- you can’t compare it to WoW expansions, because WoW is P2P
- you can’t compare it to GW1 because those were standalone games.
- you can compare it to EOTN because that was an add on (?)
- you can’t compare it to Rift, because “nobody cares about Rift or plays it”
while at the same time saying “what game kept the same population for 3 years, population slump is normal!”
(snipped due to post size)
I just want to highlight this again:
Anet have a gem store and a stream of revenue. Its probably not Riot Games level of profitability but the added content to the game is it is comes from that. HoT should be judged on its own, not based on some notion that we the player “owes” Anet for patching the game or making it sub free. If GW2 is your passion and you want it, by all means go for it. Anet still has me on good will they built up from GW1 but we should all be able to take a step back and look at it for what it is.
You cannot compare GW1’s games and the 1 expansion to GW2 because those games were not even MMOs to begin with, they were never even marketed as an MMO. GW1 was more like the Diablo series but with a graphical lobby, and nobody ever considers Diablo series as an MMO.
Also it is far from lacking in content, it is jammed packed with content, perhaps if you actually played the beta you might know this. Plus more content is going to be added to HoT over time.
I played the beta… Its not “jammed” pack with content. While you try to call others out, try actually reading what I wrote. Also the potential for future content is worth less than content on hand. You can assign value to it but if we compare that to what we currently know, its not as valuable. That does not excuse HoT since these types of game naturally adds content over time.
GW1 is an MMO. Anet choose to try to differentiate its features but its an MMO. Its massively online multiplayer. Steam has it listed as an MMO (I think this is the only third party retailer left?) and CORPG redirects to MMORPG on Wikipedia. Give me actual objective proof that GW1 was not an MMO rather than your own interpretations and I’ll believe you.
It defines it to be a CORPG which we always have shown to be an MMORPG. GW compares itself to other MMOs, it won MMO game of the year (yes “ironically” since its not a pure “mmo” but it shows that it is still in that category") Diablo was never considered an MMO but GW1 sure as hell was. Either by popular consent or definition shenanigans.
Future content added to HoT after release is very much valuable, it is part of the reason to buying HoT as well.
Not going to dig deep into searches looking for what the developers themselves saying that GW1 was not an MMO, Guild Wars 2 takes up the vast majority of the search results. But yes the developers themselves stated it was not an MMO.
MMOs are played in a persistent worlds, and GW1 definitely did not have persistent worlds. The towns/outposts were just a new fancy way of doing lobbies. GW1 had far more in common with Diablo series than it did with MMOs. Using your definition of MMOs, you might as well as call any game that has a lobby system as an MMO.
Future content is a reason to buy any sort of MMO. These types of games are known to add post release content. Again I didn’t say its not worth something but it sure as heck isn’t worth the same as what you get on release day.
I didn’t realize we get to make up our own assumptions and assume it to be right. Prove to me the developers stated that GW1 is not an MMO. You seem to be making quite the claim without anything to back it up. If I said the developers said the sky was green, would you take my word for it? Furthermore its ineffective and lazy when you say you don’t go too “deep” to back up what you are saying. If you are trying to establish a fact, you better back it up. GW1 had a loose persistent world. I really wonder if you are speaking out of your behind or if you actually played the original game based on these strange claims. Heck even GW2’s own wiki backs it up. http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Open_world
Notice the following line: “employs persistent environments more extensively than Guild Wars”
Sure there is more persistence, but that wording proves that GW1 had it too.
I am not making my own definition of MMO. I am using what the industry regards as an MMO. If I have to spoonfeed you the Wikipedia and Steam links I will. All of my evidence shows that by definition a CORPG = MMORPG. Furthermore by popularity, GW1 is regarded to be slotted into the MMO genre. I’m open to a debate on why GW1 isn’t an MMO. It certainty isn’t a conventional one. You’re going to need some proof though otherwise its just an opinion.
GW1 has zero persistence world. The towns/outposts do not count at all, again those were just more fancy lobbies. Once you left those lobbies, you were in an instanced world that was only for you and your party and nobody else. Anybody who has actually played GW1 can tell you this. Also in the years I have played GW1, rarely did I see someone refer to the game as an MMO, in fact more often then not when someone did mention it as an MMO on the town/outpost chats there would be a ton of people to correct them and tell them it is not an MMO.
Also a long time ago Guild wars 1 website had a faq that had this answer to the question if Guild Wars 1 was an MMO.
Rather than labeling Guild Wars an MMORPG, we prefer to call it a CORPG (Competitive Online Role-Playing Game).
Then the rest of the answer would go into more detail of the key differences between an MMO and CORPG. They have since deleted the whole FAQ altogether, but you can find many places referencing it on the net.
Also, the quote you used from the Wiki doesn’t exist.
No one would have corrected you. They would say that more specifically it would be a CORPG but MMO fits. You’re making up bullkitten and any vet of GW1 can tell you it. CORPG is a subset of MMO. The devs like to use that label as it helps GW1 differentiate themselves from the market but notice how they did not deny it is not an MMO. They prefer to give it a different name. CORPG is simply a marketing term that is based on an MMO. You can’t get around this and your credibility has been shot. Don’t conjure random opinions you claim to be fact and try to pass it off. I’ve given you plenty of evidence and all you have is hearsay.
“The article’s approach to classifying the game should be based on how it was received, not by how the developers decided to market it. Wikipedia is not beholden to reinforce a company’s advertising campaigns. As it stands, “CORPG” seems to be a marketing term invented by Anet which did not gain any use or recognition outside of Guild Wars. The term therefore does not improve the reader’s understanding of the subject. However, we should also still make mention of the fact that Anet attempted to market this neologism."
