There's not much point to do it more than once. Or maybe again after you forgot what it all looked like.
Without a big incentive, not many people will go there again weekly/daily when there are other fun things to do that cost less time doing and less time preparing.
Sure, I would raid it once or maybe twice just to see it. And then never touch it again. I can't imagine people would raid regularly for next to no reward.
Instead of putting the option "Sure, as long as it's fun & challenging. ", you should put something like "Sure, but i wouldnt do it on farm mode" and "OFC! I love raiding so much that i could do the same raid for days and everyday".
If you made a poll asking if people here would play Hello Kitty Online 2, and wrote an option: "Sure, as long as it's fun & challenging.". Lots of ppl would agree to play it. OFC! Games are about fun and challenges.
Instead of putting the option "Sure, as long as it's fun & challenging. ", you should put something like "Sure, but i wouldnt do it on farm mode" and "OFC! I love raiding so much that i could do the same raid for days and everyday".
If you made a poll asking if people here would play Hello Kitty Online 2, and wrote an option: "Sure, as long as it's fun & challenging.". Lots of ppl would agree to play it. OFC! Games are about fun and challenges.
I voted sure. But I'm with you on this. I don't like farming raids. I like to do them to see the content and then doing them just to help others do them.
Instead of putting the option "Sure, as long as it's fun & challenging. ", you should put something like "Sure, but i wouldnt do it on farm mode" and "OFC! I love raiding so much that i could do the same raid for days and everyday".
If you made a poll asking if people here would play Hello Kitty Online 2, and wrote an option: "Sure, as long as it's fun & challenging.". Lots of ppl would agree to play it. OFC! Games are about fun and challenges.
I don't see the point in having your "Sure, but i wouldnt do it on farm mode" option, seeing how I specifically said that it will follow ArenaNet's philosophy (just like dungeons). So tell me, what exactly would you be forced to farm when after completing a raid (if they were to add raids) you will will be guaranteed a piece of gear. So doing a raid 5 or 6 times, at your own discretion, for gear you don't really need, is in no way farming raids. If it were then people would be farming Dungeons. Which is why I didn't need such an option.
No, I wouldnt like to raid in GW2. I dont want to plan jumping-through-hoops-with-39-other-ppl in my agenda anymore. Raids are too annoying to gather people for.
This is why I like the idea of GW2. Dynamic events and WvWvW you can just show up for and participate. For coordinated teamplay I prefer smaller groups so it is easier to find enough friends for what you want to do. For this they have arena pvp and difficult dungeons in pve.
So no thanks. I wont miss raids. Or gearprogression for that matter. I really despise that, no matter how fun some raids were.
EDIT: None of the answers in poll did reflect my opinion.
First: don't the larger dynamic events that require more people a fairly good example of why this game doesn't need raids for people to play together?
Second: I could have sworn people were asking for there games to be more open with less instances a while ago. Why is it that people want an open world, and then spend all their time in an instance with a few dozen other people?
Third: If I am not mistaken, there are end game zones (not instances) for which people, who like a greater challenge than the rest of the game can offer with the reverse sidekicking feature, can spend time killing undead Orrians and other things. There are dungeons that have been described as VERY challenging (in explorable mode). I don't really see the doing in having raids in GW2 when GW2 has the option to do those things in the open world.
I used to TL;DR, but then I took a bullet point to the footnote.
I would play them, but i hope they don't lose their time with that. I would like better more 5 man than raid. You don't need ot be 20 to do hard content.
hell yes, i would raid without the gear progression.
in WoW you HAD TO raid to keep up with gear. it wasnt the combat mechanics, or the fun encounters that drew people to the end-game PVE. it was the necessity.
part of GW2's core foundation is the combat. the game was built around it, just like Global Agenda. and i could play GA's randomized PVE encounters for hours without getting bored. similarly, GW2's content will keep me interested as long as the combat is fun.
Of course I would raid if it weren't to include gear progression.
