Guild Wars 2

Vayne.8563:

clay.7849:

Vayne.8563:

I’m still a Guild Wars 1 fan. And look at Guild Wars 1. It did okay…but it never really took off. It spent a lot of time wandering in limbo, until we ended up with expansions likes Hearts of the North and Winds of Change. No thanks.

I’ve thought about this a lot and I realize that if I want a game that does what I want it to do, a game to be healthy and alive and coming out with more content, it needs more players.

Anet found out the hard way that the “masses” won’t just go for cosmetic items. They tried and failed. People weren’t going for legendaries, and they were leaving the game, because once they maxed out their characters, they were done. They were trained this way by other games.

Sorry Vayne, I can’t agree with you on this one.

7 years of active population, 4 of which were after the last expansion was released.

One of the best selling PC games ever made.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_PC_video_games

There is nothing about GW1 that failed or any evidence to show it never “took off”. In fact, all the evidence points completely to the contrary.

I don’t think you were ever a GW1 fan, I think you just say that because you think it helps your arguments somehow.

So I have 50/50 and GWAMM because I was never a fan? How does one get GWAMM without being a fan? You think I played maybe for a week. You want to come into Guild Wars and see my EL kunnevang tonic, maybe?

Guild Wars never took off. I say this because it’s true. When I say take off, it didn’t have the numbers to do what Anet wanted to do with it. It made a lot of sales and it had a die hard following, but in case you weren’t around then, once heroes were introduced, people found it harder and harder to find groups.

PvPers started leaving because of balance decisions with the newer professions. Some people started leaving when Ursan was nerfed or when perma-sin was nerfed. In the end, there were a whole lot less people playing, and then it picked up again with the HoM calculator because people were excited.

The only time it was really hopping was during things like Canthan New Year, when people would log on to get celestial pets.

But I watched some very big guilds whittle away to nothing in my time there.

If I wasn’t a fan, why would I have spent so much on in game costumes from the shop?

Ok, so you were a fan. Sorry to offend you so much about a game. :/

Anyway, I agree with you about the heroes and the PvP. Those were all things ANet did that were detrimental to the game. However, to say it didn’t “take off” or wasn’t successful is simply wrong. GW1 had some of the best numbers of any online multiplayer game to date.

Also, the one thing you fail to mention, which is kind of the crux of this thread, is that it didn’t die because of no vertical gear progression.

Shootsfoot.9276:

clay.7849:

Vayne.8563:

I’m still a Guild Wars 1 fan. And look at Guild Wars 1. It did okay…but it never really took off. It spent a lot of time wandering in limbo, until we ended up with expansions likes Hearts of the North and Winds of Change. No thanks.

I’ve thought about this a lot and I realize that if I want a game that does what I want it to do, a game to be healthy and alive and coming out with more content, it needs more players.

Anet found out the hard way that the “masses” won’t just go for cosmetic items. They tried and failed. People weren’t going for legendaries, and they were leaving the game, because once they maxed out their characters, they were done. They were trained this way by other games.

Sorry Vayne, I can’t agree with you on this one.

7 years of active population, 4 of which were after the last expansion was released.

One of the best selling PC games ever made.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_PC_video_games

There is nothing about GW1 that failed or any evidence to show it never “took off”. In fact, all the evidence points completely to the contrary.

I don’t think you were ever a GW1 fan, I think you just say that because you think it helps your arguments somehow.

That list is way wrong.

Look how many copies they are saying WoW sold.

That’s because they count each expansion of WoW separate.

Vayne.8563:

I’m still a Guild Wars 1 fan. And look at Guild Wars 1. It did okay…but it never really took off. It spent a lot of time wandering in limbo, until we ended up with expansions likes Hearts of the North and Winds of Change. No thanks.

I’ve thought about this a lot and I realize that if I want a game that does what I want it to do, a game to be healthy and alive and coming out with more content, it needs more players.