Furthermore as if you couldn’t get less credible, you clearly edited the GW2 wiki page for Open World yourself. Its beyond obvious that the wiki lists a change that was done 9/10/15 right as you make your claim. (also see photo attached) http://wiki.guildwars2.com/index.php?title=Open_world&diff=next&oldid=563522
Attempting to fool someone with such underhanded tactics will get you nowhere.
Guild Wars is a CORPG, or Competitive/Cooperative Online Role Playing Game developed for Windows by ArenaNet and published by NCsoft. The first campaign of Guild Wars, Guild Wars Prophecies was released on April 28, 2005. The different genre was chosen (as opposed to the “Massively Multiplayer Online (MMO) RPG”) due to the perceived differences between the game and other MMOs…
Yet clicking on the blue link for “competitive online role-playing game” in wikipedia results in a redirect to “MMO”. The Wikipedia page proves my argument. Either by definition or popular consent (see IGN MMO GOTY comment along with Wikipedia GW talk page), GW1 is an MMO. It may have a subsection it falls under, but it sure as heck is an MMO. I have yet to see actual proof refuting this. CORPG is a marketing term and I think is very obviously under the umbrella of MMO.
- you can’t compare it to WoW expansions, because WoW is P2P
- you can’t compare it to GW1 because those were standalone games.
- you can compare it to EOTN because that was an add on (?)
- you can’t compare it to Rift, because “nobody cares about Rift or plays it”
while at the same time saying “what game kept the same population for 3 years, population slump is normal!”
(snipped due to post size)
I just want to highlight this again:
Anet have a gem store and a stream of revenue. Its probably not Riot Games level of profitability but the added content to the game is it is comes from that. HoT should be judged on its own, not based on some notion that we the player “owes” Anet for patching the game or making it sub free. If GW2 is your passion and you want it, by all means go for it. Anet still has me on good will they built up from GW1 but we should all be able to take a step back and look at it for what it is.
You cannot compare GW1’s games and the 1 expansion to GW2 because those games were not even MMOs to begin with, they were never even marketed as an MMO. GW1 was more like the Diablo series but with a graphical lobby, and nobody ever considers Diablo series as an MMO.
Also it is far from lacking in content, it is jammed packed with content, perhaps if you actually played the beta you might know this. Plus more content is going to be added to HoT over time.
I played the beta… Its not “jammed” pack with content. While you try to call others out, try actually reading what I wrote. Also the potential for future content is worth less than content on hand. You can assign value to it but if we compare that to what we currently know, its not as valuable. That does not excuse HoT since these types of game naturally adds content over time.
GW1 is an MMO. Anet choose to try to differentiate its features but its an MMO. Its massively online multiplayer. Steam has it listed as an MMO (I think this is the only third party retailer left?) and CORPG redirects to MMORPG on Wikipedia. Give me actual objective proof that GW1 was not an MMO rather than your own interpretations and I’ll believe you.
It defines it to be a CORPG which we always have shown to be an MMORPG. GW compares itself to other MMOs, it won MMO game of the year (yes “ironically” since its not a pure “mmo” but it shows that it is still in that category") Diablo was never considered an MMO but GW1 sure as hell was. Either by popular consent or definition shenanigans.
Future content added to HoT after release is very much valuable, it is part of the reason to buying HoT as well.
Not going to dig deep into searches looking for what the developers themselves saying that GW1 was not an MMO, Guild Wars 2 takes up the vast majority of the search results. But yes the developers themselves stated it was not an MMO.
MMOs are played in a persistent worlds, and GW1 definitely did not have persistent worlds. The towns/outposts were just a new fancy way of doing lobbies. GW1 had far more in common with Diablo series than it did with MMOs. Using your definition of MMOs, you might as well as call any game that has a lobby system as an MMO.
Future content is a reason to buy any sort of MMO. These types of games are known to add post release content. Again I didn’t say its not worth something but it sure as heck isn’t worth the same as what you get on release day.
I didn’t realize we get to make up our own assumptions and assume it to be right. Prove to me the developers stated that GW1 is not an MMO. You seem to be making quite the claim without anything to back it up. If I said the developers said the sky was green, would you take my word for it? Furthermore its ineffective and lazy when you say you don’t go too “deep” to back up what you are saying. If you are trying to establish a fact, you better back it up. GW1 had a loose persistent world. I really wonder if you are speaking out of your behind or if you actually played the original game based on these strange claims. Heck even GW2’s own wiki backs it up. http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Open_world
Notice the following line: “employs persistent environments more extensively than Guild Wars”
Sure there is more persistence, but that wording proves that GW1 had it too.
I am not making my own definition of MMO. I am using what the industry regards as an MMO. If I have to spoonfeed you the Wikipedia and Steam links I will. All of my evidence shows that by definition a CORPG = MMORPG. Furthermore by popularity, GW1 is regarded to be slotted into the MMO genre. I’m open to a debate on why GW1 isn’t an MMO. It certainty isn’t a conventional one. You’re going to need some proof though otherwise its just an opinion.
GW1 has zero persistence world. The towns/outposts do not count at all, again those were just more fancy lobbies. Once you left those lobbies, you were in an instanced world that was only for you and your party and nobody else. Anybody who has actually played GW1 can tell you this. Also in the years I have played GW1, rarely did I see someone refer to the game as an MMO, in fact more often then not when someone did mention it as an MMO on the town/outpost chats there would be a ton of people to correct them and tell them it is not an MMO.
Also a long time ago Guild wars 1 website had a faq that had this answer to the question if Guild Wars 1 was an MMO.
Rather than labeling Guild Wars an MMORPG, we prefer to call it a CORPG (Competitive Online Role-Playing Game).
