Guild Wars 2

Erasculio.2914:

…huge difference between constructive criticism and whining. Unfortunately, fanboys cannot see this difference, and as such try to silence anyone who thinks differently.

Unfortunately, the tone of your writing, not only the review in question, is such that you are effectively guilty of the same, while accusing everybody who disagrees with your “infallible” arguments as “fanbois.” I personally feel insulted whenever someone lumps me with “fanbois” just because I can’t agree with him/her. It is the main flaw of your writing-you have decided that your viewpoint is “fact” and “superior”, and have decided to pre-dismiss anything to the contrary.

Again, wish people were more open-minded than this, but the world is full of this kind of intolerant (“I am always right, you must be wrong! You have no right to dissent!”) situations, so it doesn’t surprise me in the least (though it is a shame).

Think about it, what weight does any argument has that can only be defended with “if you disagree, then you must be a fanboi”?

Erasculio.2914:

Heijincks.9267:

You’re trying to tell Anet about things:
a) most people don’t really care about
b) most people disagree with you about

I’m rather curious as to how you know what “most people” think.

I don’t know. However, the fact that you implicitly assert that you do somehow know in regards to your interpretations gives me a warrant to generalize as well. It’s to prove a point to you rather than to provide a counterpoint, but proving this point also scrutinizes your “review”.

Despite this however, there are more in disagreement to your “review” than there are in agreement.

I love how people are generalising every CoF run as being zerk speed runs when I’ve been doing a lot of CoF runs over the past few days (for skins, not for money before anyone starts down that road). I never have to wait longer than a minute to get an invite on my ele, and because it’s a recent 80 I do not have ascended/full zerk gear. Out of the many runs I’ve been on over the past week only 1 or 2 has taken significantly longer, and most are literally only 30 seconds longer than the full warrior setups. You can easily avoid elitist players if you want to, however if you always want to join speed runs, all I can say is that makes you somewhat elitist yourself.

My review of the ‘review’: 5 out of 5 trollfaces. Well done, you got plenty of bites.

There will be never a perfect game end that is the fact… but this is not the point.
So let be honest here….You guys are happy from what u see so far?
1 PvE > 7 /10 Like the fact they give Temp. content but the core just don’t work us it should. To match grind for fractal end Legendary weapons. Lots of people give up on this long ago..trying to be short here..
2 Class balance end skills 6/10 Not match to be said here… Limited builds end no enough skills . Every weapon should have at least 10 more sub skills same us elites
Builds need attention. More weapons for every class.
3 WvW 4/10 Is getting old. Fixing the culing was great… thumbs up for that but giving people some Green / yellow skins that u can get for 1.99 s was just slap in the face . Progression is great but promotion of zerg end no attention to small play make the game one sited . 10/20 man Raids need it.( have nothing to do with PvE) At least commanders should have raid option. Change the map texture ….
Map 1 desert
Map 2 water
Map 3 snow
EB is ok just need to get bigger
4 PvP 9/10 Is getting there ..but depends very mach on 2 end how is balanced. They go hand end hand . GvG arena need it

To sum it up… love the game ,is great but to go to the next level some things need to be addressed . Overall 6/10 but can be better, way better
Just my opinion.. don’t go crazy about it

Erasculio.2914:

Yes.
The community is dominated by grinders and exploiters because ArenaNet introduced multiple systems in the game catering to those players, instead of following their stated goal of trying to cater to the opposite group (those who do not usually like MMOs). It’s laughable to think that the design of a game does not influence what kind of community it will have. ArenaNet has some ways to deal with this issue, such as changing the design or at least making the game require less reliance on other players (so someone could just ignore the bad community).

1. One of first games to introduce DR and limit farming, it totally caters to grinders!
2. Exploiters tend to get banned, it totally caters to exploiters!
3. So you want the game to be singleplayer, because you hate over 3 million people without no real basis… Yeah, your problem, not theirs.

Erasculio.2914:

Wrong. Pick an example of a game review using the word fail:
https://www.google.com.br/search?q=review+ign+"the+game+fails"

And we know how unbias IGN is, especially when they had a Mass Effect 3 reporter modeled after their own reporter and then blindly defended the game insulting millions and millions of people. They have been EA lapdogs for a while now. If you want to be a good reviewer don’t follow their example.

Erasculio.2914:

Let me teach you a few things: a review is someone’s opinion. You can trust a review based either on knowing the reviewer and sharing the same tastes (which is only known after following a reviewer for quite some time), or based on the arguments used in the review. Saying “this game has bad graphics because it has too much pink and I hate pink” is as much an opinion as saying “this game has bad graphics because it is filled with clipping, and is using an outdated engine that renders obsolete textures”, but the latter has better arguments in which to stand.

