So just because some people have left WoW does not mean that millions others will do so as well just because a new game pops up. There have been plenty of big launches since WoW has existed and there will be plenty more and it will just keep on chugging along without paying very much attention to those other titles.
It is just insane (this isn't directed at you) that people on this forum forget this EVERY SINGLE TIME A NEW GAME GETS ANNOUNCED. Everytime there are people who are like "Oh this time will be the time that WoW gets killed." No it won't. It wasn't last time, it won't be this time, and it won't be next time. To honestly believe otherwise is just naive and silly. Truthfully I am baffled when adults think this way as they should know better.
Interesting, but you should know better too.
You say, look at the past, but if you do so, then you notice that in history no trend lasts forever: large companies formerly thought untouchable lose their touch or fall into oblivion, getting taken over, whole gaming genres can rise or fall over the years, or to take your example: you mention that MMO games have failed the last few years. But that's only a trend of the last years. Before WoW there were other trends in MMO market, and those were broken too when WoW came.
Meaning, no trend is forever, and neither is this trend that all new MMO's are doomed to fail or cannot be successful at gaining and holding 300k-500k subs and more. The fact that MMO"s have failed to do so until now isn't proof that it'll never happen. That's logic for you.
Does this mean that WoW will be 'killed' or surpassed? Of course not, certainly not with its current lead. But the fact that 1 million+ people bought MMO's like AoC, or WAR, or Aion shows that there are enough people who want something new and not always the same MMORPG they've been playing for years.
And if a MMORPG can be equally enjoyable to them for a longer period of time, then it can hold on to them for longer than only a few months.
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."
Help me here. I could have swore that i read a ANET dev explain that even though dynamic events will happen all over, the outcome of those events will eventually reset and not stay permanent.
I know that this system is being touted as revolutionary and all, but if say, a village gets attacked and is lost. For the dynamic system to really work, shouldn't it stay lost and not revert back to a happy go lucky village full of town folk.
I mean, to constantly have to go and defend and retake the same content over and over, seems like it could become dull and repetative.
Just wondering if i have it wrong or is this how it will be.
That's pretty close. Nothing is permanently changed, but it isn't strictly cyclical either. Events (as I understand them) will have a success or failure branch. In the case of the village under attack by centaurs, if you drive them off and save the village, you'll be able to make use of the NPCs and services there. However, at some point the centaurs will be back to take another kick at the can and try to take the town again. If no one stops them, the event fails and the village is lost. It remains like this until someone comes along and boots the invaders out again.
It's actually more of a linear model than a cyclical one because it doesn't go around in a circle, but moves forward and back along the chain. When you reach the end of the chain, it doesn't start over from scratch again, but slowly works it's way back down to the beginning unless someone prevents it.
A better example I heard was having a series of outposts getting over-run in some frontier region. The outposts are lost one by one, as the antagonists move deeper inland. To take them all back, you need to start at the furthest inland encroachment and push your way back to the sea along the event chain. When you reach it, you can get to do the final event in the chain. When this is over, nothing gets reset but the invaders will be back, trying to take those outposts again, until eventually, if unopposed, they totally control the entire area. Anyone entering the event chain at that point will be faced with enemies in total control of all the outposts and probably roaming dangerously across the landscape.
I think this what they mean by a permanent change to the world. Unless players are actively participating, event chains basically degrade until they are at their beginning again. Actually, I think that's the best word to use. Event chains don't reset, they degrade over time.
This may not be the case for all events, but I'm pretty sure it is for the ones that were explained.
Good to see the the writers for this site are as insane as the forum users on this site.
GW2 will not be the biggest game out there, ever, literally ever. It is not going to happen, it has no chance of happening. This is just getting ridiculous now
People also forget the biggest reason why people stay with WoW, investment. They have invested their time and money in their characters and they get attached to them. This means the majority won't just jump ship when a new game comes out. Some of them will try new games and then a lot of those people will return to WoW because they don't want to take the time to build up their characters/build up their wealth/status in another game. They also have their guild and friends in WoW and that is a tough thing for many to leave.
Hmm. Well....I agree wtih leaving long time guilds and guildmates being difficult. That was actually the ONE thing (my family was also in the guild) that I held onto that kept be playing the last year I played, however.....eventually, for some people, that alone isn't enough to keep them in the game and....many that leave do NOT return.
I had lots of time and effort invested and many level 80 characters and all the crafting professions maxed as well. There is a HUGE time investment there. But....I eventually left WoW, nonetheless, and others have (and will) as well. Now....will EVERYONE eventually leave? Probably not. But the things you mentioned are not enough to hold people hostage forever IF they become burnt out and just simply don't care anymore, and....that DOES happen.
Personally...I enjoy the leveling up part of a game MUCH more than end game ANYWAY. So "starting over" to ME....is a new exciting ADVENTURE. I don't cringe at the idea of leaving a game to "start over" somewhere else, if I perceive there will be a new adventure for me. Adventure is what it's all about to me. The fresh new experience of exploring new worlds, meeting new people, and whatnot....what else is it ABOUT? Just my opinion, of course.
A common flaw of poster on this site is the "I did this so clearly lots of others will too." argument. You left WoW and so did other people, of course it happens (I tried WoW myself and hated it and left shortly after getting there). 12 million other people have not left WoW. Will even 2 million of those people suddenly quit WoW and jump onto GW2 when it is released? NO and the reasons are what I said above along with the fact that there are millions of people who are not even burned out on WoW yet, they still find it fun.
So just because some people have left WoW does not mean that millions others will do so as well just because a new game pops up. There have been plenty of big launches since WoW has existed and there will be plenty more and it will just keep on chugging along without paying very much attention to those other titles.
