im calling it right here: GW2 will actually be bigger than WoW.
I think maybe we have finally reached a point where omeone can legitimately say that about a game.
Not saying GW2 will be, who knows, but for maybe the first time it's not triggering a 'yeah, right...' response from me.
And that's the exciting part, isn't it? Usually there's this lingering sort of doubt, this nagging thought of "Yeah, but in the videos I saw, X looked kind of lame, and Y is looking pretty weak ..."
The only thing I've seen in GW2 videos that concern me are the running animations. Bugs the ever living hell out of me that the character can drift to one side or the other instead of being dead center in the middle of the screen all the time. Thankfully it's not something I see myself being so bothered by that I refuse to play because of it.
I'm going to be bold and predict that even if GW2 does succeed beyond a cynic's wildest dreams (outlook uncertain), it will not change the way MMOs are designed in any significant manner.
First, since MMO design takes so long, the MMOs that we'll be seeing over the next five years have already started being developed, too late to implement the kinds of foundational changes that ArenaNet has built into GW2 from the ground up. That means Dynamic Events instead of quests (or instead of DEs as an additional feature on top of quests), changes to the holy trinity, explorable dungeons in lieu of raiding, WvWvW PvP, etc.
Second, since GW2 doesn't have a subscription fee, I would be willing to bet that like many players, many devs have simply written it off as a one-off not to be taken seriously at all, and so even if it does succeed, excuses will be made for its success, such as "of course it succeeded, it's F2P" or "of course it succeeded, Asians love that crap" and so on. Its success would be seen as less of something to be emulated and more of an anomaly. That it could succeed based on its features will not even be considered. Of course, if it fails, it will be seen to be because of those samefeatures.
So, nah.
Even though I'm eagerly anticipating Guild Wars 2 (with ArenaNet's balls in my mouth ), I have to say that this post has made the most sense here and I agree with it. So no matter how sucessful the game is, future MMOs are already in development, with their own system being implemented already and if they were to add things in light of GW2's success, it will result in the same old crap with features shoehorned in at the last minute.
If the OP is talking about B2P then I don't think so, here is why :
GW2 first release will be short. Way shorter than people think. Two weeks in, will be buying the first expansion, soon after the next. Before you know it you will have $200 invested in the game, and be thinking how did that happen ?
They are making all expansions at the same time, that is one reason its taking so long.
You will say...But GW1 waited 6 mo or more to release expantions....This is not GW1 !!!
Personally I give it a 95% chance you make the same disappointed threads about GW2 that you've made about ToR.
Even if you compare GW2 with TOR months before it released, there are huge differences. Even just from info and gameplay videos, there was a ton of negativity about TOR. Lots of people could see the game had some major glaring weaknesses. I'm not seeing anything like that, regarding GW2. Of course it might be disappointing, but not the same way that TOR has been.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
If the OP is talking about B2P then I don't think so, here is why :
GW2 first release will be short. Way shorter than people think. Two weeks in, will be buying the first expansion, soon after the next. Before you know it you will have $200 invested in the game, and be thinking how did that happen ?
They are making all expansions at the same time, that is one reason its taking so long.
You will say...But GW1 waited 6 mo or more to release expantions....This is not GW1 !!!
Nothing is free !!!!
So let's say GW2 has as many expansions in 7 years as GW1 did. What, four? Five? We'll even say five even though I don't think it's true.
We'll say I buy all those for $50.
That's $250. Wow! That's a lot! Until you consider I've paid thousands of dollars to play World of Warcraft over the same span of time. 14 a month * 12 months a year * 7 years = $1,176.00! And that isn't even counting the character transfers I bought, the stupid noncombat pets and mounts I got for my girlfriend and the second account I purchased a second box for and paid for for about six months.
I mean, I don't know about you, but I think the B2P model is a much, much better deal. It would be a much better deal even if I had to buy two expansions a year (And I seriously doubt even that would happen). Do the math.
I just want to point out that even WAR changed the way future games are designed in a significant manner (public quests anyone?). You don't have to be a mega success to do this. You just have to have a good idea.
Actually WAR did much more... For those short on memory, before WAR PvP was considered a red-headed step-child in mmos and leveling through PvP was unthinkable. I ditched all other mmos for WAR exactly because it had the balls (yes, the mmo scene is that inert) to offer leveling through PvP rather than grind-for-days-so-you-can-unlock-PvP standard of those horrible WoW raid-or-buzz-off days.
