@drakaena

People tried elitism through those in GW1.

Didn't work.

Same for Champions Online, really.

Originally posted by DarkPony

Oh dear ... someone just made instant gratification, lack of long term gameplay incentives and Anet's player conflict avoidance philosophy sound good ... and got away with it!?

BM' ing this for future reference.

I disagree on almost all parts but I do recognize your speach writing capacities. You could probably sell people bricks for gold bars.

Sometimes I love your wit and insight.  This is one of those times.  I'm just a little bit disappointed Soylent Green wasn't in the OP list, but I'll get over it.

Originally posted by tordurbar

Although I agree that  GW2 is making some out of the box decisions I can't say that I agree with the OP that "everyone is equal at max level" is a good thing. This is an interesting way of balancing pvp but my experience has been that most pvp players don't want equality they want to "pawn" their opponents.

What incentive is there to continue playing? Somebody correct me if I am wrong but it seems that at max level the only thing that I can shoot for are more achievements and titles. For some this might be fun but for me, if you are not progressing in either gear or in character points then I lose interest.

I do think that GW2 is doing something that will keep me going after max level for some time - downleveling in dynamic events. I have never heard of this before and I am eager to see how it turns out.

Im gonna play gw2 for the same reason i play all my other "Video Games"   to have fun,  everyone feels that they have to be rewarded to have fun,  my reward is the enjoyment i get out of playing, and i myself will get more enjoyment from losing or winning close fights  then from owning or getting owned which is what happens in gear grind games

I don't :)   My post came out a little more negative than I expected. The OP is right on for what I feel is the most important facet of GW2 - ArenaNet is making some radical changes. I am not one that appreciates change for the sake of change but some of their ideas really have me interested and even those that I don't agree with I am eager to see how they work out.

Originally posted by DarkPony

Oh dear ... someone just made instant gratification, lack of long term gameplay incentives and Anet's player conflict avoidance philosophy sound good ... and got away with it!?

BM' ing this for future reference.

I disagree on almost all parts but I do recognize your speach writing capacities. You could probably sell people bricks for gold bars.

Originally posted by tordurbar

Although I agree that  GW2 is making some out of the box decisions I can't say that I agree with the OP that "everyone is equal at max level" is a good thing. This is an interesting way of balancing pvp but my experience has been that most pvp players don't want equality they want to "pawn" their opponents.

What incentive is there to continue playing? Somebody correct me if I am wrong but it seems that at max level the only thing that I can shoot for are more achievements and titles. For some this might be fun but for me, if you are not progressing in either gear or in character points then I lose interest.

I do think that GW2 is doing something that will keep me going after max level for some time - downleveling in dynamic events. I have never heard of this before and I am eager to see how it turns out.

The incentive to continue playing, and what ANet is trying to achieve, is simply a game you want to keep playing. Why chase a carrot down the narrow path of endgame, erecting walls behind you to all content prior, when you can make it so the entire world always remains viable and worth experiencing? When you can run level 30 explorer mode dungeons at level 80 and still have your arse handed to you if you're not careful, all to get armor that will be as good as your level 80 armor (actually, you can put your level 80 stats on it) simply because you like the challenge and the look... well, there you go. Your incentive to continue playing is because it's fun, no matter where you are or what level you are.

Originally posted by drakaena
I would bet anything titles will be used as achievements are looked upon in wow. You can't join so and so pro team if you don't have this or that title proving your skill.

1.) It didn't work that way in GW1. I fail to see why it would in GW2.

2.) The only content that requires other people is dungeons, and that's five-man content. If you don't have four other friends at the ready to play a game with you, then just play one of the other types of content available (dynamic events, personal storyline, et cetera).

Entitlement? I'm not entirely sure on your logic here. So people who have the time or skill to do community-driven events, aka raids, somehow either intrinsically entitled or they feel entitled. I could follow you if you mean the former, but judging fromy our particular form of rhetoric you are implying the latter.

Raids these days only take as much time as you want them to. Most of them aren't terribly hard and you can clear them in either one sitting over two to three hours or spend one hour over a couple of nights. One hour isn't that hard to find...hell, two hours isn't that hard to find. Yet, somehow, people that think like you seem to believe the rest of us who spend our FREE time differently feel like we're entitled to some secret club that we don't want you in.

