I liked the first one. I haven't read much about the second one at this point. But if it was anything like the first, there is no way in hell I'd pay a monthly fee for the game tbh. I mean it's not really an mmo in the sense that I can encounter someone anywhere I go. That was limited to cities, which really makes them nothing more than visual chat rooms to me. To me guild wars was an average co-op rpg and an above average fantasy based shooter. Like I said, I did like the game. it's just not a mmo or anything resembling one to me. Maybe this new one is different?
Yeah with GW2 the whole "co-op RPG" thing is done. It is a full blown MMO with a persistant world. You should read up on the game.
Are people forgetting cash shop in GW? thats how they generate revenue on their F2P model.
cash shop in GW was minimal, alot of p2p games have cash shops with more things on sale.
Point is not if its minimal or not. minimal both in number and usage. fluff items like extra storage which makes 40 slots 50 etc, skill sets which you can get by just playing and avatar visual change simiilar to other games. so if its minimal it sells less, if it sells less it generates less money. since the topic is about the money generated, its point on. So what if they are not selling wepaons and potions in their shop? they are still generating lots of revenue from it. assumption, though saying its not much was also assumption on my part but i based mine on the the things sold and the fact that i didnt need to visit that shop for anything. So to say that their income is solely based on box sales is wrong.
the thing is even if they generate money through that cash shop its irrelevant since p2p models have that also. the question is why p2p models need to take monthly subs? they also have cash shops, if that revenue is enough for gw why not for them?
I liked the first one. I haven't read much about the second one at this point. But if it was anything like the first, there is no way in hell I'd pay a monthly fee for the game tbh. I mean it's not really an mmo in the sense that I can encounter someone anywhere I go. That was limited to cities, which really makes them nothing more than visual chat rooms to me. To me guild wars was an average co-op rpg and an above average fantasy based shooter. Like I said, I did like the game. it's just not a mmo or anything resembling one to me. Maybe this new one is different?
I agree with you there, i really dont think Guild Wars 1 was good enough for a subscription model. But if the developers deliver on their promises in Guild Wars 2, then i think the MMO players are going to have a somewhat large shift in support. Guild Wars 2 has offers or many things:
---------------------------
Persistent Worlds
Boss encounters
Dungeons
Crafting System
Swimming and Jumping (something we all missed from GW1 *sniff*)
Open World PVP, as well as competitive PVP
Multiple Races and Classes
Player Housing (Something still desired by many gamers, altho not many games have done it well)
Dynamic Events system (A whole new name for leveling, no more crappy linear quest chain that you have to do on every character).
-----------------------------
I am sure we can all mention one MMO that has the first 7 listed there, but the last 2, i think not. If they are actually as they say, and are featured in Guild Wars 2, i would say that GW2 is far more deserving of the subscrption model but Arenanet doesnt like it. More for us gamers right? Heck, it even has better graphics than the other MMO we all know about...
Putting it that way, how can a game with what seems to be more features and a more advanced engine run off a B2P model, whereas an old game with old graphics requires a subscription. And dont keep saying because GW has a Cash Shop, so does other MMOs, and they also release expansions same as GW...
Fair point there i think...
------------------------------
On another note, we can put it this way, how many of us here havent been bothered to play WoW because of its subscription, im one of them. Here comes guild wars 2, no subscription and with a hell of alot of promised features (Hopefully not just hype). This model sure is going to make a dent...
I liked the first one. I haven't read much about the second one at this point. But if it was anything like the first, there is no way in hell I'd pay a monthly fee for the game tbh. I mean it's not really an mmo in the sense that I can encounter someone anywhere I go. That was limited to cities, which really makes them nothing more than visual chat rooms to me. To me guild wars was an average co-op rpg and an above average fantasy based shooter. Like I said, I did like the game. it's just not a mmo or anything resembling one to me. Maybe this new one is different?
This is probably the first "realistic" post on the subject I have read so far. GW (1) was not an MMO. I do not expect GW2 to be an MMO. NCsoft Arenanet have made people THINK this is an MMO by doing several things.