It is just insane (this isn't directed at you) that people on this forum forget this EVERY SINGLE TIME A NEW GAME GETS ANNOUNCED. Everytime there are people who are like "Oh this time will be the time that WoW gets killed." No it won't. It wasn't last time, it won't be this time, and it won't be next time. To honestly believe otherwise is just naive and silly. Truthfully I am baffled when adults think this way as they should know better.
I think it was Ramonski that pointed out that GW2 is less a WoW competitor than it is a running mate. Why? Business model -- they don't rely on the same subscriber base. And I think you're underestimating how attractive the B2P model is, and how many people are going to be willing put money down on the box IN ADDITION to maintaining their existing WoW sub. And this is where GW2's model really shines because it can passively entice users of other games to buy into it, without forcing them to make a choice. Over time, migration will swell GW2's numbers because (opinion) the game will be that good.
No, we won't see it hit 12 million subscribers, but I think it's reasonable to say that it may comfortably take second spot behind the WoW behemoth. Friggin' 'A', bubba. Works for me.
uhhh, as for WoW i persoanlly don't care if it does or not, gotta understand some ppl just have their way of thinking, if they love their WoW charcaters so much that anyother game is worthless in their eyes, what can we do about it? just let them be
as for GW2, i think the game will be amazing, they've really gone all out on this, it's going to be an addictive game for sure, but in a way it'll manage to satisfy you in short hours of gameplay, thats why i said "those guys are smart"
it's not the same addictivness that you'de get from WoW or any traditional mmorpg repetetive grindfest
World of Warcraft is nearing it's shelf life. It's graphics are seriously dated, it's quest system archaic. Guild Wars 2 brings a whole new game to the table with jaw dropping stylized painterly graphics that really spices up visual quality without leaving behind people with less graphic capable machines. It is abandoning the old mentality quest and grouping system for something unique and altogether their own. Everything i have witnessed so far with their blogs, videos, and other info releases tells me they have really listened to what players are looking for in a next generation game. ArenaNet seems well position to give Blizzovision a run for it's money, which i for one hope they succeed. I think this is a great time for MMO gamers that somebody is actually putting the industry on notice it's coming in to kick ass and take names. We need more game devs like ArenaNet to spice up a stagnant MMO market.
I think it was Ramonski that pointed out that GW2 is less a WoW competitor than it is a running mate. Why? Business model -- they don't rely on the same subscriber base. And I think you're underestimating how attractive the B2P model is, and how many people are going to be willing put money down on the box IN ADDITION to maintaining their existing WoW sub. And this is where GW2's model really shines because it can passively entice users of other games to buy into it, without forcing them to make a choice. Over time, migration will swell GW2's numbers because (opinion) the game will be that good.
No, we won't see it hit 12 million subscribers, but I think it's reasonable to say that it may comfortably take second spot behind the WoW behemoth. Friggin' 'A', bubba. Works for me.
Well, that all sounds logical but the thing is that Wow is getting old fast. Wow do have gotten a lot more new subs in China but in EU and NA it is losing them.
If GW2 releases in China I am pretty sure it will pass Wow in a few years, 2-3 or so. In the west it will happen pretty fast.
Wow fans will move over to other games, the only thing stopping them right now is the fact that most MMOs are pretty bad. Every single Wow player I know have quit Wow at least once, most several times but they got tired of the games they moved to and went back to Wow again. But next year will a few games that actually is good releasing and I think many of them will move permanently to one of them.
Tera and TOR are worse threats to Wow than GW2 since few people play 2 P2P games but one and a B2P is common.
Wow had a great run with many subs but nothing lasts for ever. It might still go on for a few years longer in China however but Wow have already bled western players for 2 years and I doubt Cata will stop that. It will like every single successful online game slowly lose players for years.
New games will take over the top, if that will be GW2, TOR, TERA or even Wow 2 is hard to say but no game can stay on top forever, it just isn't possible.
When WoW came out there wasn't much compitition, but with all the new MMO's coming out i don't think GW2 will be the dominant force people think, i think the population of MMO players will start to spread out.
I think people tend to forget even when these new games come out people will still keep their subs to the MMO's they have been playing for years.
"The great thing about human language is that it prevents us from sticking to the matter at hand." - Lewis Thomas
i have read this series of articles here on mmporg about old-style MMOs vs the new ones. i am one of the "old guys". i hate theme parks, refiined games, overbalancing, easiness ....
i like new features, even if it would be fully sufficient to just give us the old ones back which made the old games succesful.
i doubt GW2 will surprise me. i saw too many videos and have read to many articles about revolutionary features in the last 8 years. i would be surprised if GW2 will really act against the trend.
whats really new with this feature, that you can change the world? as far as i understood in the videos, if you destroy a camp, the mobs will rebuild it after a while. you call it dynamic, i call it just longer way of respawn. if you killed the Sleeper in EQ1, this was changing the world! and these public quests we already have seen in WAR (even lousely implemented) will scale now. ok, sounds good, but does this change anything about the real problems all newer MMOs have: the lack of immersion?
we will see ... i will test it for sure. but i learned, that you better expect nothing.
when WoW came out, there was a big competition: EQ2 just launched a few weeks in advance. whatever we think today about these 2 games. these days everybody speculated, how this battle will end.
but you are right. these days we got dozens of games catering different playstyles. and this means you will find in these games just people who really like this style. i remember the days, when you had just the choice to play UO or EQ1, period. a few years later DAOC came and EVE but since then nothing worth to play, unfortunately.
we were enforced to play just all in one game. the casuals, the hardliners, the achievers, the explorers, the killers .... all together, if we liked to, or not. this made these games extremely charmy. now we got the big freedom, great stuff. but we lost something forever.
Good to see the the writers for this site are as insane as the forum users on this site.