That might be true for some, but it is hardly true for all.

How many hours do you spend per day just putzing around not really doing anything? Any time you spend where you have no concerns that require you to do something is FREE time. How you choose to spend that free time is entirely up to you. If you spend a few hours at the bar with some friends then you're choosing to have fun that way. If you spend an hour or two raiding then you're choosing to have fun that way.

Your views of raiding are horribly flawed and perhaps that's where all of this stems from. You adamantly believe it's just about getting gear and, for some, you might be right. However, for far more people raiding is just about enjoying a common interest with friends and strangers who share that interest. Gear is an afterthought that is just shiney stuff that bosses have fall out of them.

Think of it like almost any single-player game.

I'll use Zelda as a classic example. You play the game because you want to have fun playing the game, not because you want to find dat new shiney sword for dem bigger numberz. So you're playing the game, hitting things in the face, cutting grass, following the story when a giant boss appears!

Boy! What a fun fight that was! Wait...what's this?

A treasure chest?! I wonder what's in it.....

Hey! A new shield that let's me flip monsters up! Sweet!

That's how I, and many others, view raiding in an online game. The item rewards are generally less shiney and impressive than in a single-player game, but when you can organize twenty people to all achieve one common goal there is a very warm, fuzzy feeling that is only just one step below beating another team at your choice of sport. The game devs (hopefully) tried to kill all of you, but your group came out ahead.

Some people will take this too far and snub their nose at anyone who hasn't 'achieved' what they have and, unfortunately, this is a growing group. Perhaps for this reason alone doing away with standard raiding is worthwhile. With that said, though, this isn't 'entitelement' it's just elitism and many modern MMOs are already combating it by shifting raid tiers and providing what has come to be called 'welfare' gear to get people started.

Developers want as many players as possible to see the content they make. It doesn't make any sense to spend money and time making something that only a handful of people will see. The genre today makes it very easy to get "in" to raiding, but it's really up to you if you want to do that. Clearly, for you, you don't. But just keep this in mind:

In earlier days of online gaming it wasn't about gear. It was about playing the game. Then, over time, people came to find really powerful items that made their characters stronger. Some people gathered up a large number of powerful items and their characters became extremely powerful as a result. They then would go around and kill or otherwise impress-upon other players who in turn would want to be that 'uber'. And thus the gear treadmill was born.

Every MMO will have some form of gear treadmill because PLAYERS will create one. Some people will always gather up as many powerful items as they can and, in order to compete, other players will hunt down as many of the same items as they can. You're deluding yourself if you think GW 2 isn't going to have some form of gear treadmill. Leveling, in and of itself, is a form of gear treadmill and last I checked GW 2 has leveling.

But leveling doesn't create a division in the player-base at all, right?

Originally posted by Dream_Chaser

@drakaena

People tried elitism through those in GW1.

Didn't work.

Same for Champions Online, really.

I'm not quite following this post.  It's a little too abbreviated.  Are you trying to say there's not elitism in GW1?  I sure as hell hope not because it is rampant in randoms, GvG, high end instance farming, and guild alliances.  Hey you want in our group?  What's your emote?

Hell, ANet balances classes and skills based on the feedback of a few elitist guilds.  Having a few guilds so heavily influence the meta has been one of their biggest weaknesses in my opinion.

There will be elitism in GW2.  It will happen for dungeon runs, high end pve and pvp, and other areas that will surface.  You can't stop an inherent human trait from manifesting itself.

Originally posted by Dream_Chaser

@RizelStar

[mod edit]

It's like when one can't think of a comeback so he/she throws out his/her "since all else fails" speech lol, very fun obvservation.

I kind of started getting lost while reading the OP, but from what I could gather, it seems the OP can't wait to buy $80 monocles to flaunt in front of the people that just want to play and show off how big his wallet is, did I get that right?

Well OP, you go right ahead. I am sure in the grand scheme of things your $80 will be well spent. Then again, if I never see you in the game how would I even know your last name was Moneybags?

Originally posted by musicmann

The only problem i have with the OP's post is the Old MMORPG mindset that he seems to go only as far back as WOW. The real Old MMORPG mindset goes back to when this genre was about player interdepenency and virtual worlds. Even though WOW was not a bad game, it clearly ushered in a era of letting the devs do the thinking for the players and the repetative carrot on the stick design that almost every game all the way up to today has followed.

