Random Internet Guy decides Lady Gaga is good or bad based on what...?
She might not be my thing, but I'm not going to be stupid and say she isn't good when she obviously has something going for her in terms of music and presentation.
I'd argue she is both good AND successful. If you want to talk successful but not good, we can cart out the various American Idol singers: they don't write, produce, or choreography any of their stuff. They're just canaries. But Gaga does the whole act on her own. Only a fool would say she's not good, regardless of how much one likes or dislikes her aesthetics.
And if you want good but not successful, look for random street performers...
But you don't have to be one or the other. Gaga proves the point of both being an option. And good does not mean everyone is going to like your style.
Which is where we can come back to GW2.
Successful without a doubt - the only western made MMO other than WoW that's been doing well and growing in size (whereas WoW is actually declining, but still of a size where unless crazy happens, it will be a success for years to come).
Good? Its got:
solid independently made content
three fully developed game models
a variety of ways to play within each model
constant updates to keep players interested, resulting in an ever changing world
a clear vision for the style it desires that it has managed to stick to
a deeply rich lore that has inspired a lot of fan art and fan fiction
highly thematic art style that creates a unique experience and strong brand loyalty.
three supporting novels
numerous fan blogs, podcasts, and videocasts covering it every week.
a growing eSport presence (after initially dropping the ball here).
evocative music that gives the game its own mood.
highly sticky play experience for those within its target demographic.
- Like the choices made for these things or not, that they have met them is a sign the thing is good.
Aside from maybe the weekly blogs (because im not sure), the same points can be made of Age of Conan...and one can argue, its music, art and lore are much deeper.
Did the game live up to the manifesto? No... more than 50% of the philosophies in the manifesto are not clearly and concisely applied to the actual game, simply put, things do not work the same way they insinuated that they would in the manifesto.
So it is a success in that it sold 3 million boxes, the retention rate is unknown but based on various activity indicators and testimony I think it's safe to say there are more people disenfranchised with the game, than those who love it. If you think otherwise you are living under a rock, and probably just run in very pro-gw2 circles instead of listening to all sorts of gamers.
The problem with threads like these are that people who enjoy the game, have a really difficult time considering alternate points of view, they think that because they enjoy the game, everyone else has to or everyone else is wrong, and they can't fully understand or analyze the flaws of the game, because they are so biased.
tldr; gw2 turned a profit, there are more strong indicators that the population has dropped dramatically, than there are of it increasing, it failed to deliver on much of what anet promised.
TLDR; GW2
We can flip some of that thinking though.
First, what in the manifesto was missed? I would argue some people read their own personal pipe dreams into that document and when their delusions did not meet reality, blamed sources other than themselves. I see few things not met in those goals. Am I wrong or you? My vision of what they game would be has largely come to pass - perhaps I just read that document the same way they intended it.
Retention rate, population dropped a lot? Has it? or are the metrics looking at the wrong data. Servers are constantly full, overflows trigger all the time. They keep upping the maximum server population, and yet overflows still trigger and servers still end up too full. In game I can easily find areas where sure, I will only see another player every 5 to 10 minutes or so. I could conclude a ghost town from that - but larger MMOs like WoW are the just as empty in the right zones (and WoW is now resorting to a 'merged server on the fly' model to hide this). But just as quickly I can shift to another zone and be impacted by overflows, or even queues. If I try to enter WvW, I get impacted by a queue... So busy, I cannot even enter it.
- The playerbase is moving around, and they are focusing here, but not there.
On considering alternative points of view... that accusation flies both ways... I'd wager the critics are having more trouble with this than the active players. Those of us in game can easily see if we're alone in ghost towns... and we're largely not unless we zone to places where we know others are not going and then try to claim its empty.
You can 'unskew' your polling data all you want, be your own personal Karl Rove; but the thing is still quite active. Or you can accuse me of 'unskewing' - but I'm in there and actually seeing the activity, so at least I have a basis for my opinion.
Empty? You're sure you're talking about the right game here? Yesterday on Dragonbrand there were craploads of people about and actually queues on all four WvW servers. The new jumping puzzle was crowded (yeah, I did it without a portal! Woo!), L.A. it's usual bustling self.
What will be fun is when they remove the culling effect so we actually see everyone present in the PvE world. I think the "empty world" crowd will be largely silenced after that.
constant updates to keep players interested, resulting in an ever changing world
a clear vision for the style it desires that it has managed to stick to
a deeply rich lore that has inspired a lot of fan art and fan fiction
highly thematic art style that creates a unique experience and strong brand loyalty.
three supporting novels
numerous fan blogs, podcasts, and videocasts covering it every week.
a growing eSport presence (after initially dropping the ball here).
evocative music that gives the game its own mood.
highly sticky play experience for those within its target demographic.
- Like the choices made for these things or not, that they have met them is a sign the thing is good.
Aside from maybe the weekly blogs (because im not sure), the same points can be made of Age of Conan...and one can argue, its music, art and lore are much deeper.
Age of Conan is using borrowed lore, from a dead author.
The art style in the game is... generic 3D models. They're not that different from those seen in Poser / Daz3D, Neverwinter, and so on. No art style of its own... and its been shrinking.
