Originally posted by Larsa

Yes, that was my initial reaction too when I read the post (after wondering why this thread got moved to the pub). What the OP finds "fun" I probably find shallow, what I find "fun" the OP probably finds boring.

I don't play GW2 because I've not seen anything in GW2 that would be "fun" to me.

 Different strokes for different folks. Which is fine. Would be a pretty fucking boring world if we all liked the same things.

I'm not real sure why this is such a problem for some to accept. Hell, there are times those that enjoy something different end up turning me on to something I would otherwise never consider. Plus, I find it interesting to hear different perspectives and experiences with things.

Originally posted by Nikkita

Originally posted by Wickedjelly

Originally posted by Nikkita

I am surprised that someone would be obnoxious enough to define what is 'FUN' for others and also manage to insult them in process and even more susrprising is that this topic is 7 pages long with people mostly trying to tell others how to have 'fun'.

*shakes head*

 What the hell do you want from me? I'm bored at work :P

Got to do something to pass the time. Fuck actually working.

I am mostly referring to OP. It is because of post like these GW2 gets un warranted hate.

Its not Anet and surely it is not GW2's fault but it is the obnoxious fans who get on nerves of MMO players in general who in turn try to get under their skin.

This is so true. The Game is fine. The freakish fanbois are not however. They are actually hurting their beloved game rather than promoting it.

Originally posted by Axxar

Originally posted by Darkmoth

You're definitely right, one isn't better than another. For example, I think UT2004 is one of the best games ever...I still play it now and again.

It's just that I'd expect Quake to come up in a discussion about MW3 or Battlefield. It's dismaying to see someone use that as a model for RPG play.

They might not be the best examples when the topic is RPGs, but it certainly was a list of FUN games. It's probably difficult to come up with RPGs that are fun and don't have progression since it's one of the standard "pillars" of RPG gameplay. Even GW2 has progression, just not to the extent of WoW and its clones.

I think that gets to the heart of it. In fact I'd argue that character progression defines an RPG, whereas games like MW3 are more about player progression (skill-wise).

I think that WoW's detractors dislike WoW's implementation of character progression - and I agree to some extent. In WoW, 100% of your power increase comes from gear (after level cap), which is (in my opinion) not very true to it's RPG roots. In an ideal MMORPG you'd always be looking forward to new powers and abilities, not just 5 more points of agility from your gloves.

EQ1 (Alternate Advancement), Rift (Planar Attunement) and GW1 did a pretty good job of character advancement after the cap.

Ok so I know this got moved out of the GW2 forums and into the pub so ill try to stay as general with my response as possible.

Fun is exactly why I play MMORPG's and exactly why I won't play one if I'm not having fun.  I played WoW for so long but like a lot of other people it stopped being fun and so I stopped.  I knew litterally everything about WoW.  I had raided the 40 man Naxx content, I did battle with all the bosses in the BC expansion, I was a gladiator on my rogue but partway through the WOTLK era it really stopped being fun so I stopped.

So with regards to the current generation of games:

GW2 is pretty much the same.  I never hard any preconcieved notions about it, I was actually excited to play it so I bought it and tried the BWE's and very early into the release.  I never had a shred of fun playing it.  To me the quests were so boring the pvp again boring.  I do like having something to work towards and progress my character its true, but it was the CONTENT that ArenaNet created that wasn't fun for me.  Moving around as a Zerg group for DE's also made me so confused as to why people enjoyed this type of play.  So I stopped playing it and sold my account.  Honestly do I believe its worth the 60 bucks you pay for it.  Yes probably, it gives a lot of bang for the buck.  BUT I am not struggling with money and im not a kid.  I have absolutely no problem paying for a sub if its a fun game to me.

TSW was honestly very fun for me.  The combat itself is actually pretty shallow, but its back to the old school MMO's a thinking mans MMO in my opinion.  Most of the battle is won before stepping foot into the fight.  Your build has to be emaculate and make use of synergies but the active part of the combat is very shallow.  Its the quests and raiding/dungeons that are so fun to me in this game.  I have never played a game that did questing so well that I wanted to keep leveling.  The dungeon and raid encounters I knew would be excellent from having played AoC and I wasnt dissapointed.

SWTOR was honestly a game I wasn't excited to play at first because it was being touted as WoW in space.  But to be honest I have had a lot of fun with the game.  It felt refreshingly similar to the things I liked in WoW but had enough variety to keep me playing.  The PvP had some unique quirks and I enjoy how the "Force Skills" and "Tech Skills" added their own layer of strategy to PvP.

