Guild Wars 2

phys.7689:

Now here, i think they can break out of the box. Many people are afraid of their gear becoming useless, they dont have to make gearing up in the future be a process that requires you to destroy or sacrifice your old gear.

They could have improving gear post 80, be more about upgrading older gear through use of adventure, and skill points, adding rarer means for obtaining case gears.

They could make the gear stop at level 80, and only your charachter level and access to skills/abilities increase with levels post 80

But the fact is, the game really does need to extend the goals, and it probably needs ways to progress you charachters, i already have 7/8 classes to 80, barring new classes, there really isnt that much to do or see with the cap at 80.

Bam. Phys gets it. Nail, meet hammer.

SonicTHI.3217:

Mackdose.6504:

SonicTHI.3217:

Increasing the level cap in GW2 would be stupid and pointless, especially since they introduced ascended gear. Even without touching gear and only letting skills go past 80 it would break the balance and they d have to spend even more time on it.

They ll probably do it as ever since release they have been trying to cater to the WoW base more and more. Better gear to grind, soon raids, then 10 new levels, next mounts and maybe flying ones as well to top it off.
Way to show their core base that has supported them for so long the finger (again).

I forgot WoW invented vertical progression and challenging group content. Also, WoW doesn’t update every 2 weeks.

I’d take mounts over instant way point travel any day… at least there’d be people passing through zones.

WoW invented vertical progression and challenging group content… and you managed to deduce that from my post… somehow. Wow, you must be a magician!

And if you like mounts that much why did you start playing GW2 anyway? But dont worry i m sure ANET will listen to you.

No magic here, just wondering how you equate gear grinding and raiding to be “copying WoW” when GW2 has been chasing its own niche for months now, and hasn’t been biting ideas from WoW at all. But it’s cool, go ahead and back pedal.

Thanks for ignoring the “makes the world less empty” reasoning for taking mounts over way points. I guess you like having all that lovely landscape and downscaling mechanic go to waste after the leveling curve.

(mounts are also horizontal progression)

Rpgtabbycat.5869:

To be honest, Temporary content is not bringing me back to GW2. I stopped playing because I was bored of the current content. It just feels pointless to come back to play some temporary event that will only last a short time and this is over and done with. After it’s over, I’ll be back to being bored.

You guys did it right when you made content for Guild Wars 1. Why aren’t you doing the same with Guild Wars 2?

This game was very fun to level up but sadly it didn’t keep my interest. Maybe if there was something added to the game that was actually a permanent part of the game, and it was added on a regular basis, I would come back.

As the game is right now, even if you release an expansion, I most likely will not buy it and most likely will not return to the game.

I’m not trying to bash GW2, just trying to provide some honest constructive criticism for the developers of the game.

Not really, you just said you’d like “permanent content” because playing “temporary content” seems pointless. New content is new content, whether or not it’s around forever or for 2 weeks.

What permanent content exactly are you referring to, and why wouldn’t it become boring after you completed it?

SonicTHI.3217:

Increasing the level cap in GW2 would be stupid and pointless, especially since they introduced ascended gear. Even without touching gear and only letting skills go past 80 it would break the balance and they d have to spend even more time on it.

They ll probably do it as ever since release they have been trying to cater to the WoW base more and more. Better gear to grind, soon raids, then 10 new levels, next mounts and maybe flying ones as well to top it off.
Way to show their core base that has supported them for so long the finger (again).

I forgot WoW invented vertical progression and challenging group content. Also, WoW doesn’t update every 2 weeks.

I’d take mounts over instant way point travel any day… at least there’d be people passing through zones.

Risingashes.8694:

Best MMO, but will quickly be replaced by MMOs that have learnt from GW2s mistakes if they continue to fail to improve core systems instead of focusing entirely on themepark sideshows.

Which MMOs are you referring to? Hypothetical MMO That Does Everything Better #1289?

Kite.2510:

In terms of continuity:
This argument is lost the moment you defeat Zaitan for the 12th time with your 6th character.
Everything ales is frozen in time, except from the living story that simply has a time limit.
There is no reason it to be temporary. If they wanted it to be like a festival, or mark a period of the game to our hearts, the same thing could be accomplished by releasing permanent content normally, and just throw some temporary eyecandy on LA to celebrate it’s release.
An MMO needs to evolve! Not just change!

Uh, the living story mechanic is an evolution on MMO design… and your idea that the content such just “be made permanent with eye candy in LA” is exactly what we don’t need.

1. Not enough armor and weapon models. This was a massive disappointment for me since beta especially since I come from playing WoW, where every bit of armor and weapon had a different model or palette. Yes, I’m fully aware of the dye system.