Does it have huge content patches every week to two weeks? Does it have an eSports presence? Does anyone write about it? Does it have multiple different developed play models? Is the music even consistent to any theme?
Originally posted by Torgrim Lets face it GW2 is the rare gem that manage to break the WOW mold and made it B2P with monthly updates far more worthy than the traditional pay to use/sub model.Yes I know some people dont enjoy GW2 and thats perfectly fine thats just human nature, we all can't enjoy the same thing that would be absurb, but you cant say GW2 i not a success in MMORPG industry.Is GW2 success such a bad thing in grand scheme of it all?I dont think so, GW2 made a dent that WoW clones are not the absolute in MMO there are rooms for changes and improvements.
No. I don't think so, Maybe a short lived success.... but it fails in holding longevity in players.
Proud MMORPG.com member since March 2004! Make PvE GREAT Again!
constant updates to keep players interested, resulting in an ever changing world
a clear vision for the style it desires that it has managed to stick to
a deeply rich lore that has inspired a lot of fan art and fan fiction
highly thematic art style that creates a unique experience and strong brand loyalty.
three supporting novels
numerous fan blogs, podcasts, and videocasts covering it every week.
a growing eSport presence (after initially dropping the ball here).
evocative music that gives the game its own mood.
highly sticky play experience for those within its target demographic.
- Like the choices made for these things or not, that they have met them is a sign the thing is good.
Aside from maybe the weekly blogs (because im not sure), the same points can be made of Age of Conan...and one can argue, its music, art and lore are much deeper.
Age of Conan is using borrowed lore, from a dead author.
The art style in the game is... generic 3D models. They're not that different from those seen in Poser / Daz3D, Neverwinter, and so on. No art style of its own... and its been shrinking.
Does it have huge content patches every week to two weeks? Does it have an eSports presence? Does anyone write about it? Does it have multiple different developed play models? Is the music even consistent to any theme?
Aside form the blogs (which i already conceded), is has as much of your list as GW2 does, except AoC has better music.
Regarding "content updates every 2 weeks"...GW2 doesnt have content updates every 2 weeks....it may get frequent bug fixes (Something AoC also had in abundance in its first couple of years), but certanly not content updaes with such frequency, let alone huge ones... (Now, dont go ahead and take this as me saying it doesnt get content updates, it does, but dont try and say it does every 2 weeks lol)
I dont want to turn this into GW2 vs AoC debate, all I wanted to point out was that most of the unique items you pointed out for GW2, are not so unique at all.
BTW...the lore being "borrowed" and its author being dead...doesnt make its lore any less deep...not sure why you even felt the need to point that out lol. And if you want to talk about lore, I am also pretty sure SWTOR utterly kills it. There are many awsome reasons to play GW2 (WvW especially), but lore isnt one of them (compared to most other MMOs).
Originally posted by Torgrim Lets face it GW2 is the rare gem that manage to break the WOW mold and made it B2P with monthly updates far more worthy than the traditional pay to use/sub model.
Yes I know some people dont enjoy GW2 and thats perfectly fine thats just human nature, we all can't enjoy the same thing that would be absurb, but you cant say GW2 i not a success in MMORPG industry.
Is GW2 success such a bad thing in grand scheme of it all?
I dont think so, GW2 made a dent that WoW clones are not the absolute in MMO there are rooms for changes and improvements.
No. I don't think so, Maybe a short lived success.... but it fails in holding longevity in players.
We don't know that answer yet. I am glad that you have a crystal ball to see the future and can answer all the questions for us. Oh wait, if you did have a crystal ball that could actually see the future, you would have invested money in the next big thing and not come to a silly forum on games......
Of course GW2 is a success. A very, very, VERY, VEEEEEERY boring one, though. (
I always play it for a few days to a week, then get bored and stop. I just took 3 months or so off from even thinking about it, and I logged on yesterday, created a character, and I just walked up to the first NPC to start and was like "uuuugh" and logged out.
But to me profit =! success. From a business pov there are arguments you can make for that, but i am talking from the pov of a gamer, who wants to play good games. Let's look at the marketing and advertising that the devs themselves did.
Did the game live up to the manifesto? No... more than 50% of the philosophies in the manifesto are not clearly and concisely applied to the actual game, simply put, things do not work the same way they insinuated that they would in the manifesto.
Did the game give WoW a run for it's money or surpass it like Mike Obrien's goals were? Not even close... so it came up short here too.
So it is a success in that it sold 3 million boxes, the retention rate is unknown but based on various activity indicators and testimony I think it's safe to say there are more people disenfranchised with the game, than those who love it. If you think otherwise you are living under a rock, and probably just run in very pro-gw2 circles instead of listening to all sorts of gamers.
But if we are just talking about boxes sold, than diablo3 is one of the most successful games ever made. As gamers we know that d3 fell short and hemorrhaged players though.
So we have a game, that failed to live up to many of its big promises, and didn't achieve what the head honcho behind anet wanted it to, and by MANY forms of measurement, has lost a large amount of active players. Is that a success? To me personally it is not.
The problem with threads like these are that people who enjoy the game, have a really difficult time considering alternate points of view, they think that because they enjoy the game, everyone else has to or everyone else is wrong, and they can't fully understand or analyze the flaws of the game, because they are so biased.