First, they create social hubs (cities) where most (not all) people that are in the game will see other players. The fact that they see many other players makes them THINK this is an MMO in the traditional sense. However, these social hubs are nothing more then match making interfaces much like you would find in games like Call of Duty or Battlefield or Quake. They are not places of combat and quests and so on.
Secondly, when you go "out into the real world" of GW you do so in a very limited way. How many actual players are with you? One, two, three...maybe five. Do you see other players out going about their business? No. This is because the outside world in GW is instanced. Wether you are going solo or going out with a FEW others, you are doing something like you do it in (again) Call of Duty or Battlefield or Quake. In other words, you are playing a much SMALL game then you might think.
Thirdly, in GW, if you were out in the world you game was not played on someone's else's master server. Exception, PvP match making. The only time that you ever played on a one of Arenanet's "servers" was when you were in their social hub cities OR playing pvp matches. That is it. Again, much like Call of Duty, Battlefield or Quake, Arenanet only provided limited servers for limited things. They did not have to maintain large server clusters. They do not have "special network code". They just use the systems that are out there and dress them up differently.
And lastly, marketing. NCsoft have marketed GW and GW2 as "MMO's". Regardless if they are or are not, people glum-on to that and believe it even if not true. They then market expansions. This is still traditional in the way others have done things. Again, Call of Duty, Battlefield, and Quake have all thrived and been "f2p" but have done so based on box sales and expansions.
Bottom line, don't let the hype hit you in face. GW and GW 2 may be good games....they just aren't or won't be MMO's and as such should not be compared in any way to MM0's.
I liked the first one. I haven't read much about the second one at this point. But if it was anything like the first, there is no way in hell I'd pay a monthly fee for the game tbh. I mean it's not really an mmo in the sense that I can encounter someone anywhere I go. That was limited to cities, which really makes them nothing more than visual chat rooms to me. To me guild wars was an average co-op rpg and an above average fantasy based shooter. Like I said, I did like the game. it's just not a mmo or anything resembling one to me. Maybe this new one is different?
I agree with you there, i really dont think Guild Wars 1 was good enough for a subscription model. But if the developers deliver on their promises in Guild Wars 2, then i think the MMO players are going to have a somewhat large shift in support. Guild Wars 2 has offers or many things:
---------------------------
Persistent Worlds
Boss encounters
Dungeons
Crafting System
Swimming and Jumping (something we all missed from GW1 *sniff*)
Open World PVP, as well as competitive PVP
Multiple Races and Classes
Player Housing (Something still desired by many gamers, altho not many games have done it well)
Dynamic Events system (A whole new name for leveling, no more crappy linear quest chain that you have to do on every character).
-----------------------------
I am sure we can all mention one MMO that has the first 7 listed there, but the last 2, i think not. If they are actually as they say, and are featured in Guild Wars 2, i would say that GW2 is far more deserving of the subscrption model but Arenanet doesnt like it. More for us gamers right? Heck, it even has better graphics than the other MMO we all know about...
Putting it that way, how can a game with what seems to be more features and a more advanced engine run off a B2P model, whereas an old game with old graphics requires a subscription. And dont keep saying because GW has a Cash Shop, so does other MMOs, and they also release expansions same as GW...
Fair point there i think...
------------------------------
On another note, we can put it this way, how many of us here havent been bothered to play WoW because of its subscription, im one of them. Here comes guild wars 2, no subscription and with a hell of alot of promised features (Hopefully not just hype). This model sure is going to make a dent...
Sadly I must inform you that there will not be open world pvp in GW2. All servers for all intents and purposes will be pve servers. Pvp will only take place in the "mists" (an extremely large scale battleground with three servers competing against each other for different resources/achievements/tasks) and various arenas (gvg, hoh, random, 4v4, etc.).
If GW2 can deliver a topnotch experience without the sub ... what the hell are the other games doing with our subs?
Or will GW2 be a subpar experience afterall compared to p2p since they have less funding?
