that GW2 made at release?

If anything CoH was shut down to help revenue, not to hurt it.

But, I agree as a publisher of games, and not the developer, GW2 is just a small part of the entire NCSoft company and as such NCSoft’s ability to be worth less than half of what it was a year and a half ago, may not have anything to do with GW2.

The gaming industry in general is down.

See my previous post in this thread.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Is-Guild-Wars-2-Doing-Well/1757784

TwoBit.5903:

I don’t think the presence subs is a good basis for argument. There are too many problems with that premise. First of all, MMOs are in competition for people’s time. If people aren’t willing to give the game their time (much less their money), then it can’t rightfully factor them into their playerbase. And then there’s the issue with knowing the relative sizes of the ones willing to pay subs and the ones who aren’t, and more importantly how loyal the latter group will be.

Being willing to give time is completely different than being willing to give money. I paid for Guild Wars 2. If I am willing to wait for it to mature, then I can do so without throwing money at it every month. So many people play and leave and come back.

With a pay to play MMO there’s an extra barrier to coming back. You have to like it enough to pay again to try it. That’s not really the case with a buy to play MMO. A lot of people who got bored or tired of the game came back and feel refreshed. Would they have paid to come back? Logically some would have and some wouldn’t have.

At any rate, like I said, a whole lot of people in the thread I mentioned specifically said they’d never pay a monthly fee for any game. They don’t believe in it. And we still need to know how big that group is.

It might be noted however that in similar polls, Guild Wars 1 players often said the same thing over the years, and many of those people played Guild Wars 1 for years. After all, if you’re not willing to spend monthly money on entertainment, are you going to go out and buy a ton of games all the time?

For anyone just coming into this thread, here’s a synopsis

“GW2 is doing great!”
“No it isn’t, it’s already dead or dying!”
“What? Prove it!”
“I don’t need to prove it, you prove it’s still doing well!”
“I don’t need to prove it’s doing well, you prove it’s dying!”
ad nauseum
The End.

killcannon.2576:

For anyone just coming into this thread, here’s a synopsis

“GW2 is doing great!”
“No it isn’t, it’s already dead or dying!”
“What? Prove it!”
“I don’t need to prove it, you prove it’s still doing well!”
“I don’t need to prove it’s doing well, you prove it’s dying!”
ad nauseum
The End.

The fact that people are even quoting each other instead of typing out over nine thousand replies to the OP puts it a cut above the average for these forums, IMHO.

killcannon.2576:

For anyone just coming into this thread, here’s a synopsis

“GW2 is doing great!”
“No it isn’t, it’s already dead or dying!”
“What? Prove it!”
“I don’t need to prove it, you prove it’s still doing well!”
“I don’t need to prove it’s doing well, you prove it’s dying!”
ad nauseum
The End.

I don’t know. I did offer a few facts. One stock company predicted Guild Wars 2 would hit 3.2 million sales in the first year, and they accomplished that in less than half that time. It was on the basis of that companies recommendations that many people bought NCSoft Stock. In other words the game has at least met expectations…that much is fact.

I also pointed out that Anet was hiring, and rather broadly hiring. Since other games that have no met expectations recently have cut their staff, rather than hired, I would say that there’s at the very least anecdotal evidence that the game isn’t dying.

Doing well or not, there’s no real evidence of it dying. There is some evidence that it’s at least met expectations.

I think GW2 is Safe for now but after new MMOs hit the market there is no doubt it will lose a lot of players people want to try something new and gw2 will be something from the past.
So how to stop players from leaving:

1- Improve the game mechanics (just do one of the dragon events and you will see exactly what’s wrong it is only zerg dps/rez ) lack of combat depth is there and nobody can say it not.

2- Add more skills (I wish if someone from Arena Net will give us any info about this they never talk about this).
GW2 is becoming more like Farmville go collect your eggs(daily), milk your cow (dragon chest)…………………………………… no challenge.

Assyrian.4827:

I think GW2 is Safe for now but after new MMOs hit the market there is no doubt it will lose a lot of players people want to try something new and gw2 will be something from the past.
So how to stop players from leaving:

1- Improve the game mechanics (just do one of the dragon events and you will see exactly what’s wrong it is only zerg dps/rez ) lack of combat depth is there and nobody can say it not.