GW2 will not be the biggest game out there, ever, literally ever. It is not going to happen, it has no chance of happening. This is just getting ridiculous now
People also forget the biggest reason why people stay with WoW, investment. They have invested their time and money in their characters and they get attached to them. This means the majority won't just jump ship when a new game comes out. Some of them will try new games and then a lot of those people will return to WoW because they don't want to take the time to build up their characters/build up their wealth/status in another game. They also have their guild and friends in WoW and that is a tough thing for many to leave.
Hmm. Well....I agree wtih leaving long time guilds and guildmates being difficult. That was actually the ONE thing (my family was also in the guild) that I held onto that kept be playing the last year I played, however.....eventually, for some people, that alone isn't enough to keep them in the game and....many that leave do NOT return.
I had lots of time and effort invested and many level 80 characters and all the crafting professions maxed as well. There is a HUGE time investment there. But....I eventually left WoW, nonetheless, and others have (and will) as well. Now....will EVERYONE eventually leave? Probably not. But the things you mentioned are not enough to hold people hostage forever IF they become burnt out and just simply don't care anymore, and....that DOES happen.
To the first poster:
One of the things about WoW is that it is easy enough (and arguably enjoyable enough) to progress your characters that it isn't as hard to leave them behind as it is in other games. I can name at least 12 people off the top of my head who have let go of 5+ level 70 characters at the end of the Burning Crusade expansion to completely reroll on a new server for WotlK. Many of those players sold their accounts completely and never looked back. And I know of more than 20 players who are doing this again for the upcoming Cataclysm expansion (almost every single one of whom stopped playing WoW around march of this year). Last I played, I did not know a single person in my immediate or extended WoW friend group who had fewer than 7 level 80s, and I'd estimate that 80% of the people I knew had every single class leveled to 80.
The fact is it's not hard to level in WoW. And with Cataclysm completely revamping the old zones and quests, plus the addition oif 2 new races, players want to level even more now. Many players are whispering "I guess I'll level a 2nd shaman first." Still many others are simply enjoying the adventure of leaving their old characters behind and beginning anew.
That's all just personal experience, but I have seen tons and tons of examples of this. It's not a completely isolated incident.
To the 2nd poster:
The scope of the on-line community for MMO players has widened...well...massively. Everyone knows what ventrillo is. Everyone participates in some sort of forum community, whether it be a specific game's official forum, a guild group's forum, or a general public forum like this one. Players become facebook friends and know each others' email addresses. Players who have formed bonds in one game can now easily stay in touch and play multiple games with each other.
Nowadays I observe players forming strong ties to a particular body of friends, as opposed to a generic guild of 25-50 players. These ties extend beyond any one game. For example, a strong friend base of 12-15 players may have formed in WoW at some point. At various points in time, some or all of those players may leave WoW to play something else or just take a general break. Right now, 4 of them might be playing FF14 together in the same Linkshell, 4 might not be playing any MMO, and 4 might still play WoW regularly, while any combination of them might log on at night to play a few quick games of Team Fortress 2 or League of Legends together.
Unlike the days of UO or EQ (although I'm sure there are plenty of exceptions), leaving an MMO today no longer means saying goodbye to in-game friends forever. The tools are there to remain in touch and continue playing all kinds of games together. It's one very positive aspect of modern online gaming communities
i have read this series of articles here on mmporg about old-style MMOs vs the new ones. i am one of the "old guys". i hate theme parks, refiined games, overbalancing, easiness ....
i like new features, even if it would be fully sufficient to just give us the old ones back which made the old games succesful.
i doubt GW2 will surprise me. i saw too many videos and have read to many articles about revolutionary features in the last 8 years. i would be surprised if GW2 will really act against the trend.
whats really new with this feature, that you can change the world? as far as i understood in the videos, if you destroy a camp, the mobs will rebuild it after a while. you call it dynamic, i call it just longer way of respawn. if you killed the Sleeper in EQ1, this was changing the world! and these public quests we already have seen in WAR (even lousely implemented) will scale now. ok, sounds good, but does this change anything about the real problems all newer MMOs have: the lack of immersion?
we will see ... i will test it for sure. but i learned, that you better expect nothing.
well i truly do understand why you look at things this way but you also have to remember that many of the things other games promised were said in a way that were it "technicly wasn't lieing" and gave gamers room for their imagination to run wild.
not saying they cant do that with this but they are very very specific about what will be in game and they have even said (unlike other companys) anything they have told us about "is already implemented".
on my final note i would like to give a quick visual aid for the dynamic event system and to point out that dynamic events dont actualy respawn they are pushed along a chain and the chain of events itself never stops being active meaning one of the events in said chain will always be going on
here is said visual aid
centaurs win: town is under their controll
/ | centaurs move to next village town under attack players retake
/ | / town and so on and so on and ..... / town peacefull
/ | / players attack centaur village
| |
centaurs retake their home centaur reinforcements arrive
/ players get pushed back centaur reinforcements defeated
i think this illustrates it somewhat ok but i have seen much better jobs
i have read this series of articles here on mmporg about old-style MMOs vs the new ones. i am one of the "old guys". i hate theme parks, refiined games, overbalancing, easiness ....
i like new features, even if it would be fully sufficient to just give us the old ones back which made the old games succesful.
i doubt GW2 will surprise me. i saw too many videos and have read to many articles about revolutionary features in the last 8 years. i would be surprised if GW2 will really act against the trend.
whats really new with this feature, that you can change the world? as far as i understood in the videos, if you destroy a camp, the mobs will rebuild it after a while. you call it dynamic, i call it just longer way of respawn. if you killed the Sleeper in EQ1, this was changing the world! and these public quests we already have seen in WAR (even lousely implemented) will scale now. ok, sounds good, but does this change anything about the real problems all newer MMOs have: the lack of immersion?
we will see ... i will test it for sure. but i learned, that you better expect nothing.