So yea it really is all about fun for me.

Originally posted by MikeJezZ
So what happened to play for fun? 

 

Not sure how you mean this cause I only play games that are fun TO ME!

 

I'm 26 years old. I grew up with the gaming which seriously started with commodore 64. I played numerous games, both sp and mp. The old syndicate, alone in the dark, doom, dungeon keeper, quake, unreal + ut and so on. 

 I'm 40 years old, grew up with gaming since Pong, which was followed by Atari2600, ComVic20/64, MSX and every other console till the PS3 and XB360 which are the only consoles I never bought. Always had a homecomputer, but not untill Medal of Honor (thought around 98/99?) came out I started to become a serious pc gamer and started to upgrade or buy a new computer almost every 6/8 months.

Notice what all these games share?

-that the only carrot is "having fun". 

Hmmm Fun is still my only motivation to play a game. If it aint fun I aint playing

 

I played DAoC, EVE, SWToR, WoW, Aion, AoC and so on, you get the picture. 

 

Gw2 is traditional in some ways. You pick a race, a profession (class), crafting profession and then you're set for you xp journey. 

I pick a class/profession and start my journey, don't really care about XP as I already know I will gain XP but it's the journey that counts.

In WoW, if you've played for years and you had a friend you invited and got all excited - the only way to play with him was alting. 

I played WoW, had some ingame friends out leveling me, that never prevented them from spending time with me ingame, cause their focus was fun and not XP, they didn't care if they outleveld a area aslong they/we where having fun this could be just playing healers for me or simple tasks as watching my back, they didn't help with the killing as that was already easy for me and I wanted to keep a challenge towards myself, but they also gave some guidens when entering new area's etc...But I also solo'd allot in WoW due to the game being very very easy.

 

In gw2 you can jump to his location where you get slightly nerfed, and both of you get rewarded with xp and still gear for your very own level. 

For some people gaining XP is fun, for others the journey and whatever can be done in the gameworld.

 

He can join you in WvW, where he's still able to be anything but worthless. Neither of you have to get 80 to play sPvP together. Jump right in with balanced boosted 80 chars. 

Hmm slightly dissappointed with this cause to me fun within a gameworld should be challenging and I have something that I call "gamerspride" and really enjoy achieving things ingame (as I like that in rl aswell), but jumping in a game where everyone is balanced/lvl'd equally kinda destroy's my type of fun. 

You can play PvP and PvE together no matter the level difference. 

I personaly feel that I might become very bored very quickly thus not having fun.

You can level anywhere with everything you want. Farming nodes, dynamic events, WvW, exploration. 

Hmm the more I read into reactions on GW2 the more I feel it caters to those type of players who want it all and want it now. Not sure if the game is fiting for me, but glad there are many who are enjoying the game cause as a gamer I like seeing other gamers enjoying a game of their liking regardless how I feel about a game. Yet sometimes I read things about GW2 that makes me curious. Eventually I know I will buy the game, but it aint yet on my to buy list.......yet

-so what am I looking forward to when I'm 80?

-WvW and Dynamic Events will be where I'm mostly at. And heavy altaholic. I'm in love with the "skills not gear" what guild wars 2 does. And in the end it's a fake feeling getting stronger gear. 

 

*ding 80, get [Wooden Sword of Nublet] with 38999 str, go to next dungeon getting [Legendary Poking Stick of Thousand Trolls] after run number 9000, just to deal the same damage in percent to the next boss*

 

The only reason bosses gets harder in traditional mmo's are gear level. Once out leveled you win with gear and not skills. 

 

In gw2 the content will have the same difficult no matter if you have legendary boomstick of puking monkey or drowning whale. 

 

It's the mmo answer to ut or similar where the main key is having fun. 

 

But I guess it sucks suddenly playing a game where gear and not skills saves your bubbling ass in arena. 

Brain dead zealot grinders are so much last year. I never understood it. 

To be honost it seems GW2 is allot more geared towards as already said the "want it all and want it now crowd" then any other MMO before it, atleast judging the game from the things YOU said.

What you completely ignored is the fact that fun has so many different levels and meaning to all sorts of different gamers, which means what is fun to you does not have to me it's fun for me and visa versa....