2- Add more skills (I wish if someone from Arena Net will give us any info about this they never talk about this).
GW2 is becoming more like Farmville go collect your eggs(daily), milk your cow (dragon chest)…………………………………… no challenge.

I don’t think the main idea is to stop people from leaving. Arenanet has said they realize people want variety and should go enjoy other games, come back and play this as well. I think the true focus would be “how do we get them to come back after the initial appeal of those other games dies down?” And furthermore, a focus I’m sure they are intent on is how do we simply keep people playing in general, to make this “one” of the MMO’s they play regularly.

Vayne.8563:

TwoBit.5903:

I don’t think the presence subs is a good basis for argument. There are too many problems with that premise. First of all, MMOs are in competition for people’s time. If people aren’t willing to give the game their time (much less their money), then it can’t rightfully factor them into their playerbase. And then there’s the issue with knowing the relative sizes of the ones willing to pay subs and the ones who aren’t, and more importantly how loyal the latter group will be.

Being willing to give time is completely different than being willing to give money. I paid for Guild Wars 2. If I am willing to wait for it to mature, then I can do so without throwing money at it every month. So many people play and leave and come back.

With a pay to play MMO there’s an extra barrier to coming back. You have to like it enough to pay again to try it. That’s not really the case with a buy to play MMO. A lot of people who got bored or tired of the game came back and feel refreshed. Would they have paid to come back? Logically some would have and some wouldn’t have.

At any rate, like I said, a whole lot of people in the thread I mentioned specifically said they’d never pay a monthly fee for any game. They don’t believe in it. And we still need to know how big that group is.

It might be noted however that in similar polls, Guild Wars 1 players often said the same thing over the years, and many of those people played Guild Wars 1 for years. After all, if you’re not willing to spend monthly money on entertainment, are you going to go out and buy a ton of games all the time?

If players aren’t willing to give an MMO their time or attention, they naturally aren’t going to invest any money the goods it offers. By comparison, B2P MMOs have advantages over P2P in the lack of subs, but it’s still a stretch to assume that no subs=retention. MMOs aren’t the only type of entertainment available. How likely is it that players who left will come back at all for more of the same when there’s so much else they could do? On that note, how likely is it that the GW2 players who have left will come back at all even if they didn’t have anything else going on? Is the quality and quantity of content offered by GW2 enough to bring these players back and get enough of them to shell out money to support the developers?

If it sounds like I’m asking too many questions, that’s because the presumption of B2P=retention has that many holes in it.

On the other hand, P2P games have gamers that are generally happy to be paying for a premium service in the first place. However, the service acts as sunk cost over time and had other implications that many GW1 players wanted to get away from. I don’t think it means that these players didn’t have the money to spend (although that is true for some). It likely means they didn’t want to spend that much money or time on one game, because of financial reasons or otherwise. If could very well be worth it for them to go out and pay for or rent other shiny titles, or do real life stuff.

Jski.6180:

So you want every thing at the start of the game? I mean in effect it sounds like you do not even wanted to exp grind that IS in this game from level 1-80 all be in a super easy one.

Strawman argument, levelling is not a grind. GW1 was not a grind, that is similar to what was expected in GW2 as far as obtaining max stat items goes.

To the OP: I’m part of the 30+ gamer demographic. I love immersion in my games, and I tend to play mature, story-telling based RPGs like Dragon Age more than any other genre. Yet I LOVE the SAB, and wish it would stay around permanently. (Although I fully expect it won’t.) Just because we may prefer games with more serious content doesn’t mean we automatically hate lighter, more whimsical additions.

morrolan.9608:

Jski.6180:

So you want every thing at the start of the game? I mean in effect it sounds like you do not even wanted to exp grind that IS in this game from level 1-80 all be in a super easy one.

Strawman argument, levelling is not a grind. GW1 was not a grind, that is similar to what was expected in GW2 as far as obtaining max stat items goes.

