Guild Wars 2

Mosharn.8357:

currency is better then rng. Plus you dont have to store it in your bank anymore its with you all the time. I know too much currency is bad but its simple and is specific on what you need to do for what you need to spend on.

Currency isn’t fun. RNG is more engaging because it can happen at any time, not after a calculated amount of time saving up your pennies. That stuff is for real life budgeting, not a fantasy video game. You may enjoy chores, not me.

The most important thing about the rewards needs to be that it rewards the team who was able to muster the organization and develop a strategy, and that they have access to rewards from the kill that others in the area do not for simply “being there.”

I have a thread specifically on this started yesterday, if it throws this thread off topic too far: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/New-Tequatl-Rewards-Guild-Recognition/

Vayne.8563:

Actually I know quite a few people who have paid a sub and don’t play a game. In fact, I know people who continue to pay for subs for games they don’t play.

Don’t ask me why.

I’m sorry, but the percentage of people who are PAYING monthly for a game and NOT playing it is minute, at best. And if you DO believe what you’re saying, then surely you have to agree that box sales in no way reflects active players…

Don’t move the goalposts – there’s nothing wrong with asking ArenaNet to define “active” players just as Blizzard has done.

Then, and only then, could we get a bead on the original topic of “is this game growing” because anecdotal evidence we have shows the opposite.

By the way, this isn’t directed at “you” specifically but rather the collective “you” including ArenaNet

Vayne.8563:

I know Eve does report that, but again, most companies don’t. Even WoW doesn’t usually tell you how many players are on at the same time and they have 8 million subscribers.

Players = subscribers in EVE’s case.
Players = subscribers in WoW’s case.
Sales does not = players in GW2’s case.

We don’t care how many people are playing at the same time… we care how many players are actively playing.

What I would like is for ArenaNet to define what an “active player” is (similar to how Blizzard has defined an active player/subscriber as someone who has paid to play the game during the course of a given month.)

ArenaNet could do the same thing – even “logging in once in a calendar month” would be enough of a definition.

Then we could accurately measure if the game is growing or not. Sales is simply an indication of sales, not players.

My feeling (with no numbers of course, purely anecdotal evidence) is that while ArenaNet seems to be pretty decent at selling boxes and getting new players, there are more players leaving out the back of the bus.

So to me, it feels like the net population is shrinking despite new players coming in.

I’ll say it again – the only way to measure this is if they reported players instead of sales. But they seem to refuse that.

Distaste.4801:

Because everyone there is putting forth effort whether you recognize it or not. The second you start rewarding a group of people over another it creates tension. Why is anyone going to come help another guild kill Teq if they aren’t going to be rewarded the same?

It can’t be both ways.

Why do you suppose ArenaNet released GW2 with bowling pin world bosses that simply fall over? Because they had to account for everyone and any number of people doing it, without working together or coordinating in the slightest.

Now that they’re going to require strategy and coordination, it’s by definition going to leave out the random non-grouped player from any meaningful contribution.

In fact those players can’t even say “please invite me to the raid so I can help execute your plan” if they wanted to, because there are no large group management tools in place. (In my opinion, MUCH greater group/party tools have to accompany this change, but that’s a different discussion.)

So since those players are unable to put in the same level of effort (remember, “showing up” is no longer enough effort, you must play as a team) the same rewards should not be available to them.

And let’s not even get into the problem of drive-by-boss stabbings from leachers.

Distaste.4801:

I’d imagine it would go something like Guild A attempts Tequatl, Guild B sits back not helping, Guild A wipes, Guild B comes in and then attempts to “steal” Tequatl. Then the drama, name calling, etc starts….that’s real great for community building!

Actually, it is great for community building!

Players start to recognize guild names in PvE in a meaningful way. They also get to start recognizing players by name (instead of the ridiculous faceless WvW.) This in itself spins up an atmosphere of aspiration in the community.

“GuildX just took down Tequatl!”

“Did Tequalt’s Fang of Doom” drop?

“Yep! PlayerX got it!”

“Grats!”

That whole process inspires other players to try new things and talk to new people. That means they will be meeting other players, socializing and playing better as they work to become part of an actual team. Something Guild Wars 2 currently doesn’t have in PvE, and ArenaNet seems to have recognized.

Sometimes, some exclusivity is the ultimate community building tool.