Originally posted by Aerowyn

Originally posted by Lorkii

Originally posted by Aerowyn

Originally posted by Lorkii

Simple, most people want to advance their characters, not have most of their skills in a level or 2. I love playing games for fun, i ll look at PS2 as an example. I ve literally gotten everything you can in the beta for it, to add to my characters progression, I m still playing it, even though I can t advance him more. Why because it s a fun game. That said, I m looking forward to release, because I absolutely love the game, but look forward to progressing my char more.

I look at GW2, and don t hate me, it s an opinion. I find it becoming extremely boring, because I wasn t improving my char, anymore. Im not a raider, Im not a loot whore. I just like to see my char advance somehow. I like to do a dungeon here and there, not sit in a city, hit a button and wait. So i ll do a dungeon here and there, and enjoy the rest of what the game has to offer. Once the fun isn t there I ll move on. There was alot of things GW2 did well, but I can honestly say it was uninstalled off my HD faster then any MMO at release. If you ask me why it s free, you cna try it later. I really have enough to play, and don t see my self ever caring for it, unless they make some large fundamental changes.

Morale of the story, while I was playing PS2 I realized I want to advance my char more through progression, but still have alot of fun without it. GW2 I simply didn t have fun, progression or not. What does that mean, not everyone likes GW2 as the OP seems to, but that doesn t make them wrong for liking progression, or as alot say grind. I ll take my so called grind anyday.

how so? you are constantly improving you character in this game through new gear, new skills, traits, equipment modifications.. it has all the progression any other MMO has , not all in the exact same fashion IE tiered gear sets but the progression is there and your character does get stronger and you are givin a lot more options with skills/traits as well. Yes there is scaling but right now say you are level 40 and go back to a level 10 area you scale down in hp and stats so you don't 1 shot everything but you definitely are a good deal stronger than you were at level 10 fighting those same creatures.

See this is the mentality I m talking about. I like the so called "tired gear sets" I like a real defining role in my classes, not what a weapon changes, I like going out and doing some quests on my own, not that people are interferring with me, I just want to go off and do something without other people once in awhile, I know you effectively can do this in GW2 but it s not the same. I  honestly can say , that I was excited for GW2 because of the DEs, but it is easily IMO, the worst design for an MMO, to base most of your game off this. I was getting extremely annoyed by stupid orange circles all the time. As I said though GW2 is so far from the typical MMO, it makes me dislike it more then any MMO I ve tried. Alot will like it, but alot won t , people need to accept that. I know my guild whioe I was playing it sure showed that. Active player base dropped from 100+ to about 5+, and most agreed they didn t like it.

fine you don't like the game or how its setup but to compare its progression to PS2 which isn't even a MMORPG doesn't really make much sense and has much less character progression than GW2 to boot..   and my guild grows everyday with others in the thousands and growing... what's your point on that? Also what i put in red so many have been asking for this since wow was released and we saw clone after clone emerge and fall.. so that in my book is hardly a negative. IMHO static quest hubs are the worst thing you could do for a MMO in terms of questing especially for longevity and wanting to play through multiple times.

Lol, this is typical read nothing but you want to hear fanbois. Disect what I said and it will make sense. And no GW2 doesn t have more progression then PS2, not even close. All on character definition, it s laugable between the 2.

Originally posted by The_Korrigan

Originally posted by Lorkii

Originally posted by seridan
Fun was dead until GW2 came along now we can finally play a game for fun. It's just sad that it took the industry so many years to reach this point

See this is the shit, that so called haters respond to and get jumped on. To me GW2 is easily one of the least fun games created. Am I right not for everyone, but to me it plain sucks.

Sure thing - GW2 will most likely not be "fun" for those who need a gear carrot, that feeling of superiority because they invested tons of hours in the game and therefore deserve to one hit noobs, completely disregarding balance and other people's fun.

GW2 is for people who played UO or AC1, along with people who were looking for a game without the frigging gear carrot which rules the genre for like 7+ years at least.

Interesting I played both those games and can t agree at all.

---

Originally posted by The_Korrigan

...Sure thing - GW2 will most likely not be "fun" for those who need a gear carrot, that feeling of superiority because they invested tons of hours in the game and therefore deserve to one hit noobs, completely disregarding balance and other people's fun.

GW2 is for people who played UO or AC1, along with people who were looking for a game without the frigging gear carrot which rules the genre for like 7+ years at least.

---

From your posts here you're one of those people that played that gear carrot game for many years. Obviously you found it "fun". Did you enjoy your feeling of superiority?

Now you find another game "fun" and mock people that play the game you played yourself for many years. Bad style.

That said, looks like quite a large number of GW2 fans are former WoW fans, now bashing the game that they played for many years.