Gear progression is common in many MMOs as of today, and it creates a diversity in the community that shouldn't be there. Instead of making the game co-operative, it sets a glorified standard in the raiding community such as "Who has the biggest e-peen with the best loots". I can't comment on the many times I have tried to raid and do content, only to be put down that my "Dps was too low" when I was doing my best rotation possible, or that "I had insufficient item levels" when this was the best gear I was -able- to get with my play schedule.
Which is the reason I have pretty much stopped trying to raid nowadays. It's pointless when everyone's sad mindset is on the rewards at the end, instead of the REAL content that lies in-between. I'm not saying that getting loot shouldn't be fun; It is in all honesty. But skill should be a MUCH bigger factor in progression over item quality.
Who knows how they will handle this highly debatable aspect. Maybe they will make item drops for aesthetics only and playful bragging rights like in the original Guild Wars? I sure hope so.
Currently playing: Star Wars: The Old Republic, World of Warcraft, Dota 2, League of Legends
Waiting on: Blade & Soul, Guild Wars 2, Tera, Kingdoms of Amular, Firefall
The only way I'll raid in GW2 is if there is no gear progression involved. I enjoy raids because I get to interact and coordinate with more than 3-4 people at a time and I see new content. I don't enjoy hanging around players that are there just for the loot. It's the same with PvP.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
First: don't the larger dynamic events that require more people a fairly good example of why this game doesn't need raids for people to play together?
Second: I could have sworn people were asking for there games to be more open with less instances a while ago. Why is it that people want an open world, and then spend all their time in an instance with a few dozen other people?
Third: If I am not mistaken, there are end game zones (not instances) for which people, who like a greater challenge than the rest of the game can offer with the reverse sidekicking feature, can spend time killing undead Orrians and other things. There are dungeons that have been described as VERY challenging (in explorable mode). I don't really see the doing in having raids in GW2 when GW2 has the option to do those things in the open world.
Yeah, you certainly bring up interesting points. People constantly b*tch about how MMOs are becoming so highly instanced based & soloable that loads of people should be elated with ArenaNet and what they are trying to do. That raid-like content, in Guild Wars 2, is being taken out of an instanced and being brought out to the open-world for all to experience. Not just the loud-mouthed minority, but all.
Maybe I should have added a "Guild Wars 2 doesn't need Raids" option, because I'm sure that's how a lot of people here would vote. Shame I cannot edit a poll. (>_<) ARGH!!
I would be happy with no loot, instead they should reward with mass amounts of currency, if you think about it, the gold would be insentive, and then with more gold in the econoemy there would be more money to buy crafted items and materials, players would raid for progression and gold instead of gear.
that keeps the main gear as being obtained through current methods, crafting, vendors, quests, 5 man dungeons.
I would play them, but i hope they don't lose their time with that. I would like better more 5 man than raid. You don't need ot be 20 to do hard content.
Exactly. The only reason why 20+ man raid content is hard in MMOs, is because there is a greater chance of something going wrong in them.
Like recently in Rift I did a 5-man expert T2 dungeon run and it was nuts to solo-heal through. Gave my fingers a work out (cause I play Warden / Sentinel) and after it the other 4 members of the group thought I was a really good healer & decided to invite me to their Guild's raid that night. Now this was my 1st time raiding, so I really didn't know what to expect. But in the end it really wasn't anything special, because the mechanics were akin to what I was already doing in the expert dungeons and also because a quater of the group was composed of healers, I rarely had to do more than press 2 buttons, every 10 secs.
As for the difficultly, we ended up wiping mostly from idiots who didn't manage their pets properly or because people were just weren't paying attention.
So yeah, the only thing that makes raids more difficult is because there are people to help screw it up. ANet can make extremely difficult 5-man encounters by actually making them genuinely challenging.
I like the way that raids gave specific jobs to people (I'm not talking specifically about class roles) so that each person had to perform his or her task so that the group could carry on. So person A might have to kite, while person B used cc skills to slow, and person C and D needed to do their thing and so on. I really enjoyed working together with people to do these sorts of complicated tasks, and if they provide this sort of thing then I will be happy enough even if it's not in a raid. If they provide it in a raid at a later date then I'm happy too. Loot is merely a reward for success, I don't want the rewards to be greater for raiders then non-raiders but different is nice.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
Well, the dungeons already planned in Guild Wars 2 will reward the player with unique armor and weapons (apperance-wise), so it wouldn't really change much if they would make a dungeon with more than 5 players.