The answer is simple - traditional approach and developer/publisher greed. Also, being B2P oriented apparently puts more pressure on developers when it comes to quality because you can't solve things by going "Oh well, we'll let the players wait for 2-3 months till we fix the game... they ARE paying us monthly, after all" because you're relying on your players not becoming disenchanted with your game so that they won't buy the expansion AND the expansions themselves have to be pretty high quality given that they're your only source of revenue.
So you're saying that Arenanet is more "honest" then the others resulting in successfull following this approach.
Well they just got more respect from me if that's the case.
Are people forgetting cash shop in GW? thats how they generate revenue on their F2P model.
cash shop in GW was minimal, alot of p2p games have cash shops with more things on sale.
Point is not if its minimal or not. So what if they are not selling wepaons and potions in their shop? they are still generating lots of revenue from it. So to say that their income is solely based on box sales is wrong.
P2P do it to, so the argument of cashshop is moot. (doesn't matter to what level they do it).
Are people forgetting cash shop in GW? thats how they generate revenue on their F2P model.
cash shop in GW was minimal, alot of p2p games have cash shops with more things on sale.
Point is not if its minimal or not. So what if they are not selling wepaons and potions in their shop? they are still generating lots of revenue from it. So to say that their income is solely based on box sales is wrong.
P2P do it to, so the argument of cashshop is moot. (doesn't matter to what level they do it).
No the point is not moot since you asked if GW2 can do it why not other MMOS? i am simply telling you how they do it.
90% of haters are begging for love. 10% just want a little attention -- Paulo Coelho
I liked the first one. I haven't read much about the second one at this point. But if it was anything like the first, there is no way in hell I'd pay a monthly fee for the game tbh. I mean it's not really an mmo in the sense that I can encounter someone anywhere I go. That was limited to cities, which really makes them nothing more than visual chat rooms to me. To me guild wars was an average co-op rpg and an above average fantasy based shooter. Like I said, I did like the game. it's just not a mmo or anything resembling one to me. Maybe this new one is different?
This is probably the first "realistic" post on the subject I have read so far. GW (1) was not an MMO. I do not expect GW2 to be an MMO. NCsoft Arenanet have made people THINK this is an MMO by doing several things.
First, they create social hubs (cities) where most (not all) people that are in the game will see other players. The fact that they see many other players makes them THINK this is an MMO in the traditional sense. However, these social hubs are nothing more then match making interfaces much like you would find in games like Call of Duty or Battlefield or Quake. They are not places of combat and quests and so on.
Secondly, when you go "out into the real world" of GW you do so in a very limited way. How many actual players are with you? One, two, three...maybe five. Do you see other players out going about their business? No. This is because the outside world in GW is instanced. Wether you are going solo or going out with a FEW others, you are doing something like you do it in (again) Call of Duty or Battlefield or Quake. In other words, you are playing a much SMALL game then you might think.
Thirdly, in GW, if you were out in the world you game was not played on someone's else's master server. Exception, PvP match making. The only time that you ever played on a one of Arenanet's "servers" was when you were in their social hub cities OR playing pvp matches. That is it. Again, much like Call of Duty, Battlefield or Quake, Arenanet only provided limited servers for limited things. They did not have to maintain large server clusters. They do not have "special network code". They just use the systems that are out there and dress them up differently.
And lastly, marketing. NCsoft have marketed GW and GW2 as "MMO's". Regardless if they are or are not, people glum-on to that and believe it even if not true. They then market expansions. This is still traditional in the way others have done things. Again, Call of Duty, Battlefield, and Quake have all thrived and been "f2p" but have done so based on box sales and expansions.
Bottom line, don't let the hype hit you in face. GW and GW 2 may be good games....they just aren't or won't be MMO's and as such should not be compared in any way to MM0's.
Hence my last statement in the op:
"Or will GW2 be a subpar experience afterall compared to p2p since they have less funding?"
Are people forgetting cash shop in GW? thats how they generate revenue on their F2P model.
cash shop in GW was minimal, alot of p2p games have cash shops with more things on sale.
Point is not if its minimal or not. So what if they are not selling wepaons and potions in their shop? they are still generating lots of revenue from it. So to say that their income is solely based on box sales is wrong.