Originally posted by Darkmoth

Originally posted by Axxar

Originally posted by Darkmoth

You're definitely right, one isn't better than another. For example, I think UT2004 is one of the best games ever...I still play it now and again.

It's just that I'd expect Quake to come up in a discussion about MW3 or Battlefield. It's dismaying to see someone use that as a model for RPG play.

They might not be the best examples when the topic is RPGs, but it certainly was a list of FUN games. It's probably difficult to come up with RPGs that are fun and don't have progression since it's one of the standard "pillars" of RPG gameplay. Even GW2 has progression, just not to the extent of WoW and its clones.

I think that gets to the heart of it. In fact I'd argue that character progression defines an RPG, whereas games like MW3 are more about player progression (skill-wise).

Progression, yes.  But must it always be so strictly and perpetually vertical?

Even classic D&D flattened out by the stage one would call "endgame."  

Originally posted by KaosProphet

Originally posted by Darkmoth

Originally posted by Axxar

They might not be the best examples when the topic is RPGs, but it certainly was a list of FUN games. It's probably difficult to come up with RPGs that are fun and don't have progression since it's one of the standard "pillars" of RPG gameplay. Even GW2 has progression, just not to the extent of WoW and its clones.

I think that gets to the heart of it. In fact I'd argue that character progression defines an RPG, whereas games like MW3 are more about player progression (skill-wise).

Progression, yes.  But must it always be so strictly and perpetually vertical?

Even classic D&D flattened out by the stage one would call "endgame."  

No, they don't always have to be strictly vertical. I think GW1 is a good example of a successful game that transitioned from vertical to horizontal-ish at "endgame". Almost all modern shooters incorporate some sort of rpg-ish elements. Variety is good, and I support a range of games that do progression differently.

My real beef isn't with horizontal progression, though. It's with  the idea that people who like vertical character progression have been "brainwashed by WoW" or something. Vertical progression predates WoW (and EQ) by a fair stretch, as anyone who played older games would know. Here's a blurb about progression from Ultima I:

"Hit points are the most important aspect of advancement. They can be gained by giving tribute to any king. The higher the tribute, the bigger the gain. Alternatively, killing monsters in dungeons and then exiting gives hit points as well. Character levels exist (each 1,000 xp = +1 level), mostly as an indicator of how far the character is progressing, but they also may determine:

• The volume of monsters that appear on the overland map, and
• What items are available in certain shops.

Stats can be raised by finding the various signposts after getting the quest by the king"

Originally posted by Darkmoth

Originally posted by KaosProphet

Originally posted by Darkmoth

Originally posted by Axxar

They might not be the best examples when the topic is RPGs, but it certainly was a list of FUN games. It's probably difficult to come up with RPGs that are fun and don't have progression since it's one of the standard "pillars" of RPG gameplay. Even GW2 has progression, just not to the extent of WoW and its clones.

I think that gets to the heart of it. In fact I'd argue that character progression defines an RPG, whereas games like MW3 are more about player progression (skill-wise).

Progression, yes.  But must it always be so strictly and perpetually vertical?

Even classic D&D flattened out by the stage one would call "endgame."  

No, they don't always have to be strictly vertical. I think GW1 is a good example of a successful game that transitioned from vertical to horizontal-ish at "endgame". Almost all modern shooters incorporate some sort of rpg-ish elements. Variety is good, and I support a range of games that do progression differently.

My real beef isn't with horizontal progression, though. It's with  the idea that people who like vertical character progression have been "brainwashed by WoW" or something. Vertical progression predates WoW (and EQ) by a fair stretch, as anyone who played older games would know. Here's a blurb about progression from Ultima I:

"Hit points are the most important aspect of advancement. They can be gained by giving tribute to any king. The higher the tribute, the bigger the gain. Alternatively, killing monsters in dungeons and then exiting gives hit points as well. Character levels exist (each 1,000 xp = +1 level), mostly as an indicator of how far the character is progressing, but they also may determine:

• The volume of monsters that appear on the overland map, and
• What items are available in certain shops.

Stats can be raised by finding the various signposts after getting the quest by the king"

Sure, it's always been there.  But when did it shift from being 'part of the game' to being (more or less) the reason for doing anything in the game?

Ultima 1 had vertical progression, but it also had a point beyond just that.  A story, with a beginning and an ending.  P&P had - depending on GM - either freedom, or a campaign with a beginning and an ending.  But for either variety,  vertical progression was more a means to an end than an end in itself.  Sure it had elements of being both, but it skewed more heavily (at least IME) towards the former than the latter.  