The problem with your comparison is – a reviewer has to base his opinion on facts. If he states “I hate this game because it has pink” he is not a real reviewer. You can dislike it all you want and paint the darkest picture, but you have to use actual facts. You didn’t do that and therefore are avoiding Page 1 with passion.

Erasculio.2914:

If you ask anyone who has any kind of criticism to leave, you will end only with those who think the game is perfect. And those actually hurt the game – they are delusional (no game is perfect), and by not telling the developers how to improve, they prevent the game from ever reaching its true potential.

There is a huge difference between constructive criticism and whining. Unfortunately, fanboys cannot see this difference, and as such try to silence anyone who thinks differently.

unfortunately for your case you provided close to zero constructive criticism and even included a few suggestions that would ruin the game for everyone (including you). Well done.

It kind of saddens me how the OP cannot handle the reviews on his own review. If you want to give criticism, you better be able to handle it yourself as well.

Just read the review and i have to say that i think it is as the author would say flawed. There is transparent bias against almost everything about the game with equally transparent false equivocations and positions developed with admitted little or no experience. The review is in short shallow. The author’s impression of the game given these circumstances is understandable but that the review should be given any merit is laughable.

Tosha Daydreamer.9251:

It kind of saddens me how the OP cannot handle the reviews on his own review. If you want to give criticism, you better be able to handle it yourself as well.

Criticism on the games forums, where mostly those go to discuss the game they enjoy playing. Seems almost like a death wish on the OP’s part regardless of whether he/she can take criticism or not.

Erasculio.2914:

Conclusion

Guild Wars 2 failed. By ArenaNet’s own definition of success, “Is it fun?”, the answer often is “no, it’s not”. Good for them that the community of grinders that fill this (and all other) MMO are not really interested in fun.

Calling the best, most fun MMO ever “failed” is funny. From this post on, I can’t take you serious anymore.

Sure, some minor issues. But overall, the game is very enjoyable for a casual, as grind free as it gets with a pretty good community. Unless you deliberately seek out the worst of the worst, you will never meet them.

Jaall.3420:

Erasculio.2914:

And the amount of bugs in this game, plus how slow ArenaNet is in fixing them, is not something you see in good games.

Actually it is.

Actually, it’s not.

Do some research on how many bugs still exist in GW2. Then drill down further and find out how many bugs still exist for each profession. How long has it been since release? We’re talking the type of bugs that any other competitor has generally patched within the first few months of an MMOs release. It is, in a word, ridiculous. I actually have not seen a game with more bugs than GW2 – Ever – That be the truth

Omen.1879:

Jaall.3420:

Erasculio.2914:

And the amount of bugs in this game, plus how slow ArenaNet is in fixing them, is not something you see in good games.

Actually it is.

Actually, it’s not.

Do some research on how many bugs still exist in GW2. Then drill down further and find out how many bugs still exist for each profession. How long has it been since release? We’re talking the type of bugs that any other competitor has generally patched within the first few months of an MMOs release. It is, in a word, ridiculous. I actually have not seen a game with more bugs than GW2 – Ever – That be the truth

Guess you didn’t play Skyrim…and that’s not even an MMO.

Vayne.8563:

Omen.1879:

Jaall.3420:

Erasculio.2914:

And the amount of bugs in this game, plus how slow ArenaNet is in fixing them, is not something you see in good games.

Actually it is.

Actually, it’s not.

Do some research on how many bugs still exist in GW2. Then drill down further and find out how many bugs still exist for each profession. How long has it been since release? We’re talking the type of bugs that any other competitor has generally patched within the first few months of an MMOs release. It is, in a word, ridiculous. I actually have not seen a game with more bugs than GW2 – Ever – That be the truth

Guess you didn’t play Skyrim…and that’s not even an MMO.

Or WoW and Aion.Those games were virtually unplayable due to the bugs at launch. Some weren’t patched for over a year. In comparison with WoW TBC and current Aion, GW2 is bug free.

If Omen.1879 claims he never played a game with more bugs than GW2, he simply never played an MMO before during launch phase. And that’s a fact.

marnick.4305:

If Omen.1879 claims he never played a game with more bugs than GW2, he simply never played an MMO before during launch phase. And that’s a fact.

Gonna have to agree, most MMOs aren’t even playable for the good part of year 1 – unless you like being frustrated. (apparently enough do that some of em get a year two … sometimes)

Jack of Tears.9458:

marnick.4305:

If Omen.1879 claims he never played a game with more bugs than GW2, he simply never played an MMO before during launch phase. And that’s a fact.

Gonna have to agree, most MMOs aren’t even playable for the good part of year 1 – unless you like being frustrated. (apparently enough do that some of em get a year two … sometimes)

Just out of curiosity, what are the names of the MMOs that shut down within a year? Not just went F2P or somesuch like TOR and Secret World, but those that actually closed up shop?

