Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
If this game had a subscription fee it would fail.
Z3R01
Member UncommonPosts: 2,425
From experience people would leave in droves once they found out the game had zero progressive pve endgame content.
Small man dungeons aren't enough. If they were Rift would still have 800k subs and SWTOR wouldn't be bleeding players atm.
Endgame is everything to the majority of the mmorpg community and GW2 has very little meaningful endgame content.
A-net has gone out of their way to say they do not care if people stick with GW2 because they know the game has no reason for you to commit to it. THat's proof enough to me that the game is lacking in anytype of endgame content that traditional games have.
I'll still buy it because it doesn't have a sub and im sure many of you have said the same thing.
Playing: Nothing
Looking forward to: Nothing
Comments
But it doesn't.
Just another troll post.
Life IS Feudal
When I reach endgame I just create a new character.
Gear progression means nothing to me, it's all about getting new skills!
That's ArenNet's niche, they put out a decent game that will provide some solid gaming entertainment for a month or two then hope that you'll check out the xpacs.
Most MMO players will give it a shot regardless because there's no sub and they don't feel a need to give up their current sub based MMO of choice.
I didn't really care for GW1 but it definitely served many people well for quite some time.
Of course it would fail because it was built from the ground up to be B2P + cashshop. Anet said it from the very beginning. They wanted to bring a real mmo experience to their players while maintaining their B2P model.
If this game had a P2W cash shop it would fail.
Oh wait.... nm
You could come up with a lot of things that would cause it to fail.
If it was open world, FFA PVP with full loot, it would likely fail.
If it had a much longer leveling curve it would fail.
If it was only programmed in Cantonese it would fail.
So sure, you can think up a lot of scenarios that would cause it to fail, but fact is although it's something I'll likely buy despite not being my type of game, it will be quite successful and bring a ton of fun times for those who enjoy it.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I would still buy and and pay as much as £15 a month to play GW2, even if it had the current Cash Shop store.
I however cannot bring myself to play another MMO such as AoC/WAR/AION/EQ2/WoW/RIFT/SW:TOR and in fact they would need to pay *me* before I even stop laughing at the idea.
Guess you were wrong in your assumptions then.
If the main focus and best gear in Rift was actually from fighting against " Rifts" instead of treadmill dungeons and super grinding battlegrounds >>I'd still be playing
leaving the rest of us who were looking for whole-game pvp content? woo!
same
OP should have stated it differently, but there are quite a bit of peole concerns with the fact that on the pve side of the game GW2 is extremely weak when it comes to "ORGANIZED" activities guilds can do.
On pvp you have WvWvvW and that requires coordination and skill from 20+ people, so it is solid there. The issue is 5mans and zergable open world content is pretty weak on the pve side.
Maybe if all the people who say it will fail didnt buy it then it might fail
Too bad almost everyone one i seen that dislikes the game or think it will fail ends there post with "But im sitll gonna buy it"
I don't care about endgame PvE progression because I cannot stand raiding. A game keeping me around depends on what is available PvP wise and additional elements it has such as mini games or other activities. As a matter of fact, this philosophy that the majority's main focus is engame PvE progression (i.e. raiding) doesn't seem to be boding real well for a lot of these newer mmos. They aren't really knocking it out of the park thinking this is what the majority of the players want.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
If Gw 2 had four legs, ate apples and jumped fences, it d fail as an mmo but would probably do quite nicely as a horse.
When these people figure out that being good at pvp means more that having uber stat gear and level advantages and that you need actual skill they will leave anyway after getting their face ground into the turf a few times.
If you need a treadmill and grindfest the market is full of them.
Enjoy
Life IS Feudal
If PvP will be very good it probably wouldn't really fail even with a sub. Very good = good balance+variety of options + timely and thought out fixes of imbalances. And depends on the definition of fail...if (retail+subs)>(cost of production+running costs+cost of new content) it's a win.
But your definition of fail looks more like: omg no 1.000.000+ subs = fail!
And yet you're here..
Uptill now everyone knows, that the game is not going to have any kind of engame PVE content (except for 5 man dungeons), so if it's a major concern to them - then they will not buy it. Simple as that.
For me engame PVE (a.k.a. Rading) is not big concern.
If this game had a sub fee, you're right. It probably would fail eventually, but it would start off strong like everything else thats hyped up does. This game doesn't have an end-game which will be a problem for it no matter what anyone says, long term players want end-game, and that's the majority of people. People rush through the progression point of MMO's to get to an end-game, and if there isn't one they will just leave, hell, people have left for less then that in this genre. GW2's strength on top of it's "polishedness" will be that there's no subscription so that people don't bother uninstalling the game, and continue to jump in regularly to check things out.
The majority of MMO players are not hard core PvPer's these days, and I can't help but feel that this whole WvW thing while cool initially, will have it's glaring flaws that people gripe over incessently. We've seen this happen in every game that's attempted it and people in these communities like to bi*ch about any and everything. ArenaNet will need to find some way of keeping people extensively entertained outside of PvP, and obviously outside of end-game PvE.
Yeah, well that's your opinion man.
And if it had chocolatey marshmallows it would be part of this nutritious breakfast.
*shrugs*
"Gypsies, tramps, and thieves, we were called by the Admin of the site . . . "
whatever u can tell that to all the games that failed past 10 years ok bye.
This game the best end game in 10 years or more - WvW run by players - never ending created on the fly dynamic content
Because pvp in most titles sucks ass.
Have you ever heard of DAOC?
You sound like a WoW generation guy that knows only the WoW formula.
Life IS Feudal
edit: posted in error and deleted.
Death is nothing to us, since when we are, Death has not come, and when death has come, we are not.
i don't see how if could possibly fail.
because it is not a sub based MMO, its success depends on boxsales, and since GW1 has a large following, you can only expect a large portion of that established fanbase to buy it. then, there are people like me who never tried GW, but see features of GW2 that look interesting enough to give it a shot.
personally, i think 5 man dungeons for endgame is perfect. i can't get immersed in a game with 20+ group members all standing on the same spot, wacking away at a monster's foot, on a predictable, rinse/repeat basis. for me personally, small groups feel like i am actually part of a interactive story/adventure, even if the combat mechanics are the same as the rinse/repeat. add 20+ people to my experince, running around like fools, cluttering vent channels, etc etc etc..... really breaks my immersion. the illusion is more obvious. when i am not immersed in a game, i quit playing.
PVP that does not require a needless gear grind? that sounds fun.
PvE that removes the boring dedicated tank/healer roles? thank the gods of games! it's not that i am bored with the holy trinity..... i never liked it in the first place. everything i've read about the combat makes me want to see how it is implemented firsthand.
i don't know if i will get it on launch. depends on what is going on at the time. but i plan to get it, and i don't think i will be too disappointed because it's just a video game. it has a one time fee (+ expansions, which is fine.) and it looks fun enough to enjoy from time to time.
i dont etiher, and i pre-purchasing on the 10th, just stating that almost every post that i see about whats wrong with gw2 or it will fail or whatever reasons they have most of them state they will be buying it
if you dont like it why pay 60 bucks? so you can complain that its no good even though you knew you wouldnt like it?