As for GW2's impact.. Hmm if you combine GW2's open-ended play with Minecraft's runaway success... It would have all the makings of a perfect storm where even the most die-hard on-the-rails-wanna-be-movie-director-but-im-stuck-in-games devs would finally begin questioning the dogma where the less choice players have, the better. Additionally, SW:TOR's relative failure would really drive that message home.
If the OP is talking about B2P then I don't think so, here is why : GW2 first release will be short. Way shorter than people think. Two weeks in, will be buying the first expansion, soon after the next. Before you know it you will have $200 invested in the game, and be thinking how did that happen ? They are making all expansions at the same time, that is one reason its taking so long. You will say...But GW1 waited 6 mo or more to release expantions....This is not GW1 !!! Nothing is free !!!!
This post has to be the dumb post of 2012 so far.Who ever said GW and GW2 are free,perhaps you have spent to long following other games to realise that GW-GW2 are actually BTP games meaning you cant play unless you BUY the games.Now, perhaps i aint as smart as you but i'am pretty sure that's not getting anything for free.Now, the other dumb comment about ArenaNet making all the expansions at the same time,hence why the game has taken 5 years(average time to make an mmo)to make is BS. Link your source that ArenaNet are making all the future expansions now and have been doing for the last five years,you can't so don't even try to recover from the most pathetic post in this thread.
I'm ready for GW2, it's the only game I want right now.
...but this does remind me a lot of Asheron's Call 2. AC2 was very innovative and all that for it's time.. but its problem was that it was drastically different from the original, which wasn't popular with it's main fanbase... so they went back to AC1.
AC2 is gone now.. because it was so different and people weren't ready for something like that, even though they claimed they were. I was one of them.
I hope the same sorta thing doesn't happen to GW2. If it does then it will enforce even more of the same old stuff.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
If the OP is talking about B2P then I don't think so, here is why :
GW2 first release will be short. Way shorter than people think. Two weeks in, will be buying the first expansion, soon after the next. Before you know it you will have $200 invested in the game, and be thinking how did that happen ?
They are making all expansions at the same time, that is one reason its taking so long.
You will say...But GW1 waited 6 mo or more to release expantions....This is not GW1 !!!
Nothing is free !!!!
Haha.. I'm always fascinated how people like you even think about this...
Let's say you're right and they are making all of the expansions at the same time (which is logically impossible), don't you think the most of the content WOULDN'T be available on every single demo, or on the next demo the previous things wouldn't be available ?
Now let's do some logical thinking... If they are making all of the content at the same time, how much content would they make by now? I know they already showed us a huge world with a full world map (which is bigger than GW1 with all expansions combined, and believe me it takes about 6-10 months to even do the main quests in the game, and you're still not done with all of them, and haven't seen the whole world)... What kind of man power and resource should they have for making more content at the same time, if making this one took them this long? Bear in mind, that, they are doing A LOT of iterations and are polishing the content to it's maximum.
They didn't "wait" with gw1 expansion for 6 months, it was exactly 1 year after the release (which was done simply because they wanted to give a lot of new content to the players).
Next thing is... Don't you think they said for far too many times "We're making this game for you", "without monthly fee", etc... It's just not possible to make more money trough constant expansions with a blizzard like milking of your players than simply making it trough the market with cosmetics, or packs like in GW1. They said they'll offer stuff people will demand and want in the market. Not to mention this game isn't exactly "free" it's BUY TO PLAY. Which means, you buy the BOX make an account and NEVER pay the MONTHLY FEE.
Remmember, when you design a game to be "free" (read B2P) from the beginning you make a model which can sustain even without constant expansions. It's different from the F2P model of this latest games which turned to that model. They weren't designed to be free, they couldn't sustain with their model so they decided to go for the free model and add a lot of cash shop in it and disable half of the features so you have to buy stuff as you advance trough the game.
I'm really getting tired of ppl who never seen a GW1 model and have never played the game. So they can't really know how the stuff worked with ANet before and now are just jumping to their conclusions and just tossing dirt on a company which is far better than any other mmo company out there.
"Happiness is not a destination. It is a method of life." -------------------------------
Actually the dynamic event thing came from Rift. They copied the "Instant Adventure" concept that rift was talking about before it released the info, and you know how Blizzard likes to mess with the competition. They love releasing info and media around the time that the other competitor does. Example. CAT trailer was released in like within 2 days of GW2's trailer. Blizzard released the info on this new event thing and how it plan to work, like soon after Rift announced what they were doing on the PTS
Once and for all this is a lie:
Read this: posted in 2007, April:
So Guild Wars 2 will follow a more traditional structure of an MMO?
