Originally posted by Naqaj

Originally posted by DKLond

Without the loot progression in WoW - I don't think it would have lasted as long as it has, and I think a lot of people would have lost interest.

That's actually my point.

That point cannot be argued, WoW was designed around loot progression, so removing that would also remove it's longevity.

Infering from that that any game without loot progression doesn't have longevity is a bit of a stretch though. That's the only problem I have with your argument.

Yes, I was about to say that.

He assumes that a game without loot progression that doesn't have sandbox features doesn't have enough to keep people interested. And he uses WoW as proof of that which is a fallacy because GW2 does not have stat based gear progression. He should be comparing the longevity to GW1 at the very least. And there are many differences between GW1 and GW2 that would seem to indicate that GW2 is much better than GW1 in the longevity department.

And GW2 does actually have a form of loot progression though elite cosmetic items that you get for accomplishing difficult things (like winning official tournaments and various other things). So while it does not have a required stat based gear grind that gates content, it does have an optional gear grind.

He also dismisses the idea that PvP IS player driven content. Especially with the way WvW is designed. 

Originally posted by botrytis

Originally posted by bcbully

Originally posted by DKLond

So, basically, you repeat content with a variety of challenge settings for no real reward except aesthetic ones, right?

Exactly like all the other themeparks except for the power progression.

You do it for "fun" instead of the rewards, right? Because all other themeparks are boring because they also provide long-term rewards, right?

This is exactly what NCsoft/Anet has been selling and what a lot of these people have bought hook line and sinker.

Not really. You are assuming that A.Net runs like Funcom and EA. Well, in my experience they don't. A.Net did an admirable job with GW1 - trying to keep it going (adding content, etc).

 

If you prefer rewards like the armor grind, than this game is not for you, plain and simple.

 

You bought what Blizzard, Funcom and EA is selling hook, line and sinker.

 

As the old saying goes, many people would complain with a loaf of bread under each arm.

The problem is there is no bread. When I walked into the store NCsoft/Anet said  "I know you hate the buying  bread treadmill. Guess what we did!! We got rid of the bread!!!" Now you can just eat the sweet butter w/o those greedy bread makers in youy pocket!"

Originally posted by bcbully

Originally posted by botrytis

Originally posted by bcbully

Originally posted by DKLond

So, basically, you repeat content with a variety of challenge settings for no real reward except aesthetic ones, right?

Exactly like all the other themeparks except for the power progression.

You do it for "fun" instead of the rewards, right? Because all other themeparks are boring because they also provide long-term rewards, right?

This is exactly what NCsoft/Anet has been selling and what a lot of these people have bought hook line and sinker.

Not really. You are assuming that A.Net runs like Funcom and EA. Well, in my experience they don't. A.Net did an admirable job with GW1 - trying to keep it going (adding content, etc).

 

If you prefer rewards like the armor grind, than this game is not for you, plain and simple.

 

You bought what Blizzard, Funcom and EA is selling hook, line and sinker.

 

As the old saying goes, many people would complain with a loaf of bread under each arm.

The problem is there is no bread. NCsoft/Anet said "I know you hate buying bread treadmill. Guess what we did!! We got rid of the bread!!!" Now you can just eat the sweet butter w/o those greedy bread makers in youy pocket!"

 

 

You are trying way too hard.

DKLond, so let's suppose Anet listens to all the cries about endgame and redesign of the dungeons. Now, for the last 3 dungeons A,B and C are gated and tiered.

You are guaranteed to die halfway through B until you have obtained 5 piece of gear from A which you can only do once a week. Each piece of gear drops from dungeon A with a drop rate of 0.1%.

Similarly for C you'll die halfway through unless you have obtained another 5 piece of gear from B which you can again only do once a week with a drop rate of 0.1%.

In your opinion, regardless whether it is an ideal solution or not, will this make people play for longer and have more fun than it currently is?

Originally posted by kikoodutroa8

Originally posted by DKLond

Originally posted by Naqaj

Originally posted by DKLond

Without the loot progression in WoW - I don't think it would have lasted as long as it has, and I think a lot of people would have lost interest.

That's actually my point.

That point cannot be argued, WoW was designed around loot progression, so removing that would also remove it's longevity.

Infering from that that any game without loot progression doesn't have longevity is a bit of a stretch though. That's the only problem I have with your argument.