Then the rest of the answer would go into more detail of the key differences between an MMO and CORPG. They have since deleted the whole FAQ altogether, but you can find many places referencing it on the net.
Also, the quote you used from the Wiki doesn’t exist.
No one would have corrected you. They would say that more specifically it would be a CORPG but MMO fits. You’re making up bullkitten and any vet of GW1 can tell you it. CORPG is a subset of MMO. The devs like to use that label as it helps GW1 differentiate themselves from the market but not how they did not deny it is not an MMO. CORPG is simply a marketing term that is based on an MMO. You can’t get around this and your credibility has been shot.
Guild Wars is a CORPG, or Competitive/Cooperative Online Role Playing Game developed for Windows by ArenaNet and published by NCsoft. The first campaign of Guild Wars, Guild Wars Prophecies was released on April 28, 2005. The different genre was chosen (as opposed to the “Massively Multiplayer Online (MMO) RPG”) due to the perceived differences between the game and other MMOs…
Yet clicking on the blue link for “competitive online role-playing game” results in a redirect to “MMO”. The Wikipedia page proves my argument. Either by definition or popular consent (see IGN MMO GOTY comment), GW1 is an MMO. It may have a subsection it falls under, but it sure as heck is an MMO. I have yet to see actual proof refuting this.
I did edit it, to show you how wiki’s mean nothing for your proof. If guild wars 1 is an mmo so is diablo or any other lobby supported game. Also by popular vote doesn’t mean they are right, I think there are plenty of examples of that. CORPG is a new genre, GW1 and HellGate London, Path of the Exile would all fit in. The developers called it corpg because it was not the same as mmos, they basically created a new genre name that already existed because of Diablo and other lobby supported games, what arenanet did is make the lobby system better with graphics. The later games like HellGate London and path of the exile used this lobby method as well.
- you can’t compare it to WoW expansions, because WoW is P2P
- you can’t compare it to GW1 because those were standalone games.
- you can compare it to EOTN because that was an add on (?)
- you can’t compare it to Rift, because “nobody cares about Rift or plays it”
while at the same time saying “what game kept the same population for 3 years, population slump is normal!”
(snipped due to post size)
I just want to highlight this again:
Anet have a gem store and a stream of revenue. Its probably not Riot Games level of profitability but the added content to the game is it is comes from that. HoT should be judged on its own, not based on some notion that we the player “owes” Anet for patching the game or making it sub free. If GW2 is your passion and you want it, by all means go for it. Anet still has me on good will they built up from GW1 but we should all be able to take a step back and look at it for what it is.
You cannot compare GW1’s games and the 1 expansion to GW2 because those games were not even MMOs to begin with, they were never even marketed as an MMO. GW1 was more like the Diablo series but with a graphical lobby, and nobody ever considers Diablo series as an MMO.
Also it is far from lacking in content, it is jammed packed with content, perhaps if you actually played the beta you might know this. Plus more content is going to be added to HoT over time.
I played the beta… Its not “jammed” pack with content. While you try to call others out, try actually reading what I wrote. Also the potential for future content is worth less than content on hand. You can assign value to it but if we compare that to what we currently know, its not as valuable. That does not excuse HoT since these types of game naturally adds content over time.
GW1 is an MMO. Anet choose to try to differentiate its features but its an MMO. Its massively online multiplayer. Steam has it listed as an MMO (I think this is the only third party retailer left?) and CORPG redirects to MMORPG on Wikipedia. Give me actual objective proof that GW1 was not an MMO rather than your own interpretations and I’ll believe you.
It defines it to be a CORPG which we always have shown to be an MMORPG. GW compares itself to other MMOs, it won MMO game of the year (yes “ironically” since its not a pure “mmo” but it shows that it is still in that category") Diablo was never considered an MMO but GW1 sure as hell was. Either by popular consent or definition shenanigans.
Future content added to HoT after release is very much valuable, it is part of the reason to buying HoT as well.
Not going to dig deep into searches looking for what the developers themselves saying that GW1 was not an MMO, Guild Wars 2 takes up the vast majority of the search results. But yes the developers themselves stated it was not an MMO.
MMOs are played in a persistent worlds, and GW1 definitely did not have persistent worlds. The towns/outposts were just a new fancy way of doing lobbies. GW1 had far more in common with Diablo series than it did with MMOs. Using your definition of MMOs, you might as well as call any game that has a lobby system as an MMO.
Future content is a reason to buy any sort of MMO. These types of games are known to add post release content. Again I didn’t say its not worth something but it sure as heck isn’t worth the same as what you get on release day.
I didn’t realize we get to make up our own assumptions and assume it to be right. Prove to me the developers stated that GW1 is not an MMO. You seem to be making quite the claim without anything to back it up. If I said the developers said the sky was green, would you take my word for it? Furthermore its ineffective and lazy when you say you don’t go too “deep” to back up what you are saying. If you are trying to establish a fact, you better back it up. GW1 had a loose persistent world. I really wonder if you are speaking out of your behind or if you actually played the original game based on these strange claims. Heck even GW2’s own wiki backs it up. http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Open_world
Notice the following line: “employs persistent environments more extensively than Guild Wars”
Sure there is more persistence, but that wording proves that GW1 had it too.
I am not making my own definition of MMO. I am using what the industry regards as an MMO. If I have to spoonfeed you the Wikipedia and Steam links I will. All of my evidence shows that by definition a CORPG = MMORPG. Furthermore by popularity, GW1 is regarded to be slotted into the MMO genre. I’m open to a debate on why GW1 isn’t an MMO. It certainty isn’t a conventional one. You’re going to need some proof though otherwise its just an opinion.