2: The fractured nature of the personal story. While I thoroughly enjoyed the concept of the PS, the segmented nature of the instances and cut scenes made trying to get immersed a chore.

3: Lack of impact from event chains / waypoints ruin the world.

I wish the game had mounts. Seriously. Or, alternatively more zones should get waypoints contested. Once you have all waypoints, the world becomes a fancy lobby and not really a world at all.

I log in every so often and the game seems to be exactly as populated as it was when I stopped playing regularly.

That was back in February.

The game’s not dying.

Since they are based in Bellevue, the fall into “VALVe Time’s” jurisdiction.

Soon™.

Karizee.8076:

Aeonblade.8709:

kRiza krimos.1637:

AndrewSX.3794:

Depends what will be actually released in upcoming 6 months.

So far the competitors are so bad that Gw2, even with all its flaws, it’s prolly best option on the market atm.
(imo).

But yeah, just let WildStar or Archeage get out and things will change, and fast.

Just two names soon to be sent into oblivion like so many before them…

Until recently we had wow-killers jumping around every corner. Recently every new game that is announced will be better than GW2, sounds familiar? Has world given up on killing wow finnaly?

Um not to burst your bubble, but this game is a small niche like every other game that isn’t WoW. It sucks, but it’s the truth. It doesn’t take a brain surgeon to see that there aren’t 3 million people logging into this game, even if they bought it… Maybe 1/3rd of that actually play.

A cool mill is a lot better than most other MMO’s though! And I have never heard of anyone mention “a gw2 killer” because there is no need too, it’s not big enough to want to kill, no matter how much we want to it to grow and succeed’

Basically my point is, every company is still looking for the WoW killer. GW2 has come the closest so far in even beginning to dream of the same level of success. I use the term success loosely because I hate what WoW has become.

MoP was in the $5 discount bin a month after they released it and subscriptions in the west are down by half from the launch of this last expac. News from China is dire with Age of Wushu picking up 20 million subs and even their CEO told shareholders they will be losing more by the end of the year.

GW2 will be launching in China soon. Right now I think more people in the west play GW2 than play WoW.

Nah, I’d say WoW has double the active players of GW2, but that’s still really good for both games.

I’m playing WoW currently, because playing with friends > playing alone. However I’m always around for the fresh stuff Anet releases.

tigirius.9014:

tolunart.2095:

Mad Rasputin.7809:

But you keep on believing that is no Dev posts about looking into an issue than no issue exists. Their track record is not very good, in my book.

Several people post evidence that there is a problem with salvage rates. A dev posts that they are looking into it. He comes back to thank everyone for their efforts and says the bug has been fixed. People get free salvage kits to replace the bugged salvages.

This is not my imagination. This is the system working the right way. After the embarrassment of calling out people for posting conspiracy theories when it turned out there really was a problem, Anet cannot afford to ignore proof that there is a problem.

The thing is, actually posting conspiracy theories without backing them up with evidence will still get laughed at and dismissed.

Sooo I guess you missed all of the posts lately about the evidence from both sides that have shown that the same people get the same amount of great loot all the time with no randomness while the same people who usually get nothing still get nothing while both sets are playing the same events on a weekly basis.

Saying there is no evidence and there not being any evidence is one thing but ignoring evidence and claiming it’s not there is not evidence that everything is working properly it’s evidence that someone isn’t paying attention. There’s been multiple posts about this.

You know what, I’ve read your posts about loots drops for months now, and at this point, livestream / FRAPS or it didn’t happen.

Vayne.8563:

Varonth.5830:

Mackdose.6504:

tigirius.9014:

All things are not equal in the loot system, all people are not getting the chance for good drops, some people are stuck in a perpetual low drop 98% of the time situation so you can argue until you’re blue that there’s nothing wrong, but until everyone has equal chances at the loot there will still be a problem. That’s not what’s happening in this game I repeat loot chances are not equal in this game.

This is the only myth I can see concerning loot drops.

By this logic, I should be angry that there are people who are 98% of the time getting better loot than everyone else.

I would argue that it is actually impossible that there are accounts which have plain worse/better chances at getting rare loot… but let’s be honest it seems like a possibility when we all remember back at release.
There was a problem with some accounts not getting any WvW boni. That was an issue on a per account base. Why shouldn’t there be a related bug regarding loot.

For example, I have a char with 200% magic find. I can tell you that I found in total 9 exotics in over 2000 hours of gametime.

That doesn’t sound normal to me. And please don’t come up with stuff like, oh your samplesize is too low. It is 2000+ hours, that isn’t exactly low.

Of course, you could have spent half that time in PvP, which would completely change what you’re saying. Or standing around in LA. Or in low level zones (since exotics didn’t drop their until January (as far as I know).