Actually yes, that changes it a lot. It makes it a "raid," equipped with all the usual annoying (to me) raid-like things, such as trying to get the group ready to GO and do the raid to begin with....waiting on late people is irritating. Then you have the coordinating attacks effort where there are always several people who make the exact same mistake over and over and over, even after being told what they're doing and how NOT to....and this leading to multiple wipes and armor repairs. I could go on a bit more, but those two things are the MOST irritating to me and they are a mainstay of raiding. I never had near the trouble getting together a group of FIVE on time to do anything and generally the dungeons also ran more smoothly because the communication was better than it was with 10 or more people.
Ok maybe I'm missing something here. Is the desire to just experience content tailored to a larger group? Is there anything stopping folks from hauling out their entire guild to tackle a Dynamic Event? If it all scales to number of participants then guilds can just create their own chaotic long run raids. Since a character can belong to multiple guilds then just set one up for raiding and use the guild chat channel (or more likely voice) for coordination. Just because you don't have to group or coordinate for Dynamic Events doesn't mean you can't.
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
Like others, I did not vote because none of the options reflected any of my personal reasons for wanting to raid or not.
I understand full well exactly why instanced content is here to stay... special/unique open world encounters that are persistent get permacamped like in EQ.
If you've got any real population size, developers these days really don't have much choice in making instanced content available, otherwise, for most of their players it won't really BE available.
However, the LAST thing that I want to see is real character stat progression raid instances with fixed size of player participation. This all but guarantees a fundamentally toxic in-game community and converts the PVE end game experience from being fun to being a job. I've done the high end progression raiding thing in WoW, never again.
If a developer resorts to those kinds of mechanics to drive their endgame, what that tells me is that they do not have the creativity to provide an alternative end-game PVE experience, and are depending on a not-very fun grind mechanic to keep people playing, and paying.
The problem of what do developers set up for a PVE endgame hasn't really been answered. How do you make a never ending story and not make it a repetitive grind of the same thing, and NOT make it involve PVP?
I mention that last part because for PVP the solution has already been presented: strategic, zone control, interlocked objective world PVP that controls access to resources in high demand. Basically, a war. Yes, all those aspects have to be present for it to work or it won't fly. If the battle is only at once place at a time, it is whoever brings the larger zerg wins or whether the game's technology/servers can handle a HUGE fight all in one place without crashing or becoming a total slow motion slideshow. If it isn't about resource control, not enough people will care to participate. You need interlocked objectives to spread people out, allow supply line/reinforcement interdiction, and to make divide-and-conquer tactics possible. Panetside and DaoC/New Frontiers are good examples of this.
What is a battleground, or whatever a game decides to call instanced, fixed map, fixed team size pvp? Its an FPS shooter with more varied character options as a tradeoff against better graphics.
What is arena modes? Its a ritualized gank group vs gank group fight for bragging rights with the element of surprise removed.
What both arena and battlegrounds have in common is that the outcomes of those fights have no relevance to the greater outside world of the MMO at all. Also, both of these styles of play could be done quite effectively outside of an MMO. You don't HAVE to use an MMO format to be able to do these things.
But for a real war, with every 'unit' being an actual human being, the MMO format is a requirement. This is something only a MMO can do. It also makes that world feel more real, and gives players something to particiapate in that actually makes a difference in that world.
The PVE side needs something like this for the endgame world to feel more real, and involve the playerbase as a whole. I know that some folks would argue that Rift has done this. Unfortunately, (for me at least) closing random rifts whether they were stand alone or part of one of the various world event type periods that pop up just became playing whack-a-mole, and they also were irrelevant from character progression because Rift was a gear based game and the best gear still involved either 20 man PVE fixed raid size instances or endless BG grinding on the PVP side.
Without the gear rewards I wouldnt raid at all. The only reason i ever raid is to get gear for PvP and without that I don't see the point in playing against limited AI when i can play against other people with evolving playstyles and tactics.