P2P do it to, so the argument of cashshop is moot. (doesn't matter to what level they do it).
No the point is not moot since you asked if GW2 can do it why not other MMOS? i am simply telling you how they do it.
I asked why GW2 can run their game without subs ... subs being the only thing that is different.
Are people forgetting cash shop in GW? thats how they generate revenue on their F2P model.
cash shop in GW was minimal, alot of p2p games have cash shops with more things on sale.
Point is not if its minimal or not. So what if they are not selling wepaons and potions in their shop? they are still generating lots of revenue from it. So to say that their income is solely based on box sales is wrong.
Yeah, they added more things to the cashshop after they stopped making expansions. Its probably also a trying case to see what will sell, so they can do it again in GW2.
But the main reason for the B2P payment model, is because they designed the game around it. With the planned chapters every 6months. This just seems to have ended prematurely.
Other games that have released already, cant simply go f2p. You can see that with LOTRO and EQ2 that a lot of thought had gone into that process and they also changed a lot for this. They had to introduce new type of accounts and find something to deal with lifetime subs or their excisting normal subs. Its also a change that they clearly didnt plan when they were designing the game, but feel like its now necessary to stay in the market.
Are people forgetting cash shop in GW? thats how they generate revenue on their F2P model.
cash shop in GW was minimal, alot of p2p games have cash shops with more things on sale.
Point is not if its minimal or not. So what if they are not selling wepaons and potions in their shop? they are still generating lots of revenue from it. So to say that their income is solely based on box sales is wrong.
P2P do it to, so the argument of cashshop is moot. (doesn't matter to what level they do it).
No the point is not moot since you asked if GW2 can do it why not other MMOS? i am simply telling you how they do it.
I asked why GW2 can run their game without subs ... subs being the only thing that is different.
Cashshop is not a difference since P2P do it to.
I hope this makes it clear.
And thats what i told you, through in game item shops. How else do you think they generate revenue other then speedy expansions which cost as much as the original game? we are talking about B2P titles here not P2P.
I don"t know why cash shop is no difference when thats big part of their income.
90% of haters are begging for love. 10% just want a little attention -- Paulo Coelho
This is probably the first "realistic" post on the subject I have read so far. GW (1) was not an MMO. I do not expect GW2 to be an MMO. NCsoft Arenanet have made people THINK this is an MMO by doing several things.
First, they create social hubs (cities) where most (not all) people that are in the game will see other players. The fact that they see many other players makes them THINK this is an MMO in the traditional sense. However, these social hubs are nothing more then match making interfaces much like you would find in games like Call of Duty or Battlefield or Quake. They are not places of combat and quests and so on.
Secondly, when you go "out into the real world" of GW you do so in a very limited way. How many actual players are with you? One, two, three...maybe five. Do you see other players out going about their business? No. This is because the outside world in GW is instanced. Wether you are going solo or going out with a FEW others, you are doing something like you do it in (again) Call of Duty or Battlefield or Quake. In other words, you are playing a much SMALL game then you might think.
Thirdly, in GW, if you were out in the world you game was not played on someone's else's master server. Exception, PvP match making. The only time that you ever played on a one of Arenanet's "servers" was when you were in their social hub cities OR playing pvp matches. That is it. Again, much like Call of Duty, Battlefield or Quake, Arenanet only provided limited servers for limited things. They did not have to maintain large server clusters. They do not have "special network code". They just use the systems that are out there and dress them up differently.
And lastly, marketing. NCsoft have marketed GW and GW2 as "MMO's". Regardless if they are or are not, people glum-on to that and believe it even if not true. They then market expansions. This is still traditional in the way others have done things. Again, Call of Duty, Battlefield, and Quake have all thrived and been "f2p" but have done so based on box sales and expansions.
Bottom line, don't let the hype hit you in face. GW and GW 2 may be good games....they just aren't or won't be MMO's and as such should not be compared in any way to MM0's.
Lol. Don't let the blind and uninformed scepticism hit you in the face either.
First, you should watch the videos, because it shows an open world with all kinds of other players running around, and yes, more than a hand ful.