How many hours doesn’t tell me anything.

Stand back, Vayne, I got this.

2000 hours is a small sample size compared to the vast amount of hours put in by everyone who isn’t you.

I too would agree that it’s likely impossible for accounts to have flat out better or worse loot than other accounts. It’s completely possible to have a really long bad (or good) luck streak though.

Perma-DR on an account would have a been a massive bug and would have received the attention of devs early and loudly. The fact that perma-DR is still getting lip service is a reminder that some people really do think the world is against them.

Aeonblade.8709:

I’m sorry you two feel that some people’s time is more valuable than others. It gives us an insight into humanity and the game both at the same time. Good show. It’s not disingenuous to place blame on the party at fault btw to whoever said that.

Gonna try to keep this on topic a lil bit for the OP and step out a while. Thanks guys.

I’m sorry you feel your family is a burden on your playtime. So much so, that you blame the developer of the game. The only one you don’t seem to blame is yourself, who is ironically the only person who can reasonably change the situation.

Meanwhile, everyone else gets that it’s the player who’s responsible for his play habits.

Aeonblade.8709:

Rising Dusk.2408:

Aeonblade.8709:

The trade off being someone’s $60 is worth more than mine, gotcha.

Both players have the same opportunities, one just chooses not to pursue them. That’s the player’s prerogative.

Whoosh. It’s not a choice if some of us have families and work. Who chooses a game over their family? This is actually really funny to me, thanks :P

Exactly his point, you control your play time. Trying to pawn it off on Arenanet discriminating against working players is really disingenuous.

Full disclosure: I work full time and don’t have enough time for large blocks of gaming, even on weekends.

Aeonblade.8709:

Mackdose.6504:

Herr der Friedhoefe.2490:

Aeonblade.8709:

There is no reason some dude playing 1 hour a day 5 days a week should end with more laurels than me playing 5 hours one day on the weekend.

Exactly. No single players time or effort should be worth more or less than any other player. That is almost word for word from the so called Manifesto that this game was sold on.

“Play the game the way you want to play…” and all that yadda yadda.

He’s not being restricted in his play, just in the rewards for the time played.

If you can’t do 30 minutes a day to get the laurel then don’t. I’m not about to get mad that I can’t get Arah armor because I can’t have 3 hours set aside to run it. I can’t get dungeon master, either.

There are trade offs to 5 hours in one day vs 1 hour for 5 days, and you would do well to bring both sides to the table when discussing time played vs rewards.

The trade off being someone’s $60 is worth more than mine, gotcha.

The world doesn’t revolve around any one play style. I don’t see where your $60 is worth less when you can do exactly the same thing as any other player.

Are you about to get mad that Anet doesn’t plan rewards around your anniversary or major natural disasters either?

Herr der Friedhoefe.2490:

Aeonblade.8709:

There is no reason some dude playing 1 hour a day 5 days a week should end with more laurels than me playing 5 hours one day on the weekend.

Exactly. No single players time or effort should be worth more or less than any other player. That is almost word for word from the so called Manifesto that this game was sold on.

“Play the game the way you want to play…” and all that yadda yadda.

He’s not being restricted in his play, just in the rewards for the time played.

If you can’t do 30 minutes a day to get the laurel then don’t. I’m not about to get mad that I can’t get Arah armor because I can’t have 3 hours set aside to run it. I can’t get dungeon master, either.

There are trade offs to 5 hours in one day vs 1 hour for 5 days, and you would do well to bring both sides to the table when discussing time played vs rewards.

Herr der Friedhoefe.2490:

ghost.3208:

(why is everyone so upset about dailies??).

It’s about the laurel that’s tied to it. It’s an artificial time gate to obtain some fairly nice stuff, and players hate that sort of thing. In my case it means that there is no chance ever that I’ll buy an expansion of this game.

What exactly does this time-gate besides stats and pink text? All content is open with or without laurel gear.

tigirius.9014:

All things are not equal in the loot system, all people are not getting the chance for good drops, some people are stuck in a perpetual low drop 98% of the time situation so you can argue until you’re blue that there’s nothing wrong, but until everyone has equal chances at the loot there will still be a problem. That’s not what’s happening in this game I repeat loot chances are not equal in this game.

This is the only myth I can see concerning loot drops.

By this logic, I should be angry that there are people who are 98% of the time getting better loot than everyone else.

Vayne.8563:

I don’t know that high end crafting materials should be found in any zone. What you’d end up with in that case is everyone in the lowest zones possible farming and empty end zones. There needs to be some sort of balance.

Make the early zones too rewarding and you have the same problem you had in Orr.

They should be found in any zone. More specifically, in zones with high NPC control over the landscape (Read: mid level zones) T6 bags should be available to drop until player control of the zone is back.