well i truly do understand why you look at things this way but you also have to remember that many of the things other games promised were said in a way that were it "technicly wasn't lieing" and gave gamers room for their imagination to run wild.
not saying they cant do that with this but they are very very specific about what will be in game and they have even said (unlike other companys) anything they have told us about "is already implemented".
on my final note i would like to give a quick visual aid for the dynamic event system and to point out that dynamic events dont actualy respawn they are pushed along a chain and the chain of events itself never stops being active meaning one of the events in said chain will always be going on
here is said visual aid
centaurs win: town is under their controll
/ | centaurs move to next village town under attack players retake
/ | / town and so on and so on and ..... / town peacefull
/ | / players attack centaur village
| |
centaurs retake their home centaur reinforcements arrive
/ players get pushed back centaur reinforcements defeated
i think this illustrates it somewhat ok but i have seen much better jobs
I tried to explain why dynamic events can have some sense of permanency here:
I don't see it being possible to go a whole lot further than this, outside of a single player game. If you still consider events nothing more than mobs on a longer respawn, I've got nothing else to add.
Ok, let me seize this opportunity to point out something about MMOs that has certainly contributed to their:
OVER-SELLING & UNDER-DELIVERING
malaise of the last 1/2 decade or more.
EG in this thread is DYNAMIC EVENTS: There is still so much confusion on how these things work, how much more innovative or not they are and how people's expectations need to be better managed given the red-writing we all know about above from most MMOs!
I think the problem boils down to using fluff or flowery language when ArenaNet need to release a diagramatic explanation of the core model of Dynamic Events, which decrease PR/Marketing/common denominator language but increase technical accuracy.
For theme-park MMOs Dynamic Events look to be a real step forward for these linear MMOs:
1 Scaling - 1/few players can attempt them, but larger groups cause scaling: Increase activation of mobs skills, more mobs, more for all players to do, effectively even challenge for all groups (see Geoff grub interview)
2 Movability - Not confined to cause&effect in one part of the map, but can move around and have effects that lead to changes elsewhere.
3 Chaining - Are not isolated/separate events, but either an outcome or state reached will lead onto further outcomes eg "17/18" chains exist in at least one DE.
4 Triggerability - In a variety of ways: Talking to an NPC, moving an object apparently unrelated, players not taking any action about an event triggers another event, an event can trigger another DE or path into another DE.
5 Persistence - They stay in a state until some players' actions change them back or change the content on the map in other areas for other players eg Enemy mobs in The Charr base Steeleye Span. Persistent <> Permanent.
6 Even Rewards - Contribution must exceed a minimum for a medal (interchangeable intangible rewards) which if reached any/all players will receive depending on if they earn bronze, silver, gold. No lottery.
Now a diagramatic representation of these features as eg's would really help.
Who said anything about molded from? I SAID molded to....TO..complement WoW. You know, like the B2P price model? That was a DIRECT effect of A.net not wanting to go head to head with WoW to compete with subscription numbers. And it was a very suave move I might add. It's debonair gameplay and instant level 20 out the box characters. Yet another hurdle lowered so players don't have to feel overwhelmed from playing two mmos.
You really have to let down your guard some and approach this from another angle. The business model and the casual gameplay elements are both drawn from A.net looking at WoW and deciding it's best to work with the beast that fight it head 2 head.
GW1 was B2P before WoW get even close to the poppularity it has now. It's not because of WoW, it's because of ALL OTHER MMORPGs out there, whether they are F2P or P2P. Most players argue about not playing one of those 2 payment models because they don't have money for monthly subs or they don't wanna "pay to win". It's not DIRECT effect my friend, you just think and hope it is. But I consider that WoW does have a good influence in their choice for GW2 payment model, althouth they probably were already thinking in doing the same thing they did with GW1, which was a great financial success. why not use it with GW2 too?
It will educate you in how GW was dreamed up by Ex-Blizzard employees. Also to the guy that says O'Brien dreamt up WoW....please. He was the creator of Battle.net. A service that allows players to play online for free. A far cry from creating WoW. World of Warcraft was created by Rob Pardo, Jeff Kaplan and Tom Chilton.
"The idea, an online game without monthly fees, was born in 2000. The dot com boom was about to bust. Strain and the two other ArenaNet founders, Mike O’Brien and Patrick Wyatt, held big-time positions at Blizzard in Irvine, Calif. All had been involved, in one way or another, with the company’s string of successful franchises: “StarCraft,” the “Diablo” games and the “Warcraft” games.
O’Brien was the original creator and champion of Blizzard’s Battle.net, a free service that let gamers go head-to-head against each other online. Because it was free, it was an instant hit — and, as Strain puts it: “one of the single most important and positive decisions in the history of that company.”
But Battle.net was expensive to maintain. And Blizzard was looking ahead to “World of Warcraft,” an extension of its popular “Warcraft” games played completely online. It was a pricey proposition, requiring constant care and feeding. But the upkeep would be paid for by the $15 monthly subscription fees.
: If Traditional MMOs like “World of Warcraft” and “EverQuest” are based on this subscription system. And the whole design of these games is indivisible with the business model people are paying $15 a month, they want to get their money’s worth. So developers architect gameplay that rewards those who spend hours and hours online killing rats for experience points. For these players, time spent leveling up is a badge of honor."
Then they go on to explain what their idea of a mmo should be based on WHAT THEY SAW WITH WoW.
"But Strain, O’Brien and Wyatt wanted to do something different. They wanted to create, as Strain puts it, an “MMO for the rest of us.” Those folks who may have played their fair share of “Ultima Online” as teenagers, but were now looking for something that didn’t require five hours a day to feel satisfying.
“Our design goal when creating ‘Guild Wars’ was this: ‘If I’ve got 30 minutes before dinner, will I have fun playing this game?’” says Strain.