It's sorta like those guys that claim gw2 is just the chess of mmo pvp, when in reality it is really dumbed down pvp that barely anyone cares about, and has a terrible competitive community as shown by how little interest there is on things like twitch.tv. Simply put there is a correlation between how popular a game is, and how many people want to watch people streaming that particular game, when GW2 was huge (near launch) there were a lot of people watching it, now that so many players have quit, it is astonishingly unpopular for streams. Anet has never been shy about popularity milestones, so it's pretty obvious the game hasn't been growing, if they had tons of active players they would mention it too, because it is good PR and advertising.
Also even if it is a success from a purely business pov, it isn't quite as simple as how much revenue it made. Anet had a brand, with the launch of GW2 they have strengthened and weakened their brand to different types of players. I think overall gw2 left the loyal gw1 fans very unhappy, and it didn't really have staying power with most seasoned mmo players. This will impact their future appeal. Sort of like with d3 blizzard did a ton of damage to their brand name, now in blizzard's case they have so much momentum that they can get away with it. I don't really think anet is in that position. Unless anet comes up with something completely mindblowing, their next game probably won't even do as well as gw2, because they have done quite a bit of damage, they made too many bold claims, and failed to deliver to a very noticeable extent.
tldr; gw2 turned a profit, there are more strong indicators that the population has dropped dramatically, than there are of it increasing, it failed to deliver on much of what anet promised.
TLDR; GW2
this pretty much says everything about about the subject and he didn't even offend anyone
Last time I played it was quite empty. Handful of people doing Orr events. Some in LA. Zerging around in Mists was so boring I didn't bother. Maybe players were there. Server was EU Shiverpeaks or something like that.
But to me profit =! success. From a business pov there are arguments you can make for that, but i am talking from the pov of a gamer, who wants to play good games. Let's look at the marketing and advertising that the devs themselves did.
Did the game live up to the manifesto? No... more than 50% of the philosophies in the manifesto are not clearly and concisely applied to the actual game, simply put, things do not work the same way they insinuated that they would in the manifesto.
Did the game give WoW a run for it's money or surpass it like Mike Obrien's goals were? Not even close... so it came up short here too.
So it is a success in that it sold 3 million boxes, the retention rate is unknown but based on various activity indicators and testimony I think it's safe to say there are more people disenfranchised with the game, than those who love it. If you think otherwise you are living under a rock, and probably just run in very pro-gw2 circles instead of listening to all sorts of gamers.
But if we are just talking about boxes sold, than diablo3 is one of the most successful games ever made. As gamers we know that d3 fell short and hemorrhaged players though.
So we have a game, that failed to live up to many of its big promises, and didn't achieve what the head honcho behind anet wanted it to, and by MANY forms of measurement, has lost a large amount of active players. Is that a success? To me personally it is not.
The problem with threads like these are that people who enjoy the game, have a really difficult time considering alternate points of view, they think that because they enjoy the game, everyone else has to or everyone else is wrong, and they can't fully understand or analyze the flaws of the game, because they are so biased.
It's sorta like those guys that claim gw2 is just the chess of mmo pvp, when in reality it is really dumbed down pvp that barely anyone cares about, and has a terrible competitive community as shown by how little interest there is on things like twitch.tv. Simply put there is a correlation between how popular a game is, and how many people want to watch people streaming that particular game, when GW2 was huge (near launch) there were a lot of people watching it, now that so many players have quit, it is astonishingly unpopular for streams. Anet has never been shy about popularity milestones, so it's pretty obvious the game hasn't been growing, if they had tons of active players they would mention it too, because it is good PR and advertising.
Also even if it is a success from a purely business pov, it isn't quite as simple as how much revenue it made. Anet had a brand, with the launch of GW2 they have strengthened and weakened their brand to different types of players. I think overall gw2 left the loyal gw1 fans very unhappy, and it didn't really have staying power with most seasoned mmo players. This will impact their future appeal. Sort of like with d3 blizzard did a ton of damage to their brand name, now in blizzard's case they have so much momentum that they can get away with it. I don't really think anet is in that position. Unless anet comes up with something completely mindblowing, their next game probably won't even do as well as gw2, because they have done quite a bit of damage, they made too many bold claims, and failed to deliver to a very noticeable extent.
tldr; gw2 turned a profit, there are more strong indicators that the population has dropped dramatically, than there are of it increasing, it failed to deliver on much of what anet promised.
TLDR; GW2
this pretty much says everything about about the subject and he didn't even offend anyone
ikr now let's reverse(Cause you can honestly) everything he said...well I be damn would you look at that.
I seriously hope I don't need to elaborate, it'd be a lot of typing to do. Anyway
I might get banned for this. - Rizel Star.
I'm not afraid to tell trolls what they [need] to hear, even if that means for me to have an forced absence afterwards.
P2P LOGIC = If it's P2P it means longevity, overall better game, and THE BEST SUPPORT EVER!!!!!(Which has been rinsed and repeated about a thousand times)
Common Sense Logic = P2P logic is no better than F2P Logic.
For Anet, NCSoft and their investors = yes or maybe, depends how much money they want. For me as player = not. For any other players = depends on their opinions, yes and no.
