Doubt it. I have been playing GW for the past 5+ year and GW doesn't have nearly as much content as GW2 will have. Millions still play Guild Wars faithfully. Longevity will be the least of the game's concerns.

Yeah, isuppose your right. GW1 still has a pretty large follwing. Didnt look at it that way.

In my opinion, the thing that really keeps people playing MMOs is the people they know in the game.  PvP can keep those people who like PvP playing and the sense of accomplishment might keep people playing towards a hard to reach goal, but most of the time, those things have no value if there aren't people there to share your accomplishments with.

I don't dissagree with your points, but I have to think that some of the feeling of repetition comes from either a feeling of stagnation (by which I mean a sense of nothing happening) or the utter lack of diversity in things to do.  For most people, playing with other people is fairly diversifying, and interaction is enjoyable.  Its part of why I like PvP so much.  With so much in the way of encouraging players to interact with others in PvE, I can see GW2 remaining fun a lot longer than other games.

Does that make any sense at all?

for sure, i suppose there isnt any one ingrediant to longevity, but is sure do miss that addictive feeling  =P

If you enjoy PvP then there will be a great longevity. Getting skills and learning to use them in GW1 had me going on several years off and on.

Call of Duty and Battlefield both lasted me many years, both of which I never touched the non-competitive side.

Even so, rewards will always be virtual, and I already see any rewards as strictly titles or something I don't really care for. Learning the system that will be in PvP is much more tangible than having "Legendary Explorer" next to your name.

Two reasons:

1) Games aren't offering much of anything new... especially when it comes to endgame <-- the thing that should keep you playing for a long time.

Some features are new... some things are wrapped in shinier packages... but the gameplay is no doubt, something you've done before... probably several times.

2) There are a LOT more options now.  If you get a bit bored... or the shiny feeling wears off... it's very easy to switch to something else and enjoy a month or two of the shiny feeling.

LOL @  Legendary Explorer,   best title eva!!!

---

Originally posted by WellzyC

 

 

My concern for Guild Wars is that it’s going to have that “play for 3 weeks and get bored feeling”, because after reading about the game, it seems there is very little to work on or work for. I enjoy the idea of dynamic events and personal story. But without goals (and I don’t mean leveling) the game starts to feel repetitive quickly.

 

---

The big elephant in the room in general on this forum, is the way that people talk about "Longevity" aka end-game.

Everyone wants good end-game. Occasionally you see the folks who long for journey-not-the-destination. GW1 tried to disrupt the bullcrap. You got max level and max level stats within hours into the game. You where not playing the numbersw. You are not numbers. You are not stats. You are you, and you should be judged by yourself, not some stats. 

Here is the philosoraptor for you; If a MMO actually had good end-game, wouldn't we all be playing that? All MMOs who had great end-games at certain points seemed to became ruined by developers through patches and expansions - DAOC(PvP), SWG(everything, economy, crafting, social), Planetside(pvp), Ultima Online(expansion)... 

So could it be... could it be that "people" on this and other video game websites are chasing dreams about end game like some worthwhile notion? 

Every new MMO release it's the same thing. "basically you can only do a bunch of stuff once you are finished with the game". 

In other words people are saying: the game gets boring once you are finished with it. It's soom hoolahoop denial spectrum of refusing to acknowledge that enjoyment will go down once you know the inn's and outs of the game. A fundamental of every game.

I believe the reason might be that people expect these rules not to apply in the name of new content. Only problem with that is, that new content is usually more content. More Ogres.. but with different colored hats. And instead of saving villagers you need to save horses in dresses.

more content does not equal new types of gameplay. you can only make a dynamic quest in so many ways. you can change the actors and goals, and swap out the devices you use to solve the problem. throwing buckets of water on fire, cutting trees, using catapults. whatever.

in the end it's all context sensitive actions. its all the same AI enemy system, same spawning systems. there is an underlaying engine and foundation that echoes the same gameplay again and again. we crave new things all the time.