Anet found out the hard way that the “masses” won’t just go for cosmetic items. They tried and failed. People weren’t going for legendaries, and they were leaving the game, because once they maxed out their characters, they were done. They were trained this way by other games.

Sorry Vayne, I can’t agree with you on this one.

7 years of active population, 4 of which were after the last expansion was released.

One of the best selling PC games ever made.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_PC_video_games

There is nothing about GW1 that failed or any evidence to show it never “took off”. In fact, all the evidence points completely to the contrary.

I don’t think you were ever a GW1 fan, I think you just say that because you think it helps your arguments somehow.

Vayne.8563:

The OP makes my point better than I do. Here’s a guy who’s saying there’s no real vertical progression in Guild Wars 2, or at least not nearly enough. People from other games aren’t seeing this nefarious vertical progression that Guild Wars 1 players see. Guild Wars one players see the glass half empty, when in fact it’s not quite, but almost full.

There is some vertical progression in this game, but without the gated content, it’s meaningless. At least the OP seems to think so.

There isn’t much vertical progression in this game. Even with the black eye ascended gear gave ArenaNet loyalists, it still has not reached the levels of other MMO’s. True.

But, what is inherently good about gear progression that isn’t about making players feel more powerful than other players? Do you honestly think there is a need for a gear treadmill in this game because other games do it? Remember, you said yourself you were a GW1 fanboy at some point – so do you think that game needed vertical gear progression? Clearly, it did quite well without it.

ASB.4295:

clay.7849:

Well, the idea that you need new items to overcome new challenges is something that is largely in your head.

That’s the thing, isn’t it? It’s not a real progression, but an illusory one. Whether encounters truly become more difficult or are just a are of numbers however is largely irrelevant. What most people crave is not a specific kind of progression, but the feeling of having progressed. Even if it’s just an illusory number, better gear is far superior at creating the feeling of “getting somewhere” with your playtime for many many people than, compared to say, the mastery of a new mob mechanic. Production costs for vertical progression is also a hell of a lot lower than trying to implement new mechanics. Most people don’t care how they improve, for them all that matters is the good feeling they get once in a while in the back of their head when the game tells them they improved themselves. +5 power triggers that feeling a lot more reliably than anything else.

I think you nailed it with the production costs. It is less expensive to add the illusion of progression through gear rather than new and challenging content.

Zenith.6403:

clay.7849:

Exactly. Someone needs to remind Zenith that companies work for us – the consumer – and not the other way around. We get to tell them whatever the hell we kitten well please because we paid for their game.

- It’s a quid pro quo situation. There are tons of products and services out there and I have no obligation to buy them. You would do well to actually read what is said in EULA that you agreed to when you started playing the game. Companies may respond to player posts for PR reasons, but they have no obligation to read anything we’re posting here, much less make changes based on them.

If you want to make a difference, the first step is to get hired to Anet. Your impact as forum poster is worth jack squat.

There are thousands of examples I can give of public pressure causing a company to make changes without anyone needing to infiltrate the company. Yes, attempts at making changes through a forum may not always work. But, they don’t always NOT work either. The best way to make sure NOTHING happens is to say nothing at all.

And, I still don’t have to stop telling a company what to do. They still work for us, the consumer. Without us, they don’t exist.

Rochambeau.4502:

clay.7849:

Rochambeau.4502:

I would suspect that the regular playerbase is declining, just like ti does in every MMO after 4-6 months.

The PvE aspect of the game is very limited – “Dress Up Barbie” progression doesn’t make for much longevity for PvE players.

The PvP/WvW component will keep the game strong, as kitten is never ending market to be tapped.

Well, ANet has stated the exact opposite. They said that one they reached their baseline of post release players, that number has increased. The only other company to do that has been EVE.

Furthermore, your logic of no progession = no players is so very flawed. There once was this company called ArenaNet that made a game called Guild Wars that was based around no vertical progression. They lasted 7 years and were one of the most successful online PC games ever sold.

But, nice try.