If it weren't all about gear I'd probably run dungeons and raids, I love dungeons in TES games as an example. I also enjoy boss encounters. The problem is I'd probably only run them once or twice, which adds nothing to longevity. The upwards progression does though. I get that progression in other areas, as I don't like the gear dependancy used in many forms of MMo dungeon crawling or raiding.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Comments
There's not much point to do it more than once. Or maybe again after you forgot what it all looked like.
Without a big incentive, not many people will go there again weekly/daily when there are other fun things to do that cost less time doing and less time preparing.
Sure, I would raid it once or maybe twice just to see it. And then never touch it again. I can't imagine people would raid regularly for next to no reward.
Instead of putting the option "Sure, as long as it's fun & challenging. ", you should put something like "Sure, but i wouldnt do it on farm mode" and "OFC! I love raiding so much that i could do the same raid for days and everyday".
If you made a poll asking if people here would play Hello Kitty Online 2, and wrote an option: "Sure, as long as it's fun & challenging.". Lots of ppl would agree to play it. OFC! Games are about fun and challenges.
I voted sure. But I'm with you on this. I don't like farming raids. I like to do them to see the content and then doing them just to help others do them.
My theme song.
I would do them just to do them but I prefer what is currently in the game, large open world boss fights.
I don't see the point in having your "Sure, but i wouldnt do it on farm mode" option, seeing how I specifically said that it will follow ArenaNet's philosophy (just like dungeons). So tell me, what exactly would you be forced to farm when after completing a raid (if they were to add raids) you will will be guaranteed a piece of gear. So doing a raid 5 or 6 times, at your own discretion, for gear you don't really need, is in no way farming raids. If it were then people would be farming Dungeons. Which is why I didn't need such an option.
No, I wouldnt like to raid in GW2. I dont want to plan jumping-through-hoops-with-39-other-ppl in my agenda anymore. Raids are too annoying to gather people for.
This is why I like the idea of GW2. Dynamic events and WvWvW you can just show up for and participate. For coordinated teamplay I prefer smaller groups so it is easier to find enough friends for what you want to do. For this they have arena pvp and difficult dungeons in pve.
So no thanks. I wont miss raids. Or gearprogression for that matter. I really despise that, no matter how fun some raids were.
EDIT: None of the answers in poll did reflect my opinion.
First: don't the larger dynamic events that require more people a fairly good example of why this game doesn't need raids for people to play together?
Second: I could have sworn people were asking for there games to be more open with less instances a while ago. Why is it that people want an open world, and then spend all their time in an instance with a few dozen other people?
Third: If I am not mistaken, there are end game zones (not instances) for which people, who like a greater challenge than the rest of the game can offer with the reverse sidekicking feature, can spend time killing undead Orrians and other things. There are dungeons that have been described as VERY challenging (in explorable mode). I don't really see the doing in having raids in GW2 when GW2 has the option to do those things in the open world.
I used to TL;DR, but then I took a bullet point to the footnote.
I would play them, but i hope they don't lose their time with that. I would like better more 5 man than raid. You don't need ot be 20 to do hard content.
hell yes, i would raid without the gear progression.
in WoW you HAD TO raid to keep up with gear. it wasnt the combat mechanics, or the fun encounters that drew people to the end-game PVE. it was the necessity.
part of GW2's core foundation is the combat. the game was built around it, just like Global Agenda. and i could play GA's randomized PVE encounters for hours without getting bored. similarly, GW2's content will keep me interested as long as the combat is fun.
Of course I would raid if it weren't to include gear progression.
Gear progression is common in many MMOs as of today, and it creates a diversity in the community that shouldn't be there. Instead of making the game co-operative, it sets a glorified standard in the raiding community such as "Who has the biggest e-peen with the best loots". I can't comment on the many times I have tried to raid and do content, only to be put down that my "Dps was too low" when I was doing my best rotation possible, or that "I had insufficient item levels" when this was the best gear I was -able- to get with my play schedule.