They sold 3 million copies. Yet after 1 year - still 3 million. I will call it success when new games comes out and people points at them "Lol, GW2 clone".
But to me profit =! success. From a business pov there are arguments you can make for that, but i am talking from the pov of a gamer, who wants to play good games. Let's look at the marketing and advertising that the devs themselves did.
Did the game live up to the manifesto? No... more than 50% of the philosophies in the manifesto are not clearly and concisely applied to the actual game, simply put, things do not work the same way they insinuated that they would in the manifesto.
Did the game give WoW a run for it's money or surpass it like Mike Obrien's goals were? Not even close... so it came up short here too.
So it is a success in that it sold 3 million boxes, the retention rate is unknown but based on various activity indicators and testimony I think it's safe to say there are more people disenfranchised with the game, than those who love it. If you think otherwise you are living under a rock, and probably just run in very pro-gw2 circles instead of listening to all sorts of gamers.
But if we are just talking about boxes sold, than diablo3 is one of the most successful games ever made. As gamers we know that d3 fell short and hemorrhaged players though.
So we have a game, that failed to live up to many of its big promises, and didn't achieve what the head honcho behind anet wanted it to, and by MANY forms of measurement, has lost a large amount of active players. Is that a success? To me personally it is not.
The problem with threads like these are that people who enjoy the game, have a really difficult time considering alternate points of view, they think that because they enjoy the game, everyone else has to or everyone else is wrong, and they can't fully understand or analyze the flaws of the game, because they are so biased.
It's sorta like those guys that claim gw2 is just the chess of mmo pvp, when in reality it is really dumbed down pvp that barely anyone cares about, and has a terrible competitive community as shown by how little interest there is on things like twitch.tv. Simply put there is a correlation between how popular a game is, and how many people want to watch people streaming that particular game, when GW2 was huge (near launch) there were a lot of people watching it, now that so many players have quit, it is astonishingly unpopular for streams. Anet has never been shy about popularity milestones, so it's pretty obvious the game hasn't been growing, if they had tons of active players they would mention it too, because it is good PR and advertising.
Also even if it is a success from a purely business pov, it isn't quite as simple as how much revenue it made. Anet had a brand, with the launch of GW2 they have strengthened and weakened their brand to different types of players. I think overall gw2 left the loyal gw1 fans very unhappy, and it didn't really have staying power with most seasoned mmo players. This will impact their future appeal. Sort of like with d3 blizzard did a ton of damage to their brand name, now in blizzard's case they have so much momentum that they can get away with it. I don't really think anet is in that position. Unless anet comes up with something completely mindblowing, their next game probably won't even do as well as gw2, because they have done quite a bit of damage, they made too many bold claims, and failed to deliver to a very noticeable extent.
tldr; gw2 turned a profit, there are more strong indicators that the population has dropped dramatically, than there are of it increasing, it failed to deliver on much of what anet promised.
TLDR; GW2
I'm sorry for my post above, this guy closed thread. Nothing more to say. Well done!
For Anet, NCSoft and their investors = yes or maybe, depends how much money they want. For me as player = not. For any other players = depends on their opinions, yes and no.
They sold 3 million copies. Yet after 1 year - still 3 million. I will call it success when new games comes out and people points at them "Lol, GW2 clone".
Even if it creeps up to 4 million, boxes sold means nothing when it comes to player retention
Case in point? Diablo 3.
Easy fix? Announce unique logins per day/month like Blizz did with Diablo 3.
GW2 was one of the worst games I've ever played and I'm not saying that to be a troll or even put anyone down, I just really really disliked it. It was one of the few games I had been looking forward to since quitting Warhammer. The lore and multiple story lines were uninspiring and honestly boring. The monotone voice actors only added to the static and boring feel of the story.
Throughout many of the trailers, and probably even the manifesto one of the game designers would constantly say this game isn't going to be about "going out and killing 10 rats", well that was essentially the premise of almost every heart I completed in GW2. To say it got boring after the 3rd heart is an understatement.
I was a big fan and addict of DaOC and Warhammer Online, playing each game for years, and the thing I was looking forward to the most in GW2 was the open world, objective based pvp. They ruined open world PVP in this game more so than I have ever seen in any other. There is absolutely no strategy, it is just one massive RANGED zerg vs zerg, the keyword there being "RANGED". The melee portion of classes are completely null and void in the mists and the downed state ultimately makes the already massive cluster fuck even more confusing and complicated. There was so much they could have taken away from DaOC and Warhammer Online that could have made it extremely successful but they didn't. All they did was make it a 3 faction system like DaOC and added some small, medium, and large objectives, and completely overlooked all the subtleties Warhammer utilized which in my opinion made it the best open world objective based pvp mmo ever.
Overall, Guild Wars 2 in my opinion is boring, super easy, left a lot to be desired and a lot of promises unfulfilled. I commend them on their efforts to try new and innovative features and ideas but overall I don't think this game was a success. The only success that came from it was that I think it will make future mmos better because of the things they did very poorly and the things that were promising and were a success about the game.
Success = high quality, doesnt need a sub, adds content and continually improves, makes a modest profit I.e not greedy for big share dividends and bonuses.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
GW2 was one of the worst games I've ever played and I'm not saying that to be a troll or even put anyone down, I just really really disliked it. It was one of the few games I had been looking forward to since quitting Warhammer. The lore and multiple story lines were uninspiring and honestly boring. The monotone voice actors only added to the static and boring feel of the story.