If GW2 can break out of the norm mode that has plagued this genre for the last 7 yrs. then it just might do enough to change how these games are made.

Fair comments.

I disagree with you that it is the devs doing the thinking for players which is breaking down the community. Content quality now is far better in allowing players able to do things.

My first MMO was DAOC. The population of MMO players was small and you had to work together. It very much about player interdependancy because you got a bad name quickly and people stopped grouping. You then made amends and got back into the community or you learned to solo. To me, mmos were more about socializing then playing. In that regard it didnt feel like a grind because I was catching up with online friends on how their day at work went or what happened in their college class.

WoW changed that but not because of any inherrant evilness of WoW or because the devs decided they were going to do the thinking for the community. Because it went mainstream you had a virtual limitless supply of group mates and if you ninja looted or bailed mid run it didnt matter. There were no reprocussions. At that point the socialness declined outside of a good guild and I would add that most guilds now a days don't know any better as far as how social they can be with one another.

Signed in just to say great post, mate :) cheers!

Originally posted by Dream_Chaser

Originally posted by Torvaldr

Originally posted by DarkPony

Oh dear ... someone just made instant gratification, lack of long term gameplay incentives and Anet's player conflict avoidance philosophy sound good ... and got away with it!?

BM' ing this for future reference.

I disagree on almost all parts but I do recognize your speach writing capacities. You could probably sell people bricks for gold bars.

Sometimes I love your wit and insight.  This is one of those times.  I'm just a little bit disappointed Soylent Green wasn't in the OP list, but I'll get over it.

(mod edit)

You call me names and be derogatory and project hate?  Is that how GW2 fans argue?  Is this what the rest of the MMO community can expect from GW2 players?

So because Dark Pony doesn't agree with you he's part of the problem.  Are we supposed to just agree with you as though you've some special insight into how we all work?

I'm not in pain.  I'm happy with my MMO and I'm happy in general.  I just don't agree with you that this game is going to be a genre changer.  There's not much genre changing about it.  Guild Wars 1 didn't change the genre.  GW2 is a "F2P" game with an upfront cost and a cash shop - not changing the genre there.  It has eSports pvp - not changing the genre there either - MOBAs and FPS ladder games have done it already.

It's probably going to be a very fun game, but why do you think everyone is going to want to play it or have new MMOs developed in the same style?  My guess is that horizontal advancement is not going to be as popular as people claim.  If it was GW1 would have changed the industry.  It's a good game, but not a genre changer.

Originally posted by Dream_Chaser

Originally posted by Torvaldr

Originally posted by DarkPony

Oh dear ... someone just made instant gratification, lack of long term gameplay incentives and Anet's player conflict avoidance philosophy sound good ... and got away with it!?

BM' ing this for future reference.

I disagree on almost all parts but I do recognize your speach writing capacities. You could probably sell people bricks for gold bars.

Sometimes I love your wit and insight.  This is one of those times.  I'm just a little bit disappointed Soylent Green wasn't in the OP list, but I'll get over it.

[mod edit]

So much ad hominems. ...

*sad pony*

I could write a similar post filled with cleverly disguised personal insults on your rose colored glasses (which seem more like a rose colored welding helmet with a built in reality distortion field generator) but I digress.
 

Originally posted by Torvaldr

Originally posted by Dream_Chaser

Originally posted by Torvaldr

Originally posted by DarkPony

Oh dear ... someone just made instant gratification, lack of long term gameplay incentives and Anet's player conflict avoidance philosophy sound good ... and got away with it!?

BM' ing this for future reference.

I disagree on almost all parts but I do recognize your speach writing capacities. You could probably sell people bricks for gold bars.

Sometimes I love your wit and insight.  This is one of those times.  I'm just a little bit disappointed Soylent Green wasn't in the OP list, but I'll get over it.

[mod edit]

[mod edit]

I was going to say pretty much the exact same thing. OP goes from well-written rhetoric to base name-calling in rapid fashion.

GW 2 IS GW 1 with better graphics and flashier animations. Add in a few more upgrades for good measure, but nothing shocking or even new. Oh and let's not forget a cash shop.

There ARE going to be items that will be more or less powerful in some way. People ALWAYS find a way to min-max a character.

Change would be fantastic!

If GW 2 were actually changing anything.