This kind of push-pull would get more players into the world and would give farmers something to farm.

ZudetGambeous.9573:

John Smith.4610:

Hello all, let’s keep in mind that this was just one change, it isn’t intended to be the one saving grace of the whole economy it was simply a market correction.

Standard: We saw that dust was too expensive and it wasn’t on a correcting trend. We made it easier and more prevalent to get dust without any major changes to the current balance.

Econospeak

hide spoiler

We wanted a shift of the supply curve for dust without change the balance too much in any other markets, we were making a change in pseudo isoloation (bisolation if you will).

so you nerfed the crap out of every possible source of dust then couldn’t figure out why it was getting more expensive so you slapped a band-aid on it.

An easier and more prevalent way to get dust was the original system that you beat continually with a bat until it stopped giving dust. If you really wanted to not change the balance of other markets then you wouldn’t have used the mat used in the most recipes in the game to do that, you would have just increased the drop rate of dust.

I love how non-developers think they know better than the actual developers on how to fix problems. It’s almost like that solution (just increasing drop rate) is so obvious, that it was tested and didn’t fix the problem without introducing more problems.

Tisler.6297:

Vayne.8563:

Most of the people who started in my guild of 100 are still playing, though not all of them every day like they used to. See, everyone has a story.

Yes, you right everyone has a story. So for the population we can only guess with some reasonable stupid way.
Like I counted head by head in LA(JQ) there around 150 player there in busy hours(Weekend).
Base on this number, lets count the 4 high lv map same as LA, others (21 maps) half of it.(In fact i don’t believe there 75 people in most map, but lets just count as Maximum.)
150 * 4 + 75 * 21 + 166*4(wvw) = 2839
JQ is one of the highest population server, lets just count all server same as JQ.
2839 * 50 (EU+NA) = 141950
Since people live every where, count each 8 hours as a big zone.
141950 * 3 = 425850
So 1/6 of the 3 million copes. (And i believe the true population should be much less)

I know this not a good estimation, but I hope you fan boys know:more people leaving this game compare the new people join this game. One day gw2 will become a normal Korean MMO like others.

That’s probably not a bad estimation actually, with concurrent players right around 30-50k

Vayne.8563:

ESO would be a valid topic of discussion six months after it released. Let’s not disguise that fact that some people have called pre-November the golden days, something I completely disagree with by the way. I don’t think the game has changed as much as some would say, and some of the changes are for the better anyway.

As someone who’s been here since pre-purchase in April, I can validate your observation that not much changed with the November patch. The game has done nothing but improve over time, but good luck convincing a forum of that.

Vayne.8563:

Guild Wars 2 needs some longer quest type content. The personal story is too fragmented and the dynamic events are too immediate. It needs epic quest lines, possibly linked to the orders.

I know they take time to make, but I think they’d really benefit the game, because it’s that longer type of content that’s really missing.

This.

Oh and a player base that isn’t completely obsessed with rewards.

And more content that wrecks you, your town, your ability to WP (out, not in) and every NPC in a zone wide radius. Make me care.

WTB a massive creature who moves from node to node wreaking havoc on the countryside.

munkiman.3068:

Vayne.8563:

Gasoline.2570:

I didn’t find any glasses from southsun??? The vendors didn’t have them. Where should I look?

There were goggles on southsun…maybe that’s what he’s talking about?

Ha, he’s referring to looking at the world through rose colored glasses

What’s sad is that having reasonable opinions and expectations is considered “seeing the world through rose-colored glasses.”

projectcedric.6951:

ColinJohanson.2394:

We’ve been playing around so far this year with a lot of different concepts to see what works for a living world game, and see what players liked and didn’t like. Based on all of your feedback, you’ll be seeing a greater degree of permanent content built into future living world releases in 2013. And of course, some things you’ve seen before may return again, in its current form but updated like SAB or holiday festivals, or in a new form entirely….

So to put this in another way, basically you were playing around with our gaming experience and now you’re saying that you’re planning to put in more permanent content now that you’ve pretty much arrived at what you think the game should be.

In other words, the whole of past year has been one big open beta, except there is no server-reset at the end of it all. In other words, no matter how beautiful the game was when it came out, it wasn’t finished to begin with because you haven’y made up your mind yet about what to put in permanently.

In other words, we are all guinea pigs to you.

Hi there! This must be your first MMO. Welcome to the genre, where the first year of a major MMO is usually one filled with bugs, broken classes, and changing features.

WoW was like this, LoTRO was like this, AoC was like this, Warhammer was like this.

Par for the course.

I thought I’d seen it all on this forum.

Your premise is extremely flawed.