Flannum: There are a couple of problems that you get in a normal MMO. One is the kill-stealing, and the second is that players need to be reading from the same page so far as quests go, what step of the quest you're on - a lot of the games have some Quest Sharing which does help - but it's still often a problem trying to ensure that you're having the same content as your friends. There are times when you feel that you can't play that character because you're going to advance past that area, and you want to save those things so you can do them with your friends. So the Event System circumvents a lot of that stuff, for instance in an area you might have a dragon that shows up occasionally. It'll send a big event message to everybody in that zone saying that "Hey, the dragon is here!" You'll be able to see that and try to fight the dragon off with as many players that want to participate in that - and all those players will get rewarded.
But then we want those events to have consequences on the world. So for instance, if the players don't manage to defeat the dragon - perhaps not enough came to help or they're not strong enough - and it burns down a bridge or something like that. That then triggers the next event chain; perhaps workers from the nearby village start to head off and form caravans to repair the bridge, but bandits in the local area decide that it's a good time to go and rob some people, and attack the worker caravans. So the next event to show up for everybody is to go and help rescue the caravans, and everybody that participates in saving them will get rewarded for it once the caravans reach their destination. Our goal is to have a lot of different things like this going on in any given area at various times, so that when you get together with friends you're not going off to do a quest, you get together to "Go to that valley where the Char attack, and see what's happening." The idea is that there'll be Easter Egg events and events that happen quite regularly, so you'll never be quite sure what's going on in the zone.
So there's an actual Cause and Effect dynamic built into the game?
Yeah that's a big thing for us, to make these persistent areas feel like living worlds, like they're alive, and that a player's actions matter and have a real impact on the world.
And certain quests would only appear depending on the success or failure of an event?
Sure, for instance, you might go out and escort some workers that are going out to pick some mushrooms, and creatures from the nearby dungeon go out and attack them. If players are quick enough to help them, then a dungeon quest might appear where you'll have to rescue a bunch of captured workers. We definitely want to do a lot of things like that. You might have things like you go down into the nearest dungeon where a really tough boss is, but the party fails to defeat him - which gets him angry, and he comes out to retaliate. The idea is there's a lot of different ways to trigger these events, and so part of the fun is discovering "Hey, this is how we get the dragon out!"
Took some time to find it but I read that back then...
This information already existed before Rift's announcement (2008), now you have to prove Trion talked about this before. But you could say it is Warhammer PQ 2.0.
Not immediately, mmos take around 4 years to make, developers aren't going to change tack mid stream, so even if gw2 is a roaring success we will still get 3 years or so of wow clones
If the OP is talking about B2P then I don't think so, here is why :
GW2 first release will be short. Way shorter than people think. Two weeks in, will be buying the first expansion, soon after the next. Before you know it you will have $200 invested in the game, and be thinking how did that happen ?
They are making all expansions at the same time, that is one reason its taking so long.
You will say...But GW1 waited 6 mo or more to release expantions....This is not GW1 !!!
Nothing is free !!!!
I don't know about you but I would definately prefer to spend my money on real content, which an expansion generally is. All those people who have subbed to SWTOR, for example, have currently paid at least $15 each and so far have got... one new flashpoint and four new bosses in a existing operation.. for $15?? At least with an expansion you get a considerable amount of content for the money you pay AND you know what you are getting when you pay it, instead of just getting what you are given AFTER you paid for it.
The other thing to note is that expansions are 'optional'. You do not need them to continue playing with all the features you originally paid for, so you are free to enjoy what you have so far and choose if and when you want to get the expansion and part with your money.
So basically, If I have $200 invested in the game and I have $200 worth of content I choose to get.. there really isnt anything to complain about. I got what I paid for/wanted. But, as another example, for people playing a game like Vanguard they paid around $150 over a year and got almost nothing new in terms of content for their money.
And you're right, this isn't GW1, but GW1 is the only example of how ArenaNet do their expansions and from that evidence we currently know that they:
1. Showed everyone how to make expansions whilst still keeping older content just as viable at endgame.
2. Kept the PvP and PvE sections seperate.
Both of which show that they:
3. Make expansions 100% optional to enjoy the game.
As of right now, there is no real reason to believe they are going to do something different.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
Gw2 will not affect mmos in any great way because of the sole fact that it is not a sub type game and investors will go "wed prefer something to beat wows 10 million subscribers" and you wont e able to use gw2 numbers because its single purchase + cash shop
''/\/\'' Posted using Iphone bunni ( o.o) (")(") **This bunny was cloned from bunnies belonging to Gobla and is part of the Quizzical Fanclub and the The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club**
Gw2 will not affect mmos in any great way because of the sole fact that it is not a sub type game and investors will go "wed prefer something to beat wows 10 million subscribers" and you wont e able to use gw2 numbers because its single purchase + cash shop
You have to consider competition though...