Throughout many of the trailers, and probably even the manifesto one of the game designers would constantly say this game isn't going to be about "going out and killing 10 rats", well that was essentially the premise of almost every heart I completed in GW2. To say it got boring after the 3rd heart is an understatement.
I was a big fan and addict of DaOC and Warhammer Online, playing each game for years, and the thing I was looking forward to the most in GW2 was the open world, objective based pvp. They ruined open world PVP in this game more so than I have ever seen in any other. There is absolutely no strategy, it is just one massive RANGED zerg vs zerg, the keyword there being "RANGED". The melee portion of classes are completely null and void in the mists and the downed state ultimately makes the already massive cluster fuck even more confusing and complicated. There was so much they could have taken away from DaOC and Warhammer Online that could have made it extremely successful but they didn't. All they did was make it a 3 faction system like DaOC and added some small, medium, and large objectives, and completely overlooked all the subtleties Warhammer utilized which in my opinion made it the best open world objective based pvp mmo ever.
Overall, Guild Wars 2 in my opinion is boring, super easy, left a lot to be desired and a lot of promises unfulfilled. I commend them on their efforts to try new and innovative features and ideas but overall I don't think this game was a success. The only success that came from it was that I think it will make future mmos better because of the things they did very poorly and the things that were promising and were a success about the game.
Your problem stems from the fact you like the other games and this one is not like them. Well, I would hope so as I played those games and disliked them both.
But, opinions are like, well you get the idea.
Overall, yes they could have done better with the game but I think the game is decent. Some pople think it is easy (on this forum because we have leet haxxors here) and on the GW2 forum - people complaining because it is not easy enough.
I don't believe your premise that people will not follow GW2 because it was flawed, they will follow it because it tried to do things different - maybe they didn't succeed with some but overall they did things decent and it is a decent game.
If you can't admit that GW2 is a success because of your hate of it, then you really need to get out more - it is a game after all, nothing really important, just fun for some.
GW2 was one of the worst games I've ever played and I'm not saying that to be a troll or even put anyone down, I just really really disliked it. It was one of the few games I had been looking forward to since quitting Warhammer. The lore and multiple story lines were uninspiring and honestly boring. The monotone voice actors only added to the static and boring feel of the story.
Throughout many of the trailers, and probably even the manifesto one of the game designers would constantly say this game isn't going to be about "going out and killing 10 rats", well that was essentially the premise of almost every heart I completed in GW2. To say it got boring after the 3rd heart is an understatement.
I was a big fan and addict of DaOC and Warhammer Online, playing each game for years, and the thing I was looking forward to the most in GW2 was the open world, objective based pvp. They ruined open world PVP in this game more so than I have ever seen in any other. There is absolutely no strategy, it is just one massive RANGED zerg vs zerg, the keyword there being "RANGED". The melee portion of classes are completely null and void in the mists and the downed state ultimately makes the already massive cluster fuck even more confusing and complicated. There was so much they could have taken away from DaOC and Warhammer Online that could have made it extremely successful but they didn't. All they did was make it a 3 faction system like DaOC and added some small, medium, and large objectives, and completely overlooked all the subtleties Warhammer utilized which in my opinion made it the best open world objective based pvp mmo ever.
Overall, Guild Wars 2 in my opinion is boring, super easy, left a lot to be desired and a lot of promises unfulfilled. I commend them on their efforts to try new and innovative features and ideas but overall I don't think this game was a success. The only success that came from it was that I think it will make future mmos better because of the things they did very poorly and the things that were promising and were a success about the game.
I have to completely disagree with your assessment of GW2's PVP. WvW in GW2 is what WAR tried to be as an entire game, but failed quite hard at it.
What killed it (GW2) for me though, was the lack of purposefull PvE Endgame. Its the same reason Call of Duty took over from Unreal Tournament as the online frag fest of choice. Regardless of genre (but more importantly in RPGs), you need something keeping you coming back time and time again. Regardless of how fun a dungon is, there is only so many times you will run it when there is no meaningfull impact/ progression for your charecter (im not talking about loot/gear, so dont even go there :P ).
GW2 was one of the worst games I've ever played and I'm not saying that to be a troll or even put anyone down, I just really really disliked it. It was one of the few games I had been looking forward to since quitting Warhammer. The lore and multiple story lines were uninspiring and honestly boring. The monotone voice actors only added to the static and boring feel of the story.
Throughout many of the trailers, and probably even the manifesto one of the game designers would constantly say this game isn't going to be about "going out and killing 10 rats", well that was essentially the premise of almost every heart I completed in GW2. To say it got boring after the 3rd heart is an understatement.
I was a big fan and addict of DaOC and Warhammer Online, playing each game for years, and the thing I was looking forward to the most in GW2 was the open world, objective based pvp. They ruined open world PVP in this game more so than I have ever seen in any other. There is absolutely no strategy, it is just one massive RANGED zerg vs zerg, the keyword there being "RANGED". The melee portion of classes are completely null and void in the mists and the downed state ultimately makes the already massive cluster fuck even more confusing and complicated. There was so much they could have taken away from DaOC and Warhammer Online that could have made it extremely successful but they didn't. All they did was make it a 3 faction system like DaOC and added some small, medium, and large objectives, and completely overlooked all the subtleties Warhammer utilized which in my opinion made it the best open world objective based pvp mmo ever.