Somewhere in the porting to the MMORPG concept, though, it changed.  Now people are doing content for the gear, which allows them to do tougher content for better gear ad nauseum.  And it's that idea for which I blame EQ, WOW and everything that followed in the footsteps of either.

Originally posted by KaosProphet

Originally posted by Darkmoth

No, they don't always have to be strictly vertical. I think GW1 is a good example of a successful game that transitioned from vertical to horizontal-ish at "endgame". Almost all modern shooters incorporate some sort of rpg-ish elements. Variety is good, and I support a range of games that do progression differently.

My real beef isn't with horizontal progression, though. It's with  the idea that people who like vertical character progression have been "brainwashed by WoW" or something. Vertical progression predates WoW (and EQ) by a fair stretch, as anyone who played older games would know. Here's a blurb about progression from Ultima I:

"Hit points are the most important aspect of advancement. They can be gained by giving tribute to any king. The higher the tribute, the bigger the gain. Alternatively, killing monsters in dungeons and then exiting gives hit points as well. Character levels exist (each 1,000 xp = +1 level), mostly as an indicator of how far the character is progressing, but they also may determine:

• The volume of monsters that appear on the overland map, and
• What items are available in certain shops.

Stats can be raised by finding the various signposts after getting the quest by the king"

Sure, it's always been there.  But when did it shift from being 'part of the game' to being (more or less) the reason for doing anything in the game?

Ultima 1 had vertical progression, but it also had a point beyond just that.  A story, with a beginning and an ending.  P&P had - depending on GM - either freedom, or a campaign with a beginning and an ending.  But for either variety,  vertical progression was more a means to an end than an end in itself.  Sure it had elements of being both, but it skewed more heavily (at least IME) towards the former than the latter.  

Somewhere in the porting to the MMORPG concept, though, it changed.  Now people are doing content for the gear, which allows them to do tougher content for better gear ad nauseum.  And it's that idea for which I blame EQ, WOW and everything that followed in the footsteps of either.

Totally agree with you here. And you know when it shifted - when the Verant guys realized that the longer we played, the longer we'd pay a sub. These games became carefully-disgused Skinner boxes. EQ was by far the worst offender with the 72-hour camps for an item that dropped %0.01 of the time. WoW followed up with the gear grinds you mentioned.

I don't want us to throw out the baby with the bathwater though. Progression shouldn't be the only reason to play, but at least for me, progression should always be a central element.

Originally posted by Stx11

I agree he would have been better to "self censor" some of the terms he used.

On the other hand I can definitely appreciate his frustration for one reason - he posted this here in the GW2 forums where we are hourly having to deal with pretty much the same 8-10 people regurgatating "Hater" threads. If he posted this in the WoW Forum everybody should go after him as a "hater" and a "troll" - and the same applies to somebody trashing Sandboxes in the EVE Forums.

Also all of these posts would be inapproprate in the Pub section.

But can you see where it might get really freakin' annoying to have the same 8-10 people show up in every GW2 thread (including all the positive ones) and rant?

Can you also possibly imagine how exciting it is for those of us who have been wanting and dreaming about a game like this to finally get it? And for it to be soooooo good (at least for us) 

The people who crave "progression" have their games. Sandboxers can definitely use a little help. But to tell us we can't get excited, happy, and maybe a tad over-enthusiastic about our preferred game in our own forums area?

Nope, not buying that one sorry.

EDIT: How did this suddenly end up in the Pub? When I wrote this reply it was in the GW2 General Section?!?

I can understand completely his frustration. As a gaming vet who happens to enjoy WoW still as her primary game, people come to the forums and bash WoW as much as they can along with the players. So many forum posters belittle WoW players at every opportunity they get to prove whatever lame point they have, lame because it is a low tactic of arguments/debates to insult and discredit the opposing side as a means to render one's opinion more valid.

I have not yet played GW2, but have lurked here and I do see what you are talking about. All I can say is, don't stoop to the level of the haters that annoy you so much because you join them if you do.

Originally posted by MikeJezZ

I'm 26 years old.

And?  I'm old enough for you to have grandkids... I own a pocket calculator that's a lot older than you.  :D  I'm not getting at you here, but why open a post with your age?  Is it relevant?  Is it even meaningful?  At my age I can tell you this - age is not a virtue.  :)

GW2 is fun, I agree (I'm an altoholic like you) but fun is where you find it.  Anything can be fun.  There are people who spend a lot of money and time collecting used postage stamps and it's fun for them.  I don't knock them because it isn't fun for me though.