Why would you infer from that? That's not logical.

I'm commenting on GW2 - not "any" game and not every game.

I'm simply not seeing a replacement of "loot progression" that would provide longevity. At least, I'm highly sceptical of that being possible.

You need a horizon - you need some kind of reason to keep playing. My point is that repeating dynamic events without a sufficient carrot won't be enough. I don't believe it can be. Why? Because of the nature of content and the natural limitation of any team - no matter the size or talent.

You can't create content fast enough - it's impossible.

Now, loot or power progression is one way - and it doesn't have to be like WoW. Another way is player-driven content creation. GW2 seems to have neither.

Unless, of course, you think WvW is player-driven content. It might have been, if it didn't reset every 2 weeks and it actually meant something in the open world.

No offense, DK, but I think trying to argument with the fanbois is like pissing against the wind. They'll stick to their "GW2 don't need endgame" and other mantras taught by Anet cos that's what they want to believe, as silly as it sounds.

 

Well..even if ''fanbois'' agree with you Anet will not add stat progression as endgame so I don't see point of this TBH.

Originally posted by bcbully

The problem is there is no bread. When I walked into the store NCsoft/Anet said  "I know you hate the buying  bread treadmill. Guess what we did!! We got rid of the bread!!!" Now you can just eat the sweet butter w/o those greedy bread makers in youy pocket!"

 

 

Ugh, there you go again. So busy looking for the bread that you walked right past the buffett.

Originally posted by DKLond

Originally posted by Naqaj

Originally posted by DKLond

Without the loot progression in WoW - I don't think it would have lasted as long as it has, and I think a lot of people would have lost interest.

That's actually my point.

That point cannot be argued, WoW was designed around loot progression, so removing that would also remove it's longevity.

Infering from that that any game without loot progression doesn't have longevity is a bit of a stretch though. That's the only problem I have with your argument.

Why would you infer from that? That's not logical.

I'm commenting on GW2 - not "any" game and not every game.

I'm simply not seeing a replacement of "loot progression" that would provide longevity. At least, I'm highly sceptical of that being possible.

You need a horizon - you need some kind of reason to keep playing. My point is that repeating dynamic events without a sufficient carrot won't be enough. I don't believe it can be. Why? Because of the nature of content and the natural limitation of any team - no matter the size or talent.

You can't create content fast enough - it's impossible.

Now, loot or power progression is one way - and it doesn't have to be like WoW. Another way is player-driven content creation. GW2 seems to have neither.

Unless, of course, you think WvW is player-driven content. It might have been, if it didn't reset every 2 weeks and it actually meant something in the open world.

You aren't being fair by saying "repeating dynamic events" is the only endgame activity in GW2. Your cedibility to me at least drops sharply off when you expect me to accept that. WvW, sPvP, personal story, crafting, dungeons and Orr are all end game activities that should be considered when discussing what happens in GW2 once you hit max level. In GW2, the strength of the endgame is the variety of things you have access to. And because of the way it is designed, any time they add something, it will be relevant for everyone forever. It truly does have he potential to offer the most variety out of any themepark on the market.

And dismissing WvW based on it resetting every two weeks does not remove the "player driven content." You can just say it, but it doesn't make it true.

Originally posted by kikoodutroa8

No offense, DK, but I think trying to argument with the fanbois is like pissing against the wind. They'll stick to their "GW2 don't need endgame" and other mantras taught by Anet cos that's what they want to believe, as silly as it sounds.

 

We're not saying GW2 doesn't need endgame. We're saying it has endgame, probably more than other MMOs out there (especially themeparks). It's simply not the same generic gear grind that other MMOs have accustomed people to.

Originally posted by meari

DKLond, so let's suppose Anet listens to all the cries about endgame and redesign of the dungeons. Now, for the last 3 dungeons A,B and C are gated and tiered.

You are guaranteed to die halfway through B until you have obtained 5 piece of gear from A which you can only do once a week. Each piece of gear drops from dungeon A with a drop rate of 0.1%.

Similarly for C you'll die halfway through unless you have obtained another 5 piece of gear from B which you can again only do once a week with a drop rate of 0.1%.

In your opinion, regardless whether it is an ideal solution or not, will this make people play for longer and have more fun than it currently is?