Distaste.4801:

GW2 is/was supposed to be an all inclusive MMO where everyone could contribute and be rewarded. As soon as you start dolling out rewards/recognition to subsets of the community, the community will then start falling apart. The community as a whole is much more important than certain guilds needing to be recognized to feel superior to others. Go find a sandbox MMO for that type of recognition/loot because this isn’t the game for it.

Just to reiterate… you can’t have teamwork matter and be all-inclusive at the same time. And as I indicated, this kind of thing can actually make the community much stronger in the long run.

Make no mistake – this is absolutely the right design direction for Anet to go with world bosses, but it has to go hand-in-hand with more attention to team play and making sure the reward system is fair.

I’m not saying that players who just “show up” get 0 rewards, but they shouldn’t have a chance at the best rewards (the unique Ascended weapon skin or whatever it is that will be dropping from this boss, and presumably others in the future.)

Pifil.5193:

Zeldain.5710:

And I don’t think that everyone who just comes along to participate should be entitled to the same chance at the same rewards.

Why not? Because they’re not in the same guild as the guy wearing a commander tag and telling people to do what they were going to do anyway?

PVE in GW2 is not that complex, this new fight is no exception, after one or two tries it’ll be pretty obvious what needs to be done during the stages and any individual who looks around, reacts to changing circumstances and moves to fill a needed role is just as deserving of rewards as a footsoldier from some guild who follows orders.

If that’s the case there’s no point in doing this change to the system.

If you deal with organizing X amount of people to do the work, and deal with the people who aren’t helping (and maybe even hindering) your ability to kill it… why should they have the same chance at the same loot as the group that puts in the effort?

This whole thing will fall flat on its face if there isn’t something to delineate the group that puts forth the effort vs the players who are simply “also there.”

TehPwnerer.7215:

Probably not considering it requires the efforts of everyone on the server to cooperate to take it down. I’m sure there’ll be guilds that take credit for kills though.

I think there should be a systemic mechanic that recognizes and rewards the coordinating guild somehow.

And I don’t think that everyone who just comes along to participate should be entitled to the same chance at the same rewards.

I think it’s a step in the right direction, but if done right, it will be punishing and unforgiving. Meaning those who don’t communicate or coordinate (such as in today’s encounter) should not be rewarded just for cursorily helping.

How will ArenaNet control this?

So, one of the things that GW2 did on launch was have these open world encoutners that were just zergs… no strategy, no tactics… just… show up.

ArenaNet seems to be willing to tweak that recipe now with the revamped Tequatl encounter… no way you are going to beat it without coordination.

My question is about rewards and more importantly, recognition.

It was mentioned that item skins unique to that boss will be available, which is something I believe should have been in from the start.

- How will coordinated play reward the team organizing it, vs. the passer-by who just tags the mob? Do they get a chance at the very same loot?

- Will a guild be able to somehow be recognized for defeating or at least driving the kill?

Helicity.3416:

Serious question, what about the players who do not enjoy crafting, have never crafted?

You’re going to make only one avenue for obtaining AWs, and make that avenue based on a sidemechanic that a lot of players find tedious, uninteresting and is biased towards PvE play? Really?

What happened to “play how YOU like” and “Every player can get the same rewards via THEIR preferred mode of play” ?

I’m actually very annoyed with this short-sighted and obvious money grab.

Why?

Because Ascended weapons are only being implemented to boost Gem sales.

Because Arenanet knows that a lot of us have no crafting leveled up, and Arenanet knows that a lot of players will end up needing to buy a massive amount of low-end materials off the TP, which in turn will entice some of them to buy gems and exchange them for gold.

It’s disgusting, the GW2 Manifesto is a lie.

The solution is: you can buy gems, sell them for gold then buy from crafters.

I promise you. That is working as intended.

Akimbo.4835:

So I can probably call myself a “casual” player, though I have 5 level 80 characters, 4 of those in full exotic gear, I definitely don’t play as much or farm as hard as a lot of players out there.

I’ve been in Fractals once, found it incredibly boring and didn’t feel like grinding something I didn’t enjoy for the ascended trinkets. That didn’t bother me too much, I could access some of this using Laurels – costly, but I considered it “fair”.

Now with an intended update to add ascended weapons and armour, I’m going to fall behind the power creep:

I’m expecting to be excluded from groups if I don’t have all ascended gear. Please don’t give me “hurr durr, play with friends” etc. You know that people are going to be excluded from groups due to not having the top-tier gear.