Please post evidence that substantiates your hypothesis that ANet is specifically targeting the impoverished demographic. And no, analogies don’t count as evidence.

killcannon.2576:

Mackdose.6504:

killcannon.2576:

Putting those clumps of however many people back into the world would be a great first step.

You’ve said this countless times.

How would you go about doing this? If it was as easy as you’re implying, it would be done already. Problem is, as much as you blame the mechanics of the game, it’s a player problem.

Players will always tunnel vision the easiest rewards for their time.

So then, instead of stating a nebulous idea, let’s discuss possible solutions.

Mirta, I, and other players have put forth various ideas to fix or alleviate the situation that I would say are far from nebulous. There are many posts throughout this thread that talk about these ideas. Blaming players for a game mechanic problem is always the easy route.

It’s the easy route because it’s 100% valid.

As for the ideas, I’m not seeing any beyond “improve loot drops in XYZ areas.”

We need less loot and more cosmetic rewards; more bragging rights. We need more mechanics that make playing the game its own reward.

FirstBlood.7359:

Comebacks are impossible.

This. Conquests points in GW2 need to be more like Victory Points in Company of Heroes.

That is to say when Red holds one point, Blue holds one point, and no one holds the third point, the score doesn’t tick.

This will drag out matches a bit more, and the game becomes a push/shove rather bunker up.

It’d be nice if the underdog team could stop the score ticker and make a comeback, something that Company of Heroes did extremely well.

killcannon.2576:

Putting those clumps of however many people back into the world would be a great first step.

You’ve said this countless times.

How would you go about doing this? If it was as easy as you’re implying, it would be done already. Problem is, as much as you blame the mechanics of the game, it’s a player problem.

Players will always tunnel vision the easiest rewards for their time.

So then, instead of stating a nebulous idea, let’s discuss possible solutions.

clay.7849:

@Kichiwan

We’re not taking about employees getting jobs elsewhere, we’re taking about the founders of a company leaving over creative differences.

Except that didn’t happen. They moved to NCSoft from Anet in 2008 and then left NCsoft in 2009.

Jeff founded Undead Labs.
Patrick went to work as COO for En Masse Entertainment.

Stop making things up.

clay.7849:

Also, my reasoning for this game not achieving the goals supposedly set out for it, is that it has really fallen in to the same cycle of evey other MMO that has failed to achieve those goals as well. Sure, it may be different, but I see nothing yet to make me think it will. B2P or not has nothing to do with it.

What cycle of every other MMO? Define the cycle.

And what nebulous goals is this game (and apparently every MMO) failing to achieve?

Xia.3485:

Kichwas.7152:

Anyone who takes that kind of marketing speech that seriously is going to have trouble functioning in the modern media-driven world…

Seems to me marketing has been the same since the 1980’s.. Its some serious koolaid if you know what I mean.

I don’t feel the marketing for GW2 was dishonest, I also don’t feel it exaggerated too much either. It was especially honest once they lifted the NDA on the beta.. the internet was flooded with information and first impressions. That’s when I bought (pre-bough) a copy. I knew full well it wasn’t going to be a raiding game, or something like the other MMOs I played. Being able to play some weekends before release was a bonus.

So yeah, I’m not sure how someone can claim they were lied to (extreme case) or mislead.

I’ve been on the front lines of the ANET LIES debate since release (I’m not proud of that) and generally it’s caused by unchecked expectations and poor reading comprehension.
Also, confirmation bias.

gurugeorge.9857:

The argument about “stickiness” only works with subscription games – the whole point of the addictive grind was that it attracted a bunch of people who were likely to stick with the game and keep paying a monthly subscription, and that formed the core playerbase. That logic doesn’t have any meaning with B2P. All you need with B2P is to have enough players around to create a background buzz for casual players, to have enough in the cash shop to let casual players get a boost now and then, and to engender enough enjoyment for casual players so that they’ll pony up for the next expansion. Naturally, it’s nice if some hardcore players stick around too, but it’s not as CRUCIAL for the game’s life and longevity as it would be for a subscription MMO.

There’s a different kind of “stickiness” that comes from the virtual world aspect (people like hanging out in this particular virtual place), and that’s what ANet are aiming for with the “living world” idea.

There’s a different kind of “stickiness” again that comes from hardcore PvP players. The PvP scene in GW2 is pretty healthy so far as I can see.

At the end of the day, basing your income on players who are liable to become heavily addicted was never a good idea. It led to a hardcore sticky playerbase, true, and that hardcore playerbase created good viral marketing for the game, true; but the bulk of subscribers was always casual anyway (check the stats for WoW) and there was always a high churn rate of casual players anyway. ANet have just gone with the flow of that and reversed the design emphasis from hardcore > casual to casual > hardcore.