I don't think they can realistically change the game like that now. It would require a major redesign of balance and all kinds of things - and it would be completely counter to their philosophy.

No, I think the game needs to come out and we'll see whether it has longevity or not.

What I'm saying is that I don't think it has longevity for a lot of people, but I'm not proposing a solution for GW2. I'm proposing alternatives for a potential future. Ideas to be reflected upon and responded to.

Originally posted by DKLond

Originally posted by Naqaj

Originally posted by DKLond

Without the loot progression in WoW - I don't think it would have lasted as long as it has, and I think a lot of people would have lost interest.

That's actually my point.

That point cannot be argued, WoW was designed around loot progression, so removing that would also remove it's longevity.

Infering from that that any game without loot progression doesn't have longevity is a bit of a stretch though. That's the only problem I have with your argument.

Why would you infer from that? That's not logical.

I'm commenting on GW2 - not "any" game and not every game.

Yes it is not logical. That is why I'm not following your argument. The assumption in your argument is that GW2 without loot progression has no longevity because WoW without loot progression has no longevity. But GW2 is not WoW, there are significant differences in the design. WoW was designed around loot progression as the motivator for when the leveling content runs out. GW2 is designed around contend that doesn't run out for quite a while.

Of course you will at some point be tired of repeating the same event. Noone is argueing that. But there are a lot of events to cycle through before that point is reached. 

GW2 doesn't have endless longevity, but it has at least as much as any other MMO.

Originally posted by DKLond

Originally posted by meari

DKLond, so let's suppose Anet listens to all the cries about endgame and redesign of the dungeons. Now, for the last 3 dungeons A,B and C are gated and tiered.

You are guaranteed to die halfway through B until you have obtained 5 piece of gear from A which you can only do once a week. Each piece of gear drops from dungeon A with a drop rate of 0.1%.

Similarly for C you'll die halfway through unless you have obtained another 5 piece of gear from B which you can again only do once a week with a drop rate of 0.1%.

In your opinion, regardless whether it is an ideal solution or not, will this make people play for longer and have more fun than it currently is?

I don't think they can realistically change the game like that now. It would require a major redesign of balance and all kinds of things - and it would be completely counter to their philosophy.

No, I think the game needs to come out and we'll see whether it has longevity or not.

What I'm saying is that I don't think it has longevity for a lot of people, but I'm not proposing a solution for GW2. I'm proposing alternatives for a potential future. Ideas to be reflected upon and responded to.

Don't dodge the question. You said the way Anet approached power progression reduces longevity and fun, just imagine in a hypothetical scenario they added the progression right back in. What now?

Originally posted by kikoodutroa8

Originally posted by DKLond

Originally posted by Naqaj

Originally posted by DKLond

Without the loot progression in WoW - I don't think it would have lasted as long as it has, and I think a lot of people would have lost interest.

That's actually my point.

That point cannot be argued, WoW was designed around loot progression, so removing that would also remove it's longevity.

Infering from that that any game without loot progression doesn't have longevity is a bit of a stretch though. That's the only problem I have with your argument.

Why would you infer from that? That's not logical.

I'm commenting on GW2 - not "any" game and not every game.

I'm simply not seeing a replacement of "loot progression" that would provide longevity. At least, I'm highly sceptical of that being possible.

You need a horizon - you need some kind of reason to keep playing. My point is that repeating dynamic events without a sufficient carrot won't be enough. I don't believe it can be. Why? Because of the nature of content and the natural limitation of any team - no matter the size or talent.

You can't create content fast enough - it's impossible.

Now, loot or power progression is one way - and it doesn't have to be like WoW. Another way is player-driven content creation. GW2 seems to have neither.

Unless, of course, you think WvW is player-driven content. It might have been, if it didn't reset every 2 weeks and it actually meant something in the open world.

No offense, DK, but I think trying to argument with the fanbois is like pissing against the wind. They'll stick to their "GW2 don't need endgame" and other mantras taught by Anet cos that's what they want to believe, as silly as it sounds.

 

It's not that the game doesn't need an endgame, but for many endgame=loot progression, because of WoW has taught them over the past 8 years. In some regards endgame begins at level 2 in GW2, since you can enter sPvP at full power and just do that. You can also enter WvW and just do that. Both of those forms of content are generally considered part of endgame in other mmos, but in GW2 you can participate immediately.