I’m expecting to never play WvW, since people will have an artificial advantage in terms of gear, rather than everyone having (relatively) easy access to the same level of gear. (Exotics.)

It’s a direction that GW2 is going in which concerns me. One of the reasons I loved GW1 was that it was easy to get top-tier gear, but hard/expensive to get the best/rarest skins. GW2 isn’t GW1, of course I realise that, however I feel that this may dishearten a lot of players, who have put the effort into getting group-acceptable gear (i.e. full exotics) only to find that they’re now behind the curve again.

I know this won’t stop Anet releasing this update, but just wanted to express my concern at the decision.

No worry, I am sure there will be a cash shop solution for you!

Galen Grey.4709:

If $160m – $180m is break-even point. How did eve online survive all these years with $90m?

how is blade and soul surviving with just $8.1m !

which MMOs make even close to $160m? apart from WoW of course?

and lineage 1… Its impressive how well that game does in asia and it failed to even be viable over here. Talking about cultural difference!

Well, go and do the math on SW:TOR and answer why they went f2p so soon. They sold almost 3 million boxes…. not counting subscriptions or CE assumptions, that’s $180m right there. They should have been in FINE shape.

ArenaNet has admitted consistently they’ve got ~200 employees there, so unless they are paying them squat, you can count on that meaning about $20m annually in salaries alone. Add in marketing, infrastructure, service (support) etc. It’s safe to say it costs at least $40m to run GW2 every year.

And NCSoft shareholders also expect a profit… don’t forget about that.

Tom Gore.4035:

Zeldain.5710:

Tom Gore.4035:

Zeldain.5710:

For some reason, Anet is afraid to tell us the total amount of active players.

Since GW2 does not have a subscription, they would first have to define what is an “active” player. Anyone who has logged in within the last week? The last month?

Concurrence is a much better measure in a non sub-based game like GW2.

So let them define it – it’s not that hard. Even if it’s “player has logged in once per month.” Blizzard always took time to even define subscribers, as obvious as it seems.

Concurrence is terrible because it exists as a peak, and it happened 1 time… does not show at all how many people are playing. Its a terrible way to measure anything, the LEAST of which is a game like GW2.

Funny thing you should mention Blizzard, as a signifigant portion of WoW’s “subscriber” number they like to wave around comes from China, where there are no subscriptions. Practically Blizzard has defined a Chinese “subscriber” to some arbitraty time spent per month to make their number look higher than it should.

I will of course agree that an EVE-like real-time indication would be the best way to show the number of active players, but I don’t think that’s going to happen.

Blizzard made it very clear that everyone they were counting as a subscriber was paying at least SOME money to play their game each month. That’s a fact.

ArenaNet could do the very same thing… tell us the number of individual players who have paid something in a given month.

Simple, but they won’t do it. Why?

Tom Gore.4035:

Zeldain.5710:

For some reason, Anet is afraid to tell us the total amount of active players.

Since GW2 does not have a subscription, they would first have to define what is an “active” player. Anyone who has logged in within the last week? The last month?

Concurrence is a much better measure in a non sub-based game like GW2.

So let them define it – it’s not that hard. Even if it’s “player has logged in once per month.” Blizzard always took time to even define subscribers, as obvious as it seems.

Concurrence is terrible because it exists as a peak, and it happened 1 time… does not show at all how many people are playing. Its a terrible way to measure anything, the LEAST of which is a game like GW2.

Galen Grey.4709:

SilverShadow.3021:

Galen Grey.4709:

Gehenna.3625:

The financial reports shows that Last year GW2 made a lot of money and in the first two quarters of 2013 sales are down dramatically, like 70% down…Also the second quarter was down from the first quarter again. So the financial reports actually show that the game is going down financially in the first half of this year. In that sense GW2 has followed the same trend as other MMOs.

Anet/NcSoft have also said that by now the game is stabilising and slowly growing again. So the game is not dying but financially I don’t think they’re exactly sitting on roses either.

So my assessment is that it’s doing ok. Not great, not horrible, but ok.

First quarter it made a ton of money cause it sold a ton of boxes. it did what 2 million in 1 month? at $60 not counting deluxe and collecters thats $120m right there. No game can keep selling 2 – 3 million boxes per quarter. At lauch you have all the people who have been waiting for it buying it. Then its people who come across it, or who change their minds etc.. the later will always be a lot smaller.