Not many MMOs close within a year, but many of them were killed by bugs that made them upplayable. The one that comes immediately to mind is Warhammer online, which was so buggy it was literally unplayable. AoC when it came out was absolutely dreadful and continues to have bugs to this day, years later.

WoW when it came out was very buggy, so much so that during its first weeks the servers were down almost as much as they were up.

Vangard was beyond buggy at launch and remains so to this day.

All the PW games are riddles with bugs and so are the Turbine games. Mind you, games do tend to get better after a year or two, but some bugs are never fixed.

I can’t imagine people think most MMOs are less buggy than Guild Wars 2.

The last I heard, Warhammer Online was still… online. Did it shut down? I’m wondering because I often hear about “dying” and “dead” MMOs, yet when I did some searching for them I found that most were still online, and in the case of WO and Age of Conan, had recently been updated. If no one is playing these games, I imagine the servers would be shut down because they just drain money from the companies that run them. So I assume there are still people playing, and the claims that they have died are greatly exaggerated.

I only know of a few MMOs that have permanently shut down. Matrix Online and Tabula Rasa are the only ones I can recall at the moment. Oh, and City of Heroes, most recently, and Star Wars Galaxies, in favor of the newer SW MMO.

tolunart.2095:

Jack of Tears.9458:

marnick.4305:

If Omen.1879 claims he never played a game with more bugs than GW2, he simply never played an MMO before during launch phase. And that’s a fact.

Gonna have to agree, most MMOs aren’t even playable for the good part of year 1 – unless you like being frustrated. (apparently enough do that some of em get a year two … sometimes)

Just out of curiosity, what are the names of the MMOs that shut down within a year? Not just went F2P or somesuch like TOR and Secret World, but those that actually closed up shop?

That’s what I’m talking about, forced to go freeplay … not a good fate for a game that went in expecting a monthly subscription. (and within a few months nonetheless)

Jack of Tears.9458:

That’s what I’m talking about, forced to go freeplay … not a good fate for a game that went in expecting a monthly subscription. (and within a few months nonetheless)

It’s been quite successful in some cases. And the people running businesses are seldom sentimental, if a F2P game barely covered the costs to run it, I doubt it would still be running. So any MMO that hasn’t shut down can be assumed to be at least moderately profitable.

marnick.4305:

Vayne.8563:

Omen.1879:

Jaall.3420:

Erasculio.2914:

And the amount of bugs in this game, plus how slow ArenaNet is in fixing them, is not something you see in good games.

Actually it is.

Actually, it’s not.

Do some research on how many bugs still exist in GW2. Then drill down further and find out how many bugs still exist for each profession. How long has it been since release? We’re talking the type of bugs that any other competitor has generally patched within the first few months of an MMOs release. It is, in a word, ridiculous. I actually have not seen a game with more bugs than GW2 – Ever – That be the truth

Guess you didn’t play Skyrim…and that’s not even an MMO.

Or WoW and Aion.Those games were virtually unplayable due to the bugs at launch. Some weren’t patched for over a year. In comparison with WoW TBC and current Aion, GW2 is bug free.

If Omen.1879 claims he never played a game with more bugs than GW2, he simply never played an MMO before during launch phase. And that’s a fact.

Played em all. You just got to look deep enough Like I said, do the research. OP makes very valid points.

Omen.1879:

OP makes very valid points.

Valid
val·id
Adjective
Actually supporting the intended point or claim; acceptable as cogent: “a valid criticism”.

Posting these quotes again, just in case anyone mistakenly thinks there is anything “valid” about OP’s “review”.
– "the community is really bad”
– “the community of GW2 players is deeply flawed”
– “It speaks wonders about how bad the GW2 community is”
– “One of Guild Wars 2’s main issues is its community”

tolunart.2095:

Jack of Tears.9458:

That’s what I’m talking about, forced to go freeplay … not a good fate for a game that went in expecting a monthly subscription. (and within a few months nonetheless)

It’s been quite successful in some cases. And the people running businesses are seldom sentimental, if a F2P game barely covered the costs to run it, I doubt it would still be running. So any MMO that hasn’t shut down can be assumed to be at least moderately profitable.

Right, but the point was that these games were so crappy the first year – usually because of bugs – that they were forced to go free to play. GW2 isn’t as buggy as those games were the first year; I know, I played a few of them and those bugs could be downright gamebreaking.

Jack of Tears.9458:

Right, but the point was that these games were so crappy the first year – usually because of bugs – that they were forced to go free to play. GW2 isn’t as buggy as those games were the first year; I know, I played a few of them and those bugs could be downright gamebreaking.

Oh, I agree. Every MMO has bugs, and some are handled better than others. But I find it an endless source of amusement that games are pronounced “dead” when they are in fact still active years later, still have people playing them, and obviously bring in enough money – even as “free to play” games – that they are kept online. But they’re dead, and no one plays them.