Second, ANet commented about GW itself was a CORPG, but they have stated a lot of times that GW2 is a MMORPG just like a lot of other MMO's.
Third, for World vs world PvP they've been talking about numbers like each side bringing 500+ people as an example; sorry, but that doesn't seem like non-massive to me.
And fourth, the videos and reports from players from the Gamescom are already proving how wrong you are in your comments and they will continue to prove you wrong the next few days.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
If GW2 can deliver a topnotch experience without the sub ... what the hell are the other games doing with our subs?
Or will GW2 be a subpar experience afterall compared to p2p since they have less funding?
Well, this boils back to the debate of whether or not Guild Wars is an mmo. When you leave a town in Guild Wars (dunno if it will be the same in GW2) you were in a single player/co-op game. You don't run into other players working on quests in the same area as you, traveling from zone to zone, or anything. They don't make a full gameworld like in other games where other players can assist or hinder you because they just happen to be nearby. Plus Arena Net has pure shite for CS so, when you handle things like that its not like they have the overhead that a WOW or EQ2 has.
If GW2 can deliver a topnotch experience without the sub ... what the hell are the other games doing with our subs?
Or will GW2 be a subpar experience afterall compared to p2p since they have less funding?
Well, this boils back to the debate of whether or not Guild Wars is an mmo. When you leave a town in Guild Wars (dunno if it will be the same in GW2) you were in a single player/co-op game. You don't run into other players working on quests in the same area as you, traveling from zone to zone, or anything. They don't make a full gameworld like in other games where other players can assist or hinder you because they just happen to be nearby. Plus Arena Net has pure shite for CS so, when you handle things like that its not like they have the overhead that a WOW or EQ2 has.
If GW2 can deliver a topnotch experience without the sub ... what the hell are the other games doing with our subs?
Or will GW2 be a subpar experience afterall compared to p2p since they have less funding?
Well, this boils back to the debate of whether or not Guild Wars is an mmo. When you leave a town in Guild Wars (dunno if it will be the same in GW2) you were in a single player/co-op game. You don't run into other players working on quests in the same area as you, traveling from zone to zone, or anything. They don't make a full gameworld like in other games where other players can assist or hinder you because they just happen to be nearby. Plus Arena Net has pure shite for CS so, when you handle things like that its not like they have the overhead that a WOW or EQ2 has.
Well we are talking GW2 here
Yes, I realize that. Is GW2 a gameworld, or town hubs with instances? Haven't heard either way tho I would have to think it is more of the latter since that is what they did well with in the original.
If GW2 can deliver a topnotch experience without the sub ... what the hell are the other games doing with our subs?
Or will GW2 be a subpar experience afterall compared to p2p since they have less funding?
Well, this boils back to the debate of whether or not Guild Wars is an mmo. When you leave a town in Guild Wars (dunno if it will be the same in GW2) you were in a single player/co-op game. You don't run into other players working on quests in the same area as you, traveling from zone to zone, or anything. They don't make a full gameworld like in other games where other players can assist or hinder you because they just happen to be nearby. Plus Arena Net has pure shite for CS so, when you handle things like that its not like they have the overhead that a WOW or EQ2 has.
Well we are talking GW2 here
Yes, I realize that. Is GW2 a gameworld, or town hubs with instances? Haven't heard either way tho I would have to think it is more of the latter since that is what they did well with in the original.
If GW2 can deliver a topnotch experience without the sub ... what the hell are the other games doing with our subs?
Or will GW2 be a subpar experience afterall compared to p2p since they have less funding?
The top notch experience part is certainly debatable, after hearing everyone say that about GW1 for so long I decided to try it one day only to discover it was one of the worst games I had ever stepped foot in, ever.
GW1 also was far from an MMO, which means it's costs of operation were significantly different. I doubt GW2 is going to suddenly become a real MMO and still be free, they are most likely going to base most of the inner workings off of GW1 which means it would still not be an MMO.
So essentially they can not have a subscription because it is far from a top notch experience and far from being an MMO.
If GW2 can deliver a topnotch experience without the sub ... what the hell are the other games doing with our subs?
Or will GW2 be a subpar experience afterall compared to p2p since they have less funding?
Well, this boils back to the debate of whether or not Guild Wars is an mmo. When you leave a town in Guild Wars (dunno if it will be the same in GW2) you were in a single player/co-op game. You don't run into other players working on quests in the same area as you, traveling from zone to zone, or anything. They don't make a full gameworld like in other games where other players can assist or hinder you because they just happen to be nearby. Plus Arena Net has pure shite for CS so, when you handle things like that its not like they have the overhead that a WOW or EQ2 has.
Well we are talking GW2 here
Yes, I realize that. Is GW2 a gameworld, or town hubs with instances? Haven't heard either way tho I would have to think it is more of the latter since that is what they did well with in the original.
GW2 will have a persistant world with no instanced town hubs. They released that information all the way back when they first announced development around 2006.
If GW2 can deliver a topnotch experience without the sub ... what the hell are the other games doing with our subs?
Or will GW2 be a subpar experience afterall compared to p2p since they have less funding?
Well, this boils back to the debate of whether or not Guild Wars is an mmo. When you leave a town in Guild Wars (dunno if it will be the same in GW2) you were in a single player/co-op game. You don't run into other players working on quests in the same area as you, traveling from zone to zone, or anything. They don't make a full gameworld like in other games where other players can assist or hinder you because they just happen to be nearby. Plus Arena Net has pure shite for CS so, when you handle things like that its not like they have the overhead that a WOW or EQ2 has.
Well we are talking GW2 here
Yes, I realize that. Is GW2 a gameworld, or town hubs with instances? Haven't heard either way tho I would have to think it is more of the latter since that is what they did well with in the original.
Well, you could read some interviews with Guild Wars 2 devs of course. This has been answered multiple times now.
But yeah, you can also show up uninformed in threads about a game and start assuming all kinds of things. Expecting the answering to be done by the ppl who actually take the time to inform themselves instead of just jumping to conclusions. With as result that each thread is filled with repeating the same over and over.
Yes, I realize that. Is GW2 a gameworld, or town hubs with instances? Haven't heard either way tho I would have to think it is more of the latter since that is what they did well with in the original.
A few posts up cyphers gives the answer to this.
Yep. And just a few minutes ago the Gamescom livefeed showed the demoplayer roaming around in an open world where he encountered and supported other players, and a large mass of players fighting the dragon that can be seen at the end of the latest GW2 video.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
MOST MMO's do not release expansions like they are planning to do and have done with GW1 for more box sales (WoW the exception). Going off merely speculation, if they release a new expansion at high rates like they say, every 6 months you'll pay roughly 40-60 bucks for the box depending on what they sell it for. So essentially it's similar to paying 6-10 bucks per month. In addition, they will make plenty of revenue from the people wanting to look purrdy with CS items. If it's a new expansion every year than you're talking 3-5 bucks per month. So yes it is cheaper than say your 15/m norm, but it's still nice pocket change. This type of game relies on numbers.
Box sales alone for this game will generate mucho dinero given its name, state of hype, etc...
Comments
Yeah with GW2 the whole "co-op RPG" thing is done. It is a full blown MMO with a persistant world. You should read up on the game.
Steam: Neph
the thing is even if they generate money through that cash shop its irrelevant since p2p models have that also. the question is why p2p models need to take monthly subs? they also have cash shops, if that revenue is enough for gw why not for them?
I need more vespene gas.
I agree with you there, i really dont think Guild Wars 1 was good enough for a subscription model. But if the developers deliver on their promises in Guild Wars 2, then i think the MMO players are going to have a somewhat large shift in support. Guild Wars 2 has offers or many things:
---------------------------
Persistent Worlds
Boss encounters
Dungeons
Crafting System
Swimming and Jumping (something we all missed from GW1 *sniff*)
Open World PVP, as well as competitive PVP
Multiple Races and Classes
Player Housing (Something still desired by many gamers, altho not many games have done it well)
Dynamic Events system (A whole new name for leveling, no more crappy linear quest chain that you have to do on every character).