It realty not leveling up is the fist ideal of a grind. That what you did in old RPG you would grind you levels so you where able to get though the next boss level etc.. All of the add on of gear came way later in the RPG world. Your just getting confused what the world grind even means.

TwoBit.5903:

Vayne.8563:

TwoBit.5903:

I don’t think the presence subs is a good basis for argument. There are too many problems with that premise. First of all, MMOs are in competition for people’s time. If people aren’t willing to give the game their time (much less their money), then it can’t rightfully factor them into their playerbase. And then there’s the issue with knowing the relative sizes of the ones willing to pay subs and the ones who aren’t, and more importantly how loyal the latter group will be.

Being willing to give time is completely different than being willing to give money. I paid for Guild Wars 2. If I am willing to wait for it to mature, then I can do so without throwing money at it every month. So many people play and leave and come back.

With a pay to play MMO there’s an extra barrier to coming back. You have to like it enough to pay again to try it. That’s not really the case with a buy to play MMO. A lot of people who got bored or tired of the game came back and feel refreshed. Would they have paid to come back? Logically some would have and some wouldn’t have.

At any rate, like I said, a whole lot of people in the thread I mentioned specifically said they’d never pay a monthly fee for any game. They don’t believe in it. And we still need to know how big that group is.

It might be noted however that in similar polls, Guild Wars 1 players often said the same thing over the years, and many of those people played Guild Wars 1 for years. After all, if you’re not willing to spend monthly money on entertainment, are you going to go out and buy a ton of games all the time?

If players aren’t willing to give an MMO their time or attention, they naturally aren’t going to invest any money the goods it offers. By comparison, B2P MMOs have advantages over P2P in the lack of subs, but it’s still a stretch to assume that no subs=retention. MMOs aren’t the only type of entertainment available. How likely is it that players who left will come back at all for more of the same when there’s so much else they could do? On that note, how likely is it that the GW2 players who have left will come back at all even if they didn’t have anything else going on? Is the quality and quantity of content offered by GW2 enough to bring these players back and get enough of them to shell out money to support the developers?

If it sounds like I’m asking too many questions, that’s because the presumption of B2P=retention has that many holes in it.

On the other hand, P2P games have gamers that are generally happy to be paying for a premium service in the first place. However, the service acts as sunk cost over time and had other implications that many GW1 players wanted to get away from. I don’t think it means that these players didn’t have the money to spend (although that is true for some). It likely means they didn’t want to spend that much money or time on one game, because of financial reasons or otherwise. If could very well be worth it for them to go out and pay for or rent other shiny titles, or do real life stuff.

I never said B2P=retention. Totally putting words into my mouth here. What I did say was that there is an audience of people who will NEVER play an MMO with a monthly fee, and we don’t know how big that audience is.

If only part of that audience is retained, that means you have a base of players that aren’t ever going to play WoW unless WoW drops its monthly fee, which I don’t see happening.

I think that retention requires players. If you don’t have players, you can’t retain them. So this base of people who’ll never play a monthly fee have to be factored into any equation.

nekitten234:

Calae.1738:

Mature content = blood, nudity, terror, coarse language, violence, politics, economics, moral controversy and scientific material.

(edit: added bold)

Bold part sounds much more like teenage – (very) young adult dream movie/show/game …

One by one:

• blood: yeah, right — people really want to look at “real” blood and gore (trust me, it’s not even remotely fun seeing it IRL)
• nudity: (“Internet is for pr0n, …”) — nudity just because of sake of nudity is everything else than mature
• terror/violence: playing games should be fun or I missed something — try it IRL and someone will teach you new real meaning of that … fast
• coarse language: kitten, kitten, bulkitten, oh kitten, … my kitten, wow kitten … WOW I’m 100% mature 1337 guy (and I’m the one who can be very explicit when talking)
• politics/economics: oh gawd no, never, ever — we have enough of those “types” IRL to have another batch in game (well in game we maybe can kill get rid of them … hmm that’s not that bad idea)
• moral controversy: ?? (very, very broad), we hate them because they are <insert difference here> or “yeah, I can act as real #$%^@# in game w00t!”
• scientific material: huh? Hard science? You want to travel 12hr to get to next place, be killed in one hit as humans are not that fire-proof, perma death, spend weeks or more to get enough material to make that leet sword, spend tons of time working to get finances in order to buy something … erm … RL (still) have better gfx and all of that in it. (and I’m long time fan of the hard SF)

To be clear, I don’t mind having things from the list in game (except politics #$#%) but it should be in because it’s FUN not just to call it “mature/adult”.