The level of hyperbole that people in these forums can reach! Just in case you wonder why I don’t take anything here seriously, remember the dead games that are still online, with empty servers that make more than enough money to justify their operating costs.

I mean, the majority of claims people make here is just pure… fertilizer…

Hell, these days F2P is considered a pretty decent business model for MMO; I’m sure Neverwinter is gonna make a mint.

Jack of Tears.9458:

Hell, these days F2P is considered a pretty decent business model for MMO; I’m sure Neverwinter is gonna make a mint.

If anything, it’s the sub-based model that’s on the Endangered Species list.

tolunart.2095:

The last I heard, Warhammer Online was still… online. Did it shut down? I’m wondering because I often hear about “dying” and “dead” MMOs, yet when I did some searching for them I found that most were still online, and in the case of WO and Age of Conan, had recently been updated. If no one is playing these games, I imagine the servers would be shut down because they just drain money from the companies that run them. So I assume there are still people playing, and the claims that they have died are greatly exaggerated.

I only know of a few MMOs that have permanently shut down. Matrix Online and Tabula Rasa are the only ones I can recall at the moment. Oh, and City of Heroes, most recently, and Star Wars Galaxies, in favor of the newer SW MMO.

They say MMOs are dead when they’re down to 1 or 2 servers. Like 1 PvP server and 1 PvE server.

Vayne.8563:

They say MMOs are dead when they’re down to 1 or 2 servers. Like 1 PvP server and 1 PvE server.

I hope “they” are not doctors.

Doctor: Time of death, 3:52 pm.

Patient: Uh, I’m not dead.

Doctor: Well you’re not moving fast enough, that’s close enough for me.

I always thought that “dead” means, you know, lifeless. As in nothing there any more. Not “merely 50,000 people playing the game” or something.

I guess no one told them their game died.

tolunart.2095:

Vayne.8563:

They say MMOs are dead when they’re down to 1 or 2 servers. Like 1 PvP server and 1 PvE server.

I hope “they” are not doctors.

Doctor: Time of death, 3:52 pm.

Patient: Uh, I’m not dead.

Doctor: Well you’re not moving fast enough, that’s close enough for me.

I always thought that “dead” means, you know, lifeless. As in nothing there any more. Not “merely 50,000 people playing the game” or something.

I guess no one told them their game died.

Dead, in MMO terms, means it’s down to it’s last players who stubbornly cling to the game even though it will never get another update, and no one is left to fix the bugs…or something close to it.

Like Sony abandoned work on Vanguard, even though it had the potential to be one of the greatest MMOs of all time. But it launched with so many bugs, and played so badly on so many people’s systems, that it was dead before the honeymoon phase wore off. If you wanted to see a buggy game, that’s the one to look at. Guild Wars 2 is flawless by comparison.

Though the game had a lot of neat ideas, a few of which I haven’t seen anywhere else.

Vayne.8563:

Dead, in MMO terms, means it’s down to it’s last players who stubbornly cling to the game even though it will never get another update, and no one is left to fix the bugs…or something close to it.

Like Sony abandoned work on Vanguard, even though it had the potential to be one of the greatest MMOs of all time. But it launched with so many bugs, and played so badly on so many people’s systems, that it was dead before the honeymoon phase wore off. If you wanted to see a buggy game, that’s the one to look at. Guild Wars 2 is flawless by comparison.

Though the game had a lot of neat ideas, a few of which I haven’t seen anywhere else.

When I played Rift I heard that Warhammer Online and Age of Conan had died. I went to their websites and both had been updated recently.

LOL it’s just semantics, and I’m not going to argue the point, but I find it hilarious that people pronounce a game “dead” when all they are really saying is “it doesn’t matter to ME any more.”

Businesses die all the time. Stores go out of business, entire chains of restaurants close. When that happens, they don’t exist any more. When I see a website for a “dead” game that has announcements about bugs that were fixed or a new PvP map or somesuch, then I say to myself, the game still exists, and people are playing it.

So, I’m not going accept it when “they” say the game is dying, or dead. Magic the Gathering has been dying since a few months after its release in 1993. But I don’t think Wizards of the Coast noticed, they were too busy counting money. They still are.

tolunart.2095:

Vayne.8563:

Dead, in MMO terms, means it’s down to it’s last players who stubbornly cling to the game even though it will never get another update, and no one is left to fix the bugs…or something close to it.

Like Sony abandoned work on Vanguard, even though it had the potential to be one of the greatest MMOs of all time. But it launched with so many bugs, and played so badly on so many people’s systems, that it was dead before the honeymoon phase wore off. If you wanted to see a buggy game, that’s the one to look at. Guild Wars 2 is flawless by comparison.

Though the game had a lot of neat ideas, a few of which I haven’t seen anywhere else.

When I played Rift I heard that Warhammer Online and Age of Conan had died. I went to their websites and both had been updated recently.