It took the trio a year and a half to build their “secret sauce,” a smart publishing system that would let them stream cool new stuff to players in real-time, rather than the massive downloadable patches used by traditional MMOs."
Just to let you know I didn't make up the ex-blizzard guys running things up:
By the time the first “campaign” — which is what ArenaNet calls the stand-alone installments of “Guild Wars” — rolled out in the spring of 2005, the game had generated good buzz. “Guild Wars” was — and is — stunningly beautiful and meticulously detailed. Ex-Blizzard guys were running the show. And, NCsoft believed in them. But still, some in the industry and the game press believed “Guild Wars” would fail.
Like I said all along. GW and GW 2 were created to work WITH WoW not work against it. ANd I don't have a problem with that. But if you really believe that a bunch of people that use to work for Blizzard didn't take any influence with them when they formed another company and made their mmo (not saying they used any ideas, just they figured a way to work around the behemoth) then you are the one not up on things.
"Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas."
Nicely done Ramonski, Thanks. The Only Reason I don't play sub games is...the almighty budget. Yeah, yeah, I know, "50 cents a day..."
What if i don't want to pay fifty cents a day for something i already paid for?
Apologies, that's more than one reason, I'm sorry I just contradicted myself. All I can say is, Companies like ArenaNet, and RealTime Worlds deserve support for trying (and thankfully sometimes succeeding) to provide Options to the market.
After lots of reading on sites like this one, and others I realize sub fees aren't entirely neccessary, but do have a place. So do cash shops. They have a place because different players examine those models and decide (which is their right) that "This model works best for me."
Thank goodness Arena Net saw another way, and its working, and fitting my playstyle and budget. I am hoping fervently that other companies will come up with other models of design and revenue that will bring (and keep) people in this genre, because I think only now or in the near future is it really going to hit its stride as an entertainment medium.
You guy/gals are hyping this game up way too much. it would need to be 100% perfect with never ending content to even partially meet expectations.
You need to stop this... before this game releases and ultimately lets you down just like Aion did for those fans and FFXIV did recently for its followers.
Do not, I repeat, Do not over hype yourself out from enjoying the game!
thanks for the further explanation of the dynamix model. but i am still sceptical.
it all depends how complex these dynamic action are. will the lizards for example need just 1 hour to come back, or will it be days in a long chain of invasion and occupation. will there be dynamic events all over the zone in every damn zone, influencing each other in a way that it is hard to recognize whats really going on and forecast what will happen, whats to do and what will be the results of our action?
if the dynamic events are really all over the world, highly mashed and extremely complex, we will be in the middle of a living world. honestly, i doubt the have been able to do this. you would need a fully new kind of AI for this. and how to control it finally be the devs. or did they really stopped controlling and micro- designing every damn encounter? just let things hapen and see, how players deal with it? and if iot doesnt work, lauch a patch? now, this would be really old-style ind a new better way.
if its just a town here an there, invaded by mobs every hour always in the same manner and defended by players if available or not, then it will be just an artificial kind of respawn.
thanks for the further explanation of the dynamix model. but i am still sceptical.
it all depends how complex these dynamic action are. will the lizards for example need just 1 hour to come back, or will it be days in a long chain of invasion and occupation. will there be dynamic events all over the zone in every damn zone, influencing each other in a way that it is hard to recognize whats really going on and forecast what will happen, whats to do and what will be the results of our action?
if the dynamic events are really all over the world, highly mashed and extremely complex, we will be in the middle of a living world. honestly, i doubt the have been able to do this. you would need a fully new kind of AI for this. and how to control it finally be the devs. or did they really stopped controlling and micro- designing every damn encounter? just let things hapen and see, how players deal with it? and if iot doesnt work, lauch a patch? now, this would be really old-style ind a new better way.
if its just a town here an there, invaded by mobs every hour always in the same manner and defended by players if available or not, then it will be just an artificial kind of respawn.
thanks for the further explanation of the dynamix model. but i am still sceptical.
it all depends how complex these dynamic action are. will the lizards for example need just 1 hour to come back, or will it be days in a long chain of invasion and occupation. will there be dynamic events all over the zone in every damn zone, influencing each other in a way that it is hard to recognize whats really going on and forecast what will happen, whats to do and what will be the results of our action?
if the dynamic events are really all over the world, highly mashed and extremely complex, we will be in the middle of a living world. honestly, i doubt the have been able to do this. you would need a fully new kind of AI for this. and how to control it finally be the devs. or did they really stopped controlling and micro- designing every damn encounter? just let things hapen and see, how players deal with it? and if iot doesnt work, lauch a patch? now, this would be really old-style ind a new better way.
if its just a town here an there, invaded by mobs every hour always in the same manner and defended by players if available or not, then it will be just an artificial kind of respawn.
It's a full 1 hour 13 minute presentation by 2 Arenanet developers explaining the system, broken down conveniently into 21 sub sections on the right hand side, which you can click to advance to that part of the video.
thanks for the further explanation of the dynamix model. but i am still sceptical.
it all depends how complex these dynamic action are. will the lizards for example need just 1 hour to come back, or will it be days in a long chain of invasion and occupation. will there be dynamic events all over the zone in every damn zone, influencing each other in a way that it is hard to recognize whats really going on and forecast what will happen, whats to do and what will be the results of our action?
if the dynamic events are really all over the world, highly mashed and extremely complex, we will be in the middle of a living world. honestly, i doubt the have been able to do this. you would need a fully new kind of AI for this. and how to control it finally be the devs. or did they really stopped controlling and micro- designing every damn encounter? just let things hapen and see, how players deal with it? and if iot doesnt work, lauch a patch? now, this would be really old-style ind a new better way.
if its just a town here an there, invaded by mobs every hour always in the same manner and defended by players if available or not, then it will be just an artificial kind of respawn.
would say that is to expect too much, if you want to ruin the experience for yourself, am certain you could do by staying in the same event chain, it is event chains where you effect what happens next, but doubt they will take weeks or even days before it have to recycle.
their system is awesome because it creates the illusion of a changing world, and that it hopefully is a way of making quests more engaging, than the current way that NPCs hand you the quests.