First, EVE has never released verifiable numbers. That game has been the biggest urban legend in gaming history. Any reference to a subscriber number can be traced back to comments from the developer without any tangible proof.

The last game that published real numbers was DAoC and they eventually stopped doing it.

Now, everyone uses completely subjective “High Medium Low” designations, which can be changed at the whim of the developer.

So, nice try to you too.

So a developer needs to not only release their numbers, they need to make them verifiable? Weak argument bro.

http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/02/28/eve-online-hits-500-000-subscribers-heads-into-second-decade/

I don’t understand the low, medium, high comment either. I thought subscribers are subscribers?

This is a great video someone showed me once about the difference between extrinsic and intrinsic rewards playing video games. Like Danikat said, there are a lot of people that play video games for the content and the challenge of that content, rather than for the rewards. GW1 was particularly good at that aspect while having virtually no vertical progression, which is something that ArenaNet did much differently than any other MMO.

Is Dwayna open on any server?

RoRo.8270:

clay.7849:

RoRo.8270:

Not sure why you’re complaining about this. You knew it was rng beforehand and past experience would tell you the chance of getting 1 isn’t that high yet you still do it then complain? A sucker is born every minute

Yes, it is dumb to buy BLKs hoping to get anything of value. That doesn’t mean that what ANet is doing is any better.

For the record, I have never bought a BLK and never intend to. But, I still think we shouldn’t have skins gated behind terribad RNG.

This isn’t a p2p game anet is a business not a charity

Then give us stuff that will make me want to purchase gems. Like I said, I haven’t purchased gems because of RNG – same with you. So, the smart people aren’t purchasing gems. How is that helping their bottom line?

Jemmi.6058:

clay.7849:

Pandemoniac.4739:

This game doesn’t need a trinity, or massive changes to the skills, it needs team voice chat, or chat macros so that pugs can co-ordinate more easily.

While I miss the GW1 combat system greatly. I agree with this a lot.

The only other thing it is missing is to make the encounters more exciting/difficult. Make team play mean something. I have gone through dungeons with guild members in teamspeak and still there is very little communication especially compared to GW1. Maybe it’s because I’m used to PvP, but I really yearn for the communication and team play that I seem to remember in GW1.

I agree that in game voice chat would help with communication, but vent and teamspeak work OK. As you said, there is still very little that is said on these runs. Most of the vent speak for me is often casual talk – like what new gaming PC someone bought, or what’s on TV etc. Very little coordination is required. That is because we all know our one singular role. DPS.

Sadly, yes. I do think that they can make combat more meaningful than it is now with a few changes. It will never be like GW1 was and I think I have learned to stop hoping for that for now.

RoRo.8270:

Not sure why you’re complaining about this. You knew it was rng beforehand and past experience would tell you the chance of getting 1 isn’t that high yet you still do it then complain? A sucker is born every minute

Yes, it is dumb to buy BLKs hoping to get anything of value. That doesn’t mean that what ANet is doing is any better.

For the record, I have never bought a BLK and never intend to. But, I still think we shouldn’t have skins gated behind terribad RNG.

BioFringe.7945:

killcannon.2576:

BioFringe.7945:

clay.7849:

SneakyErvin.3056:

People claim server population doesnt indicate players, but it does. It indicates players online, and servers have a higher limit than they had at release, the limit has increased gradually since release. Some servers also have a much higher population now.

This is wrong, as confirmed by ANet:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Server-Populations/first#post703192

Not to burst anyone’s bubble here but that quote doesn’t really say one way or another. Especially if you take it in context of the original question…

“What does it actually mean when the server populations says “High” or “Full.” Does ANet go by the number of people CURRENTLY on said server, or by the number of accounts MADE on said server.”

Oh, and thanks for the signature comment…I think.

It goes by the number of accounts currently residing on the server, not current players. It only fluctuates if someone deletes their account on the server or transfers. Guesting has no impact.

That quote was from before guesting so that doesn’t matter.