Which is the reason I have pretty much stopped trying to raid nowadays. It's pointless when everyone's sad mindset is on the rewards at the end, instead of the REAL content that lies in-between. I'm not saying that getting loot shouldn't be fun; It is in all honesty. But skill should be a MUCH bigger factor in progression over item quality.
Who knows how they will handle this highly debatable aspect. Maybe they will make item drops for aesthetics only and playful bragging rights like in the original Guild Wars? I sure hope so.
Currently playing: Star Wars: The Old Republic, World of Warcraft, Dota 2, League of Legends
Waiting on: Blade & Soul, Guild Wars 2, Tera, Kingdoms of Amular, Firefall
The only way I'll raid in GW2 is if there is no gear progression involved. I enjoy raids because I get to interact and coordinate with more than 3-4 people at a time and I see new content. I don't enjoy hanging around players that are there just for the loot. It's the same with PvP.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Here is a reply/commentary on this subject
http://www.gw2pvpstrategy.com/2011/09/current-topic-debate-endgame-guild-wars-2-raids-etc/
Yeah, you certainly bring up interesting points. People constantly b*tch about how MMOs are becoming so highly instanced based & soloable that loads of people should be elated with ArenaNet and what they are trying to do. That raid-like content, in Guild Wars 2, is being taken out of an instanced and being brought out to the open-world for all to experience. Not just the loud-mouthed minority, but all.
Maybe I should have added a "Guild Wars 2 doesn't need Raids" option, because I'm sure that's how a lot of people here would vote. Shame I cannot edit a poll. (>_<) ARGH!!
I would be happy with no loot, instead they should reward with mass amounts of currency, if you think about it, the gold would be insentive, and then with more gold in the econoemy there would be more money to buy crafted items and materials, players would raid for progression and gold instead of gear.
that keeps the main gear as being obtained through current methods, crafting, vendors, quests, 5 man dungeons.
Exactly. The only reason why 20+ man raid content is hard in MMOs, is because there is a greater chance of something going wrong in them.
Like recently in Rift I did a 5-man expert T2 dungeon run and it was nuts to solo-heal through. Gave my fingers a work out (cause I play Warden / Sentinel) and after it the other 4 members of the group thought I was a really good healer & decided to invite me to their Guild's raid that night. Now this was my 1st time raiding, so I really didn't know what to expect. But in the end it really wasn't anything special, because the mechanics were akin to what I was already doing in the expert dungeons and also because a quater of the group was composed of healers, I rarely had to do more than press 2 buttons, every 10 secs.
As for the difficultly, we ended up wiping mostly from idiots who didn't manage their pets properly or because people were just weren't paying attention.
So yeah, the only thing that makes raids more difficult is because there are people to help screw it up. ANet can make extremely difficult 5-man encounters by actually making them genuinely challenging.
I like the way that raids gave specific jobs to people (I'm not talking specifically about class roles) so that each person had to perform his or her task so that the group could carry on. So person A might have to kite, while person B used cc skills to slow, and person C and D needed to do their thing and so on. I really enjoyed working together with people to do these sorts of complicated tasks, and if they provide this sort of thing then I will be happy enough even if it's not in a raid. If they provide it in a raid at a later date then I'm happy too. Loot is merely a reward for success, I don't want the rewards to be greater for raiders then non-raiders but different is nice.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
I don't hate much, but I hate Apple© with a passion. If Steve Jobs was alive, I would punch him in the face.
Actually yes, that changes it a lot. It makes it a "raid," equipped with all the usual annoying (to me) raid-like things, such as trying to get the group ready to GO and do the raid to begin with....waiting on late people is irritating. Then you have the coordinating attacks effort where there are always several people who make the exact same mistake over and over and over, even after being told what they're doing and how NOT to....and this leading to multiple wipes and armor repairs. I could go on a bit more, but those two things are the MOST irritating to me and they are a mainstay of raiding. I never had near the trouble getting together a group of FIVE on time to do anything and generally the dungeons also ran more smoothly because the communication was better than it was with 10 or more people.
Oh and.....
Guild Wars 2 doesn't need raids.