What's silly to me, is that there is so much information out there about how the game operates, but people can't be bothered to go read. What's even MORE silly is that the folks who want loot progression gaming (aka WoW style) are pissy that it doesn't exist in GW2. This information has been available for months and months, yet people still complain. Instead, they should either learn to accept the game for what it is and adapt, or move on.

It's pretty simple actually.

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by DKLond

Originally posted by Naqaj

Originally posted by DKLond

Without the loot progression in WoW - I don't think it would have lasted as long as it has, and I think a lot of people would have lost interest.

That's actually my point.

That point cannot be argued, WoW was designed around loot progression, so removing that would also remove it's longevity.

Infering from that that any game without loot progression doesn't have longevity is a bit of a stretch though. That's the only problem I have with your argument.

Why would you infer from that? That's not logical.

I'm commenting on GW2 - not "any" game and not every game.

I'm simply not seeing a replacement of "loot progression" that would provide longevity. At least, I'm highly sceptical of that being possible.

You need a horizon - you need some kind of reason to keep playing. My point is that repeating dynamic events without a sufficient carrot won't be enough. I don't believe it can be. Why? Because of the nature of content and the natural limitation of any team - no matter the size or talent.

You can't create content fast enough - it's impossible.

Now, loot or power progression is one way - and it doesn't have to be like WoW. Another way is player-driven content creation. GW2 seems to have neither.

Unless, of course, you think WvW is player-driven content. It might have been, if it didn't reset every 2 weeks and it actually meant something in the open world.

You aren't being fair by saying "repeating dynamic events" is the only endgame activity in GW2. Your cedibility to me at least drops sharply off when you expect me to accept that. WvW, sPvP, personal story, crafting, dungeons and Orr are all end game activities that should be considered when discussing what happens in GW2 once you hit max level. In GW2, the strength of the endgame is the variety of things you have access to. And because of the way it is designed, any time they add something, it will be relevant for everyone forever. It truly does have he potential to offer the most variety out of any themepark on the market.

 

And dismissing WvW based on it resetting every two weeks does not remove the "player driven content." You can just say it, but it doesn't make it true.

The reason I use dynamic events - is because that's where GW2 stands out in the PvE department. I know some people like to claim it offers so much more than other MMOs, but it doesn't. But it does offer dynamic events where most MMOs offer static quests and daily quests, etc.

Rift offered and promised much the same thing, by the way - but I concede that DEs are taking the concept further. How successful they'll be remains to be seen.

All the other established MMOs offer crafting, dungeons (many have multiple difficulties today), and the other PvE elements you mention. So, GW2 offers nothing more here - except that it scales content more aggressively - which essentially means it allows for repetition of more content. But ALL the other MMOs offer power progression on top of those things - and GW2 doesn't.

As for PvP, yes - WvW is something that most established MMOs of the themepark model don't deliver to the same extent. But many offer alternatives - like WoW arenas, Rift conquest, TSW Fusang - and stuff like that.

But the 2-week reset really does mean that it doesn't change the world - and it remains a closed-off instance. It doesn't offer power progression either.

I can't deny that it will be a popular feature - but I don't see it providing enough longevity without changing the open world or offering power progression.

Originally posted by kikoodutroa8

No offense, DK, but I think trying to argument with the fanbois is like pissing against the wind. They'll stick to their "GW2 don't need endgame" and other mantras taught by Anet cos that's what they want to believe, as silly as it sounds.

As opposed to the mantras that say all endgame needs to follow the same principles taught by people who can't let gear progression go?  Look, even though your post is deliberately inflammatory, I can answer it by saying that most games don't even have an endgame... why is that MMOs need to follow the same principles or otherwise they're no good?

If you told me in my NES days that one day, there would be games where the only way to get stronger was to run the same level over and over again, I'd think it was the stupidest idea in the world.  But now that WoW was so successful, that seems to automatically mean the system is not only viable, but totally not a scam to keep you paying sub fees at the expense of 90% of the rest of the content.

I wasn't always a fan of GW2, but I know what makes sense and what doesn't.

Originally posted by DKLond

Originally posted by meari

DKLond, so let's suppose Anet listens to all the cries about endgame and redesign of the dungeons. Now, for the last 3 dungeons A,B and C are gated and tiered.

You are guaranteed to die halfway through B until you have obtained 5 piece of gear from A which you can only do once a week. Each piece of gear drops from dungeon A with a drop rate of 0.1%.

Similarly for C you'll die halfway through unless you have obtained another 5 piece of gear from B which you can again only do once a week with a drop rate of 0.1%.

In your opinion, regardless whether it is an ideal solution or not, will this make people play for longer and have more fun than it currently is?

I don't think they can realistically change the game like that now. It would require a major redesign of balance and all kinds of things - and it would be completely counter to their philosophy.

No, I think the game needs to come out and we'll see whether it has longevity or not.

What I'm saying is that I don't think it has longevity for a lot of people, but I'm not proposing a solution for GW2. I'm proposing alternatives for a potential future. Ideas to be reflected upon and responded to.

The problem with adding a stat based loot progression to GW2 is important to understand.

GW2 is designed in such a way as to keep all content in the game relevant. Once you get to 80, you have access to everything the game has to offer. The gear plateaus at a certain point. So from that point forward, all additional content can be balanced around that plateau. If they added a stat based gear grind, all of the old content would become obsolete. That is why it will not work for this game. Ever. They are developing a game where they want all content to be relevant to all people, expanding the game horizonatally instead of vertically.

I personally think that design has a bright future. For example, if we were talking about WoW, at 85 you would be able to do Karazhan at level 85 right now and have it be relevant. Over time, the content will grow and grow and grow and it will never be left behind.

Originally posted by Kaneth

Originally posted by kikoodutroa8

Originally posted by DKLond

Originally posted by Naqaj

Originally posted by DKLond

Without the loot progression in WoW - I don't think it would have lasted as long as it has, and I think a lot of people would have lost interest.

That's actually my point.

That point cannot be argued, WoW was designed around loot progression, so removing that would also remove it's longevity.

Infering from that that any game without loot progression doesn't have longevity is a bit of a stretch though. That's the only problem I have with your argument.

Why would you infer from that? That's not logical.

I'm commenting on GW2 - not "any" game and not every game.

I'm simply not seeing a replacement of "loot progression" that would provide longevity. At least, I'm highly sceptical of that being possible.

You need a horizon - you need some kind of reason to keep playing. My point is that repeating dynamic events without a sufficient carrot won't be enough. I don't believe it can be. Why? Because of the nature of content and the natural limitation of any team - no matter the size or talent.

You can't create content fast enough - it's impossible.

Now, loot or power progression is one way - and it doesn't have to be like WoW. Another way is player-driven content creation. GW2 seems to have neither.

Unless, of course, you think WvW is player-driven content. It might have been, if it didn't reset every 2 weeks and it actually meant something in the open world.

No offense, DK, but I think trying to argument with the fanbois is like pissing against the wind. They'll stick to their "GW2 don't need endgame" and other mantras taught by Anet cos that's what they want to believe, as silly as it sounds.

 

It's not that the game doesn't need an endgame, but for many endgame=loot progression, because of WoW has taught them over the past 8 years. In some regards endgame begins at level 2 in GW2, since you can enter sPvP at full power and just do that. You can also enter WvW and just do that. Both of those forms of content are generally considered part of endgame in other mmos, but in GW2 you can participate immediately.

What's silly to me, is that there is so much information out there about how the game operates, but people can't be bothered to go read. What's even MORE silly is that the folks who want loot progression gaming (aka WoW style) are pissy that it doesn't exist in GW2. This information has been available for months and months, yet people still complain. Instead, they should either learn to accept the game for what it is and adapt, or move on.

It's pretty simple actually.

I think I know more about how the game operates than the average GW2 fan, but thanks for assuming otherwise :)

It's not about not knowing how it works - but disagreeing with how that makes the game a long-term experience.

Also, to make an analogy about giving most things to players immediately - instead of gating the content:

1. A child at christmas receives one or two fantastic presents.

2. A child at christmas receives one hundred fantastic presents.

In which of the above scenarios does the presents have the most meaning - and is the child with a hundred presents truly more fulfilled or happier than the child with only one or two?

There's such a thing as overexposure and oversatuation - and it inevitably leads to apathy.