LOL it’s just semantics, and I’m not going to argue the point, but I find it hilarious that people pronounce a game “dead” when all they are really saying is “it doesn’t matter to ME any more.”

Businesses die all the time. Stores go out of business, entire chains of restaurants close. When that happens, they don’t exist any more. When I see a website for a “dead” game that has announcements about bugs that were fixed or a new PvP map or somesuch, then I say to myself, the game still exists, and people are playing it.

So, I’m not going accept it when “they” say the game is dying, or dead. Magic the Gathering has been dying since a few months after its release in 1993. But I don’t think Wizards of the Coast noticed, they were too busy counting money. They still are.

Oh yeah, I agree. The only games I can think of off the top of my head that really have died are Dungeon Runners, City of Heroes/Villians, Star Wars Galaxies…I’m sure there are others, I just cant’ think of them. I mean Everquest is still running. People still play UO even.

Vayne.8563:

Oh yeah, I agree. The only games I can think of off the top of my head that really have died are Dungeon Runners, City of Heroes/Villians, Star Wars Galaxies…I’m sure there are others, I just cant’ think of them. I mean Everquest is still running. People still play UO even.

It’s like calling someone “fanboy” or “troll” for no reason other than the person disagrees with you. It’s a way to dismiss something or someone as irrelevant without having to provide a valid reason.

It makes me wish I were a psychology student or something, you could write a thesis, a book, even make a whole career out of studying MMO players…

There are people who do this. You see call outs every once in a while to get one to one feedback for their thesis.
What amazes me is that more companies do not collaborate with universities about this. Would be a huge benefit to both. Anet hired an economist but not a psychologist, both would have been helpful.

tolunart.2095:

Vayne.8563:

Oh yeah, I agree. The only games I can think of off the top of my head that really have died are Dungeon Runners, City of Heroes/Villians, Star Wars Galaxies…I’m sure there are others, I just cant’ think of them. I mean Everquest is still running. People still play UO even.

It’s like calling someone “fanboy” or “troll” for no reason other than the person disagrees with you. It’s a way to dismiss something or someone as irrelevant without having to provide a valid reason.

It makes me wish I were a psychology student or something, you could write a thesis, a book, even make a whole career out of studying MMO players…

Yargesh.4965:

There are people who do this. You see call outs every once in a while to get one to one feedback for their thesis.
What amazes me is that more companies do not collaborate with universities about this. Would be a huge benefit to both. Anet hired an economist but not a psychologist, both would have been helpful.

I’m sure they do, but they hide them behind some consultant title so people don’t realize how much they’re being manipulated. WoW clones, Farmville spinoffs, these games are too polished to have sprung into being by accident.

True, but an undergrad could sort through these forums much better than the current state of moderation (not just in this game but the majority of games). Psychological manipulation is not the same as psychological direction, just ask any cult member.

tolunart.2095:

Yargesh.4965:

There are people who do this. You see call outs every once in a while to get one to one feedback for their thesis.
What amazes me is that more companies do not collaborate with universities about this. Would be a huge benefit to both. Anet hired an economist but not a psychologist, both would have been helpful.

I’m sure they do, but they hide them behind some consultant title so people don’t realize how much they’re being manipulated. WoW clones, Farmville spinoffs, these games are too polished to have sprung into being by accident.

maddoctor.2738:

You can achieve most hearts by doing dynamic events near them (except for 2-3 out of 301 hearts) that’s also a fact.

Wrong. A quick look at the lists of hearts shows it’s more than “2-3”. Your “fact” is a joke.

More humorously, you don’t even understand the argument you are trying to defend. Vayne claimed my criticism of hearts was too harsh because he never has sto stop to do them – he just plays the nearby dynamic events, and that fills the hearts. In other words, he just ignores them. If the best thing you can say about an aspect of the game is that you can ignore it, it deserves to be harshly criticized.

Star Ace.5207:

while accusing everybody who disagrees with your “infallible” arguments

My arguments are infallible since no one here has managed to refute them. The great majority has not even tried.

This topic has 3 main discussions:

1. “Your review is your opinion”. Which is a pleonasm.

2. “Hearts can be ignored since doing dynamic events fills them”. That’s not true, as I have already proved taking examples from the game. Even if it were, though, that’s a weak argument, as described above (since when is ignoring an aspect of the game a sign that it has been well developed?).

3. “You are trolling”. Ad hominem may be the most common logical fallacy on the internet, but it’s still the weakest one.

The review, that some people are complaining is too long, is long because it has points about most aspects of the game. I am still waiting to see a decent, logical counter-argument to the points there. So far, Vayne has tried to counter one line (and has been proved to be wrong), and a single other person has tried to counter with some random nonsense, and that’s it. All other replies are basically one of the 3 variations above, not really adding anything to the discussion.