If GW2 winds up being an excellent game
and
If many WoW players wind up preferring GW2 to WoW
Then people are going to start to wonder why they should pay a subscription for an inferior product. If GW2 becomes the "dominant" MMORPG with a B2P model, then P2P is in serious trouble. For a P2P game to succeed in a GW2-dominant environment, then it will have to be significantly better than GW2 in the eyes of its target demographic.
Gw2 will not affect mmos in any great way because of the sole fact that it is not a sub type game and investors will go "wed prefer something to beat wows 10 million subscribers" and you wont e able to use gw2 numbers because its single purchase + cash shop
This is not a kids fight. Investors don't think like that.
Gw2 will not affect mmos in any great way because of the sole fact that it is not a sub type game and investors will go "wed prefer something to beat wows 10 million subscribers" and you wont e able to use gw2 numbers because its single purchase + cash shop
You have to consider competition though...
If GW2 winds up being an excellent game
and
If many WoW players wind up preferring GW2 to WoW
Then people are going to start to wonder why they should pay a subscription for an inferior product. If GW2 becomes the "dominant" MMORPG with a B2P model, then P2P is in serious trouble. For a P2P game to succeed in a GW2-dominant environment, then it will have to be significantly better than GW2 in the eyes of its target demographic.
What happens if Firefall does extremely well? If its F2P yet has tons of people playing and spending money, would you then say, that in order to make a B2P game to succeed in a FireFall-dominant environment, one would have to be significantly better than Firefall?
Gw2 will not affect mmos in any great way because of the sole fact that it is not a sub type game and investors will go "wed prefer something to beat wows 10 million subscribers" and you wont e able to use gw2 numbers because its single purchase + cash shop
You have to consider competition though...
If GW2 winds up being an excellent game
and
If many WoW players wind up preferring GW2 to WoW
Then people are going to start to wonder why they should pay a subscription for an inferior product. If GW2 becomes the "dominant" MMORPG with a B2P model, then P2P is in serious trouble. For a P2P game to succeed in a GW2-dominant environment, then it will have to be significantly better than GW2 in the eyes of its target demographic.
What happens if Firefall does extremely well? If its F2P yet has tons of people playing and spending money, would you then say, that in order to make a B2P game to succeed in a FireFall-dominant environment, one would have to be significantly better than Firefall?
If Firefall can deliver an experience that a group of people find superior to WoW, AND they pay less money in Firefall, then yes of course, at least for that group.
But F2P games are known for deceptive marketing and nickel and diming customers...so there's always that to consider as well.
If so, which areas of MMO development will GW2 have the most influence on?
Doesn't that depend on how well it does?
Mirroring GW1's release (Boom of players, "damn its not WoW" bust) would tend to do the opposite.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Comments
And that's the exciting part, isn't it? Usually there's this lingering sort of doubt, this nagging thought of "Yeah, but in the videos I saw, X looked kind of lame, and Y is looking pretty weak ..."
The only thing I've seen in GW2 videos that concern me are the running animations. Bugs the ever living hell out of me that the character can drift to one side or the other instead of being dead center in the middle of the screen all the time. Thankfully it's not something I see myself being so bothered by that I refuse to play because of it.
Even though I'm eagerly anticipating Guild Wars 2 (with ArenaNet's balls in my mouth
), I have to say that this post has made the most sense here and I agree with it. So no matter how sucessful the game is, future MMOs are already in development, with their own system being implemented already and if they were to add things in light of GW2's success, it will result in the same old crap with features shoehorned in at the last minute.
If the OP is talking about B2P then I don't think so, here is why :
GW2 first release will be short. Way shorter than people think. Two weeks in, will be buying the first expansion, soon after the next. Before you know it you will have $200 invested in the game, and be thinking how did that happen ?
They are making all expansions at the same time, that is one reason its taking so long.
You will say...But GW1 waited 6 mo or more to release expantions....This is not GW1 !!!
Nothing is free !!!!