President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club
Ok maybe I'm missing something here. Is the desire to just experience content tailored to a larger group? Is there anything stopping folks from hauling out their entire guild to tackle a Dynamic Event? If it all scales to number of participants then guilds can just create their own chaotic long run raids. Since a character can belong to multiple guilds then just set one up for raiding and use the guild chat channel (or more likely voice) for coordination. Just because you don't have to group or coordinate for Dynamic Events doesn't mean you can't.
Without progression an RPG will die for me. Gear progression matters. I don't if crafters want to be the center of the universe of gear progression.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
Like others, I did not vote because none of the options reflected any of my personal reasons for wanting to raid or not.
I understand full well exactly why instanced content is here to stay... special/unique open world encounters that are persistent get permacamped like in EQ.
If you've got any real population size, developers these days really don't have much choice in making instanced content available, otherwise, for most of their players it won't really BE available.
However, the LAST thing that I want to see is real character stat progression raid instances with fixed size of player participation. This all but guarantees a fundamentally toxic in-game community and converts the PVE end game experience from being fun to being a job. I've done the high end progression raiding thing in WoW, never again.
If a developer resorts to those kinds of mechanics to drive their endgame, what that tells me is that they do not have the creativity to provide an alternative end-game PVE experience, and are depending on a not-very fun grind mechanic to keep people playing, and paying.
The problem of what do developers set up for a PVE endgame hasn't really been answered. How do you make a never ending story and not make it a repetitive grind of the same thing, and NOT make it involve PVP?
I mention that last part because for PVP the solution has already been presented: strategic, zone control, interlocked objective world PVP that controls access to resources in high demand. Basically, a war. Yes, all those aspects have to be present for it to work or it won't fly. If the battle is only at once place at a time, it is whoever brings the larger zerg wins or whether the game's technology/servers can handle a HUGE fight all in one place without crashing or becoming a total slow motion slideshow. If it isn't about resource control, not enough people will care to participate. You need interlocked objectives to spread people out, allow supply line/reinforcement interdiction, and to make divide-and-conquer tactics possible. Panetside and DaoC/New Frontiers are good examples of this.
What is a battleground, or whatever a game decides to call instanced, fixed map, fixed team size pvp? Its an FPS shooter with more varied character options as a tradeoff against better graphics.
What is arena modes? Its a ritualized gank group vs gank group fight for bragging rights with the element of surprise removed.
What both arena and battlegrounds have in common is that the outcomes of those fights have no relevance to the greater outside world of the MMO at all. Also, both of these styles of play could be done quite effectively outside of an MMO. You don't HAVE to use an MMO format to be able to do these things.
But for a real war, with every 'unit' being an actual human being, the MMO format is a requirement. This is something only a MMO can do. It also makes that world feel more real, and gives players something to particiapate in that actually makes a difference in that world.
The PVE side needs something like this for the endgame world to feel more real, and involve the playerbase as a whole. I know that some folks would argue that Rift has done this. Unfortunately, (for me at least) closing random rifts whether they were stand alone or part of one of the various world event type periods that pop up just became playing whack-a-mole, and they also were irrelevant from character progression because Rift was a gear based game and the best gear still involved either 20 man PVE fixed raid size instances or endless BG grinding on the PVP side.
I am very pleased on how GW2 is looking so far. It doesn´t need raiding to be a great game.
Guild Wars didn´t have raiding and it is extremely fun & challenging to play.
Looks like some "wow-minded" players already starting to complain on GW2 design.
Well...it isn´t "WoW"...and no...it doesn´t have raids. Get over it.
Without the gear rewards I wouldnt raid at all. The only reason i ever raid is to get gear for PvP and without that I don't see the point in playing against limited AI when i can play against other people with evolving playstyles and tactics.
If it weren't all about gear I'd probably run dungeons and raids, I love dungeons in TES games as an example. I also enjoy boss encounters. The problem is I'd probably only run them once or twice, which adds nothing to longevity. The upwards progression does though. I get that progression in other areas, as I don't like the gear dependancy used in many forms of MMo dungeon crawling or raiding.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson