Originally posted by Zhauric

Maybe it's me but threads like these are what is wrong with this genre today. We seem to WANT games to fail. The OP pretty much paints that as a desire and the reasoning behind the poll is they feel it will be. Is it really that difficult for folks to either like or dislike a game then move on? Why in the world do we want to see so many games fail when the better these games do the more options we have. I don't know about anyone else but I love having options instead of being pigeon-holed.

I'm with you.  I don't like many current MMOs out there, but as I've said many times, just because I don't like it doesn't mean it shouldn't be available to people who may not want the same things I do out of an MMO.  In contrast, a lot of forum complainers toss a game in the trash if it doesn't have the same bells and whistles as their big standard, and then start threads trashing it. But I posted a thread in off-topic discussion a while back that explained that as human beings we are psychologically prone to backing one "team" and hating another.  It's just the way it is.  OP is just falling in line with typical human behavior, and a lot of people follow suit.

Originally posted by Eir_S

Originally posted by Zhauric

Maybe it's me but threads like these are what is wrong with this genre today. We seem to WANT games to fail. The OP pretty much paints that as a desire and the reasoning behind the poll is they feel it will be. Is it really that difficult for folks to either like or dislike a game then move on? Why in the world do we want to see so many games fail when the better these games do the more options we have. I don't know about anyone else but I love having options instead of being pigeon-holed.

I'm with you.  I don't like many current MMOs out there, but as I've said many times, just because I don't like it doesn't mean it shouldn't be available to people who may not want the same things I do out of an MMO.  In contrast, a lot of forum complainers toss a game in the trash if it doesn't have the same bells and whistles as their big standard, and then start threads trashing it. But I posted a thread in off-topic discussion a while back that explained that as human beings we are psychologically prone to backing one "team" and hating another.  It's just the way it is.  OP is just falling in line with typical human behavior, and a lot of people follow suit.

Agreed.    While I found GW2 not to my liking, it does not mean it should change.  I am FAR from advocating any changes, it would be close to impossible to make such wide & drastic changes that would make GW2 more to my liking and there would be no guarantee and at same time it would ruin experience for those people who actually enjoy it.

GW2 has right to be operational and to bring fun to people who like it.  

Does not change fact I am bit disappointed.

Originally posted by fenistil

Yeah concentrated so much on 'outdoor' that I forgot about buildings in Lotro.  Seems I got over it cause I liked this game so much in past.

--------------

WoW & GW2 - no zoned world is definately not more immersive.  WoW's of course did not make sense, but pieces of terrain looking like curved out of world as a whole does not make sense either.  Of course best is to have seamless world that gradually change it's scenery without drastic changes like in WoW, but If I have to choose what's better - seamless drastic changing is better and more immersive than zoned.

LOTRO was a very good game until approx. Mines of Moria. Then the catastrophic decline of quality and also of respect of Tolkien's lore started. And the "free 2 play / pay 2 win" model it has now is utterly awful. Still, having to load for every single building was very immersion destructive.

_________

I'm usually strictly anti-zone. I disliked Age of Conan because of it, because it was so linear and also the zone links didn't make any sense. I disliked TSW partially because of that too, those games don't feel like a world, the zones aren't connected. Zones in EQ2 were almost hillarious as their connection wasn't making any sense most of the time, you completely changed landscape, textures, biome when you zoned (similar to EQ1).

In GW2, the zone connections make sense. As I said, you don't go from snow covered tundra to lush jungle just by passing a portal. A good example is the passage from Snowden Drifts to Gendarran Fields, where you are still in the mountains when you enter Gendarran, and you actually run DOWN and the snow becomes more sparse as you arrive in the plains.

I would still have prefered GW2 to be seamless, of course, but zones like that don't break my immersion. They are well done, and the transitions all make sense.

_________

This is not really on topic, even though it's interesting, so I'll stop here with that - but GW2 is the first "zoned" game I have no problem with. And at least, you can enter buildings and caves (HUGE caves, mini dungeons, etc...) without have a loading screen... ;-)

Originally posted by fenistil

Yeah concentrated so much on 'outdoor' that I forgot about buildings in Lotro.  Seems I got over it cause I liked this game so much in past.