And the inability to have a decent discussion here is – guess what? – a good way to show people how the community here is lacking.

I’m sorry but since your review is too biased and you insult the community on numerous occasions, I can’t take this review seriously. No offense, I’m sure you did your best.

Erasculio.2914:

Vayne claimed my criticism of hearts was too harsh because he never has sto stop to do them – he just plays the nearby dynamic events, and that fills the hearts. In other words, he just ignores them. If the best thing you can say about an aspect of the game is that you can ignore it, it deserves to be harshly criticized.

Except that the reason you can ignore them is not because they are useless, but because you can complete them by just enjoying the game. That is the opposite of something that needs to be criticized.

However, I do not necessarily agree with that. I often am going out of my way to do hearts, and do the DE’s while I am at it for double reward.

Jemmi.6058:

Except that the reason you can ignore them is not because they are useless, but because you can complete them by just enjoying the game.

By doing dynamic events, based on what Vayne and some others have said. In other words, dynamic events are (some times) great, yes. Hearts, meanwhile, are meaningless – the fact they can be ignored and just done automatically while people are doing some other kind of content (when that’s possible) is a great way to show how weak hearts are. The fact some posters here have adamantly used this argument to defend hearts is also a great way to show how bad they are – even those trying to defend them cannot use any better point than “they don’t get in the way”.

Hearts should have been some kind of content that people activelly do because they enjoy doing them (regardless of any reward), or they should just have been removed from the game.

tolunart.2095:

When I played Rift I heard that Warhammer Online and Age of Conan had died. I went to their websites and both had been updated recently.

LOL it’s just semantics, and I’m not going to argue the point, but I find it hilarious that people pronounce a game “dead” when all they are really saying is “it doesn’t matter to ME any more.”

Businesses die all the time. Stores go out of business, entire chains of restaurants close. When that happens, they don’t exist any more. When I see a website for a “dead” game that has announcements about bugs that were fixed or a new PvP map or somesuch, then I say to myself, the game still exists, and people are playing it.

So, I’m not going accept it when “they” say the game is dying, or dead. Magic the Gathering has been dying since a few months after its release in 1993. But I don’t think Wizards of the Coast noticed, they were too busy counting money. They still are.

dead for an MMO means that barely anyone plays it anymore. GW1 is close to dead. Canthat only has 2 channels – English and International. I’m up to the 7th mission. Seen 3 people in total. That’s playing for weeks.
Warhammer Online and Age of Conan both only have maybe a few players left. A couple of hundreds. That’s not enough to support an MMO or to create any kind of population.

Mirta.5029:

dead for an MMO means that barely anyone plays it anymore. GW1 is close to dead. Canthat only has 2 channels – English and International. I’m up to the 7th mission. Seen 3 people in total. That’s playing for weeks.
Warhammer Online and Age of Conan both only have maybe a few players left. A couple of hundreds. That’s not enough to support an MMO or to create any kind of population.

Yes, I know that, I just find it funny and an example of the way people blow things way out of proportion. It must be a gamer thing, because I see examples of it everywhere in the forums.

I bought a copy of GW1 and during the evenings when I go into any of the game worlds I see dozens of people wandering around the communal areas. I don’t know how many are actually playing the game because they are in private instances, but I don’t get the impression that it’s dead. At 5 am or so, yes, there’s perhaps myself and another person or two. But this is common in any game, there are peak and off-peak hours.

Given this, and the fact that most MMOs do not release exact population numbers, I have a hard time believing that Warhammer and AoC are down to “hundreds” of players. Such a population would never justify the expense of keeping the servers running and would be shut down. Unless perhaps the games are run by nonprofit corporations?

I understand people speculate about things, I do it all the time. I consider what I know about a subject and try to come to a logical conclusion. But claims like this are neither logical nor speculative. It’s a big reason why many people – I would imagine the devs included – will never take the things posted here seriously.

Erasculio.2914:

maddoctor.2738:

You can achieve most hearts by doing dynamic events near them (except for 2-3 out of 301 hearts) that’s also a fact.

Wrong. A quick look at the lists of hearts shows it’s more than “2-3”. Your “fact” is a joke.

More humorously, you don’t even understand the argument you are trying to defend. Vayne claimed my criticism of hearts was too harsh because he never has sto stop to do them – he just plays the nearby dynamic events, and that fills the hearts. In other words, he just ignores them. If the best thing you can say about an aspect of the game is that you can ignore it, it deserves to be harshly criticized.

Star Ace.5207:

while accusing everybody who disagrees with your “infallible” arguments

My arguments are infallible since no one here has managed to refute them. The great majority has not even tried.

This topic has 3 main discussions:

1. “Your review is your opinion”. Which is a pleonasm.

2. “Hearts can be ignored since doing dynamic events fills them”. That’s not true, as I have already proved taking examples from the game. Even if it were, though, that’s a weak argument, as described above (since when is ignoring an aspect of the game a sign that it has been well developed?).