I ll be happy suprised if the event cycles are as huge as you want them to be :P but also am certain that if you follow the pace of the game, it will work as intended, instead of sticking to 1 area, knowing its chains and be annoyed when you get back to start, no matter if it take 1, 2, 3 or w/e hours, before its back to start. I really do not expect an event chain to take hours before it restart tho.
its not a true changing world, we all know that, but imo its an awesome way to make the illusion of it - which it will if they made the game proper....also love the idea of the events changing depending how many ppl join in on it, which make having other people around a wanted thing rather than a pain, like in current MMOs that focus on solo gameplay - especially when they just launched.
thanks for the further explanation of the dynamix model. but i am still sceptical.
it all depends how complex these dynamic action are. will the lizards for example need just 1 hour to come back, or will it be days in a long chain of invasion and occupation. will there be dynamic events all over the zone in every damn zone, influencing each other in a way that it is hard to recognize whats really going on and forecast what will happen, whats to do and what will be the results of our action?
if the dynamic events are really all over the world, highly mashed and extremely complex, we will be in the middle of a living world. honestly, i doubt the have been able to do this. you would need a fully new kind of AI for this. and how to control it finally be the devs. or did they really stopped controlling and micro- designing every damn encounter? just let things hapen and see, how players deal with it? and if iot doesnt work, lauch a patch? now, this would be really old-style ind a new better way.
if its just a town here an there, invaded by mobs every hour always in the same manner and defended by players if available or not, then it will be just an artificial kind of respawn.
would say that is to expect too much, if you want to ruin the experience for yourself, am certain you could do by staying in the same event chain, it is event chains where you effect what happens next, but doubt they will take weeks or even days before it have to recycle.
their system is awesome because it creates the illusion of a changing world, and that it hopefully is a way of making quests more engaging, than the current way that NPCs hand you the quests.
I ll be happy suprised if the event cycles are as huge as you want them to be :P but also am certain that if you follow the pace of the game, it will work as intended, instead of sticking to 1 area, knowing its chains and be annoyed when you get back to start, no matter if it take 1, 2, 3 or w/e hours, before its back to start. I really do not expect an event chain to take hours before it restart tho.
its not a true changing world, we all know that, but imo its an awesome way to make the illusion of it - which it will if they made the game proper....also love the idea of the events changing depending how many ppl join in on it, which make having other people around a wanted thing rather than a pain, like in current MMOs that focus on solo gameplay - especially when they just launched.
The time it takes for events to revert to the beginning could be minutes, hours, days, months maybe even years depending on the event and if players are taking part in it.
Ok, let me seize this opportunity to point out something about MMOs that has certainly contributed to their:
OVER-SELLING & UNDER-DELIVERING
malaise of the last 1/2 decade or more.
EG in this thread is DYNAMIC EVENTS: There is still so much confusion on how these things work, how much more innovative or not they are and how people's expectations need to be better managed given the red-writing we all know about above from most MMOs!
I think the problem boils down to using fluff or flowery language when ArenaNet need to release a diagramatic explanation of the core model of Dynamic Events, which decrease PR/Marketing/common denominator language but increase technical accuracy.
For theme-park MMOs Dynamic Events look to be a real step forward for these linear MMOs:
1 Scaling - 1/few players can attempt them, but larger groups cause scaling: Increase activation of mobs skills, more mobs, more for all players to do, effectively even challenge for all groups (see Geoff grub interview)
2 Movability - Not confined to cause&effect in one part of the map, but can move around and have effects that lead to changes elsewhere.
3 Chaining - Are not isolated/separate events, but either an outcome or state reached will lead onto further outcomes eg "17/18" chains exist in at least one DE.
4 Triggerability - In a variety of ways: Talking to an NPC, moving an object apparently unrelated, players not taking any action about an event triggers another event, an event can trigger another DE or path into another DE.
5 Persistence - They stay in a state until some players' actions change them back or change the content on the map in other areas for other players eg Enemy mobs in The Charr base Steeleye Span. Persistent <> Permanent.
6 Even Rewards - Contribution must exceed a minimum for a medal (interchangeable intangible rewards) which if reached any/all players will receive depending on if they earn bronze, silver, gold. No lottery.
Now a diagramatic representation of these features as eg's would really help.
It's a full 1 hour 13 minute presentation by 2 Arenanet developers explaining the system, broken down conveniently into 21 sub sections on the right hand side, which you can click to advance to that part of the video.
I missed that one before, thanks for the link, it was a lot of information and some of it were new to me at least.
Comments
Interesting, but you should know better too.
You say, look at the past, but if you do so, then you notice that in history no trend lasts forever: large companies formerly thought untouchable lose their touch or fall into oblivion, getting taken over, whole gaming genres can rise or fall over the years, or to take your example: you mention that MMO games have failed the last few years. But that's only a trend of the last years. Before WoW there were other trends in MMO market, and those were broken too when WoW came.
Meaning, no trend is forever, and neither is this trend that all new MMO's are doomed to fail or cannot be successful at gaining and holding 300k-500k subs and more. The fact that MMO"s have failed to do so until now isn't proof that it'll never happen. That's logic for you.
Does this mean that WoW will be 'killed' or surpassed? Of course not, certainly not with its current lead. But the fact that 1 million+ people bought MMO's like AoC, or WAR, or Aion shows that there are enough people who want something new and not always the same MMORPG they've been playing for years.
And if a MMORPG can be equally enjoyable to them for a longer period of time, then it can hold on to them for longer than only a few months.
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."