--------------

WoW & GW2 - no zoned world is definately not more immersive.  WoW's of course did not make sense, but pieces of terrain looking like curved out of world as a whole does not make sense either.  Of course best is to have seamless world that gradually change it's scenery without drastic changes like in WoW, but If I have to choose what's better - seamless drastic changing is better and more immersive than zoned.

Interesting thing on the zones, however, is how little you wind up "zoning" (mostly entering new areas). Consider that GW2 has their waypoint travel system, so whereever you go by waypoint there's a brief load. You get used to that. When you enter a new zone, again the brief load. It becomes a non-factor due to the fast travel in the game. The zones no longer feel "zone-ish" simply because I can get anywhere via waypoint instead of needing to use the zone boundaries.

I like also how they've integrated waypoints and portals into the lore of the game. Map travel originated in GW1, and there's even a quest there where you chat with a kid who claims his mother invented it. So for an original Guild Wars vet map travel and waypoints feel natural and you'd actually break immersion to remove those. Again, this ties directly to why even though zones exist they actually feel like they belong (for some of us at least).

Originally posted by CallsignVega

From a very experienced MMORPG player's perspective, the writing is already on the wall. This game will be dead by Christmas. 

Shallow game-play, no end game content, unplayable WvW with unbelievable lag and invisible armies of players. 

We must be playing a different game!

And please, stop with the "from a very experienced MMORPG player's perspective" - it doesn't mean jack and doesn't give your opinion any more or less validity.

Trust me, this is coming from a very experienced MMORPG player's perspective. ;)

People can d!ck measure all day "I started with SWG in 2003!" "Well I started with EQ in 99!" "Well I started with UO in 98!" and none of it matters.

There are a ton of people who started playing MMOs with WoW or TOR whose opinions I'd value far, far higher than many vets who have played as long if not longer than I have.

Originally posted by fenistil

Originally posted by Eir_S

Originally posted by Zhauric

Maybe it's me but threads like these are what is wrong with this genre today. We seem to WANT games to fail. The OP pretty much paints that as a desire and the reasoning behind the poll is they feel it will be. Is it really that difficult for folks to either like or dislike a game then move on? Why in the world do we want to see so many games fail when the better these games do the more options we have. I don't know about anyone else but I love having options instead of being pigeon-holed.

I'm with you.  I don't like many current MMOs out there, but as I've said many times, just because I don't like it doesn't mean it shouldn't be available to people who may not want the same things I do out of an MMO.  In contrast, a lot of forum complainers toss a game in the trash if it doesn't have the same bells and whistles as their big standard, and then start threads trashing it. But I posted a thread in off-topic discussion a while back that explained that as human beings we are psychologically prone to backing one "team" and hating another.  It's just the way it is.  OP is just falling in line with typical human behavior, and a lot of people follow suit.

Agreed.    While I found GW2 not to my liking, it does not mean it should change.  I am FAR from advocating any changes, it would be close to impossible to make such wide & drastic changes that would make GW2 more to my liking and there would be no guarantee and at same time it would ruin experience for those people who actually enjoy it.

GW2 has right to be operational and to bring fun to people who like it.  

Does not change fact I am bit disappointed.

Exactly.  I first saw this kind of thing back in the 90's with Mario vs. Sonic.  Lots of people liked Sonic, but I felt the game was not to my liking.  And MMOs are no different, people will still argue about them like they're school kids trying to get something over on another kid's game, myself included lol

Originally posted by fenistil

Originally posted by Eir_S

Originally posted by Zhauric

Maybe it's me but threads like these are what is wrong with this genre today. We seem to WANT games to fail. The OP pretty much paints that as a desire and the reasoning behind the poll is they feel it will be. Is it really that difficult for folks to either like or dislike a game then move on? Why in the world do we want to see so many games fail when the better these games do the more options we have. I don't know about anyone else but I love having options instead of being pigeon-holed.

I'm with you.  I don't like many current MMOs out there, but as I've said many times, just because I don't like it doesn't mean it shouldn't be available to people who may not want the same things I do out of an MMO.  In contrast, a lot of forum complainers toss a game in the trash if it doesn't have the same bells and whistles as their big standard, and then start threads trashing it. But I posted a thread in off-topic discussion a while back that explained that as human beings we are psychologically prone to backing one "team" and hating another.  It's just the way it is.  OP is just falling in line with typical human behavior, and a lot of people follow suit.