So all that happens is that the game has some hardcore features but maybe not enough to satisfy some hardcore players, and instead of creating a positive buzz for the game, those players bellyache and create a slight negative buzz. But my impression from around the net is that most players who play GW2 absolutely love it to bits precisely BECAUSE it’s a game they can easily pick up and put down, and with the living world content, it is sufficiently interesting and different each time you pick it up.

Anet is certainly banking on that premise, which is also a unique feature in the genre.

However, I disagree that Anet is prioritizing casual players (as in “just here to hang out and have fun”) over any other kind of player.

I think Anet is shooting for the mainstream gamer. Not the “7 hour marathon everyday” player, not the “play for an hour and log off for 2 weeks” player.

I’ve seen several people argue that not focusing on one of these two groups (Casual, Hardcore) is a recipe for failure, citing the concept of trying to please everyone pleases no one. The major failing in this logic is that the player base isn’t binary.

To date, I’ve labeled myself a casual gamer, which in MMO parlance is true. In general gaming parlance however, I’m a core gamer. I can play about 14 hours a week, I learn mechanics and drill down into theorycrafting and build experimentation, but not so much that it consumes all of my free time.

This game is tailor-made for core gamers, and because core gamers sit in the middle of the bell curve, the game actually manages to please a large amount of the player base without needing to cater to some niche group on the extremes of the curve.

But there is evidence the game is doing well…

1. There are many active players during off-peak hours.
2. It has been repeatedly said in multiple interviews that the game sold well beyond expectations, and concurrent players and repeat log-ins have stabilized. This is reflected by point 1.
3. the GW2 community is active and stable, as seen on these and other community forums. (i.e. reddit)
4. The trading post is still moving extremely fast, which shows that the are many active traders.

The game is healthy, and there is plenty of evidence in and out of the game that reflects that. You don’t need a million active players to have a successful and healthy MMO.

To answer the topic question:

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

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

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

Hawkian.6580:

And by the way, it’s not a binary state. It’s a continuum.

I’m a semi-casual semi-hardcore gamer.

This is known as a “core” or mainstream gamer.

clay.7849:

Xia.3485:

clay.7849:

I used that definition to show that, by definition, casual players aren’t going to play a game for long.

If someone only plays 8 hours or less a week it doesn’t mean he’ll quit sooner than another. And even if he does, it doesn’t impact revenue (no subscription).

On the flip side, the limited play time may motivate the player to buy boosts from the gem shop with real money, thus increasing revenue.

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

You should go read your own post again, it’s limited time OR limited interest . Limited interest gamers aren’t going to play MMOs in the first place, since we’re making up facts that we can’t back up. Also show me some evidence that casual = less money, because by and large that’s wrong as hell.

Source? Look up a game called “The Sims.”

clay.7849:

Mackdose.6504:

clay.7849:

Mackdose.6504:

clay.7849:

Mackdose.6504:

clay.7849:

Aeonblade.8709:

clay.7849:

Mackdose.6504:

clay.7849:

Casual players won’t show the kind of dedication or devotion to a game by the nature of the definition of casual.

I’m a casual player.

I only play GW2, CS:GO, LoL, BF3 and then whatever Singleplayer AAA title happens to catch my fancy.

Out of those games, GW2 dominates my hours played. I play games maybe 10-14 hrs a week.

I’m not an outlier, either. you should drill down your definition of casual because as it stands, your point doesn’t hold water.

Hold on… you missed my definition of casual in my last posts? I think I made it pretty clear. Hell, I even linked to the Merriam Webster definition.

What about the definition of casual don’t you understand?

He’s telling you the video game definition of casual and the dictionary definition mean two separate things. And they pretty much always have.

No, he thinks the definition of casual is time spent in game. I disagree. Where, exactly, is your definition of “Video Game Casual” posted? Links would help.

http://bit.ly/XVYuMb

Thanks for that! I found this:

“A casual gamer is a player whose time or interest in playing games is limited.”

If your interest in a game is limited, it stands to reason that you won’t play it for long.

Thanks for helping me show you that your are wrong.

I’m sorry, next time read the material:

“The term casual gamer can also be used to distinguish between play styles of level-based character advance in nonlinear games with respect to the amount of dedicated hours of play. MMORPGs may require many hours of grinding to develop a character to maximum level and reach the endgame. Other games like Eve Online and The Lord of the Rings Online try to balance leveling so that casual gamers can play along with those dedicating more hours to the game.”

Check the part I bolded for you. “Can also” does not mean “the only definition”.

I’m sorry but, you really failed in trying to sway my opinion by using an optional definition found on a wiki page as proof of anything.

It’s not optional, it’s contextual.