-----------------------------
I am sure we can all mention one MMO that has the first 7 listed there, but the last 2, i think not. If they are actually as they say, and are featured in Guild Wars 2, i would say that GW2 is far more deserving of the subscrption model but Arenanet doesnt like it. More for us gamers right? Heck, it even has better graphics than the other MMO we all know about...
Putting it that way, how can a game with what seems to be more features and a more advanced engine run off a B2P model, whereas an old game with old graphics requires a subscription. And dont keep saying because GW has a Cash Shop, so does other MMOs, and they also release expansions same as GW...
Fair point there i think...
------------------------------
On another note, we can put it this way, how many of us here havent been bothered to play WoW because of its subscription, im one of them. Here comes guild wars 2, no subscription and with a hell of alot of promised features (Hopefully not just hype). This model sure is going to make a dent...
This is probably the first "realistic" post on the subject I have read so far. GW (1) was not an MMO. I do not expect GW2 to be an MMO. NCsoft Arenanet have made people THINK this is an MMO by doing several things.
First, they create social hubs (cities) where most (not all) people that are in the game will see other players. The fact that they see many other players makes them THINK this is an MMO in the traditional sense. However, these social hubs are nothing more then match making interfaces much like you would find in games like Call of Duty or Battlefield or Quake. They are not places of combat and quests and so on.
Secondly, when you go "out into the real world" of GW you do so in a very limited way. How many actual players are with you? One, two, three...maybe five. Do you see other players out going about their business? No. This is because the outside world in GW is instanced. Wether you are going solo or going out with a FEW others, you are doing something like you do it in (again) Call of Duty or Battlefield or Quake. In other words, you are playing a much SMALL game then you might think.
Thirdly, in GW, if you were out in the world you game was not played on someone's else's master server. Exception, PvP match making. The only time that you ever played on a one of Arenanet's "servers" was when you were in their social hub cities OR playing pvp matches. That is it. Again, much like Call of Duty, Battlefield or Quake, Arenanet only provided limited servers for limited things. They did not have to maintain large server clusters. They do not have "special network code". They just use the systems that are out there and dress them up differently.
And lastly, marketing. NCsoft have marketed GW and GW2 as "MMO's". Regardless if they are or are not, people glum-on to that and believe it even if not true. They then market expansions. This is still traditional in the way others have done things. Again, Call of Duty, Battlefield, and Quake have all thrived and been "f2p" but have done so based on box sales and expansions.
Bottom line, don't let the hype hit you in face. GW and GW 2 may be good games....they just aren't or won't be MMO's and as such should not be compared in any way to MM0's.
Let's party like it is 1863!
Sadly I must inform you that there will not be open world pvp in GW2. All servers for all intents and purposes will be pve servers. Pvp will only take place in the "mists" (an extremely large scale battleground with three servers competing against each other for different resources/achievements/tasks) and various arenas (gvg, hoh, random, 4v4, etc.).
Steam: Neph
So you're saying that Arenanet is more "honest" then the others resulting in successfull following this approach.
Well they just got more respect from me if that's the case.
P2P do it to, so the argument of cashshop is moot. (doesn't matter to what level they do it).
No the point is not moot since you asked if GW2 can do it why not other MMOS? i am simply telling you how they do it.
90% of haters are begging for love. 10% just want a little attention -- Paulo Coelho
Hence my last statement in the op:
"Or will GW2 be a subpar experience afterall compared to p2p since they have less funding?"
We will have to see what the near future brings.
I asked why GW2 can run their game without subs ... subs being the only thing that is different.
Cashshop is not a difference since P2P do it to.
I hope this makes it clear.
I wouldn't mind seeing it but I am sure somehow all these compaines would be figuring out how to weazel a cash shop in there.
"When it comes to GW2 any game is fair game"
Yeah, they added more things to the cashshop after they stopped making expansions. Its probably also a trying case to see what will sell, so they can do it again in GW2.