Originally posted by DKLond

Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by DKLond

Originally posted by Naqaj

Originally posted by DKLond

Without the loot progression in WoW - I don't think it would have lasted as long as it has, and I think a lot of people would have lost interest.

That's actually my point.

That point cannot be argued, WoW was designed around loot progression, so removing that would also remove it's longevity.

Infering from that that any game without loot progression doesn't have longevity is a bit of a stretch though. That's the only problem I have with your argument.

Why would you infer from that? That's not logical.

I'm commenting on GW2 - not "any" game and not every game.

I'm simply not seeing a replacement of "loot progression" that would provide longevity. At least, I'm highly sceptical of that being possible.

You need a horizon - you need some kind of reason to keep playing. My point is that repeating dynamic events without a sufficient carrot won't be enough. I don't believe it can be. Why? Because of the nature of content and the natural limitation of any team - no matter the size or talent.

You can't create content fast enough - it's impossible.

Now, loot or power progression is one way - and it doesn't have to be like WoW. Another way is player-driven content creation. GW2 seems to have neither.

Unless, of course, you think WvW is player-driven content. It might have been, if it didn't reset every 2 weeks and it actually meant something in the open world.

You aren't being fair by saying "repeating dynamic events" is the only endgame activity in GW2. Your cedibility to me at least drops sharply off when you expect me to accept that. WvW, sPvP, personal story, crafting, dungeons and Orr are all end game activities that should be considered when discussing what happens in GW2 once you hit max level. In GW2, the strength of the endgame is the variety of things you have access to. And because of the way it is designed, any time they add something, it will be relevant for everyone forever. It truly does have he potential to offer the most variety out of any themepark on the market.

 

And dismissing WvW based on it resetting every two weeks does not remove the "player driven content." You can just say it, but it doesn't make it true.

The reason I use dynamic events - is because that's where GW2 stands out in the PvE department. I know some people like to claim it offers so much more than other MMOs, but it doesn't. But it does offer dynamic events where most MMOs offer static quests and daily quests, etc.

Rift offered and promised much the same thing, by the way - but I concede that DEs are taking the concept further. How successful they'll be remains to be seen.

All the other established MMOs offer crafting, dungeons (many have multiple difficulties today), and the other PvE elements you mention. So, GW2 offers nothing more here - except that it scales content more aggressively - which essentially means it allows for repetition of more content. But ALL the other MMOs offer power progression on top of those things - and GW2 doesn't.

As for PvP, yes - WvW is something that most established MMOs of the themepark model don't deliver to the same extent. But many offer alternatives - like WoW arenas, Rift conquest, TSW Fusang - and stuff like that.

But the 2-week reset really does mean that it doesn't change the world - and it remains a closed-off instance. It doesn't offer power progression either.

I can't deny that it will be a popular feature - but I don't see it providing enough longevity without changing the open world or offering power progression.

Sorry, your excuse for why WvW (and PvP in general) is not player driven content falls flat. PvP doesn't need to change the world to be called player driven. PvP is the very definition of player driven.

You seem to think gear based stat progression is the only way to keep people interested (with the exception of sandbox elements). I think that is the most boring mechanic on the planet at this point and it's the reason I don't play MMORPGs right now. Dungeon grinding or raid grinding every week is one of the worst thing that ever happened to MMORPGs. To you, it keeps you playing, to me, it makes me quit.

Once someone recognizes the pattern, I just don't see how someone could do that to themselves. They are literally on a hamster wheel. Once I saw the hamster wheel, it's just really hard for me to go back.

Originally posted by DKLond

Originally posted by Kaneth

Originally posted by kikoodutroa8

Originally posted by DKLond

Originally posted by Naqaj

Originally posted by DKLond

Without the loot progression in WoW - I don't think it would have lasted as long as it has, and I think a lot of people would have lost interest.

That's actually my point.

That point cannot be argued, WoW was designed around loot progression, so removing that would also remove it's longevity.

Infering from that that any game without loot progression doesn't have longevity is a bit of a stretch though. That's the only problem I have with your argument.

Why would you infer from that? That's not logical.

I'm commenting on GW2 - not "any" game and not every game.

I'm simply not seeing a replacement of "loot progression" that would provide longevity. At least, I'm highly sceptical of that being possible.

You need a horizon - you need some kind of reason to keep playing. My point is that repeating dynamic events without a sufficient carrot won't be enough. I don't believe it can be. Why? Because of the nature of content and the natural limitation of any team - no matter the size or talent.