Even if you compare GW2 with TOR months before it released, there are huge differences. Even just from info and gameplay videos, there was a ton of negativity about TOR. Lots of people could see the game had some major glaring weaknesses. I'm not seeing anything like that, regarding GW2. Of course it might be disappointing, but not the same way that TOR has been.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
Repeating the same horseshit over and over again won't make it any more true
So let's say GW2 has as many expansions in 7 years as GW1 did. What, four? Five? We'll even say five even though I don't think it's true.
We'll say I buy all those for $50.
That's $250. Wow! That's a lot! Until you consider I've paid thousands of dollars to play World of Warcraft over the same span of time. 14 a month * 12 months a year * 7 years = $1,176.00! And that isn't even counting the character transfers I bought, the stupid noncombat pets and mounts I got for my girlfriend and the second account I purchased a second box for and paid for for about six months.
I mean, I don't know about you, but I think the B2P model is a much, much better deal. It would be a much better deal even if I had to buy two expansions a year (And I seriously doubt even that would happen). Do the math.
Actually WAR did much more... For those short on memory, before WAR PvP was considered a red-headed step-child in mmos and leveling through PvP was unthinkable. I ditched all other mmos for WAR exactly because it had the balls (yes, the mmo scene is that inert) to offer leveling through PvP rather than grind-for-days-so-you-can-unlock-PvP standard of those horrible WoW raid-or-buzz-off days.
As for GW2's impact.. Hmm if you combine GW2's open-ended play with Minecraft's runaway success... It would have all the makings of a perfect storm where even the most die-hard on-the-rails-wanna-be-movie-director-but-im-stuck-in-games devs would finally begin questioning the dogma where the less choice players have, the better. Additionally, SW:TOR's relative failure would really drive that message home.
This post has to be the dumb post of 2012 so far.Who ever said GW and GW2 are free,perhaps you have spent to long following other games to realise that GW-GW2 are actually BTP games meaning you cant play unless you BUY the games.Now, perhaps i aint as smart as you but i'am pretty sure that's not getting anything for free.Now, the other dumb comment about ArenaNet making all the expansions at the same time,hence why the game has taken 5 years(average time to make an mmo)to make is BS. Link your source that ArenaNet are making all the future expansions now and have been doing for the last five years,you can't so don't even try to recover from the most pathetic post in this thread.A few points that any mmo should have are.
Being much higher level and get scaled down when assisting friends when they level up in lower contend.
Node stealing , bots or players doesnt matter its mind numbing to farm already let alone when retards keep stealing it.
Fully custom pvp character to hop into pvp and work out strats / playstyle
Awesome events for max server participation brings and builds community.
Battlegrounds objective based pvp
World Pvp - here is where most developers completely miss the nail...
Server versus server pvp
Just to name a few that should be the new standard for any new mmo to come.
I'm ready for GW2, it's the only game I want right now.
...but this does remind me a lot of Asheron's Call 2. AC2 was very innovative and all that for it's time.. but its problem was that it was drastically different from the original, which wasn't popular with it's main fanbase... so they went back to AC1.
AC2 is gone now.. because it was so different and people weren't ready for something like that, even though they claimed they were. I was one of them.
I hope the same sorta thing doesn't happen to GW2. If it does then it will enforce even more of the same old stuff.
no
why?
people demand they want new, they want innovation.
then when they get innovation they complain about it, so much so that it gets changed, or nerfed until the game fails miserably.
GW 2 is in a position to attract many layers from other mmo's.
For PvP reasons
For PvE reasons
Trinity reasons
BtP Reasons
4 BIG+ points scored already
WoW's decline
SWTOR decline
Many other mmo's decline
People are spoiled these days and you need to stand out of the masses to shine in 2012, GW2 have it all.
Can we savely say that it might be one of the most anticipated mmo's ever created ?
Some may say no not at all, but iam not easely hyped up about mmo's but this one is is looking for to beatifull to say otherwise.
It will set a whole new standard in mmo's to come and for that reason people might buy it in masses.
Haha.. I'm always fascinated how people like you even think about this...
Let's say you're right and they are making all of the expansions at the same time (which is logically impossible), don't you think the most of the content WOULDN'T be available on every single demo, or on the next demo the previous things wouldn't be available ?
Now let's do some logical thinking... If they are making all of the content at the same time, how much content would they make by now? I know they already showed us a huge world with a full world map (which is bigger than GW1 with all expansions combined, and believe me it takes about 6-10 months to even do the main quests in the game, and you're still not done with all of them, and haven't seen the whole world)... What kind of man power and resource should they have for making more content at the same time, if making this one took them this long? Bear in mind, that, they are doing A LOT of iterations and are polishing the content to it's maximum.