Why anything from above is called “mature” escapes me completely. And I do love dark/no win scenarios, but done right (sadly, very rare), not just created to get that (whatever) title.

BTW can anyone name one title who has above things which is not swarmed with “not very mature people” (deliberately omitted age as that is not real measure for it)?

I agree so much with your post. Nothing in that list remotely resembles mature content. Especially gore, blood, nudity and expletives are typically teen content, more specifically it is considered NOT mature to swear and get all giggly over a sideboob.

Vayne.8563:

clay.7849:

Xia.3485:

clay.7849:

It may, but it may not. Your point? Casual = limited interest. How can you argue that leads to more money? Oh, that’s right, you can’t.

You are having a tantrum aren’t you? Sorry. We should end the conversation before you get more upset.

By the way, the real money in gaming is now in casual games and cash shops. Its not for nothing failed mmos go free to play. But hey, if you want to believe otherwise its your right.

Proof? Links?

EVE seems to be doing quite well…

Eve is doing well, but last I checked, they didn’t have half a million subscribers. I’m guessing at least that number of people are playing Guild Wars 2 right, not daily but over all. And yes, it’s just a guess.

But if a couple of months ago they hit the 3 million market, and 2/3s of those people have stopped playing, you have a million people left. And more people do come to the game all the time, because we’re constantly getting new players in the guild.

A game can exist quite happily on half a million players or even less, and still make a profit. If Guild Wars 2 keeps getting better (and to many of us it is), then it’ll be here for a long time to come.

Yes you are using nothing but speculative numbers in your argument.. and what you fail to understand is even if there are a million players left the concurrent numbers of logins based on the 1million is going to be significantly lower… but you and I or anyone know nothing of the games overheads, the breakpoints or there cashflow dynamics… you are simply trying to play the doomsayer and white angel all at the same time.. whilst armed with nothing but baseless facts and sheer guess work.

If the game is enjoyable for you then why do you need to seek clarification if the game is thriving or not currently and why even bother comparing it with other MMO’s with other business models behind them….. you lack any kind of informative facts from which to base this from.

Many MMO’s over the years have failed, not simply because they were sub based or “pay to play” but because the global economy has changed, the marketplace in which they are sat has expanded in all directions and us gamers have so much choice available to us…. every new launch sees a wave of players come and go. Yes there are also some that were just incredibly bad or poorly managed etc, etc but please…. P2P, B2P, F2P.. all of the different models have their pro’s but at the same time they are all able to be effected by the same cons…. in fact many MMO prefer to offer a choice now of how you wish to play.. sub or F2P…
Every game will also then have its collection of white nights and cash shop whiners and every MMO has a person or persons who seek feel compelled for some reason to write threads about the games rise/demise.

If your really interested in ANETS or other MMO’s grounding then write a letter and enquire to them or look out for their quarterly reports etc (if they have them)… until then go enjoy the game and quit writing this nonsense.

Vayne.8563:

TwoBit.5903:

Vayne.8563:

TwoBit.5903:

I don’t think the presence subs is a good basis for argument. There are too many problems with that premise. First of all, MMOs are in competition for people’s time. If people aren’t willing to give the game their time (much less their money), then it can’t rightfully factor them into their playerbase. And then there’s the issue with knowing the relative sizes of the ones willing to pay subs and the ones who aren’t, and more importantly how loyal the latter group will be.

Being willing to give time is completely different than being willing to give money. I paid for Guild Wars 2. If I am willing to wait for it to mature, then I can do so without throwing money at it every month. So many people play and leave and come back.