You can't create content fast enough - it's impossible.

Now, loot or power progression is one way - and it doesn't have to be like WoW. Another way is player-driven content creation. GW2 seems to have neither.

Unless, of course, you think WvW is player-driven content. It might have been, if it didn't reset every 2 weeks and it actually meant something in the open world.

No offense, DK, but I think trying to argument with the fanbois is like pissing against the wind. They'll stick to their "GW2 don't need endgame" and other mantras taught by Anet cos that's what they want to believe, as silly as it sounds.

 

It's not that the game doesn't need an endgame, but for many endgame=loot progression, because of WoW has taught them over the past 8 years. In some regards endgame begins at level 2 in GW2, since you can enter sPvP at full power and just do that. You can also enter WvW and just do that. Both of those forms of content are generally considered part of endgame in other mmos, but in GW2 you can participate immediately.

What's silly to me, is that there is so much information out there about how the game operates, but people can't be bothered to go read. What's even MORE silly is that the folks who want loot progression gaming (aka WoW style) are pissy that it doesn't exist in GW2. This information has been available for months and months, yet people still complain. Instead, they should either learn to accept the game for what it is and adapt, or move on.

It's pretty simple actually.

I think I know more about how the game operates than the average GW2 fan, but thanks for assuming otherwise :)

It's not about not knowing how it works - but disagreeing with how that makes the game a long-term experience.

Also, to make an analogy about giving most things to players immediately - instead of gating the content:

1. A child at christmas receives one or two fantastic presents.

2. A child at christmas receives one hundred fantastic presents.

In which of the above scenarios does the presents have the most meaning - and is the child with a hundred presents truly more fulfilled or happier than the child with only one or two?

There's such a thing as overexposure and oversatuation - and it inevitably leads to apathy.

Your anology fails because you assume the gifts the first child receives are fantastic. What if the boy receives a krusty doll that he doesn't want, and when he asks if he can get a remote race car he is told "No, you must play krusty every single day over the next year, then maybe we'll get you a remote race car next christmas".

While the second child receives all hundred gifts amongst which are the krusty doll and the race car. He gets to shrug at krusty and just pick up the remote car and start playing right away.

Originally posted by DKLond

I think I know more about how the game operates than the average GW2 fan, but thanks for assuming otherwise :)

It's not about not knowing how it works - but disagreeing with how that makes the game a long-term experience.

Also, to make an analogy about giving most things to players immediately - instead of gating the content:

1. A child at christmas receives one or two fantastic presents.

2. A child at christmas receives one hundred fantastic presents.

In which of the above scenarios does the presents have the most meaning - and is the child with a hundred presents truly more fulfilled or happier than the child with only one or two?

There's such a thing as overexposure and oversatuation - and it inevitably leads to apathy.

You are just a big ball of fallacy today.

I'd rather have 100 presents as it would make me more fulfilled and happier.

Originally posted by DKLond 

It's not that the game doesn't need an endgame, but for many endgame=loot progression, because of WoW has taught them over the past 8 years. In some regards endgame begins at level 2 in GW2, since you can enter sPvP at full power and just do that. You can also enter WvW and just do that. Both of those forms of content are generally considered part of endgame in other mmos, but in GW2 you can participate immediately.

What's silly to me, is that there is so much information out there about how the game operates, but people can't be bothered to go read. What's even MORE silly is that the folks who want loot progression gaming (aka WoW style) are pissy that it doesn't exist in GW2. This information has been available for months and months, yet people still complain. Instead, they should either learn to accept the game for what it is and adapt, or move on.

It's pretty simple actually.

I think I know more about how the game operates than the average GW2 fan, but thanks for assuming otherwise :)

It's not about not knowing how it works - but disagreeing with how that makes the game a long-term experience.

Also, to make an analogy about giving most things to players immediately - instead of gating the content:

1. A child at christmas receives one or two fantastic presents.

2. A child at christmas receives one hundred fantastic presents.

In which of the above scenarios does the presents have the most meaning - and is the child with a hundred presents truly more fulfilled or happier than the child with only one or two?

There's such a thing as overexposure and oversatuation - and it inevitably leads to apathy.

So now you're saying GW2 has too much endgame?