Originally posted by Dibdabs

Originally posted by MikeJezZ

I'm 26 years old.

And?  I'm old enough for you to have grandkids... I own a pocket calculator that's a lot older than you.  :D  I'm not getting at you here, but why open a post with your age?  Is it relevant?  Is it even meaningful?  At my age I can tell you this - age is not a virtue.  :)

GW2 is fun, I agree (I'm an altoholic like you) but fun is where you find it.  Anything can be fun.  There are people who spend a lot of money and time collecting used postage stamps and it's fun for them.  I don't knock them because it isn't fun for me though.

Age is relevant in the sense that by the time someone is 26 years old, he has an education, his own appartment, he is past the pubescent phase of finding an identity, he is responsible for himself and his actions, etc. Only large pieces missing are: career, perhaps not dealing with the death of his parents or other close "older" persons,  dealing with his own mortality, creating a family of his own, etc.

Originally posted by Dibdabs

Originally posted by MikeJezZ

I'm 26 years old.

And?  I'm old enough for you to have grandkids... I own a pocket calculator that's a lot older than you.  :D  I'm not getting at you here, but why open a post with your age?  Is it relevant?  Is it even meaningful?  At my age I can tell you this - age is not a virtue.  :)

GW2 is fun, I agree (I'm an altoholic like you) but fun is where you find it.  Anything can be fun.  There are people who spend a lot of money and time collecting used postage stamps and it's fun for them.  I don't knock them because it isn't fun for me though.

Its a strange phenomena that players of certain games cannot understand that their having fun is not universal and if you actually articulate why you find a certain game not fun, ie in GW2 case the lack of meaningful progression for them and I must put emphasis on the FOR THEM they are brushed away as "not getting it" or just plain haterz.. I personally have a liking for Asian grinders like Sword2, Jade Dynasty and Atalntica among other games I'm thoroughly aware that many find these games the worse type of MMO imaginable but I don't feel the need to try to convince them otherwise because I don't give a shit what others think about my gaming choices. This is what annoys me about ceratin fans of games and I usually post my dislike of certain attitudes, this thread being a great example of that attitude, and I've been labelled a hater because of this. 

On the whole players play the games they enjoy whether its raid progression in WoW and EQ2, Horizontal progression and open world PvP EvE and UO, vertical progression in many grinders, because of many factors that cannot be boiled down to being brainwashed by x company as some would love to believe, they do because it fun TO THEM. I can only put it down to being a massive insecurity on the part of the poster that they cannot take critique or just plain dislike of their choice of game ie a brand that makes them feel good about themselves and when you sound them out about being intolerant of others and the gaming styles they like but I do see the irony of me sounding out these people.

And OP I'm old enough to be your dad and have played games longer than you've been alive I suggest to you a phrase that is over 3000 years old and is still pertinent today.

This man, on one hand, believes that he knows something, while not knowing [anything]. On the other hand, I – equally ignorant – do not believe [that I know anything].

Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

Originally posted by Dibdabs

Originally posted by MikeJezZ

I'm 26 years old.

And?  I'm old enough for you to have grandkids... I own a pocket calculator that's a lot older than you.  :D  I'm not getting at you here, but why open a post with your age?  Is it relevant?  Is it even meaningful?  At my age I can tell you this - age is not a virtue.  :)

GW2 is fun, I agree (I'm an altoholic like you) but fun is where you find it.  Anything can be fun.  There are people who spend a lot of money and time collecting used postage stamps and it's fun for them.  I don't knock them because it isn't fun for me though.

 

Age is relevant in the sense that by the time someone is 26 years old, he has an education, his own appartment, he is past the pubescent phase of finding an identity, he is responsible for himself and his actions, etc. Only large pieces missing are: career, perhaps not dealing with the death of his parents or other close "older" persons,  dealing with his own mortality, creating a family of his own, etc.

Actually, as I'm coming to learn, age has quite a bit to do with how we respond to certain types of marketing, and our buying habits in general. Turns out our behavior and responses can be radically different depending which generation we're from (Boomers, Gen X, Y etc) as a group and the same is probably true when it comes to what MMO's we cut our teeth on as well.

Might even be why there's a marked difference in how each of us defines something as "fun", while there are of course some commonalities, wouldnt surprise me if my gaming preferences were shared more with people of my own age rather than someone from a later generation.