I personally see it the other way around but that’s through my own experience, which is exactly what everyone else has to go by when drawing conclusions in this matter as that quote and everything else that any other devs has ever said on the subject is ambiguous at best.

EDIT: I’d love to test this for ourselves though. It wouldn’t be difficult. Just organize a mass log-off of everyone on a given server and see if the population indicator drops down a level. I’m sure we could get enough people to agree to a 10 minute simple test.

Check it out immediately following the next patch.

killcannon.2576:

BioFringe.7945:

clay.7849:

SneakyErvin.3056:

People claim server population doesnt indicate players, but it does. It indicates players online, and servers have a higher limit than they had at release, the limit has increased gradually since release. Some servers also have a much higher population now.

This is wrong, as confirmed by ANet:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Server-Populations/first#post703192

Not to burst anyone’s bubble here but that quote doesn’t really say one way or another. Especially if you take it in context of the original question…

“What does it actually mean when the server populations says “High” or “Full.” Does ANet go by the number of people CURRENTLY on said server, or by the number of accounts MADE on said server.”

Oh, and thanks for the signature comment…I think.

It goes by the number of accounts currently residing on the server, not current players. It only fluctuates if someone deletes their account on the server or transfers. Guesting has no impact.

Exactly. Thank you.

SneakyErvin.3056:

People claim server population doesnt indicate players, but it does. It indicates players online, and servers have a higher limit than they had at release, the limit has increased gradually since release. Some servers also have a much higher population now.

This is wrong, as confirmed by ANet:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Server-Populations/first#post703192

BioFringe.7945:

Jemmi.6058:

I think that exactly 3,141,592 people play this game.

I concur

I wanted to answer but your signature completely kittened my head up and now I’m drooling a little bit. What are we talking about? XD

Rochambeau.4502:

In a “Dress Up Barbie” progression game like GW2’s PvE, the PvP aspect will always win.

PvP/WvW will keep people coming back, as for many kitten is sufficient reason to play.

For those of us that like PvE, once you get a Level 80 of every class and set exotics, you’re essentially done.

Then go find another game to play. Guild Wars 1 had little to no vertical progression and was a large success, outliving many other MMO competitors.

Rochambeau.4502:

“Dress Up barbie” progression for a PvE MMO can’t carry a playerbase.

It’s fine for PvP/WvW where titles, rankings and other kitten related “rewards” are a draw but for the typical PvE player this game has about 3-4 months of playability in it’s current state and then you’re done.

Except that there was this game called Guild Wars once, and it is one of the top online PC games ever sold and saw an active playerbase for upwards of 7 years, which was about 4 years after they stopped making expansions for the game.

It was quite successful and was based around the entire idea of no vertical progession.

You logic fails.

chrisk.4320:

Copies sold is all that matters for this game. Any other metric to gauge success is utterly pointless for a non-subscription game.

Put it this way, the game could have absolutely empty servers but if millions of people were buying the game and then immediately throwing it in the fireplace, it wouldn’t matter. They still sold millions of copies.

Same goes for WoW. They could have 20 million subscribers, but zero players online at all times. They still have 20 million subscribers. That’s all that matters.

You forget this game has other revenue streams than just copies sold. Otherwise, your point would be valid.

Rochambeau.4502:

I would suspect that the regular playerbase is declining, just like ti does in every MMO after 4-6 months.

The PvE aspect of the game is very limited – “Dress Up Barbie” progression doesn’t make for much longevity for PvE players.

The PvP/WvW component will keep the game strong, as kitten is never ending market to be tapped.

Well, ANet has stated the exact opposite. They said that one they reached their baseline of post release players, that number has increased. The only other company to do that has been EVE.

Furthermore, your logic of no progession = no players is so very flawed. There once was this company called ArenaNet that made a game called Guild Wars that was based around no vertical progression. They lasted 7 years and were one of the most successful online PC games ever sold.

But, nice try.