Agreed.    While I found GW2 not to my liking, it does not mean it should change.  I am FAR from advocating any changes, it would be close to impossible to make such wide & drastic changes that would make GW2 more to my liking and there would be no guarantee and at same time it would ruin experience for those people who actually enjoy it.

GW2 has right to be operational and to bring fun to people who like it.  

Does not change fact I am bit disappointed.

Some people just need to be comforted in their "decision" to dislike this or that game by others. Call it insecurity, or just attention seeking, if they don't like something, they MUST convince others that it sucks, and that thing MUST fail. I've seen that for WoW for 8+ years, the blind hatred against the Blizzard game makes the local anti-GW2 trolls look like harmless babies.

Now I have a personal theory about this, only my opinion of course... The worst enemy of a friendly MMORPG fan forum is the bored person at work: "Nothing better to do? I'm angry because I'm at work too... so let's go annoy some fans on a random game forum, it's fun and it will avenge me for having to do this boring job." Some people just like to feed on anger rather than positively participate in the forum of a game they like. They basically make random people they don't even know on forums pay for the crappy / boring time they are having in their life at the moment.

Originally posted by BadSpock

People can d!ck measure all day "I started with SWG in 2003!" "Well I started with EQ in 99!" "Well I started with UO in 98!" and none of it matters.

I don't totally agree here. People who played games like UO or AC1, and not only WoW clones, tend to know that it's possible to have long lasting MMORPG without a predefined "end game" on rails.

Experience matters, but all depends on what kind of games the person played. If someone (e.g.) only played EQ, and then WoW or EQ2, despite being a "veteran", he has no experience at all of the variety MMORPG can have. You can be sure than an ex-AC1 player will have less problems adapting to a game like GW2 than an EQ/WoW gear grinder. This said,  a veteran who only played UO, AC1, EvE is just as bad. His blind hatred towards "theme parks" will make his opinion just as uninteresting as the one of the EQ clone grinder.

Most if not all persons I value the opinion of about MMORPGs are people who played a broad variety of those games, and I mean really played, not just for a week or two in beta but for months if not years.

I don't go on it all that much as it is now (compared to how much of my free game time I would normally devote to an mmo). Which is exactly what I expected to happen to be honest.

But I see myself popping onto it as and when they do events, or on the odd occasion I fancy running some non twitch arena sPvP. I wont just uninstall it due to the arrival of the new year put it that way.

I'm a sandbox "vet", who normally loathes themeparks. But as far as themeparks go, GW2 does the job (for me at least). If you are going to offer accessible gaming, don't force massive grinds on me. GW2 doesn't, so I can pick up and go as and when I please. Not my usual thing for an mmo, but with no sub and general high quality, it works for me to have a blast on it from time to time.

I may not personally find it anywhere near as interesting as a sandbox, but I went into the game without expecting it to be a sandbox. I looked at it as a polished, value from money product that will allow me instantly accessible gaming as and when I want it. From that point I am more than happy with the game and it will continue to sit nicely within my overall gaming experience for the foreseeable future.

As many already pointed out, GW2 is B2P, so since I paid already for the game I can afford to take as many breaks as I like and then come back when I feel like.

So the question is a bit redundant.

Maybe a good question would have been, "Will you buy the next Expansion?"

In which case I would say maybe, depending on the changes Anet will make to the game, for example if they add Housing and Raids I would probably buy it.

Silly choices for another silly poll based on a silly premise.

oh... And, can I have your stuff?

Originally posted by Mannish
Way to shallow and simplistic for me. I like mmos with depth and real progression.

So do the 'old school' players that want a 'real' MMO want a more complex virtual world or do they want to just grind their asses off for eternity? It seems that they are asking for a modern day UO but in reality want EQ with a level cap of 5,000.

Originally posted by CallsignVega

From a very experienced MMORPG player's perspective, the writing is already on the wall. This game will be dead by Christmas. 

Shallow game-play, no end game content, unplayable WvW with unbelievable lag and invisible armies of players. 

 

What are your thoughts on the topic and do you agree/disagree? Is GW2 not what you expected or do you think it's the greatest thing ever? Don't forget to vote!