That's pretty close. Nothing is permanently changed, but it isn't strictly cyclical either. Events (as I understand them) will have a success or failure branch. In the case of the village under attack by centaurs, if you drive them off and save the village, you'll be able to make use of the NPCs and services there. However, at some point the centaurs will be back to take another kick at the can and try to take the town again. If no one stops them, the event fails and the village is lost. It remains like this until someone comes along and boots the invaders out again.
It's actually more of a linear model than a cyclical one because it doesn't go around in a circle, but moves forward and back along the chain. When you reach the end of the chain, it doesn't start over from scratch again, but slowly works it's way back down to the beginning unless someone prevents it.
A better example I heard was having a series of outposts getting over-run in some frontier region. The outposts are lost one by one, as the antagonists move deeper inland. To take them all back, you need to start at the furthest inland encroachment and push your way back to the sea along the event chain. When you reach it, you can get to do the final event in the chain. When this is over, nothing gets reset but the invaders will be back, trying to take those outposts again, until eventually, if unopposed, they totally control the entire area. Anyone entering the event chain at that point will be faced with enemies in total control of all the outposts and probably roaming dangerously across the landscape.
I think this what they mean by a permanent change to the world. Unless players are actively participating, event chains basically degrade until they are at their beginning again. Actually, I think that's the best word to use. Event chains don't reset, they degrade over time.
This may not be the case for all events, but I'm pretty sure it is for the ones that were explained.
I think it was Ramonski that pointed out that GW2 is less a WoW competitor than it is a running mate. Why? Business model -- they don't rely on the same subscriber base. And I think you're underestimating how attractive the B2P model is, and how many people are going to be willing put money down on the box IN ADDITION to maintaining their existing WoW sub. And this is where GW2's model really shines because it can passively entice users of other games to buy into it, without forcing them to make a choice. Over time, migration will swell GW2's numbers because (opinion) the game will be that good.
No, we won't see it hit 12 million subscribers, but I think it's reasonable to say that it may comfortably take second spot behind the WoW behemoth. Friggin' 'A', bubba. Works for me.
those guys are smart
uhhh, as for WoW i persoanlly don't care if it does or not, gotta understand some ppl just have their way of thinking, if they love their WoW charcaters so much that anyother game is worthless in their eyes, what can we do about it? just let them be
as for GW2, i think the game will be amazing, they've really gone all out on this, it's going to be an addictive game for sure, but in a way it'll manage to satisfy you in short hours of gameplay, thats why i said "those guys are smart"
it's not the same addictivness that you'de get from WoW or any traditional mmorpg repetetive grindfest
World of Warcraft is nearing it's shelf life. It's graphics are seriously dated, it's quest system archaic. Guild Wars 2 brings a whole new game to the table with jaw dropping stylized painterly graphics that really spices up visual quality without leaving behind people with less graphic capable machines. It is abandoning the old mentality quest and grouping system for something unique and altogether their own. Everything i have witnessed so far with their blogs, videos, and other info releases tells me they have really listened to what players are looking for in a next generation game. ArenaNet seems well position to give Blizzovision a run for it's money, which i for one hope they succeed. I think this is a great time for MMO gamers that somebody is actually putting the industry on notice it's coming in to kick ass and take names. We need more game devs like ArenaNet to spice up a stagnant MMO market.
Archlinux ftw
Well, that all sounds logical but the thing is that Wow is getting old fast. Wow do have gotten a lot more new subs in China but in EU and NA it is losing them.
If GW2 releases in China I am pretty sure it will pass Wow in a few years, 2-3 or so. In the west it will happen pretty fast.
Wow fans will move over to other games, the only thing stopping them right now is the fact that most MMOs are pretty bad. Every single Wow player I know have quit Wow at least once, most several times but they got tired of the games they moved to and went back to Wow again. But next year will a few games that actually is good releasing and I think many of them will move permanently to one of them.
Tera and TOR are worse threats to Wow than GW2 since few people play 2 P2P games but one and a B2P is common.
Wow had a great run with many subs but nothing lasts for ever. It might still go on for a few years longer in China however but Wow have already bled western players for 2 years and I doubt Cata will stop that. It will like every single successful online game slowly lose players for years.
New games will take over the top, if that will be GW2, TOR, TERA or even Wow 2 is hard to say but no game can stay on top forever, it just isn't possible.
When WoW came out there wasn't much compitition, but with all the new MMO's coming out i don't think GW2 will be the dominant force people think, i think the population of MMO players will start to spread out.
I think people tend to forget even when these new games come out people will still keep their subs to the MMO's they have been playing for years.
"The great thing about human language is that it prevents us from sticking to the matter at hand."
- Lewis Thomas
i have read this series of articles here on mmporg about old-style MMOs vs the new ones. i am one of the "old guys". i hate theme parks, refiined games, overbalancing, easiness ....
i like new features, even if it would be fully sufficient to just give us the old ones back which made the old games succesful.
i doubt GW2 will surprise me. i saw too many videos and have read to many articles about revolutionary features in the last 8 years. i would be surprised if GW2 will really act against the trend.
whats really new with this feature, that you can change the world? as far as i understood in the videos, if you destroy a camp, the mobs will rebuild it after a while. you call it dynamic, i call it just longer way of respawn. if you killed the Sleeper in EQ1, this was changing the world! and these public quests we already have seen in WAR (even lousely implemented) will scale now. ok, sounds good, but does this change anything about the real problems all newer MMOs have: the lack of immersion?
we will see ... i will test it for sure. but i learned, that you better expect nothing.
played: Everquest I (6 years), EVE (3 years)
months: EQII, Vanguard, Siedler Online, SWTOR, Guild Wars 2
weeks: WoW, Shaiya, Darkfall, Florensia, Entropia, Aion, Lotro, Fallen Earth, Uncharted Waters
days: DDO, RoM, FFXIV, STO, Atlantica, PotBS, Maestia, WAR, AoC, Gods&Heroes, Cultures, RIFT, Forsaken World, Allodds
when WoW came out, there was a big competition: EQ2 just launched a few weeks in advance. whatever we think today about these 2 games. these days everybody speculated, how this battle will end.