Milkduds.7109:

Zenith.6403:

Rawkfist.8214:

The whole point of this post was that there should not be a slot machine. Cash shop micro transactions are fine but they should not be RNG based.

- Should not be? Who are you to tell a company how it should run its business? If you don’t like it, then don’t buy gems to burn to useless crap. Simple as that.

It’s because people thought that the game would not come to things like this per the way the game was advertised to us for years…

If you make a game with the promise of no gear treadmill, but then you put one in the game, and you take what people THOUGHT the game was going to be about, and you gate it behind a slot machine that takes real money to play…

You really think people have no right to say something about that?

Only in America are businesses treated like they have feelings or something….

Edit: and to be clear, putting cosmetic items on the cash shop from time to time (like the quaggan backpacks) is fine! It’s the slot machine technique with no other way to acquire the items that is making people upset.

Exactly. Someone needs to remind Zenith that companies work for us – the consumer – and not the other way around. We get to tell them whatever the hell we kitten well please because we paid for their game.

Zenith.6403:

Rawkfist.8214:

The whole point of this post was that there should not be a slot machine. Cash shop micro transactions are fine but they should not be RNG based.

- Should not be? Who are you to tell a company how it should run its business? If you don’t like it, then don’t buy gems to burn to useless crap. Simple as that.

Isn’t that the same kind of attitude that gets us into a lot of trouble with businesses? There should be some sort of ethical standard to hold businesses to. I mean, don’t you think someone should have told the banks that they should stop selling bad loans to home buyers? Shouldn’t we have people that tell business that polluting is bad?

There are some things that should and should not be – and taking advantage of customers by using impossible RNG to sucker them out of $50-$100+ is just not good business. We didn’t buy a casino game, we bought an MMO.

Milkduds.7109:

tolunart.2095:

Take items that are exclusive or in high demand but not game-altering (cosmetic items like backpack and weapon skins) and put them into random boxes. A dozen people or so complain about bad luck, a dozen people or so boast about good luck, and a million people buy boxes by the dozens.

.

I thought the whole point of this game was to play with items that “weren’t game altering” since I always heard so much preaching about no gear treadmill and no stat chasing. So… now we chase stats in Fractals (lolwut), and for the stuff that the game was originally stated to be about we have to gamble? (lolwut)

This is just what I’m gleaning from these posts and from things I read about this game during its development etc etc. I’m still a new player, so maybe I’m wrong.

You are right on the money. The philosophy of ANet has changed dramatically in the last few years.

morrolan.9608:

hamsteak.1368:

the entire reason it’s rng is to increase revenue for anet

gw2 is a b2p game, they depend on people to buy gems to keep them as a company going; i don’t really see what the issue is

Its arguably exploitative even unethical. They can get people buying gems by putting the items direct on the cash shop.

Anet used to be a company with the interests of the players being paramount. its actions like this that have completely trashed their brand.

I’d urge everyone not to buy gems for this sort of crap.

If they just put the skins in the Gem Shop, and not the stats, then it stays away from the Pay2Win/Unethical aspect much more.

The Black Lion Chest/RNG/Pay4Keys thing is pretty unethical if you ask me. People should be able to walk away with an item after spending tons of money. Not, the hope of walking away with an item.

Pandemoniac.4739:

This game doesn’t need a trinity, or massive changes to the skills, it needs team voice chat, or chat macros so that pugs can co-ordinate more easily.

While I miss the GW1 combat system greatly. I agree with this a lot.

The only other thing it is missing is to make the encounters more exciting/difficult. Make team play mean something. I have gone through dungeons with guild members in teamspeak and still there is very little communication especially compared to GW1. Maybe it’s because I’m used to PvP, but I really yearn for the communication and team play that I seem to remember in GW1.

Mackdose.6504:

clay.7849:

Mackdose.6504:

clay.7849:

Mackdose.6504:

A safe estimate is probably 650,000 – 950,000 active players, split between Europe and the US, with Europe having the higher population.