Overall, Guild Wars 2 in my opinion is boring, super easy, left a lot to be desired and a lot of promises unfulfilled. I commend them on their efforts to try new and innovative features and ideas but overall I don't think this game was a success. The only success that came from it was that I think it will make future mmos better because of the things they did very poorly and the things that were promising and were a success about the game.
As you said, your opinion. I played the games you mentioned and found they sucked rocks (DaOC and Warhammer).
But, opinion are like, well you get the idea.
Overall, yes they could have done better with the game but I think the game is decent. Some pople think it is easy (on this forum because we have leet haxxors here) and on the GW2 forum - people complaining because it is not easy enough.
I don't believe your premise that people will not follow GW2 because it was flawed, they will follow it because it tired to do things different - maybe they didn't succeed with some but overall they did things decent and it is a decent game.
If you can't admit that GW2 is a success because of your hate of it, then you really need to get out more - it is a game after all, nothing really important, just fun for some.
You have no premise for saying why you disliked those games. I think I have fairly good reasons for why I find it boring and even explained why. You didn't go any further past I hate Warhammer and DaOC. It isn't my opinion that GW2's pvp is inferior to other games when it is lacking features and mechanics of games that came many years before it. That's a fact. The decision on whether you like the pvp better than another game or not is where the opinion comes into play.
GW2, in my opinion has more significant flaws than good things going for it. It caters to the uber casual player, them and only them. I don't have a problem admitting that there are things about GW2 that are really like or love, but to say that the game as a whole was a "success" just because there were somethings I think they did very well is laughable.
I haven't played video games at all since the launch of GW2. I merely logged on today because I've been hearing a lot of hype about EQN. Of course, I've come to find the that, that hype is absolutely baseless and people are raving about the game just because they can, I honestly have put more of a focus on my education than I have anything else.
Originally posted by doodphace
I have to completely disagree with your assessment of GW2's PVP. WvW in GW2 is what WAR tried to be as an entire game, but failed quite hard at it.
What killed it for me though, was the lack of purposefull PvE Endgame. Its the same reason Call of Duty took over from Unreal Tournament as the online frag fest of choice. Regardless of genre (but more importantly in RPGs), you need something keeping you coming back time and time again. Regardless of how fun a dungon is, there is only so many times you will run it when there is no meaningfull impact/ progression for your charecter (im not talking about loot/gear, so dont even go there :P ).
I'd love for you to elaborate on how to feel GW2's open world pvp is what WAR tried to be? I think if you explained how you feel GW2 accomplished that better, we would still stay on the topic of GW2's success. Honestly almost everyone I've talked to that has played DaOC or Warhammer, have said that GW2's open world pvp was a huge disappointment, and many of them had similar reasons to me as to why they felt that way. I could have gone into much more detail in my previous post, but I didn't feel that it was necessary.
Well, i am still having fun, and they are still making money with the game, atleast more money a month then it costs to pay a full development team.
On top of that they added more free content in the first year then any subbed game ever did. Tough it was mostly seasonal based. But soon they will start with 2 weekly updates with normal regular content, and it comes totally free, no more expansion packs but a world expanding every 2 weeks.
Combat is fun and has more depth both strategically as tactically then any other true MMO (tough i still would have preferred more vissible trinnity systems), world design is awesome and more dynamic then anything else.
And there are still people everywhere around the maps to join, and still lots of new people joining. So yes, the game is a succes, but not aimed at the super duper hardcore MMO crowd mostly living on these forums.
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
I preorder GW2 and played it for a couple of weeks. I will be honest. I hate it. However you are correct is saying that up to this point it has been a success. We know this because they have stopped updating GW1.
But is GW2 truelly successful or does it just seems so for now, because of two reasons?
1. Its free to play.
2. There just isnt anything else out there thats really good.
What happens when FFXIV gets released next month? What about TESO and Wildstar? Then there is EQN, AA and CU.
Thats 6 major titles coming out soon, most within the next 12 months.
If GW2 truelly is a good and successful game, it will still be running strong 6-12 months from now. I personally dont believe it will be.
GW2 is like a bad girlfriend. You hate her and want to dump her, but no one better has come along yet.
Comments
Aside from maybe the weekly blogs (because im not sure), the same points can be made of Age of Conan...and one can argue, its music, art and lore are much deeper.
very pretty and very empty game...
success of hypo? - yes
used GW1 to get said success? - yes
better than WoW? - you must be joking
try before buy, even if it's a game to avoid bad surprises.
Worst surprises for me: Aion, GW2
We can flip some of that thinking though.
First, what in the manifesto was missed? I would argue some people read their own personal pipe dreams into that document and when their delusions did not meet reality, blamed sources other than themselves. I see few things not met in those goals. Am I wrong or you? My vision of what they game would be has largely come to pass - perhaps I just read that document the same way they intended it.