From a very experienced MMORPG player to the next, I call BS. I will probably not play it next year, but that's just me NEVER playing anyhting for more than a couple of months.

BUT: Hell, GW1 had LESS content than GW2 and stayed alive and bustling until this very day. Doom and Glooming a b2p game with the sheer quality of GW2 is spot on ridiculous. There's your occasional bugged event or disconnect, but hell, all in all its working like a charm (I know 0 people having problems with WvW).

Really, I'm usually one of those guys who understands legitimate concerns with newer releases, they DO often fall short.

But doom and glooming a perfectly fine and working BUY TO PLAY (!!!!) game is ridiculous. It's like saying Skyrim failed because it fell out of the top 20 list of most purchased games 10 months after...

M

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by Mannish
Way to shallow and simplistic for me. I like mmos with depth and real progression.

So do the 'old school' players that want a 'real' MMO want a more complex virtual world or do they want to just grind their asses off for eternity? It seems that they are asking for a modern day UO but in reality want EQ with a level cap of 5,000.

It's not really a grind if you enjoy it right? I think a lot of old school players want constant and unending progression. EQ has AAs, DAoC has RRs, WoW/Rift/ToR have gear. It's all to replicate that feeling that you got when you jumped into your very first RPG and leveled up from 1 to 2.

What's this? I got stronger? I'm more durable? I'm better? That's a cool feeling.

Arguably some methods of replicating that feeling are better than others, and it will vary from person to person what game does it for them.

@Eir_S

Yeah it is sad, althrough I hope genre will continue those shy tries of difersitication that started recently. I mean in 'medium to big titles' since indie and low budget games were always doing it.    I am not naive enough that I think it will stop 'game wars', but western mainstream mmorpg market was (and to a lesser degree still is) revolving around WoW so much that all discussions and players views were about "what is only true and best mmorpg template?".  

I do hope that mainstream market and players will accept sooner or later (even if still flaming) that there can be difftent mmorpg types that cater to (partially)difftent niches.  Maybe it will lead to creation of sub-genres in future.

Of course there is danger that situation like that can lead to flood of short-lived low budget titles, but that's for another discussion.  I will end here.

@The_Korrigan

Yeah I agree Lotro quality started to dip after SoA and continued as long as I played.  So Mirkwood was worse that MoM and gameplay changes, Enedwaith region was even worse. Of course introducing cash shop to this game was crushing for my immersion and enjoyment - what's worse I really tried to coexist with store for more than half a year after which I gave up.

GW2 - yeah zones in GW2 are deffo better than in AoC or Swtor. Still does not change I don't like them :)

"Bored workers angry because of mundane tasks they have to do, coming to flame and troll?"  Quite possible, though I would not be as bold to say all trolls are angry workers ;d

Anyway - I stop this off-topic and I will try to stay away from GW2 forum part more as I basically stopped playing. (though still havent uninstalled yet, maybe it is finally time :p)

Seeing as how this game is one of the better releases in a decade, very solid in terms of a NEW MMORPG and that it, like other long standing MMOs will be updated...

Yes, I will be playing it well over a year.

WoW had NO end game at release and its PvP was only open world PvP with NO rewards at all for almost 6 full months when the ladder system was put in place with the first battlegrounds...

GW2 is great for a new game...much more than can be said for any other game in the last 2 years thats for sure.

I've played GW1 off and on (mostly on) for over 6 years now, and I pretty much expect the same from GW2.  From what I've seen of the game so far, I don't think I'll lose interest any time soon.

In fact, I personally think GW2 is the best video game I've ever played.  It's certainly the most fun.

Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

Originally posted by Fuerchtegott
Since it has no subs, there is, by definition, no such thing as leaving the game. Also, since I am super casual regarding the amount of time I can invest in this game, I would be surprised if I reached lvl 80 with one toon in less than 6 month. And I have too much fun playing with several of the classes...

 

You do realize that paying subscription is not equivalent with playing the game? So in theory, I coud pay a subscription for a game for months without actually logging in a single time, but according to your implied definition that would not mean that I had left the game?. I would argue that in such case I would have left the game (it is possible that I didn't even enter the game) since I do no longer play it.

^^ This x 1000

The entire sale and/or sub argument is so worthless, I refuse to discuss it anymore. It means nothing.