They choose micro transactions as the revenue driver and that has increased quarter over quarter according to the financial reports . That means its actually doing great for them.

Well, not really. Let’s do a basic calculation.

Anet is said to have +300 employees long before release, today there might be a lot more. To be conservative with this assumption I’m going for 300 employees.

The average annual salary in the US in the games industry is around 75-80k, but I’m going for 70k like the first time.
300*70k=21 mio $
So we have at LEAST 21 Mio $ of costs to be covered, not counting in additional employees (well, you could try to count them from the recent ANET image we got) or lots of other expenses.

According to the NCsoft earnings release 2013 Q2 they achieved gem shop sales of 7,7 mio. 7,7*4=30,8 mio; that’s not a lot compared to my very conservative assumption of expenses.
I don’t see how they could cover studio costs while maintaining a decent revenue share just with gem shop sales.

The biggest income factor is still boxed sales with 20 mio in 2013 Q2. So yes, including boxed sales Anet is doing really good, but boxed sales WILL go down rapidly as time goes on (-4mio compared to last quarter).

To be honest that makes me really happy, because it’s basically predicting that they HAVE to deliver an expansion at some point (apart from the fact that the LS is pretty much bs in my opinion).

Ehh I dont follow sorry. The Q2 report says they did $25m this last quarter they reported on. not $7.7m Unless I am misreading something. Its $28b krw which are equivalent to $25m usd. Thats excluding the box sales. Total so far is $160m which covers all the wages for 5 years alone.

Thats also not counting the easter market which generally is greater then the western market making it so potentially it could do $200m a year from the gemshop alone.

During the call itself they said the game is doing strong and seems stable financially. It would be illegal to say that if the income was smaller then the expenses.

There’s also much more to supporting the game than salaries… there’s infrastructure, there’s marketing, there’s business operations….

My educated guess is they are on thin break-even ice.

darkdomino.9578:

Math is not my strong suite, but someone correct me if I’m wrong here:

You’ve got 400,000 active users and you’ve sold 3,000,000 copies….

According to my fancy Android calculator, that’s like 13%…. 13% of everyone who bought a copy of GW2 is actually still playing the game.

That’s…. pretty terrible. I’m not sure how A-net can feel good about numbers like that. I feel like they need to recover a LOT of lost ground to get back to where they were.

That 400,000 number is not total number of active players. That is most amount ever playing at the same time.

For some reason, Anet is afraid to tell us the total amount of active players.

Lunar Sunset.8742:

Zeldain.5710:

Lunar Sunset.8742:

I think they are doing really well, there are many people who have bought well over just the standard box price in gems. Multiply that by a thousands and you got $$$$. Good way to do business, making more money than those p2p games.

Hehe, no they aren’t.

Oh look, someone who works at Anets financial department. Send over their financial statements so I can have a look see.

It’s pretty easy to do the math… and of course, they don’t release actual player numbers. So, yeah. Let’s just say they’re no Blizzard.

Meglobob.8620:

I agree about how impressive it is to have the content updates every 2 weeks.

Is any other software developer doing this? Errrm no.

Also, when you look at them, they are pretty big, each update.

So it is IMPRESSIVE, even through each individual player may not like parts of it.

What good is it when it’s so shallow? You should be asking for quality, not quantity.

Lunar Sunset.8742:

I think they are doing really well, there are many people who have bought well over just the standard box price in gems. Multiply that by a thousands and you got $$$$. Good way to do business, making more money than those p2p games.

Hehe, no they aren’t.

Hard to tell. ArenaNet will not report actual players.

If they did, we could take the industry average of mtx conversion rate (2.5%) and grab $15 per month per player buying, and come up with a decent estimate.

In any case, it’s much smaller than a subscription game.

Yep, the basics are definitely missing. It’s clear this is not a “group” or social oriented game, it’s all about wham-bam solo zerg stuff, without concern specifically “who” is doing it.

Yeah, there’s really no reason there should be a visual change to something someone worked at getting for months.

Beats my why anyone uses Firefox (not to mention IE.)

projectcedric.6951:

Btw, it’s called “social gameplay”.