With a pay to play MMO there’s an extra barrier to coming back. You have to like it enough to pay again to try it. That’s not really the case with a buy to play MMO. A lot of people who got bored or tired of the game came back and feel refreshed. Would they have paid to come back? Logically some would have and some wouldn’t have.

At any rate, like I said, a whole lot of people in the thread I mentioned specifically said they’d never pay a monthly fee for any game. They don’t believe in it. And we still need to know how big that group is.

It might be noted however that in similar polls, Guild Wars 1 players often said the same thing over the years, and many of those people played Guild Wars 1 for years. After all, if you’re not willing to spend monthly money on entertainment, are you going to go out and buy a ton of games all the time?

If players aren’t willing to give an MMO their time or attention, they naturally aren’t going to invest any money the goods it offers. By comparison, B2P MMOs have advantages over P2P in the lack of subs, but it’s still a stretch to assume that no subs=retention. MMOs aren’t the only type of entertainment available. How likely is it that players who left will come back at all for more of the same when there’s so much else they could do? On that note, how likely is it that the GW2 players who have left will come back at all even if they didn’t have anything else going on? Is the quality and quantity of content offered by GW2 enough to bring these players back and get enough of them to shell out money to support the developers?

If it sounds like I’m asking too many questions, that’s because the presumption of B2P=retention has that many holes in it.

On the other hand, P2P games have gamers that are generally happy to be paying for a premium service in the first place. However, the service acts as sunk cost over time and had other implications that many GW1 players wanted to get away from. I don’t think it means that these players didn’t have the money to spend (although that is true for some). It likely means they didn’t want to spend that much money or time on one game, because of financial reasons or otherwise. If could very well be worth it for them to go out and pay for or rent other shiny titles, or do real life stuff.

I never said B2P=retention. Totally putting words into my mouth here. What I did say was that there is an audience of people who will NEVER play an MMO with a monthly fee, and we don’t know how big that audience is.

You you certainly did make it sound that way, especially when that’s the rhetoric commonly associated with GW2 and B2P.

As for the audience, we also don’t know how likely they’ll be retained by GW2, or if these types of players spend enough to justify the overhead.

If only part of that audience is retained, that means you have a base of players that aren’t ever going to play WoW unless WoW drops its monthly fee, which I don’t see happening.

I think that retention requires players. If you don’t have players, you can’t retain them. So this base of people who’ll never play a monthly fee have to be factored into any equation.

A theoretical equation under the conditions that these players would be playing, paying, and coming back to repeat. And we don’t know the size.

@TwoBit

Exactly….
Even if GW2 had 3million players all logged in at the same time… only the powers that be know how much is being spent through the casshop.. which aside from a box sale, is the only source of income for GW2.

I would like to think that the box sales have at least by now allowed NCSoft to hit their break even.. so as long as the cashshop stays healthy and people feel their is value in the game, then there will likely be a decent profit being made each month… but when it starts to level out or dip (and yes it will continue to find its plateau during its first year) that’s when things might begin to change… at the moment we are very much in the bait and hook stages… retention over a longer period of time is the crux of a game like GW2, especially as the competition in the marketplace is also doing all they can to attract and retain …some will fare ok, others will scrap by and hope for better times, others will fall into maintenance mode and then there are some who will close their doors and wish they had listened to what the players really wanted

GW2 might very well be “casual gamer friendly”, but if suddenly the 2/3 of their active players took a sabbatical to play other games or walk away from GW2 that has a knock on effect throughout the game should it continue for a period of time, it has to have.

However the OP or anyone else is simply guessing based on their own speculation… and it normally begins when someone logs in and struggles to find a group or see anyone out in the wilds .. then the games population must be crashing and its DOOMED … closely followed by the naysayers stating their server is fine, they have no issues getting groups, they get new guild member everyday the game is growing… etc etc etc – both could be right, both could be wrong.

Bloodstealer.5978:

Yes you are using nothing but speculative numbers in your argument.. and what you fail to understand is even if there are a million players left the concurrent numbers of logins based on the 1million is going to be significantly lower… but you and I or anyone know nothing of the games overheads, the breakpoints or there cashflow dynamics… you are simply trying to play the doomsayer and white angel all at the same time.. whilst armed with nothing but baseless facts and sheer guess work.