GW1 has zero persistence world. The towns/outposts do not count at all, again those were just more fancy lobbies. Once you left those lobbies, you were in an instanced world that was only for you and your party and nobody else. Anybody who has actually played GW1 can tell you this. Also in the years I have played GW1, rarely did I see someone refer to the game as an MMO, in fact more often then not when someone did mention it as an MMO on the town/outpost chats there would be a ton of people to correct them and tell them it is not an MMO.
Also a long time ago Guild wars 1 website had a faq that had this answer to the question if Guild Wars 1 was an MMO.
Rather than labeling Guild Wars an MMORPG, we prefer to call it a CORPG (Competitive Online Role-Playing Game).
Then the rest of the answer would go into more detail of the key differences between an MMO and CORPG. They have since deleted the whole FAQ altogether, but you can find many places referencing it on the net.
Also, the quote you used from the Wiki doesn’t exist.
No one would have corrected you. They would say that more specifically it would be a CORPG but MMO fits. You’re making up bullkitten and any vet of GW1 can tell you it. CORPG is a subset of MMO. The devs like to use that label as it helps GW1 differentiate themselves from the market but not how they did not deny it is not an MMO. CORPG is simply a marketing term that is based on an MMO. You can’t get around this and your credibility has been shot.
Guild Wars is a CORPG, or Competitive/Cooperative Online Role Playing Game developed for Windows by ArenaNet and published by NCsoft. The first campaign of Guild Wars, Guild Wars Prophecies was released on April 28, 2005. The different genre was chosen (as opposed to the “Massively Multiplayer Online (MMO) RPG”) due to the perceived differences between the game and other MMOs…
Yet clicking on the blue link for “competitive online role-playing game” results in a redirect to “MMO”. The Wikipedia page proves my argument. Either by definition or popular consent (see IGN MMO GOTY comment), GW1 is an MMO. It may have a subsection it falls under, but it sure as heck is an MMO. I have yet to see actual proof refuting this.
I did edit it, to show you how wiki’s mean nothing for your proof. If guild wars 1 is an mmo so is diablo or any other lobby supported game. Also by popular vote doesn’t mean they are right, I think there are plenty of examples of that. CORPG is a new genre, GW1 and HellGate London, Path of the Exile would all fit in. The developers called it corpg because it was not the same as mmos, they basically created a new genre name that already existed because of Diablo and other lobby supported games, what arenanet did is make the lobby system better with graphics. The later games like HellGate London and path of the exile used this lobby method as well.
You have yet to present any logical or reasoned argument with proof why. Furthermore your sad excuse for why you edited is frankly quite pathetic. It’s obvious you are trying to backtrack your subterfuge. A wiki represents a collaborative effort to establish knowledge that you are trying to perverse to suit your cause. It is built to explain things to a community based on a consensus. Just because an anon like you edited it does not change it. At this point you really should stop trying to fantasize a world I wish you are right.
PoE is an action rpg and so is Hellgate London.
All you have is some personal opinion that you try to force an argument. None of those game you mentioned used the CORPG tag. Could they be fitted into that definition? Yeah but since that massively multiplayer online subsumed CORPG I see no issue. PoE devs stated they want to avoid that particular title because of the negative association. Doesn’t make it wrong. Mmo is a broad term and is correct.
- you can’t compare it to WoW expansions, because WoW is P2P
- you can’t compare it to GW1 because those were standalone games.
- you can compare it to EOTN because that was an add on (?)
- you can’t compare it to Rift, because “nobody cares about Rift or plays it”
while at the same time saying “what game kept the same population for 3 years, population slump is normal!”
(snipped due to post size)
I just want to highlight this again:
Anet have a gem store and a stream of revenue. Its probably not Riot Games level of profitability but the added content to the game is it is comes from that. HoT should be judged on its own, not based on some notion that we the player “owes” Anet for patching the game or making it sub free. If GW2 is your passion and you want it, by all means go for it. Anet still has me on good will they built up from GW1 but we should all be able to take a step back and look at it for what it is.
You cannot compare GW1’s games and the 1 expansion to GW2 because those games were not even MMOs to begin with, they were never even marketed as an MMO. GW1 was more like the Diablo series but with a graphical lobby, and nobody ever considers Diablo series as an MMO.
Also it is far from lacking in content, it is jammed packed with content, perhaps if you actually played the beta you might know this. Plus more content is going to be added to HoT over time.
I played the beta… Its not “jammed” pack with content. While you try to call others out, try actually reading what I wrote. Also the potential for future content is worth less than content on hand. You can assign value to it but if we compare that to what we currently know, its not as valuable. That does not excuse HoT since these types of game naturally adds content over time.
GW1 is an MMO. Anet choose to try to differentiate its features but its an MMO. Its massively online multiplayer. Steam has it listed as an MMO (I think this is the only third party retailer left?) and CORPG redirects to MMORPG on Wikipedia. Give me actual objective proof that GW1 was not an MMO rather than your own interpretations and I’ll believe you.
It defines it to be a CORPG which we always have shown to be an MMORPG. GW compares itself to other MMOs, it won MMO game of the year (yes “ironically” since its not a pure “mmo” but it shows that it is still in that category") Diablo was never considered an MMO but GW1 sure as hell was. Either by popular consent or definition shenanigans.
Future content added to HoT after release is very much valuable, it is part of the reason to buying HoT as well.
Not going to dig deep into searches looking for what the developers themselves saying that GW1 was not an MMO, Guild Wars 2 takes up the vast majority of the search results. But yes the developers themselves stated it was not an MMO.
MMOs are played in a persistent worlds, and GW1 definitely did not have persistent worlds. The towns/outposts were just a new fancy way of doing lobbies. GW1 had far more in common with Diablo series than it did with MMOs. Using your definition of MMOs, you might as well as call any game that has a lobby system as an MMO.