=))

There’s nothing social about that (unless you were being sarcastic.) I wouldn’t call GW2 “anti-social” as much as I’d say it’s “asocial” meaning no one participates socially.

Yep, there’s no challenge to overcome… simply report for duty and collect loot. Like a list of chores, instead of something that inspires players to achieve greatness.

Karizee.8076:

I will NEVER pay a fee just to log in a game again. GW2 has proven that you don’t need sub fees to maintain and grow a MMO, heck they are putting out more content than sub based games.

It has actually kind of proven you DO need subscription fees to deliver large, meaty content updates on a regular schedule. Compare what WoW has released over the past year to what GW2 has and there’s simply no comparison — WoW wins hands down.

This goes to show that more is most certainly not always better, and if care isn’t taken to handle returning players it can be a catalyst to quitting.

I’d rather have many fewer but much more substantial actual content updates.

Picking a random point… no end game… I think this is the biggest critical flaw. Not so much that there aren’t “raids” but in so much as you’re doing the same thing the entire game… there’s nothing you “graduate” to.

Even professional sports have a regular season, then they have the playoffs…

TheDaiBish.9735:

Because them finishers are SO OP!

Not sure what the issue with finishers are…they don’t affect game-play whatsoever and are purely cosmetic.

That’s exactly the issue – they don’t affect gameplay whatsoever. So instead of design time going into gameplay, it went into monetization.

Soja.5918:

ANet has monetized the downed state via finisher items on the gem store.

It can be safely said that it is not going away.

And this, folks, is the truth of the f2p model.

Ronah.2869:

Down-state is GW2 unique feature. It won’t go away. And it gives a heroic feeling when you succeed and rally up. It is really innovative feature.
If you don’t want to use it, just let yourself get killed, but let others fight for their survival if they prefer.

It gives you a heroic feeling throwing sand at someone while you try and stand back up?

It’s simply a delay to death… time waster.

First, a subscription game doesn’t automatically guarantee quality, but what it DOES do is make sure the developer’s are focused on the right thing — they have to capture us with content. In order to get paid next month, they have to do something awesome this month.

In the f2p/b2p zone that ArenaNet is in, “monetization” has to be involved in every step of the design process. The events every two weeks? Think of them as sales vehicles to sell cash shop items, not unlike Hallmark has created holidays to sell cards.

Like it or not, that is the business model of a b2p/f2p game. Now, give ArenaNet credit for trying to wrap it up in the Living Story, but it ends up pretty shallow and I’m not even sure that’s worth it. I’d almost rather see that development and design time simply go into amazing and constant flow of cash shop items. They’d probably do better.

It’s easy to estimate that a subscription game of say, 500,000 players (estimating that’s the number of active GW2 players) can make more — and perhaps more importantly — forecast more accurately.

500k subscribers paying $15 a month is ~$7.5m revenue. However, using even generous mtx conversion rates of 10%, that same number of active players in GW2 gets only $750,000 in that same month. And that assumes they are spending at least $15 each.

Of course those numbers are speculation, but they are based on industry data and the best assumptions we can make about active GW2 players until ArenaNet releases actual numbers.

Summary: A subscription model doesn’t guarantee quality, but it guarantees focus on gameplay, not monetization.

Duke Blackrose.4981:

As for your subscription proposal…. keep it out of my game. I’ve bought my game. I deserve to enjoy and play it.

You’ve bought the game, fair enough. But what about the service it takes to run it, and the development of new content? That’s what I’d prefer a subscription existed to pay for.

The problem is we should not be forced into feeling sorry for them and paying money. Remember – “buy once, play forever.” But that means they have to have some deviant techniques to get money out of people, in some cases that would not have otherwise spent.

This is the sour taste f2p and b2p games leave in my mouth, which is why I much prefer a subscription model.

Mirta.5029:

Gehenna.3625:

You’d be surprised what people can actually achieve if they were just challenged. Just because we are living in a lazy, entitled society, doesn’t meant we can’t actually do better.

I have more faith in the ability of mankind than that. Sadly there’s a ton of unused potential. Anet is not the government, nor the education system, so they just cater to what people think they want. If people want easy, they’ll provide it. That’s business.

Except that this is a game and not a job. It’s something people do on their free time. I’ve done some quite challenging stuff in my life and never had an easy one. I have however played over 200 games. I know the limits of my skill. I know the problems that my brain has with 3D objects, my delay when I’m trying to react and my faulty eyes. I know that some of them were probably caused by 12 hour surgeries and being under anesthesia for so long, but just like you I like to relax and have fun in my free time, so no, want challenging? Play Dark Souls or something, don’t take entertainment away from all of us though.