They didn't "wait" with gw1 expansion for 6 months, it was exactly 1 year after the release (which was done simply because they wanted to give a lot of new content to the players).
Next thing is... Don't you think they said for far too many times "We're making this game for you", "without monthly fee", etc... It's just not possible to make more money trough constant expansions with a blizzard like milking of your players than simply making it trough the market with cosmetics, or packs like in GW1. They said they'll offer stuff people will demand and want in the market. Not to mention this game isn't exactly "free" it's BUY TO PLAY. Which means, you buy the BOX make an account and NEVER pay the MONTHLY FEE.
Remmember, when you design a game to be "free" (read B2P) from the beginning you make a model which can sustain even without constant expansions. It's different from the F2P model of this latest games which turned to that model. They weren't designed to be free, they couldn't sustain with their model so they decided to go for the free model and add a lot of cash shop in it and disable half of the features so you have to buy stuff as you advance trough the game.
I'm really getting tired of ppl who never seen a GW1 model and have never played the game. So they can't really know how the stuff worked with ANet before and now are just jumping to their conclusions and just tossing dirt on a company which is far better than any other mmo company out there.
"Happiness is not a destination. It is a method of life."
-------------------------------
Once and for all this is a lie:
Read this: posted in 2007, April:
Source: http://www.totalvideogames.com/Guild-Wars-2/feature-10962.html
Took some time to find it but I read that back then...
This information already existed before Rift's announcement (2008), now you have to prove Trion talked about this before. But you could say it is Warhammer PQ 2.0.
I don't know about you but I would definately prefer to spend my money on real content, which an expansion generally is. All those people who have subbed to SWTOR, for example, have currently paid at least $15 each and so far have got... one new flashpoint and four new bosses in a existing operation.. for $15?? At least with an expansion you get a considerable amount of content for the money you pay AND you know what you are getting when you pay it, instead of just getting what you are given AFTER you paid for it.
The other thing to note is that expansions are 'optional'. You do not need them to continue playing with all the features you originally paid for, so you are free to enjoy what you have so far and choose if and when you want to get the expansion and part with your money.
So basically, If I have $200 invested in the game and I have $200 worth of content I choose to get.. there really isnt anything to complain about. I got what I paid for/wanted. But, as another example, for people playing a game like Vanguard they paid around $150 over a year and got almost nothing new in terms of content for their money.
And you're right, this isn't GW1, but GW1 is the only example of how ArenaNet do their expansions and from that evidence we currently know that they:
1. Showed everyone how to make expansions whilst still keeping older content just as viable at endgame.
2. Kept the PvP and PvE sections seperate.
Both of which show that they:
3. Make expansions 100% optional to enjoy the game.
As of right now, there is no real reason to believe they are going to do something different.
''/\/\'' Posted using Iphone bunni
( o.o)
(")(")
**This bunny was cloned from bunnies belonging to Gobla and is part of the Quizzical Fanclub and the The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club**
You have to consider competition though...
If GW2 winds up being an excellent game
and
If many WoW players wind up preferring GW2 to WoW
Then people are going to start to wonder why they should pay a subscription for an inferior product. If GW2 becomes the "dominant" MMORPG with a B2P model, then P2P is in serious trouble. For a P2P game to succeed in a GW2-dominant environment, then it will have to be significantly better than GW2 in the eyes of its target demographic.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
This is not a kids fight. Investors don't think like that.
Blizzard is already trying to emulte non-trinity content and more active combat as best they can for the next major update.
What happens if Firefall does extremely well? If its F2P yet has tons of people playing and spending money, would you then say, that in order to make a B2P game to succeed in a FireFall-dominant environment, one would have to be significantly better than Firefall?
If Firefall can deliver an experience that a group of people find superior to WoW, AND they pay less money in Firefall, then yes of course, at least for that group.
But F2P games are known for deceptive marketing and nickel and diming customers...so there's always that to consider as well.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
Doesn't that depend on how well it does?
Mirroring GW1's release (Boom of players, "damn its not WoW" bust) would tend to do the opposite.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Subs, active player count...same shit in GW2.
Way to completely miss the point, people.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
And what point is that?
That GW2 will be an amazing game, with an active playerbase. All without requiring its players to pay a monthly fee or cash-shop item.