3. “You are trolling”. Ad hominem may be the most common logical fallacy on the internet, but it’s still the weakest one.

The review, that some people are complaining is too long, is long because it has points about most aspects of the game. I am still waiting to see a decent, logical counter-argument to the points there. So far, Vayne has tried to counter one line (and has been proved to be wrong), and a single other person has tried to counter with some random nonsense, and that’s it. All other replies are basically one of the 3 variations above, not really adding anything to the discussion.

And the inability to have a decent discussion here is – guess what? – a good way to show people how the community here is lacking.

Untrue with your comment about hearts. You can ignore SPvP if you don’t like to do it. That doesn’t mean it deserves to be criticized. In fact I know people who LIKE doing hearts. Really like them and wish there were more.

It’s a content type. You play the content you like, and you bypass the content you don’t. That’s what any person would do. If you don’t like to SPvP why would you SPvP. Since some people like hearts, those people can do them. Since I don’t (a matter of preference) I can ignore them.

Something that I ignore but other people like does not necessary deserve critcism. It’s like saying only stuff you like deserves praise and stuff you don’t like deserves criticism. It’s not really true no matter how strongly you feel.

There’s nothing wrong with most hearts except your dislike of them. This is why I say your review is amateur. Opinions like this.

This review is far too long, littered with numerous grammatical blunders and so utterly subjective in most of its criticisms it’s no wonder it needed to be self-published.

I’ll give it a C-

That’s C as in KITTEN.

Mirta.5029:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/GW2-expansion-1Q-Ncsoft-Conference-Call/first#post2011639
That’s why they’re doing well enough on sales to not need an expansion yet and that’s why I can find plenty of players in all zones.

Oh, so THAT’S why their updates so far are horrible? Because their sales are well enough to not need an expansion. That’s why we’ve had no real update since Fractals! Sheesh, don’t know what went into my mind there. I see these last 4 content patches were really filled to the brim with awesome stuff to do, like completing 5 whole new dynamic events and fixing signs! Quality content, they’re certainly earning well enough to spit out this stuff!

Rika.7249:

Oh, so THAT’S why their updates so far are horrible? Because their sales are well enough to not need an expansion. That’s why we’ve had no real update since Fractals! Sheesh, don’t know what went into my mind there. I see these last 4 content patches were really filled to the brim with awesome stuff to do, like completing 5 whole new dynamic events and fixing signs! Quality content, they’re certainly earning well enough to spit out this stuff!

you know whether you enjoy their updates or not is subjective. I personally loved both Sab and the living story thing. Now I’m waiting for the next one.

Erasculio.2914:

maddoctor.2738:

You can achieve most hearts by doing dynamic events near them (except for 2-3 out of 301 hearts) that’s also a fact.

Wrong. A quick look at the lists of hearts shows it’s more than “2-3”. Your “fact” is a joke.

More humorously, you don’t even understand the argument you are trying to defend. Vayne claimed my criticism of hearts was too harsh because he never has sto stop to do them – he just plays the nearby dynamic events, and that fills the hearts. In other words, he just ignores them. If the best thing you can say about an aspect of the game is that you can ignore it, it deserves to be harshly criticized.

Hearts are markers telling you STUFF HAPPENS HERE because vets from grinder MMOs couldn’t make up their own mind. They’re indeed the weakest part of the game because they serve one purpose: to guide new people towards events, the strong point of the game. This has been described on numerous occasions. You’re criticizing a system for working as intended …

Erasculio.2914:

maddoctor.2738:

You can achieve most hearts by doing dynamic events near them (except for 2-3 out of 301 hearts) that’s also a fact.

Wrong. A quick look at the lists of hearts shows it’s more than “2-3”. Your “fact” is a joke.

More humorously, you don’t even understand the argument you are trying to defend. Vayne claimed my criticism of hearts was too harsh because he never has sto stop to do them – he just plays the nearby dynamic events, and that fills the hearts. In other words, he just ignores them. If the best thing you can say about an aspect of the game is that you can ignore it, it deserves to be harshly criticized.

Star Ace.5207:

while accusing everybody who disagrees with your “infallible” arguments

My arguments are infallible since no one here has managed to refute them. The great majority has not even tried.

This topic has 3 main discussions:

1. “Your review is your opinion”. Which is a pleonasm.

2. “Hearts can be ignored since doing dynamic events fills them”. That’s not true, as I have already proved taking examples from the game. Even if it were, though, that’s a weak argument, as described above (since when is ignoring an aspect of the game a sign that it has been well developed?).

3. “You are trolling”. Ad hominem may be the most common logical fallacy on the internet, but it’s still the weakest one.