One thing we do know about overhead and breakpoints is that the whole GW-GW2 server design was about minimal costs and scale ability. As far as server costs go, it is pretty much a one player costs X times amount of online players. This was the core reason why a.net devs quit WoW and started their own thing, because they figured out how to make a free MMO.

Leaves employee costs, which is still low considering a.net is a mid-size firm.

I’m not making their balance, but I’d wager they can be a very healthy company with far less active players than any other MMO on the market. Don’t forget GW1 was thriving as a relatively obscure cult MMO.

Yeah the PvP community is doing really good. Its going to be esports very soon. As for PvE, its not doing that great and neither is WvW. They tried to put some ranking in WvW but that’s not doing that great either.

As you can see right now the WvW players don’t have WvW titles but the PvP players do. PvP is doing very good right now, this game is probably one of the best PvP games of all time.

If anet gives the PvE and WvW community the same amount of love it gives the PvP community than I can see the PvE and WvW doing outstanding.

uberkingkong.8041:

Yeah the PvP community is doing really good. Its going to be esports very soon. As for PvE, its not doing that great and neither is WvW. They tried to put some ranking in WvW but that’s not doing that great either.

As you can see right now the WvW players don’t have WvW titles but the PvP players do. PvP is doing very good right now, this game is probably one of the best PvP games of all time.

If anet gives the PvE and WvW community the same amount of love it gives the PvP community than I can see the PvE and WvW doing outstanding.

Sorry but this is the weirdest post in the thread. According to most people, PvE and WvW are both doing much better than SPvP. Whiles I understand some people like SPvP, it’s probably been the most complained about segment of the game…particularly with regard to balance issues.

Balance issues are a bit important in PvE and they’re a bit more important than WvW (but the whole zerg thing does a lot to mitigate that) but in 5v5, it becomes much more apparent.

I’d say PvP in Guild Wars 2 is probably the part of the game suffering the most, not the least. And the upgrades to the game tend to focus mostly on PVe.

Bloodstealer.5978:

Vayne.8563:

clay.7849:

Xia.3485:

clay.7849:

It may, but it may not. Your point? Casual = limited interest. How can you argue that leads to more money? Oh, that’s right, you can’t.

You are having a tantrum aren’t you? Sorry. We should end the conversation before you get more upset.

By the way, the real money in gaming is now in casual games and cash shops. Its not for nothing failed mmos go free to play. But hey, if you want to believe otherwise its your right.

Proof? Links?

EVE seems to be doing quite well…

Eve is doing well, but last I checked, they didn’t have half a million subscribers. I’m guessing at least that number of people are playing Guild Wars 2 right, not daily but over all. And yes, it’s just a guess.

But if a couple of months ago they hit the 3 million market, and 2/3s of those people have stopped playing, you have a million people left. And more people do come to the game all the time, because we’re constantly getting new players in the guild.

A game can exist quite happily on half a million players or even less, and still make a profit. If Guild Wars 2 keeps getting better (and to many of us it is), then it’ll be here for a long time to come.

Yes you are using nothing but speculative numbers in your argument.. and what you fail to understand is even if there are a million players left the concurrent numbers of logins based on the 1million is going to be significantly lower… but you and I or anyone know nothing of the games overheads, the breakpoints or there cashflow dynamics… you are simply trying to play the doomsayer and white angel all at the same time.. whilst armed with nothing but baseless facts and sheer guess work.

If the game is enjoyable for you then why do you need to seek clarification if the game is thriving or not currently and why even bother comparing it with other MMO’s with other business models behind them….. you lack any kind of informative facts from which to base this from.

Many MMO’s over the years have failed, not simply because they were sub based or “pay to play” but because the global economy has changed, the marketplace in which they are sat has expanded in all directions and us gamers have so much choice available to us…. every new launch sees a wave of players come and go. Yes there are also some that were just incredibly bad or poorly managed etc, etc but please…. P2P, B2P, F2P.. all of the different models have their pro’s but at the same time they are all able to be effected by the same cons…. in fact many MMO prefer to offer a choice now of how you wish to play.. sub or F2P…
Every game will also then have its collection of white nights and cash shop whiners and every MMO has a person or persons who seek feel compelled for some reason to write threads about the games rise/demise.