Sorry, I must have missed something – what does challenge have to do with time again?

Also, your particular fringe lifestyle should never figure into the game’s design.

I’d like to see raids. Even making extremely challenging version of existing world bosses, but lock them up in instanced versions of the zones that become the raid. 50 people… it would shine a huge light on GW2 at the right time (as players are declining.)

Mirta.5029:

Yoh.8469:

Too many Waypoints
The first, and single greatest game design flaw GW2 has, is Waypoints.
Or rather, the shear number of them.

They are bloody everywhere, in every single map, and in every corner of them; so that no where is more then a minute or two stroll from anywhere in the world.
This is fine for early game to mid gameplay, as it make getting around and coming back from death easy.

But at end game this has a chilling effect, several in fact.

This is where I stopped reading. I hated redoing maps in GW1 again and again and again and yes, wps are a problem in the end game – the fact that there’s not enough of them. Ever been to Orr? Especially straits of devastation? There’s about 2 wps in the whole zone that are normally not contested. If you die somewhere while exploring, prepare to faceplant into your desk in rage. I don’t think that the game should force you to be so careful that it wouldn’t be fun and I don’t think that people should spend 20 minutes getting back to the spot just to try again.
And there’s plenty of journey if you want there to be. Yesterday I ran from metrica province to the gates of arah on a level 2 character with 7 other people. It took us 5 hours that.

Here’s the thing… they’re not “re-doing maps” – you are traversing a world that is supposed to feel like a place. It’s supposed to mean something to have to go from point A to point B… it’s supposed to give you a sense of place.

That’s a single player or GW1 mentality. For an open persistent world, waypoints were a huge mistake.

Amadan.9451:

define hardcore players please, because i play hours and hours every day like an hardcore player and i still don’t love challenging content and prefer entertainment…
so when you say that guild wars 2 cater to casual, what does exactly mean? because i would define myself as casual player but in truth i’m not since i spend more time in game than in real life (and that would be hardcore)… but everytime they add useless difficulty to the game because teenagers cry in a corner for difficulty i rage (ac should be the easiest dungeon designe for lv 35 character but it is not anymore… why?)

I think he summed it up pretty well… “as long as you show up, you are rewarded.” It’s that aspect of the casual approach I think he’s talking about.

That means there’s very little value to actually receiving a reward or achievement, which in turn erodes the drive to play. Human nature.

Now, the trick is to get the right kind of difficulty on the path to the rewards… skill based, time past, grind based, etc. That’s the point of contention. Some people want more challenging combat. Some people would like more social group play, etc.

arjeidi.2690:

Action-y combat in MMOs has been around a while. Probably because the old method of “stand still and press keys” is much simpler and less entertaining. Don’t get me wrong, I’m a fan of many games that involved the “stand there” method, but it makes games get boring quick, sometimes even faster than GW2 gets boring.

Also keep in mind that when players like you or the OP feel the game is too easy, you’re asking for difficulty to be raised for all players just because some feel it’s not hard enough. No offense, but no player is entitled to an easier game and no player is entitled to a more difficult game. GW2 was designed to have sections of the game available for both. If Dungeons/Fractals/WvW/PvP are insufficient as the ‘difficult’ portions of the game, then by all means request and suggest improvements or additions in that area.

But to blanket say 100% of the game “needs” to be more difficult for 100% of the players even though not 100% of the players feel that way? Nope. Sorry. You and I don’t get to dictate to other people that what they enjoy is the “wrong” way to play the game (unless it goes against obvious design intent ala Ember farms etc).

Difficulty is a relative thing, but in and of itself it can also be a confusing term. It’s different than challenging… Achieving a goal can be challenging without being difficult. I think GW2 has more “difficulty” for a certain type of player than “challenge.”

Vayne.8563:

milo.6942:

wow I’m surprised there wasn’t a single reply in favor of op’s post. i read it all thinking “yea that’s pretty much how I feel” and thought he laid out some reasonable criticisms and possible solutions. the game needs to be more challenging and punish mistakes more. otherwise the victories are meaningless. i can’t say anything about the wvw section though, since I don’t play it.