Care to cite why/how you came up with that?

No. I will say that GW as a franchise has traditionally been more popular in Europe.

Everything else is anecdotal, and educated guessing based around projected sales, actual sales, and typical retention for an MMO.

Seeing a range on 350k-550k in the US and 450-650k in Europe hardly seems unrealistic.

Ok, well since we are playing the “make up numbers game”. I will guess that America has around 100k-150k players and Europe has around 200k-250k players.

Glad we are now making up pretend numbers based on nothing whatsoever and actually admitting to it.

Those are probably peak concurrent numbers for sure.

Based on nothing…

Karizee.8076:

US Servers
Very High – 21
High – 1
Medium – 2

EU Servers
Very High – 12
High – 1
Medium – 14

Looks like more players in the US to me.

This makes sense. If Euro players liked GW1 more (as Mackdose states), I would doubt they would keep playing GW2. They are night and day different.

Mackdose.6504:

clay.7849:

Mackdose.6504:

A safe estimate is probably 650,000 – 950,000 active players, split between Europe and the US, with Europe having the higher population.

Care to cite why/how you came up with that?

No. I will say that GW as a franchise has traditionally been more popular in Europe.

Everything else is anecdotal, and educated guessing based around projected sales, actual sales, and typical retention for an MMO.

Seeing a range on 350k-550k in the US and 450-650k in Europe hardly seems unrealistic.

Ok, well since we are playing the “make up numbers game”. I will guess that America has around 100k-150k players and Europe has around 200k-250k players.

Glad we are now making up pretend numbers based on nothing whatsoever and actually admitting to it.

Mackdose.6504:

A safe estimate is probably 650,000 – 950,000 active players, split between Europe and the US, with Europe having the higher population.

Care to cite why/how you came up with that?

Badges of Honor should be the only way to be a commander, and they should be for a lot more than 1,000 badges.

This has been suggested since day 1 and I just can’t believe it hasn’t been implemented.

Karizee.8076:

16 million hits didn’t just fall out of the sky. If a youtube video gets 16 million hits they call it viral.

/facepalm

YouTube != Wiki

Here, I didn’t want to do this, but here is a bunch of pretend crap that counters your argument:

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/guildwars2.com

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/swtor.com

Alexa estimates that the “estimated percent of global internet users” for SWTOR.com is 0.05% and guildwars2.com as 0.03%. Does that mean that there are more people playing SWTOR (a “dead” game) than there are people playing Guild Wars 2? NO It is just another attempt to make a useless argument based on nothing of any importance – especially since you can’t give us any comparison to other games or some kind of data that shows a connection between wiki hits and players active.

There is nothing you can extrapolate from your data or from mine.

Karizee.8076:

clay.7849:

Karizee.8076:

From the front page of the official Wiki:
This page has been accessed 16,872,021 times.

Some of you are greatly underestimating how many people play this game

So, how many people play this game? I really don’t think citing how many hits the wiki has received in any way can tell us how many people are actively playing.

Any number would be pure conjecture since no official numbers have been published regarding the number of players that log on each month.

However, judging from my personal observation there’s a kittenton of people everywhere with new people joining everyday and it looks like the population has doubled since November.

As far as the wiki, I started tracking hits 10 days ago. At that time there was 16,233,480 hits.
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/The-Wiki-some-random-facts/first

Compare that to 16,875,389 today. Judging from how few people in game even know about the wiki I think that’s a good indication of the healthy activity/population of the game.

Listen, I’m not denying that the game isn’t growing. I will believe the devs on that one, but “c’mon man!” you are making up crap just like everyone else.

How do you figure the population has doubled since November?

How do you know that very few people know about the wiki?

I could go and find other remarkably terrible sources of data that would show that nobody plays the game, and it would still be bad data. Furthermore, I could respond to you by saying that by my observations, the world is dying and I see less people every day. One person’s observation is also not a good indicator of how healthy this game’s population is.