Retention rate, population dropped a lot? Has it? or are the metrics looking at the wrong data. Servers are constantly full, overflows trigger all the time. They keep upping the maximum server population, and yet overflows still trigger and servers still end up too full. In game I can easily find areas where sure, I will only see another player every 5 to 10 minutes or so. I could conclude a ghost town from that - but larger MMOs like WoW are the just as empty in the right zones (and WoW is now resorting to a 'merged server on the fly' model to hide this). But just as quickly I can shift to another zone and be impacted by overflows, or even queues. If I try to enter WvW, I get impacted by a queue... So busy, I cannot even enter it.
- The playerbase is moving around, and they are focusing here, but not there.
On considering alternative points of view... that accusation flies both ways... I'd wager the critics are having more trouble with this than the active players. Those of us in game can easily see if we're alone in ghost towns... and we're largely not unless we zone to places where we know others are not going and then try to claim its empty.
You can 'unskew' your polling data all you want, be your own personal Karl Rove; but the thing is still quite active. Or you can accuse me of 'unskewing' - but I'm in there and actually seeing the activity, so at least I have a basis for my opinion.
Empty? You're sure you're talking about the right game here? Yesterday on Dragonbrand there were craploads of people about and actually queues on all four WvW servers. The new jumping puzzle was crowded (yeah, I did it without a portal! Woo!), L.A. it's usual bustling self.
What will be fun is when they remove the culling effect so we actually see everyone present in the PvE world. I think the "empty world" crowd will be largely silenced after that.
Oderint, dum metuant.
Age of Conan is using borrowed lore, from a dead author.
The art style in the game is... generic 3D models. They're not that different from those seen in Poser / Daz3D, Neverwinter, and so on. No art style of its own... and its been shrinking.
Does it have huge content patches every week to two weeks? Does it have an eSports presence? Does anyone write about it? Does it have multiple different developed play models? Is the music even consistent to any theme?
No. I don't think so, Maybe a short lived success.... but it fails in holding longevity in players.
Proud MMORPG.com member since March 2004! Make PvE GREAT Again!
Empty?
You must be kidding....
where? The server I am on is full - you cannot even transfer to it.
when? The same can be said of EQ2 used EQ1 - TESO is using ES games - so many are doing the same thing.
Last point, you really you went there? It is so subjective as to be a useless trite answer.
Aside form the blogs (which i already conceded), is has as much of your list as GW2 does, except AoC has better music.
Regarding "content updates every 2 weeks"...GW2 doesnt have content updates every 2 weeks....it may get frequent bug fixes (Something AoC also had in abundance in its first couple of years), but certanly not content updaes with such frequency, let alone huge ones...
(Now, dont go ahead and take this as me saying it doesnt get content updates, it does, but dont try and say it does every 2 weeks lol)
I dont want to turn this into GW2 vs AoC debate, all I wanted to point out was that most of the unique items you pointed out for GW2, are not so unique at all.
BTW...the lore being "borrowed" and its author being dead...doesnt make its lore any less deep...not sure why you even felt the need to point that out lol. And if you want to talk about lore, I am also pretty sure SWTOR utterly kills it. There are many awsome reasons to play GW2 (WvW especially), but lore isnt one of them (compared to most other MMOs).
We don't know that answer yet. I am glad that you have a crystal ball to see the future and can answer all the questions for us. Oh wait, if you did have a crystal ball that could actually see the future, you would have invested money in the next big thing and not come to a silly forum on games......
Of course GW2 is a success. A very, very, VERY, VEEEEEERY boring one, though.
(
I always play it for a few days to a week, then get bored and stop. I just took 3 months or so off from even thinking about it, and I logged on yesterday, created a character, and I just walked up to the first NPC to start and was like "uuuugh" and logged out.
Emty? - you must be joking
If it's not broken, you are not innovating.
this pretty much says everything about about the subject and he didn't even offend anyone
Last time I played it was quite empty. Handful of people doing Orr events. Some in LA. Zerging around in Mists was so boring I didn't bother. Maybe players were there. Server was EU Shiverpeaks or something like that.
ikr now let's reverse(Cause you can honestly) everything he said...well I be damn would you look at that.
I seriously hope I don't need to elaborate, it'd be a lot of typing to do. Anyway
I might get banned for this. - Rizel Star.
I'm not afraid to tell trolls what they [need] to hear, even if that means for me to have an forced absence afterwards.
P2P LOGIC = If it's P2P it means longevity, overall better game, and THE BEST SUPPORT EVER!!!!!(Which has been rinsed and repeated about a thousand times)
Common Sense Logic = P2P logic is no better than F2P Logic.
For Anet, NCSoft and their investors = yes or maybe, depends how much money they want. For me as player = not. For any other players = depends on their opinions, yes and no.
They sold 3 million copies. Yet after 1 year - still 3 million. I will call it success when new games comes out and people points at them "Lol, GW2 clone".
I'm sorry for my post above, this guy closed thread. Nothing more to say. Well done!
Even if it creeps up to 4 million, boxes sold means nothing when it comes to player retention
Case in point? Diablo 3.
Easy fix? Announce unique logins per day/month like Blizz did with Diablo 3.
GW2 was one of the worst games I've ever played and I'm not saying that to be a troll or even put anyone down, I just really really disliked it. It was one of the few games I had been looking forward to since quitting Warhammer. The lore and multiple story lines were uninspiring and honestly boring. The monotone voice actors only added to the static and boring feel of the story.