Future content is a reason to buy any sort of MMO. These types of games are known to add post release content. Again I didn’t say its not worth something but it sure as heck isn’t worth the same as what you get on release day.
I didn’t realize we get to make up our own assumptions and assume it to be right. Prove to me the developers stated that GW1 is not an MMO. You seem to be making quite the claim without anything to back it up. If I said the developers said the sky was green, would you take my word for it? Furthermore its ineffective and lazy when you say you don’t go too “deep” to back up what you are saying. If you are trying to establish a fact, you better back it up. GW1 had a loose persistent world. I really wonder if you are speaking out of your behind or if you actually played the original game based on these strange claims. Heck even GW2’s own wiki backs it up. http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Open_world
Notice the following line: “employs persistent environments more extensively than Guild Wars”
Sure there is more persistence, but that wording proves that GW1 had it too.
I am not making my own definition of MMO. I am using what the industry regards as an MMO. If I have to spoonfeed you the Wikipedia and Steam links I will. All of my evidence shows that by definition a CORPG = MMORPG. Furthermore by popularity, GW1 is regarded to be slotted into the MMO genre. I’m open to a debate on why GW1 isn’t an MMO. It certainty isn’t a conventional one. You’re going to need some proof though otherwise its just an opinion.
GW1 has zero persistence world. The towns/outposts do not count at all, again those were just more fancy lobbies. Once you left those lobbies, you were in an instanced world that was only for you and your party and nobody else. Anybody who has actually played GW1 can tell you this. Also in the years I have played GW1, rarely did I see someone refer to the game as an MMO, in fact more often then not when someone did mention it as an MMO on the town/outpost chats there would be a ton of people to correct them and tell them it is not an MMO.
Also a long time ago Guild wars 1 website had a faq that had this answer to the question if Guild Wars 1 was an MMO.
Rather than labeling Guild Wars an MMORPG, we prefer to call it a CORPG (Competitive Online Role-Playing Game).
Then the rest of the answer would go into more detail of the key differences between an MMO and CORPG. They have since deleted the whole FAQ altogether, but you can find many places referencing it on the net.
Also, the quote you used from the Wiki doesn’t exist.
No one would have corrected you. They would say that more specifically it would be a CORPG but MMO fits. You’re making up bullkitten and any vet of GW1 can tell you it. CORPG is a subset of MMO. The devs like to use that label as it helps GW1 differentiate themselves from the market but not how they did not deny it is not an MMO. CORPG is simply a marketing term that is based on an MMO. You can’t get around this and your credibility has been shot.
Guild Wars is a CORPG, or Competitive/Cooperative Online Role Playing Game developed for Windows by ArenaNet and published by NCsoft. The first campaign of Guild Wars, Guild Wars Prophecies was released on April 28, 2005. The different genre was chosen (as opposed to the “Massively Multiplayer Online (MMO) RPG”) due to the perceived differences between the game and other MMOs…
Yet clicking on the blue link for “competitive online role-playing game” results in a redirect to “MMO”. The Wikipedia page proves my argument. Either by definition or popular consent (see IGN MMO GOTY comment), GW1 is an MMO. It may have a subsection it falls under, but it sure as heck is an MMO. I have yet to see actual proof refuting this.
I did edit it, to show you how wiki’s mean nothing for your proof. If guild wars 1 is an mmo so is diablo or any other lobby supported game. Also by popular vote doesn’t mean they are right, I think there are plenty of examples of that. CORPG is a new genre, GW1 and HellGate London, Path of the Exile would all fit in. The developers called it corpg because it was not the same as mmos, they basically created a new genre name that already existed because of Diablo and other lobby supported games, what arenanet did is make the lobby system better with graphics. The later games like HellGate London and path of the exile used this lobby method as well.
You have yet to present any logical or reasoned argument with proof why. Furthermore your sad excuse for why you edited is frankly quite pathetic. It’s obvious you are trying to backtrack your subterfuge. A wiki represents a collaborative effort tho establish knowledge that you are trying to perverse to suit your cause. At this point you really should stop trying to fantasize a world I wish you are right.
PoE is an action rpg and so is Hellgate London.
All you have is some personal opinion that you try to force an argument. None of those game you mentioned used the CORPG tag. Could they be fitted into that definition? Yeah but since that massively multiplayer online subsumed CORPG I see no issue. PoE devs stated they want to avoid that particular title because of the negative association. Doesn’t make it wrong. Mmo is a broad term and is correct.
I edited it to show you have stupid it is to use Wiki, because anybody can edit it. There is a reason why the intellectual community (colleges for example) never accept Wiki as a valid source for writing papers. At best Wiki is a good source to find resources when there are some listed at the bottom of the page, but it is never a reliable source of information and the intellectual community is right in not accepting Wiki as a reliable source. Therefore wiki does not prove anything you say at all.
You are making MMO to broad of a term, using your definition any game with a lobby system would be an MMO. Doesn’t Call of Duty series have a lobby system?
I don’t care what “popular” vote says, what matters the most is what the developers themselves consider it as and they did not consider it as an MMO, but they created a new Genre. Therefore any comparisons in business model between GW1 and 2 are not valid because they are from different genres that are working on different (but with some similar attributes) business models. One business model may or may not work from one type of game genre to the next.