Don’t take this the wrong way, but your points are meaningless, as are many others’ in this thread.

This game doesn’t need more grinding or vertical progression. There are plenty of other MMO’s that offer this that you can play.

Karizee.8076:

From the front page of the official Wiki:
This page has been accessed 16,872,021 times.

Some of you are greatly underestimating how many people play this game

So, how many people play this game? I really don’t think citing how many hits the wiki has received in any way can tell us how many people are actively playing.

maddoctor.2738:

Vasham.2408:

Besides, if the game was successful they wouldn’t be basing server populations on accounts tied to server. It would be based on active players.

It IS based on active players.

It is actually based on where people decide to have their accounts. It is not based on how many players are playing.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Server-Populations/first#post703192

Jski.6180:

As for WvW lore if you know of FA vs TC you would know about the great dolyak massacre and the ensuing blood feud between the two worlds. That the one thing i love about WvW is its a pure playing made content and lore and i think this is where games are going to be going lore will only be a suggestion and the players will make there own lore.

I think this is great. If the living story had more stuff that somehow was like this, I think it would be awesome. As it stands, the living story is really just some “quests” that have to do with a predetermined story from ANet. Instead, we should have something that allows players to shape the story themselves. That would be much more “alive” than some linear story that gets updated every month.

Notsure.7028:

clay.7849:

Vayne.8563:

Flamenco.3894:

Yes, the manifesto worked indeed.

Do you really think most people who bought the game bought it on the strength of the manifesto? Really? lmao

You’re a bit fixated on that manifesto. Strangely I saw the manifesto, bought the game at least partly on it and I’m not disappointed at all.

To each his own.

Considering how many people bought the game and subsequently left, I think it is safe to say that the ideas behind the manifesto permeated the rumors about this game and once people realized it was another WoW clone, they left with the same distrust in MMO hype as all the others.

The only thing that gave this chance a shot at actually living up to the hype is that GW1 did break the mold. GW2, however, did not.

You actually called GW2 a wow clone? you do know the definition of clone right? this game has NOTHING that wow has. Aside from an auction house (Trading Post) I cant think of anything that is even close. Ok, you could argue that they have dungeons, yea. but there are so very few similarities that it blew my mind that you made a wow clone reference. And if your trolling, you definitely got me.

@Hawkian

Yes, I realize the problems inherent in my search. I do appreciate that your post was well thought out and explained why it was bad fact finding.

I do think we should note that the initial sales figures for games largely have nothing to do with how populated that game stays. SWTOR may be the second quickest selling MMO ever, and it is still considered unsuccessful.

I think one thing that can be noted about both is that many of their early sales were likely generated by the fact that their predecessor was largely successful. Therefore, using early sales figures gives us little insight into how well a company will do or how populated it will stay.

Vayne.8563:

Flame and Frost feels more old school to me. You actually have to walk around and talk to people. And yeah, I don’t think it’s brilliant content. It’s filler content while the bigger stuff gets worked on.

But it’s fine. The two new instances are fun, you can run them once a day, get some extra karma, and just have fun with it.

Not sure I see the problem here, unless people were expecting totally awesome events for free on a monthly basis.

I remember Rift. Every month they’d come out with a new event that had new currency, that you could cash in for nonsense. Every month. One event would hang around until the next event came out. Some of it was okay. Most of it was annoying as hell. It was just another form of daily. By the end of the month you couldn’t wait for it to go away…and then they’d replace it with the next one.

Eventually Rift has some time to add new content and they did. The same will happen with Guild Wars 2. Until then, what we get is filler content.

To expect more from a monthly upgrade is probably unreasonable.

Considering that ANet has said that they are forgoing any current plans for an expansion in favor of the living story idea, I think it makes sense for them to put the same effort into the living story as they would an expansion. If they think it is a better investment to do that for free rather than working on a paid expansion, that is their problem.

dbgfeller.8120:

Games with monthly fees are outdated, this concept doesn’t work anymore. I would never have bought it

But if you want the feeling of it, spend every month 30$ for gems. You gonna live like a King in this game ^^

I would agree with you that monthly fees should be outdated, but WoW keeps raking in the money and has the largest population of any MMO. So, when you say that the concept doesn’t work anymore, clearly that is incorrect.