If your really interested in ANETS or other MMO’s grounding then write a letter and enquire to them or look out for their quarterly reports etc (if they have them)… until then go enjoy the game and quit writing this nonsense.

You make fair enough points, but you’re entering a conversation somewhat in the middle. There have been a few threads on these forums that talk about the game dying (with absolutely no proof whatsoever), but there have been very few games pointing to the game’s health.

No one knows of course, which is the point. If people are free to post comments about how the game is dying with no evidence whatsoever, I should be free to post threads that the game is doing well. From what I can “see” in game it’s doing very well. But that’s just my point of view.

The hiring bit I find interesting because I have seen other MMOs that have let people go due to sales figures that haven’t been met. But we do KNOW how many sales were expected for Guild Wars 2, based on industry analysis, which is what defines a successful game, at least to some degree.

And we do know Anet has exceeded that expectation.

That’s not conjecture at all. That’s fact.

How it will do in the future, no one can say.

Behellagh.1468:

clay.7849:

Heijincks.9267:

Fernling.1729:

NCsoft stock has significantly dropped since the release of GW2, that tells me that something isn’t doing too well.

NCSoft isn’t only about GW2. About the time when GW2 was released, City of Heroes was shut down and that had some serious backlash.

So you think that CoH’s revenue was a big enough loss to counter the massive amounts of money that GW2 made at release?

If anything CoH was shut down to help revenue, not to hurt it.

But, I agree as a publisher of games, and not the developer, GW2 is just a small part of the entire NCSoft company and as such NCSoft’s ability to be worth less than half of what it was a year and a half ago, may not have anything to do with GW2.

The gaming industry in general is down.

See my previous post in this thread.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Is-Guild-Wars-2-Doing-Well/1757784

Gotcha. Yes, I see your point now. Can’t say I disagree either.

To answer the topic question:

The game is clearly doing well. After 7 months, AoC, WAR, SWTOR were basically dead, with very few people playing content on a regular basis compared to what we have now in GW2.

I still find consistent numbers at off-peak hours, which is a pretty reliable indicator that the game is well populated. There are still several major kinks to work out, but I knew that was going to be the case going into the game when I pre-purchased it a year ago. MMOs take time to mature, and this game’s mechanics are new relative to the stagnant design MMO players have had to deal with post-WoW.

GW1 started off good and became great. I have no reason to doubt that this game will do the same. It’s just going to take some iteration, and iteration takes time.

marnick.4305:

Bloodstealer.5978:

Yes you are using nothing but speculative numbers in your argument.. and what you fail to understand is even if there are a million players left the concurrent numbers of logins based on the 1million is going to be significantly lower… but you and I or anyone know nothing of the games overheads, the breakpoints or there cashflow dynamics… you are simply trying to play the doomsayer and white angel all at the same time.. whilst armed with nothing but baseless facts and sheer guess work.

One thing we do know about overhead and breakpoints is that the whole GW-GW2 server design was about minimal costs and scale ability. As far as server costs go, it is pretty much a one player costs X times amount of online players. This was the core reason why a.net devs quit WoW and started their own thing, because they figured out how to make a free MMO.

Leaves employee costs, which is still low considering a.net is a mid-size firm.

I’m not making their balance, but I’d wager they can be a very healthy company with far less active players than any other MMO on the market. Don’t forget GW1 was thriving as a relatively obscure cult MMO.

I can only agree with this post… though no company large or small, is immune to market forces… but unless the OP has all the actual facts, rhymes and reasons to his/her disposal.. making such threads is really nothing more than heresay… then again every MMO forum has them being reeled out over and over I guess.