People seem so certain that GW2 will have amazing end game, but as fun as it might be in the beginnig, like other games it will grow boring eventually. people need to wake up and face that. a few games like starcraft and cs have long longevity even though people play on the same maps and use the same weapons for thousands of hours because they are highly competitive and balanced. matches can have many different outcomes and strategies.

it proves that it's better to have one great map, than 10 mediocre maps. better to have 5 balanced weapons than 20 unbalanced. Call of Duty is a great example of a bloated over saturated gaming experiences. 

To solve the problem; Ralph Koaster had it right. ArenaNet can't do it. Nobodty can. nobody can make content fast enough keep up with the speed at which gamers use it, and become tired of it. developers are not even done balancing a dungeon on a beta server before people have run it 10 times, in three different versions, across open wings, doing the same thing with minor variations before they are bored.

Koasters theory was to create player driven content. gamers themselves make the content. they set the agenda. they start the war. they create and run economy. A lot of people are not smart enough for that though. they want to sell themselves to a themepark, because they lack independant thought and no sense for exploration, and most importantly, no desire to face a challenge, and thus would rather have an easy hand-holding experience with the clown holding them through static content. 

Look at Team Fortress 2. That game has been out for years and people play it by the boatloads. Why? Because its fun.

I've been playing TF2 since 2007, and they don't have much of anything to "work" towards. The game barely even had achievements when it launched, and when they finally added alternate items, they were easy to get. Now I have practically every item I want (save for a few hats), but I still play it almost every day.

In the end, the amount of "work" and goals doesn't really contribute to longevity nearly as much as simply how fun the game is.

EDIT: AAAAAAAAAH, somebody else mentioned TF2 while I was still typing.

I don't worry about longevity for me at least. Heck, I spent lots of time in WoW cooking just to get the chef hat, and nothing can be more useless than that. I run dungeons more because of the story or the fun than for the loots (though I know I'm a minority in that respect).

GW2's goal is to get rid of the elder dragons and there's currently 3 ways of doing it: Study the past by joining the Priory, putting the dragons back to sleep by joining the Whispers, or destroy the dragons with a massive army by joining the Vigil. If there's other option, surely we'll find out at the "end game" right? But as far as the main goal goes, that's all there is for now -- and surely you wont be able to meet that goal in three weeks.

The dominant end-game for Guild Wars for PvE was titles, and that was handled beautifully. I'm hoping they'll bring those back, as well as the awesome emotes that came with some of the PvP versions.

In Guild Wars 2, there are achievements, and while not elaborated on yet, they're supposed to serve the same premise.

Guild Wars 1 Titles

Guild Wars 2 Achievements

Originally posted by WellzyC

Think back to your favorite MMORPGS. For me it was DAOC, EQ, WoW, and Asherons Call. Those were my fave’s, and all 4 I played for over a year at the least. The reason these games lasted so long and had a long term appeal is that there was always something to work on. I hate to use the word “work” when I’m talking about video games. But having goals in the game like crafting, raid gear, pvp rank, ect gave that sense of accomplishment when you finally reached something that you were working for.

 

My concern for Guild Wars is that it’s going to have that “play for 3 weeks and get bored feeling”, because after reading about the game, it seems there is very little to work on or work for. I enjoy the idea of dynamic events and personal story. But without goals (and I don’t mean leveling) the game starts to feel repetitive quickly.

 

Having to obtain raid gear or having alternate advancement, fighting for a pvp rank or pvp currency for new abilities (for example) feeds that hunger that keeps players coming back to an MMO. Most are looking for that addicting hook that the past mmos have had, I think having to work for your character is the main ingredient for that longevity.

I hope I’m wrong since the Devs really haven’t talked much about endgame, But after AoC endgame is my biggest worry about mmos.

I usually get bored of playing an mmo in less than a week. So if it lasts three weeks before I get that feeling then it will have been the greatest mmo ever made. At least according to my incredibly scientific way of measuring a games quality.