A certain type of player plays games for challenge. But then, what’s more popular, slot machines or chess? Chess is more challenging but more people play slot machines. Why? Because people require different things out of games.

I don’t mind occasionally challenging content, but I’ve already done the hard yards. I’m older. Life was challenging enough for many, many years. Now, when I sit down to entertainment myself (and make no mistake, games are a form of entertainment), I want to relax, not be frustrated, not bang my head against wall. I just want to have a good time.

For many people games are an alternative to TV or movies or books. They’re something to enjoy. Not everyone desires the same level of challenge in their down time.

I’m almost certain you do not represent the market segment that is core to this genre, and GW2 specifically. Players are driven by overcoming challenges, which means things have to be difficult so they have something to progress toward. But what you think is difficult vs. other players is where the road divides.

Off topic but related, the current trend is to make MMO combat more “action-y.” GW2, TERA, WildStar, ESO… I don’t believe this is the right way to do it. The challenge and difficulty in rules-based combat should come from knowing how to build your character, not knowing how to twitch him around a screen. Every other genre will always do that better.

So in one sense I relate to what you are saying, but I believe GW2 is the wrong game for you to be saying it in.

Meglobob.8620:

Lots of words…you could have used 1…burnout…

That’s what you have.

He gave many great and specific reasons that are totally unrelated to burnout. There are design flaws that, when compounded together, remove the desire to play the game. It’s a real problem.

Incredible summary, and one the developer should pay close attention to. You are not alone — by a long shot — in your feelings.

The free weekend should be an indication they need more players. Not enough meat on the hones to count on retention enough, IMO.

1. No group play.
2. No class synergies.
3. Cash shop.

Bonus: Sucks.

Dahkeus.8243:

I have my beefs with some things, but yea, I agree this is the best MMO out right now.

This is absolutely the worst MMO for MMO players. Their manifesto was true – if you hate MMOs, you’re really going to like GW2.

Sure enough.

Game sucks.

marnick.4305:

Given that GW2 is the only MMO that’s compatible with having a real life, literally the only one, and given that there’s a huge portion of the population that has both a job and kids, GW2 is here to stay. There’s just no other MMO currently on the market that caters to people with responsibilities on that scale.

It’s the kind of people who have half an hour to play if they’re lucky. In GW2 that’s enough to get a laurel and make meaningful progress. In other games you don’t even have a group yet.

And you know what? It’s turning out not to matter. People miss the commitment, progression and immersion real MMOs have given them, and they’re fleeing GW2.

If ArenaNet wanted to make a game for people who don’t have time to play games, then… score.

Danicco.3568:

Tharjax.9068:

To make a long story short, he basically was saying based upon what Colin was saying, that GW2 is doing ok, but not well enough (bringing in enough money) to warrant an expansion.

Instead of thinking like this, why don’t we think that the game is doing so well that they will keep providing extra content monthly instead of leaving us a whole year (or more) with the same content just to profit from expansions?

They don’t sell high end gear for cash, just vanity items. They allow you to buy cash with gold. They provide extra content monthly. They don’t charge a subscription fee.

If the game wasn’t doing well, don’t you think it would require an expansion to make up for it?

It’s safe to say the majority of monthly “content” updates haven’t lived up to players’ expectations or even comparisons to other games. So if that’s all they have in mind for content without an expansion… eek.

Bloodstealer.5978:

Oooh look another one of these threads… who really cares, whatever anyone says in answer to your question is merely guessing. The only people who really know the answer to your question are the bean counters back at HQ and can you really imagine them coming here to help allay your curiosity.
What is the point of your question, why does it matter really…. the only thing you need to worry about is whether your having fun or not.

The “point” of this thread is… people want to know if they are wasting their time investing in a dead game. Why bother progressing in a game that’s dying, spend money on items, etc. Even if you’re having “fun” these games are about progression and longevity and requires population.

Once they start realizing it isn’t happening, they’re going to turn the corner in the cash shop as far as what they are willing to sell… mark my words.

zenleto.6179:

Join a couple of guilds. It might be easier if you have people to talk to while adventuring, even if you don’t actually group with them. Keep the one you like most and ditch the others later.

And here’s all you need to know about how crappy of an MMO this is.

You will be bored of GW2… it’s very niche and doesn’t have any progression. It’s not suddenly different or better than when you played before.