50 dollars or 45 euro’s or whatever is still to much for an expansion. 20 or 25 euro’s i would have had no doubt to get it for every familymember but its just simply overpriced. Either price will go down within 2 weeks after release or lots of people will simply move on. For the price of the heart of thorns expansion i can get the next generation mmo wich is alot more attractive then buying a small update for guildwars2. So yeh price will probably not go down so its time to move on to the next generation mmo Black Desert for example. http://black-desert.com/ (gotta say i love the graphics and gameplay from what i seen) I dont really want to stop playing guildwars2 but the marketting is just getting insane and sometimes you just move on to another mmo earlier then expected!
50 dollars or 45 euro’s or whatever is still to much for an expansion. 20 or 25 euro’s i would have had no doubt to get it for every familymember but its just simply overpriced. Either price will go down within 2 weeks after release or lots of people will simply move on. For the price of the heart of thorns expansion i can get the next generation mmo wich is alot more attractive then buying a small update for guildwars2. So yeh price will probably not go down so its time to move on to the next generation mmo Black Desert for example. http://black-desert.com/ (gotta say i love the graphics and gameplay from what i seen) I dont really want to stop playing guildwars2 but the marketting is just getting insane and sometimes you just move on to another mmo earlier then expected!
Black Desert looks like it is a free to play Korean game, which means it will most likely be just another Korean grinding game. So have fun with that.
Black Desert looks like it is a free to play Korean game, which means it will most likely be just another Korean grinding game. So have fun with that.
dont be naive and jump to conclusions without research. it wont be free to play but still looks very promising. they making same promisses as anet did to us. paying once, no endless grinding and a thoughtfull storyline. if it will give 3 years of fun for 50 dollars itll be a good deal again. 50 dollars for a couple hours grinding on a new map with masteries, kiting, one raid and a new class etc (wich u cant even enjoy on the old maps) seems a poor deal. easy to judge a new game tho, id rather test it out since its same price as some small expansions are.
Black Desert looks like it is a free to play Korean game, which means it will most likely be just another Korean grinding game. So have fun with that.
dont be naive and jump to conclusions without research. it wont be free to play but still looks very promising. they making same promisses as anet did to us. paying once, no endless grinding and a thoughtfull storyline. if it will give 3 years of fun for 50 dollars itll be a good deal again. 50 dollars for a couple hours grinding on a new map with masteries, kiting, one raid and a new class etc (wich u cant even enjoy on the old maps) seems a poor deal. easy to judge a new game tho, id rather test it out since its same price as some small expansions are.
Every indication I am seeing is that it is a free to play game. Also it is Korean. Haven’t seen a Korean MMO not be a grinding bore fest as of yet, so this will be a shocker if it is any different.
dont be naive and jump to conclusions without research. it wont be free to play but still looks very promising. they making same promisses as anet did to us. paying once, no endless grinding and a thoughtfull storyline. if it will give 3 years of fun for 50 dollars itll be a good deal again. 50 dollars for a couple hours grinding on a new map with masteries, kiting, one raid and a new class etc (wich u cant even enjoy on the old maps) seems a poor deal. easy to judge a new game tho, id rather test it out since its same price as some small expansions are.
black desert has already opened in beta in other regions and I would encourage you to try it. Because it’s a VERY grindy game. Power is largely based on endless leveling, however after a while enemies hit cap, while you do not. If you want to continue to be useful in PvP for your side, what you do is, you continuously grind the same enemies with diminishing returns. It approaches a level where a level can take a month and a half of every day grinding, but if you don’t, you fall behind on the PvP scene so far that you can no longer defend.
Upgrade system is similar to Tera’s. As in you grind out the materials to try and upgrade your weapons, but the upgrade can fail, sending you to grind again.
There isn’t a mass market place from what I know of, so you do actually have to be self sufficient.
The end game is VERY grindy. Unless of course they’re fundamentally changing their game just for the English audience.
Your paid GW2 account does not have the restrictions that F2P accounts have. You’ve gotten AP they can’t get. F2P accounts also have a very restricted list of what they can buy and sell on the TP, from what I gather F2P accounts can’t buy or sell dyes.
You’ve had hours of play time that they’ll never be able to get if both you and them play until ANet takes the servers down.
However, feel free to use a second email and create a second account with a HoT purchase. You’ll then have 2 paid GW2 accounts with one of the accounts having access to HoT content. Just try to remember about all of the NPE content that your main account has gotten past.
GW2 is not korean and is only about grind, even the dlc is only grind gated behind grind. But you play it.
at least you don’t have to to be competitive. You’re fairly confident that if you left the game for months you won’t be roflstomped in the open world by PvPers. Black Desert IS that kind of game though.
EDIT: for example this is a video on Black Desert! https://youtu.be/BmMQIiKukiE?t=11m26s All you do is grind levels and gear. There’s no dungeons, no raids, nothing besides open world PvP and killing the same things over and over and over again.
I would strongly encourage to look into Blayde and Soul instead, or any other upcomming MMO.
I bought Guild Wars Two full price, now that it has gone free to play how come I cannot get the expansion Heart of Thrones for free?
Let me guess, when the game was being sold for $10 on guildwars2.com, you wanted kitten refund to make up the price difference you paid at launch right?
This forum never fail to amaze me…
Seriously OP I really hope you’re just a big troll
Anyway If you’re not you probably think that your request is legit and… you should get some fresh air and try to live in the real world.
If you’re trolling, you’re just one amongs hundreds, internet is such a nice place to feel special.
Because I said so. Yes, it’s true: do not blame ANET for your woes, for it was I who made them charge for Heart of Thorns. They didn’t want to make any money, but I told them to because I’m a jerk like that.
OK, what are my advantages of having bought the Guild Wars 2 at full price over the people that are getting it for free? I am looking for what I can do now instead of what I could have done prior to it being free.
OK, what are my advantages of having bought the Guild Wars 2 at full price over the people that are getting it for free? I am looking for what I can do now instead of what I could have done prior to it being free.