See the thing about GW2 is that there is crafting and all that end game group content.  And even if your armor doesnt impact your stats any more than anyone elses (because its mainly skill based) that doesnt mean there could be some ultra rare, or ultra hard to get bad ass looking armor to strive towards.  

I think GW2 will be fine in this department, I've played GW1 for well over 750 hours since I bought it a few years ago, the only game thats given me more hours EVER was WoW and thats just because I was a kid and was easily amused 

Longevity for MMORPGS has been derived using different schemes over the years. In my opinion though it comes down to a basic principle...  Investment + Fun factor + Continued Growth/Changes + Dynamics = Longevity

Couple examples from games I have played...

For EQ it was derived from an extremely long (compare original EQ leveling times to today's fare) leveling scheme with huge amounts of risk/reward (One death = 4+ hours of straight grind gone). They coupled this with adding a large amount of items not easily attained and a slower play scheme which mandated ample amounts of downtime. This and mandatory grouping for most classes actually resulted in increased socialization. All these factors (and a good number more) contributed to a long term and considerable investment in a player's character which raised that avatar's worth in the player's eyes. In other words if you got your character to 50, in original EQ, with a good set of gear and a good reputation you felt like you had done something important. Higher risk/reward levels over a longer period of played time is one of the driving forces for EQ's longevity IMO (and also FFXI).

PVP is another driving factor for longevity as long as it is coupled with in-game investment. This can be seen any many older PVP structured MMO's. DAOC, EVE, Guild Wars, TF2, etc... PVP adds a level of dynamics that has not been successfully duplicated for PVE. Randomness, bragging rights, the feeling of testing one's skill against another human being's, a more complete immersion into the game world, etc... These can all contribute immensely to a game's "Fun factor" and somewhat to Dynamics. The only downside to relying only on PVP for longevity (IMO) is that without the feeling of investment in a player's character or game world these other factors are highly portable. In other words, as soon as the next good PVP system is out people will leave in droves for shinier swords...

All of the above examples for the most part have "Continued Growth/Changes" in the form of leveling, customization, new content, etc... The piece that needs to come to the forefront, in my opinion, is Dynamics. The ability to change the game world around you in unique ways and to experience game content not found on any fan sites would be a huge draw to most players. For an example look at the staying power of the Diablo franchise. As far as dynamics goes it had random dungeons with varying loot (and random quests for the first). Who would say that these inclusions did not greatly increase the replayability and longevity of the game? Unfortunately Dynamics is one of the most technologically demanding and expensive factors to try and increase in MMORPGS. But I still believe that the first game to make significant improvements for it will become a very long lived game indeed. Even if I am the only one playing it...

Oh well, I have rambled on long enough....

I think longevity is a problem for just about every game now.

We don't have a "three major MMO" world of the early 90's any more, and to all appearances we're coming out of eight years of market domination by the Behemoth.

That suggests some healthy competition and a much more mobile gamer society.

Originally posted by Shroom_Mage

I've been playing TF2 since 2007, and they don't have much of anything to "work" towards. The game barely even had achievements when it launched, and when they finally added alternate items, they were easy to get. Now I have practically every item I want (save for a few hats), but I still play it almost every day.

In the end, the amount of "work" and goals doesn't really contribute to longevity nearly as much as simply how fun the game is.

True, if it's good they will come. And stay.

A lot of folks still play D2 ffs!

... and if anyone hasn' seen The King of Kong yet they should do so.

That being said imo GW2 has quite a few mechanics designed SPECIFICALLY for longevity, from WvW to title hunting,  not being so story oriented and the fact that its main revenue model is selling expansions which ensures a steady stream of quality content. In fact I find it really funny that GW2 seems to promise much more longevity without a subscription than SW:TOR which counts on them. Imo both games would do better if they switched their revenue models lol. Heavily story-based SW:TOR would do better by selling "story pack expansions" every few months while GW2 with its permanent on-going features could rake in subs easily as far as I'm concerned.