Throughout many of the trailers, and probably even the manifesto one of the game designers would constantly say this game isn't going to be about "going out and killing 10 rats", well that was essentially the premise of almost every heart I completed in GW2. To say it got boring after the 3rd heart is an understatement.
I was a big fan and addict of DaOC and Warhammer Online, playing each game for years, and the thing I was looking forward to the most in GW2 was the open world, objective based pvp. They ruined open world PVP in this game more so than I have ever seen in any other. There is absolutely no strategy, it is just one massive RANGED zerg vs zerg, the keyword there being "RANGED". The melee portion of classes are completely null and void in the mists and the downed state ultimately makes the already massive cluster fuck even more confusing and complicated. There was so much they could have taken away from DaOC and Warhammer Online that could have made it extremely successful but they didn't. All they did was make it a 3 faction system like DaOC and added some small, medium, and large objectives, and completely overlooked all the subtleties Warhammer utilized which in my opinion made it the best open world objective based pvp mmo ever.
Overall, Guild Wars 2 in my opinion is boring, super easy, left a lot to be desired and a lot of promises unfulfilled. I commend them on their efforts to try new and innovative features and ideas but overall I don't think this game was a success. The only success that came from it was that I think it will make future mmos better because of the things they did very poorly and the things that were promising and were a success about the game.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
Your problem stems from the fact you like the other games and this one is not like them. Well, I would hope so as I played those games and disliked them both.
But, opinions are like, well you get the idea.
Overall, yes they could have done better with the game but I think the game is decent. Some pople think it is easy (on this forum because we have leet haxxors here) and on the GW2 forum - people complaining because it is not easy enough.
I don't believe your premise that people will not follow GW2 because it was flawed, they will follow it because it tried to do things different - maybe they didn't succeed with some but overall they did things decent and it is a decent game.
If you can't admit that GW2 is a success because of your hate of it, then you really need to get out more - it is a game after all, nothing really important, just fun for some.
I have to completely disagree with your assessment of GW2's PVP. WvW in GW2 is what WAR tried to be as an entire game, but failed quite hard at it.
What killed it (GW2) for me though, was the lack of purposefull PvE Endgame. Its the same reason Call of Duty took over from Unreal Tournament as the online frag fest of choice. Regardless of genre (but more importantly in RPGs), you need something keeping you coming back time and time again. Regardless of how fun a dungon is, there is only so many times you will run it when there is no meaningfull impact/ progression for your charecter (im not talking about loot/gear, so dont even go there :P ).
You have no premise for saying why you disliked those games. I think I have fairly good reasons for why I find it boring and even explained why. You didn't go any further past I hate Warhammer and DaOC. It isn't my opinion that GW2's pvp is inferior to other games when it is lacking features and mechanics of games that came many years before it. That's a fact. The decision on whether you like the pvp better than another game or not is where the opinion comes into play.
GW2, in my opinion has more significant flaws than good things going for it. It caters to the uber casual player, them and only them. I don't have a problem admitting that there are things about GW2 that are really like or love, but to say that the game as a whole was a "success" just because there were somethings I think they did very well is laughable.
I haven't played video games at all since the launch of GW2. I merely logged on today because I've been hearing a lot of hype about EQN. Of course, I've come to find the that, that hype is absolutely baseless and people are raving about the game just because they can, I honestly have put more of a focus on my education than I have anything else.
I'd love for you to elaborate on how to feel GW2's open world pvp is what WAR tried to be? I think if you explained how you feel GW2 accomplished that better, we would still stay on the topic of GW2's success. Honestly almost everyone I've talked to that has played DaOC or Warhammer, have said that GW2's open world pvp was a huge disappointment, and many of them had similar reasons to me as to why they felt that way. I could have gone into much more detail in my previous post, but I didn't feel that it was necessary.
Well, i am still having fun, and they are still making money with the game, atleast more money a month then it costs to pay a full development team.
On top of that they added more free content in the first year then any subbed game ever did. Tough it was mostly seasonal based. But soon they will start with 2 weekly updates with normal regular content, and it comes totally free, no more expansion packs but a world expanding every 2 weeks.
Combat is fun and has more depth both strategically as tactically then any other true MMO (tough i still would have preferred more vissible trinnity systems), world design is awesome and more dynamic then anything else.
And there are still people everywhere around the maps to join, and still lots of new people joining. So yes, the game is a succes, but not aimed at the super duper hardcore MMO crowd mostly living on these forums.
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
I preorder GW2 and played it for a couple of weeks. I will be honest. I hate it. However you are correct is saying that up to this point it has been a success. We know this because they have stopped updating GW1.
But is GW2 truelly successful or does it just seems so for now, because of two reasons?
1. Its free to play.
2. There just isnt anything else out there thats really good.
What happens when FFXIV gets released next month? What about TESO and Wildstar? Then there is EQN, AA and CU.
Thats 6 major titles coming out soon, most within the next 12 months.
If GW2 truelly is a good and successful game, it will still be running strong 6-12 months from now. I personally dont believe it will be.
GW2 is like a bad girlfriend. You hate her and want to dump her, but no one better has come along yet.