At least in theory you played from 2012 to 2015, something that no free player will have done.
Let me guess, when the game was being sold for $10 on guildwars2.com, you wanted kitten refund to make up the price difference you paid at launch right?
I didn’t even know that such sale happened.
Games go on sale many times, but at least they weren’t giving it away for free.
OK, what are my advantages of having bought the Guild Wars 2 at full price over the people that are getting it for free? I am looking for what I can do now instead of what I could have done prior to it being free.
Talk in map chat
Buy and sell anything on the trading post. Based on a thread I’ve seen in the Players Helping Players section, F2P accounts can’t buy or sell dyes.
Receive Daily Login rewards
Post here on the forums
Can exchange gold for gems. If you had a F2P account and wanted something from the gem store, you’d have to pay for gems.
Can send items or gold via mail.
Guild vault access
More character and bag slots to start
The ability to transfer from one world to another.
OK, what are my advantages of having bought the Guild Wars 2 at full price over the people that are getting it for free? I am looking for what I can do now instead of what I could have done prior to it being free.
YOU? nothing new. F2P users? no mail exchange, no chat map, 2 or 3 char slot instead of 5, no WvW before lvl60, whisp restriction and other stuff… But you’re just another “player” (feel free to change that word when you read it) that come here without even checking what you’re complaining about.
I’m not saying F2P is a nice feature or HoT price is the right one. But what you’re asking is just so wrong on so many points. And the way you did it (with no informations) didn’t help.
Thank you Seera and Moa Lith. It clarified some stuff for me. Too bad they don’t make more obvious for the player that are coming back or signing up for the first time.
Hey xadine, wow you are an angry one.
Edit: It clarified allot more that I initially researched.
As already mentioned, if you bought it in the last few weeks submit a support ticket, they usually do give you a refund, but your current account will be closed meaning you lose all your stuff and characters, and have to create a new account with a new email when you buy HoT.
If however you have had your game for a few months or years then, tough luck. Do what the rest of us are doing, not buying until it falls to a more reasonable price.
I bought Guild Wars Two full price, now that it has gone free to play how come I cannot get the expansion Heart of Thrones for free?
It’s amusing that no body has noticed he wanted Heart of Thrones for free when we are having to pay for Heart of Thorns, who knows heart of thrones might exist but its not part of the GW2 set.
GW2 is not korean and is only about grind, even the dlc is only grind gated behind grind. But you play it.
at least you don’t have to to be competitive. You’re fairly confident that if you left the game for months you won’t be roflstomped in the open world by PvPers. Black Desert IS that kind of game though.
EDIT: for example this is a video on Black Desert! https://youtu.be/BmMQIiKukiE?t=11m26s All you do is grind levels and gear. There’s no dungeons, no raids, nothing besides open world PvP and killing the same things over and over and over again.
I would strongly encourage to look into Blayde and Soul instead, or any other upcomming MMO.
black desert isnt really designed to be a theme park MMO, it was actually designed with a heavier focus on the world/community. The focus was on players interactions. The oddest part is how well they designed combat.
Could be worse OP. I bought GW2 2 days before the announcement because I didn’t want to spend more not knowing if I liked it. And seems I don’t qualify for the refund either.
I do like it so have dropped for HoT twice afterwards (GF and me). Don’t mind paying for HoT, but they got my extra money due to no trial accounts.
You know what? Its only £20.
British by act of union, English by grace of God, Northern by pure good fortune
Could be worse OP. I bought GW2 2 days before the announcement because I didn’t want to spend more not knowing if I liked it. And seems I don’t qualify for the refund either.
I do like it so have dropped for HoT twice afterwards (GF and me). Don’t mind paying for HoT, but they got my extra money due to no trial accounts.
You know what? Its only £20.
If you bougth GW2 2 days before the announcement of free to play it mean that bougth the expansion, just like any F2P would need to do to get the full game. Unless you bougth it from a third party.
What’s wrong with this people always whining? You love the game or enjoying it? Then support it! The small amount of money will not kill you. The devs needs to eat to.
OK so I been looking around and I cannot find much except for us having to spend money on buying a whole new game with DLC to replace the game we bought two years ago.
Then I found a post (which was a complete joke) where Arena Net said “We’re offering some special deals to show our appreciation for loyal players.” then talk about people who have owned the game for couple of months. What about us who owned it for two years?
So do we as owners of the core game get a discount, or very good bonuses for buying the £35 game and DLC after having paid this already for the original game? As if we do not this is more screwing the “loyal players” over!
(Before people comment I know at least one other person will have made a post like this but I could not find a good answer to this sort of question anywhere.)
The base game is now free, so those who dont have the base game buy only the HoT expansion. For veteran players there are no advantages, as far as i know.
The only thing is that if you wanna keep up with the PvE you need the Xpac. Otherwise, PvP and WvW will just work fine with the core game (Well, that’s what it look like atm).
For the question of the “fee”, we sure can rant as veteran players, since we do already buy the game. But on the other hand, we also spent 3 years without any expense playing to a game that could have had a monthly fee since there have been some incoming content. If you look at it, since launch you’ve only spent £1 per month (which is pretty cheap).
Though it’s still a hard hit to the PvE comunity…
No core profession should be balanced around an optional elite specialization.
Explain why “mechanic changes” should not be charged for. Explain Why what you label as “non-playable content” should not be charged.
You’re focusing on quantity without regard to quality and depth when it comes to the number of maps. A single HoT map is much larger than the Tyria core maps with much more to do.
The living story episodes averaged about the same length as the higher level personal story arcs. You actually got more out of the LS episodes as there were achievements to test out your skills.
It’s like locking out builds until you pay for them. Another form of pay to win. Or as someone else said, raising the level cap via the backdoor.
Gaming companies continuously change and nerf skills, and yes this is part of the game, it shouldnt be a pay-for option. These are changes gaming companies must make in order for the game to be balanced and competitive.
Now usually yes, they get their money back from ingame sales, or expansions, but this brings us back to the fact that this expansion is not worth the money they are demanding for it!
Quantity and quality are 2 things I’ve not seen from Anet, remember I am a WvW player.
Again yes living story will be free, if you log in during that episode, but miss it and you got to pay for it in the gem store. So if you are on holiday or miss a week, do you feel like paying for an episode twice?! No, didnt think so. So again LS should not be factored in as an inclusive feature.
And again as I said, the LS stuff was completable in a couple of hours, not exactly challenging, and definitely not worth the gems you have to pay for them if you miss an episode.
OK so I been looking around and I cannot find much except for us having to spend money on buying a whole new game with DLC to replace the game we bought two years ago.
Then I found a post (which was a complete joke) where Arena Net said “We’re offering some special deals to show our appreciation for loyal players.” then talk about people who have owned the game for couple of months. What about us who owned it for two years?
So do we as owners of the core game get a discount, or very good bonuses for buying the £35 game and DLC after having paid this already for the original game? As if we do not this is more screwing the “loyal players” over!
(Before people comment I know at least one other person will have made a post like this but I could not find a good answer to this sort of question anywhere.)
Yeah, you get a free character slot if, and only if you pre-purchase HoT!!!!
Amazing right!?! I know I’m now no longer upset with this overpriced feature pack!
/sarcasm
And we only got the free temporary available character slot cos veterans complained. Anet were’ gonna give us jack all at first! And it seems many are happy just getting that.
Explain why “mechanic changes” should not be charged for. Explain Why what you label as “non-playable content” should not be charged.
You’re focusing on quantity without regard to quality and depth when it comes to the number of maps. A single HoT map is much larger than the Tyria core maps with much more to do.
The living story episodes averaged about the same length as the higher level personal story arcs. You actually got more out of the LS episodes as there were achievements to test out your skills.
It’s like locking out builds until you pay for them. Another form of pay to win. Or as someone else said, raising the level cap via the backdoor.
Gaming companies continuously change and nerf skills, and yes this is part of the game, it shouldnt be a pay-for option. These are changes gaming companies must make in order for the game to be balanced and competitive.
Now usually yes, they get their money back from ingame sales, or expansions, but this brings us back to the fact that this expansion is not worth the money they are demanding for it!
Quantity and quality are 2 things I’ve not seen from Anet, remember I am a WvW player.
Again yes living story will be free, if you log in during that episode, but miss it and you got to pay for it in the gem store. So if you are on holiday or miss a week, do you feel like paying for an episode twice?! No, didnt think so. So again LS should not be factored in as an inclusive feature.
And again as I said, the LS stuff was completable in a couple of hours, not exactly challenging, and definitely not worth the gems you have to pay for them if you miss an episode.
You seem to not realize how things work. People have to pay for expansions in order to access content and features contained within them. This is how it has worked for over 20 years. You don’t get to choose what’s free and what isn’t.
You also seem unclear exactly what P2W really is unless you want to use the broad definition and call all expansions whatsoever as P2W. In that case, considering the majority of games do expansions, they’re all P2W so what’s your problem then?
I don’t understand all the hate in here. You pay 50$ and will get the initial expansion content and years of living world etc additions with it. Yeah, I still think it should be like 40$ for vets or people who already bought the base game, but still, if it’s fun, buy it.
The core game has been in sale for 10$.
As a veteran you get a character slot worth 10$ while new players get the core game, that cost 10$ before (as ANet states it’s even 100% free now)
Problem solved.
I don’t have any free slot, I have not pre-purchased this joke at this ridiculous price. I’m surprised that at least in that post they said “thank you dear loyal old players”, lol… well thank you too sir
OP, just because someone is getting the game for free, doesn’t mean you’re buying it again.
Lol? I pay the same amount as a new player but the difference is that the new player pays for a GW2+HoS, I pay the same and I just purchase HoS! I already payed the game, I don’t think I’m wrong if I think that is more correct to just pay for HoS.
And you know, if you don’t like that they’re giving away games for free, you’ll eventually not have any MMOs to play at all, because it’s already started. WoW is doing it. EQ is doing it. It removes a barrier for entry to new players. That’s business and it’s logical.
If you don’t like it, don’t buy the game, but it will never change.
If we have situations like this is thanks the behavior of ppl like you: “Hey please steal our money! We are brainless monkeys! We don’t care… How much you want? 50$ for a new class and 2 maps? Just take our money and let us play.”.
And this is it, here we are…
Exactly Scorpio, I have no need to explain any further as to why this marketing scheme NCSoft is pulling is incredibly unfair, you’ve explained it exactly as is and clearly. It was rage inducing reading people actually DEFEND this insanity. These people are indeed the exact reason why we have these problems today which unfortunately affects more than just games, but worldly problems in real life as well; it has nothing to do with “if we like the game or not”, this goes far beyond “me likey me play-play”; childish. This kind of blind “turn the cheek” mentality leads to people being treated unfairly. NCsoft/ArenaNet is treating their veteran players badly here, and it is the exact reason why neither my friend or I will be purchasing HoT until they’ve changed their business model for this Expansion. A shame because we just came back after over a year and were having a lot of fun leveling new characters, but the transparent cash grab will not allow us to play simply because “it’s fun”.
Also, yeah, I’m bumping this 2 months later, this needs to be bumped until a fair change is made or goodbye Guild Wars 2.