Man, I wish I could say this to my boss when I promise him something and don’t deliver.

We pay them. They make games for us. Their jobs exist because of us.

I think it is completely within reason to remind them that they failed on their promise to us and ask for it to be fulfilled sometime soon.

EDIT: Didn’t realize this was a parody thread… LOL

It’s like I did a time warp back to GW1’s Guru forums.

I agree that PvP and PvE should be completely separate. That being said, there’s nothing in this game that you can’t complete with any of the changes that were made.

OP probably did PvE monthly before patch and PvP after patch. If that’s the case, it sucks not everyone will be in a position to take advantage of it – but probably doesn’t mean it will keep happening moving forward.

joric.1042:

Rares are not even end-game gear, basically it is just ecto-fodder for me at least. I could see if exotics were raining from Tyria’s skies, but worrying about rare gear saturation is silly.

I’m not sure if that was aimed at my comment, but I really don’t care about rare gear saturation. I just don’t think the entire casual community spends their time worrying about how many gold chests they are going to open in a session. I have very little time to play, and I never bother with the events. Zerging mind-numbingly easy world bosses just isn’t fun after the first 3 times I did it. I would rather have a really fun quest or dungeon or something, and get compensated well for it. But, I agree that other “harder” content doesn’t get loot buffs like they should.

Aeonblade.8709:

clay.7849:

Sericenthe.5310:

Nice. There goes that whole concept of getting one chest per day. Total Nerf to the entire casual community.

I doubt the entire casual community spends their time worrying about farming event chests.

Wouldn’t it be nice to actually play the rest of the game instead of just farming the whole time?

If only they could make the rest of the game as fast paced and rewarding as event hopping.

Well, they should definitely balance loot and have it scale to difficulty, if that’s what you mean.

If you just mean they should make it really easy to get rares, I disagree. Don’t you actually like playing the game for the game?

Sericenthe.5310:

Nice. There goes that whole concept of getting one chest per day. Total Nerf to the entire casual community.

I doubt the entire casual community spends their time worrying about farming event chests.

Wouldn’t it be nice to actually play the rest of the game instead of just farming the whole time?

UnderdogSMO.9428:

Time warp was OP as all hell, my guild sall this nerf comeing from mile’s away. Funny to me to see all the people crying about it

I agree. Of all the things to cry about, a nerf to time warp isn’t one of them. And my primary is a mesmer.

Leo Paul.1659:

GW2 is 2nd. GW1 remains the best MMO I’ve played.

For as much as I kitten about this game not being anything like GW1, it is definitely the only other MMO to hold my attention for any amount of time.

I really wish combat and PvP was better, but overall it is still a pretty good game and ranks #2 in time spent in any MMO for me.

Vayne.8563:

clay.7849:

@Vayne

I agree that there is definitely some synergy, such as combo fields. Although, that synergy is basically the design of the developers. In GW1 you could find synergy that was never intended – although sometimes it did create imbalance.

One of the things that makes GW2 less deep or complex is that very rarely do you need to look beyond your weapon skills and a heal or two to complete 80% of the encounters in this game. So, while there may be more depth that exists than we know, the game was designed so casual friendly that you never really need it to win.

Basically, there is very little need of cooperative team play in GW2, especially compared to GW1.

How is this different than me and my heroes and henchmen soloing just about everything in Guild Wars 1, including hard mode dungeons?

Well one big difference is that, while you can pretty much roll through any content in GW2 with any mix of classes, you would not be able to do that in GW1 with real people or henchmen. So, yes, I agree that you can complete a lot of GW1 with heroes and henchmen, but you still need enough synergy in the group to be victorious.