Either you’re talking about facebook gamers or you’re talking about people who don’t have a lot of time. Which is it?

So, let’s just ignore all of the definitions of casual and go with yours for a minute: limited playing time.

Great! So, your playing time is limited. What happened to all the other games you used to play? Are you still playing them? No? Why? If not, how long did you play them for? Is that amount of time you played them for indicative of the amount of time you will play GW2 for? If so, does that amount of time uphold the idea that people like you will play this game for a long time? What is a long time?

So, using your definition, we are still left wondering – if you don’t have a lot of time to play video games, and you have already stopped playing video games in the past – why is GW2 so different that you think you are going to play it longer than a hardcore gamer will play another game?

Are we talking purely hours played, or amount of real time that elapses before I quit playing GW2 for good?

Knowing me and MMOs, I’ll probably stick with GW2 until the next evolutionary MMO comes out, considering I played WoW for 6 years.

clay.7849:

Mackdose.6504:

clay.7849:

Mackdose.6504:

clay.7849:

Aeonblade.8709:

clay.7849:

Mackdose.6504:

clay.7849:

Casual players won’t show the kind of dedication or devotion to a game by the nature of the definition of casual.

I’m a casual player.

I only play GW2, CS:GO, LoL, BF3 and then whatever Singleplayer AAA title happens to catch my fancy.

Out of those games, GW2 dominates my hours played. I play games maybe 10-14 hrs a week.

I’m not an outlier, either. you should drill down your definition of casual because as it stands, your point doesn’t hold water.

Hold on… you missed my definition of casual in my last posts? I think I made it pretty clear. Hell, I even linked to the Merriam Webster definition.

What about the definition of casual don’t you understand?

He’s telling you the video game definition of casual and the dictionary definition mean two separate things. And they pretty much always have.

No, he thinks the definition of casual is time spent in game. I disagree. Where, exactly, is your definition of “Video Game Casual” posted? Links would help.

http://bit.ly/XVYuMb

Thanks for that! I found this:

“A casual gamer is a player whose time or interest in playing games is limited.”

If your interest in a game is limited, it stands to reason that you won’t play it for long.

Thanks for helping me show you that your are wrong.

I’m sorry, next time read the material:

“The term casual gamer can also be used to distinguish between play styles of level-based character advance in nonlinear games with respect to the amount of dedicated hours of play. MMORPGs may require many hours of grinding to develop a character to maximum level and reach the endgame. Other games like Eve Online and The Lord of the Rings Online try to balance leveling so that casual gamers can play along with those dedicating more hours to the game.”

Check the part I bolded for you. “Can also” does not mean “the only definition”.

I’m sorry but, you really failed in trying to sway my opinion by using an optional definition found on a wiki page as proof of anything.

It’s not optional, it’s contextual.

Either you’re talking about facebook gamers or you’re talking about people who don’t have a lot of time. Which is it?

clay.7849:

Mackdose.6504:

clay.7849:

Aeonblade.8709:

clay.7849:

Mackdose.6504:

clay.7849:

Casual players won’t show the kind of dedication or devotion to a game by the nature of the definition of casual.

I’m a casual player.

I only play GW2, CS:GO, LoL, BF3 and then whatever Singleplayer AAA title happens to catch my fancy.

Out of those games, GW2 dominates my hours played. I play games maybe 10-14 hrs a week.

I’m not an outlier, either. you should drill down your definition of casual because as it stands, your point doesn’t hold water.

Hold on… you missed my definition of casual in my last posts? I think I made it pretty clear. Hell, I even linked to the Merriam Webster definition.

What about the definition of casual don’t you understand?

He’s telling you the video game definition of casual and the dictionary definition mean two separate things. And they pretty much always have.

No, he thinks the definition of casual is time spent in game. I disagree. Where, exactly, is your definition of “Video Game Casual” posted? Links would help.

http://bit.ly/XVYuMb

Thanks for that! I found this:

“A casual gamer is a player whose time or interest in playing games is limited.”

If your interest in a game is limited, it stands to reason that you won’t play it for long.

Thanks for helping me show you that your are wrong.

I’m sorry, next time read the material:

“The term casual gamer can also be used to distinguish between play styles of level-based character advance in nonlinear games with respect to the amount of dedicated hours of play. MMORPGs may require many hours of grinding to develop a character to maximum level and reach the endgame. Other games like Eve Online and The Lord of the Rings Online try to balance leveling so that casual gamers can play along with those dedicating more hours to the game.”

It also stands to reason that if a persons interest in gaming at large is limited, they wouldn’t be playing an MMO in the first place.

clay.7849:

Aeonblade.8709:

clay.7849:

Mackdose.6504:

clay.7849:

Casual players won’t show the kind of dedication or devotion to a game by the nature of the definition of casual.