But the main reason for the B2P payment model, is because they designed the game around it. With the planned chapters every 6months. This just seems to have ended prematurely.
Other games that have released already, cant simply go f2p. You can see that with LOTRO and EQ2 that a lot of thought had gone into that process and they also changed a lot for this. They had to introduce new type of accounts and find something to deal with lifetime subs or their excisting normal subs. Its also a change that they clearly didnt plan when they were designing the game, but feel like its now necessary to stay in the market.
And thats what i told you, through in game item shops. How else do you think they generate revenue other then speedy expansions which cost as much as the original game? we are talking about B2P titles here not P2P.
I don"t know why cash shop is no difference when thats big part of their income.
90% of haters are begging for love. 10% just want a little attention -- Paulo Coelho
Lol. Don't let the blind and uninformed scepticism hit you in the face either.
First, you should watch the videos, because it shows an open world with all kinds of other players running around, and yes, more than a hand ful.
Second, ANet commented about GW itself was a CORPG, but they have stated a lot of times that GW2 is a MMORPG just like a lot of other MMO's.
Third, for World vs world PvP they've been talking about numbers like each side bringing 500+ people as an example; sorry, but that doesn't seem like non-massive to me.
And fourth, the videos and reports from players from the Gamescom are already proving how wrong you are in your comments and they will continue to prove you wrong the next few days.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Well, this boils back to the debate of whether or not Guild Wars is an mmo. When you leave a town in Guild Wars (dunno if it will be the same in GW2) you were in a single player/co-op game. You don't run into other players working on quests in the same area as you, traveling from zone to zone, or anything. They don't make a full gameworld like in other games where other players can assist or hinder you because they just happen to be nearby. Plus Arena Net has pure shite for CS so, when you handle things like that its not like they have the overhead that a WOW or EQ2 has.
http://www.speedtest.net/result/7300033012
Well we are talking GW2 here
(Edited for double post)
Yes, I realize that. Is GW2 a gameworld, or town hubs with instances? Haven't heard either way tho I would have to think it is more of the latter since that is what they did well with in the original.
http://www.speedtest.net/result/7300033012
A few posts up cyphers gives the answer to this.
The top notch experience part is certainly debatable, after hearing everyone say that about GW1 for so long I decided to try it one day only to discover it was one of the worst games I had ever stepped foot in, ever.
GW1 also was far from an MMO, which means it's costs of operation were significantly different. I doubt GW2 is going to suddenly become a real MMO and still be free, they are most likely going to base most of the inner workings off of GW1 which means it would still not be an MMO.
So essentially they can not have a subscription because it is far from a top notch experience and far from being an MMO.
Don't tell the geniuses of this community that to hear them tell it a sub fee is the be all end all......
but yeah, to call this game Fantastic is like calling Twilight the Godfather of vampire movies....
GW2 will have a persistant world with no instanced town hubs. They released that information all the way back when they first announced development around 2006.
Steam: Neph
Well, you could read some interviews with Guild Wars 2 devs of course. This has been answered multiple times now.
But yeah, you can also show up uninformed in threads about a game and start assuming all kinds of things. Expecting the answering to be done by the ppl who actually take the time to inform themselves instead of just jumping to conclusions. With as result that each thread is filled with repeating the same over and over.
Yep. And just a few minutes ago the Gamescom livefeed showed the demoplayer roaming around in an open world where he encountered and supported other players, and a large mass of players fighting the dragon that can be seen at the end of the latest GW2 video.
It looked awesome.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
MOST MMO's do not release expansions like they are planning to do and have done with GW1 for more box sales (WoW the exception). Going off merely speculation, if they release a new expansion at high rates like they say, every 6 months you'll pay roughly 40-60 bucks for the box depending on what they sell it for. So essentially it's similar to paying 6-10 bucks per month. In addition, they will make plenty of revenue from the people wanting to look purrdy with CS items. If it's a new expansion every year than you're talking 3-5 bucks per month. So yes it is cheaper than say your 15/m norm, but it's still nice pocket change. This type of game relies on numbers.
Box sales alone for this game will generate mucho dinero given its name, state of hype, etc...