The review, that some people are complaining is too long, is long because it has points about most aspects of the game. I am still waiting to see a decent, logical counter-argument to the points there. So far, Vayne has tried to counter one line (and has been proved to be wrong), and a single other person has tried to counter with some random nonsense, and that’s it. All other replies are basically one of the 3 variations above, not really adding anything to the discussion.

And the inability to have a decent discussion here is – guess what? – a good way to show people how the community here is lacking.

Wow, what a severe case of a superiority complex and purple prose. By the way, you can’t refute an opinion, if that’s what you’re asking.

However, you can state how an opinion is wrong. For starters, let’s take that tidbit regarding what you said about the community. It’s completely based on your opinion that the community is bad. In other words, you’re basing an argument off your own opinion, which is a severe logical fallacy. This is just a start that goes to show how flawed your “review” is.

I don’t really care if people hate the game. Some people hate the Half Life series as well. If you don’t like GW2, alright sure, but to tell people they’re all wrong for saying why they disagree with you based on preference, and presenting extremely flawed arguments… well… just deserves an epic facepalm.

I wonder if you wrote this with the prospect of trying to convince people into thinking that the game is not as good as they thought it was, and at the same time trying to make yourself look like an intellectual master gamer of some sort.

Erasculio.2914:

Jemmi.6058:

Except that the reason you can ignore them is not because they are useless, but because you can complete them by just enjoying the game.

By doing dynamic events, based on what Vayne and some others have said. In other words, dynamic events are (some times) great, yes. Hearts, meanwhile, are meaningless – the fact they can be ignored and just done automatically while people are doing some other kind of content (when that’s possible) is a great way to show how weak hearts are. The fact some posters here have adamantly used this argument to defend hearts is also a great way to show how bad they are – even those trying to defend them cannot use any better point than “they don’t get in the way”.

Hearts should have been some kind of content that people activelly do because they enjoy doing them (regardless of any reward), or they should just have been removed from the game.

I fundamentally disagree with your argument, in that the fact that the quests don’t get in the way is great. It means they are acting as intended, in that you do them by being immersed in the world.

I do enjoy doing the heart quests while levelling as well.

Erasculio.2914:

Vayne.8563:

Never have I see a book or game review just use the word fail.

Wrong. Pick an example of a game review using the word fail:

https://www.google.com.br/search?q=review+ign+"the+game+fails"

Do you see a pattern here? You claimed I said dynamic events do not count for hearts, and you were wrong. You claimed all hearts could be achieved by playing around them instead of actively doing them, and you were wrong. You claimed game reviews don’t use the word “fail”, and you were wrong.

You didn’t read to closely the blurbs of text associates with the links your google search generated.

Most all start with “in this reviewers opinion…” and are followed by some specific thing the game failed to do, example:

XCOM: Enemy Unknown Review — Magnificent Frustration – IGN.com
www.ign.com/…/xcom-enemy-unknown-review-ma…?
Traduzir esta página
26/10/2012 – However, at least for this reviewer, the game fails to correctly increase the difficulty, as the higher difficulty levels simply punish you no matter …

You made a general defining statement that the game failed, implying that on the whole the game failed in all aspects of everything. Vayne said reviewers don’t do this and based on the links from your google search this is true.

Wow, Rascal! You really know how to stir up the fanbois!!!

I read the OP, and, while I do NOT agree with every point, I DO agree with his assessment: GW2 failed!!! It has become nothing but a gem store with a game added to it. In my opinion, they focus MORE on selling product in the gem store than they do ANYTHING else! I’ve become so disillusioned by it, I haven’t signed on to my game in months! Hell, I can’t even play GW1 any more, it’s bugged me so bad!

Oh, by the way, Rascal: the grind was added for a reason: the longer the fanbois play, the longer they sign in and farm, the more opportunities the game has to sell them more crap in the gem store! THAT is the REAL purpose for the grind.

Saldonus Darkholme.5680:

Wow, Rascal! You really know how to stir up the fanbois!!!

I read the OP, and, while I do NOT agree with every point, I DO agree with his assessment: GW2 failed!!! It has become nothing but a gem store with a game added to it. In my opinion, they focus MORE on selling product in the gem store than they do ANYTHING else! I’ve become so disillusioned by it, I haven’t signed on to my game in months! Hell, I can’t even play GW1 any more, it’s bugged me so bad!

Oh, by the way, Rascal: the grind was added for a reason: the longer the fanbois play, the longer they sign in and farm, the more opportunities the game has to sell them more crap in the gem store! THAT is the REAL purpose for the grind.

If you haven’t logged in in months then how do you know the game has become nothing but a gemstore? :p

For the record: I’ve been playing since launch, any gems I’ve acquired were purchased with ingame gold. Never felt like the gemstore was an obstruction to my enjoyment. So not really sure what you are getting at.

This is actually a really good cash shop, and I’ve seen a few. If you want some perspective, go and see Neverwinter’s cash shop. :p