I’m a casual player.

I only play GW2, CS:GO, LoL, BF3 and then whatever Singleplayer AAA title happens to catch my fancy.

Out of those games, GW2 dominates my hours played. I play games maybe 10-14 hrs a week.

I’m not an outlier, either. you should drill down your definition of casual because as it stands, your point doesn’t hold water.

Hold on… you missed my definition of casual in my last posts? I think I made it pretty clear. Hell, I even linked to the Merriam Webster definition.

What about the definition of casual don’t you understand?

He’s telling you the video game definition of casual and the dictionary definition mean two separate things. And they pretty much always have.

No, he thinks the definition of casual is time spent in game. I disagree. Where, exactly, is your definition of “Video Game Casual” posted? Links would help.

http://bit.ly/XVYuMb

Are you intentionally dodging my argument?

clay.7849:

Casual players won’t show the kind of dedication or devotion to a game by the nature of the definition of casual.

I’m a casual player.

I only play GW2, CS:GO, LoL, BF3 and then whatever singleplayer AAA title happens to catch my fancy.

Out of those games, GW2 dominates my hours played. I play games maybe 10-14 hrs a week. GW2 takes up 75% of that play time.

I’m not an outlier, either. You should drill down your definition of casual because as it stands, your point doesn’t hold water.

clay.7849:

^^

Nappyychappy hit the nail on the head, IMO.

The definition of “casual player” doesn’t lend itself to the kind of dedication and “stickiness” you need to make a game like an MMO live for a long time.

Except when you’re a casual MMO player, then it doesn’t matter what your contrived definition of “casual” is.

You don’t to be a hardcore gamer (read: lots of free time) to stick with an MMO.

Casual doesn’t mean “unskilled” or “idiot.” It just means you don’t have lots of free time.

Alloy.2839:

Calae.1738:

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

I am over 30 and don’t believe a family oriented game like GW2 would benefit from the addition of the items you mention. There are other games for people who desire that kind of content.

Erm… Bandits, separatists, orphanage fires, hospital fires, asura gates, steam engines.

The only thing that isn’t covered by the post you replied to is nudity and coarse language.

Vayne.8563:

Blacklight.2871:

Murderin.8269:

Adine.2184:

Murderin.8269:

A game without a subscription will never die.

This is a false statement . it depends on the quality of the game and the financial soundness of the company . Many free games have gone poof over the years

I figured that was obvious. Anyway neither of those apply to GW2 in the first place.

Unless there are serious developmental mistakes this game will be active until Guild Wars 3.

They’ve been making serious developmental mistakes since launch. Doesn’t seem to have had much of an adverse effect. Though it’s hard to tell without subscription numbers to use for a relative comparison. The hiring page is pretty much the only clear evidence that ANet isn’t hurting.

If the game is healthy, maybe they aren’t mistakes. I mean how many people say the Fractals was a mistake. Ascended gear is a mistake. The new super action box is a mistake. For each person who claims something is a mistake, another person likes it.

I think selling stuff in the shop that’s RNG is a mistake…I hate it. But it’s probably making them money. Over the long haul, they’ll probably make more money doing that. They’ll lose some players over it. Is it a mistake?

There have been a couple of mistakes, objectively, like the way the Lost Shores event was run…that was definitely a mistake, but a lot of things that people call mistakes are only mistakes from certain viewpoints.

And the take away from these mistakes is that Anet is learning what works and what doesn’t. Every release has been an improvement upon the game.

Calae.1738:

I’m not sure how long they will be able to sustain this though. Their Achilles heel is a AAA MMO targeted to a mature audience. The Disney stuff might be tolerable for awhile but; it’ll get dumped really fast. Your average MMO gamers is over 30 and is demanding mature content.

Good thing people are capable of playing more than one game at a time. Otherwise this all or nothing argument would hold water.

I enjoy the fact that when I don’t play for a while, I come back and suddenly I have a ton of things to do. I did the Flame and Frost instances yesterday and had lots of fun.

I’m really glad the game’s population has stabilized. It’s a fair call to say that GW2 is doing well. The population density I’m seeing is as consistent this month as it was in February. I took a break after missing February’s monthly achievement, and came back to a still bustling game.

Anet may not have the lightning in a bottle that WoW caught, but GW2 is clearly here for the long haul.

emikochan.8504:

Boo hoo, latecomers have plenty chance, old players don’t play forever. Everyone quits eventually :p

If you are dedicated you should have an advantage. Who knows maybe the leaderboards might also have sections for monthly/weekly as well as all time.

This.

The Diablo 2 ladder was the same thing, and the top changed all the time.