Bloodstealer.5978:

marnick.4305:

Bloodstealer.5978:

Yes you are using nothing but speculative numbers in your argument.. and what you fail to understand is even if there are a million players left the concurrent numbers of logins based on the 1million is going to be significantly lower… but you and I or anyone know nothing of the games overheads, the breakpoints or there cashflow dynamics… you are simply trying to play the doomsayer and white angel all at the same time.. whilst armed with nothing but baseless facts and sheer guess work.

One thing we do know about overhead and breakpoints is that the whole GW-GW2 server design was about minimal costs and scale ability. As far as server costs go, it is pretty much a one player costs X times amount of online players. This was the core reason why a.net devs quit WoW and started their own thing, because they figured out how to make a free MMO.

Leaves employee costs, which is still low considering a.net is a mid-size firm.

I’m not making their balance, but I’d wager they can be a very healthy company with far less active players than any other MMO on the market. Don’t forget GW1 was thriving as a relatively obscure cult MMO.

I can only agree with this post… though no company large or small, is immune to market forces… but unless the OP has all the actual facts, rhymes and reasons to his/her disposal.. making such threads is really nothing more than heresay… then again every MMO forum has them being reeled out over and over I guess.

That’s my point. I’d have never made this post, if I hadn’t seen two or three posts asking if it’s dying. Well, no one really knows…but we have “some” indication. If it was really dying, you wouldn’t see them hiring. There’s NO percentage in hiring a staff for a dying game. The situations where that would be acceptable are pretty kitten rare, particularly in gaming.

No one knows but conclusions can be drawn from things we do know, and things we see. But I’m kitten tired of people making stuff up. If you’re going to say the game is dying (and plenty of people on these forums have), then at least show some evidence, other than all my friends left the game.

We don’t know everything, but there is at least circumstantial evidence that the game isn’t dying. How well its’ doing, no one can say, but dying?

That’s why I made this post in the first place. As an answer to those people.

Mackdose.6504:

To answer the topic question:

The game is clearly doing well. After 7 months, AoC, WAR, SWTOR were basically dead, with very few people playing content on a regular basis compared to what we have now in GW2.

I still find consistent numbers at off-peak hours, which is a pretty reliable indicator that the game is well populated. There are still several major kinks to work out, but I knew that was going to be the case going into the game when I pre-purchased it a year ago. MMOs take time to mature, and this game’s mechanics are new relative to the stagnant design MMO players have had to deal with post-WoW.

GW1 started off good and became great. I have no reason to doubt that this game will do the same. It’s just going to take some iteration, and iteration takes time.

I agree with you, the game is young and no where near the polished product I would imagine ANET / NCSoft envisage.. but after “x” years of development the company has to start making a return on its investment… so the powers that be in the money departments push to sale.. but behind that decision they will almost definitely have an action plan of content releases.. most of which will already either be ready to implement or close to.. this is what all MMO’s would do from launch because it buys them time to design and develop the next batch of small expansions/mechanics but at the same time allow them capacity to bug fix. It also allows them time to evaluate their needs and resources internally as well as externally.. ie they may need more support infrastructure or hardware resource etc, etc… better to tread lightly and carefully unlike what SWTOR did and just push out the whole hog from the off based on box sale success.. man those hundreds of servers were sooo empty so quickly .. virtual ghost towns after 3 months

Thus far the company has been busy keeping us busy with new stuff on a regular basis but I would hazard a guess much of this was already penned in t0 a calendar release schedule… maybe the Guild Mission stuff was something out of sync but its relatively light content if you think about it.

My point is, in response to the OP.. there is no evidence to suggest this game is doing well, or not as yet.. only snippits to say the box sales have been good… so was SWTOR’s.. a record for a AAA MMO if I recall.. its what comes after that’s makes the game viable over time… I have seen nothing to suggest this game is either flourishing or dieing.. so I opt to ere on the side of caution until such times as “the truth will out” comes into play… but to base assumptions on nothing more than “I think, so its true” and job adverts is a bit to…. thin on facts for me

Though I wonder.. if ANET came back and answered the OP with " it’s unfortunate but the game is not doing as well as we hoped".. what difference would it make to us.. similarly if they said " the game is doing super, were expanding and making loads of money of all you people"… what would we all do then – - > nothing we would simply carry on playing the game as usual