but you are right. these days we got dozens of games catering different playstyles. and this means you will find in these games just people who really like this style. i remember the days, when you had just the choice to play UO or EQ1, period. a few years later DAOC came and EVE but since then nothing worth to play, unfortunately.
we were enforced to play just all in one game. the casuals, the hardliners, the achievers, the explorers, the killers .... all together, if we liked to, or not. this made these games extremely charmy. now we got the big freedom, great stuff. but we lost something forever.
played: Everquest I (6 years), EVE (3 years)
months: EQII, Vanguard, Siedler Online, SWTOR, Guild Wars 2
weeks: WoW, Shaiya, Darkfall, Florensia, Entropia, Aion, Lotro, Fallen Earth, Uncharted Waters
days: DDO, RoM, FFXIV, STO, Atlantica, PotBS, Maestia, WAR, AoC, Gods&Heroes, Cultures, RIFT, Forsaken World, Allodds
To the first poster:
One of the things about WoW is that it is easy enough (and arguably enjoyable enough) to progress your characters that it isn't as hard to leave them behind as it is in other games. I can name at least 12 people off the top of my head who have let go of 5+ level 70 characters at the end of the Burning Crusade expansion to completely reroll on a new server for WotlK. Many of those players sold their accounts completely and never looked back. And I know of more than 20 players who are doing this again for the upcoming Cataclysm expansion (almost every single one of whom stopped playing WoW around march of this year). Last I played, I did not know a single person in my immediate or extended WoW friend group who had fewer than 7 level 80s, and I'd estimate that 80% of the people I knew had every single class leveled to 80.
The fact is it's not hard to level in WoW. And with Cataclysm completely revamping the old zones and quests, plus the addition oif 2 new races, players want to level even more now. Many players are whispering "I guess I'll level a 2nd shaman first." Still many others are simply enjoying the adventure of leaving their old characters behind and beginning anew.
That's all just personal experience, but I have seen tons and tons of examples of this. It's not a completely isolated incident.
To the 2nd poster:
The scope of the on-line community for MMO players has widened...well...massively. Everyone knows what ventrillo is. Everyone participates in some sort of forum community, whether it be a specific game's official forum, a guild group's forum, or a general public forum like this one. Players become facebook friends and know each others' email addresses. Players who have formed bonds in one game can now easily stay in touch and play multiple games with each other.
Nowadays I observe players forming strong ties to a particular body of friends, as opposed to a generic guild of 25-50 players. These ties extend beyond any one game. For example, a strong friend base of 12-15 players may have formed in WoW at some point. At various points in time, some or all of those players may leave WoW to play something else or just take a general break. Right now, 4 of them might be playing FF14 together in the same Linkshell, 4 might not be playing any MMO, and 4 might still play WoW regularly, while any combination of them might log on at night to play a few quick games of Team Fortress 2 or League of Legends together.
Unlike the days of UO or EQ (although I'm sure there are plenty of exceptions), leaving an MMO today no longer means saying goodbye to in-game friends forever. The tools are there to remain in touch and continue playing all kinds of games together. It's one very positive aspect of modern online gaming communities
well i truly do understand why you look at things this way but you also have to remember that many of the things other games promised were said in a way that were it "technicly wasn't lieing" and gave gamers room for their imagination to run wild.
not saying they cant do that with this but they are very very specific about what will be in game and they have even said (unlike other companys) anything they have told us about "is already implemented".
on my final note i would like to give a quick visual aid for the dynamic event system and to point out that dynamic events dont actualy respawn they are pushed along a chain and the chain of events itself never stops being active meaning one of the events in said chain will always be going on
here is said visual aid
centaurs win: town is under their controll
/ | centaurs move to next village town under attack players retake
/ | / town and so on and so on and ..... / town peacefull
/ | / players attack centaur village
| |
centaurs retake their home centaur reinforcements arrive
/ players get pushed back centaur reinforcements defeated
i think this illustrates it somewhat ok but i have seen much better jobs
I tried to explain why dynamic events can have some sense of permanency here:
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/post/3847124
I don't see it being possible to go a whole lot further than this, outside of a single player game. If you still consider events nothing more than mobs on a longer respawn, I've got nothing else to add.
Well, the first sentence is completely wrong... closed the tab before going any further.
Ok, let me seize this opportunity to point out something about MMOs that has certainly contributed to their:
OVER-SELLING & UNDER-DELIVERING
malaise of the last 1/2 decade or more.
EG in this thread is DYNAMIC EVENTS: There is still so much confusion on how these things work, how much more innovative or not they are and how people's expectations need to be better managed given the red-writing we all know about above from most MMOs!
I think the problem boils down to using fluff or flowery language when ArenaNet need to release a diagramatic explanation of the core model of Dynamic Events, which decrease PR/Marketing/common denominator language but increase technical accuracy.
For theme-park MMOs Dynamic Events look to be a real step forward for these linear MMOs:
1 Scaling - 1/few players can attempt them, but larger groups cause scaling: Increase activation of mobs skills, more mobs, more for all players to do, effectively even challenge for all groups (see Geoff grub interview)
2 Movability - Not confined to cause&effect in one part of the map, but can move around and have effects that lead to changes elsewhere.
3 Chaining - Are not isolated/separate events, but either an outcome or state reached will lead onto further outcomes eg "17/18" chains exist in at least one DE.
4 Triggerability - In a variety of ways: Talking to an NPC, moving an object apparently unrelated, players not taking any action about an event triggers another event, an event can trigger another DE or path into another DE.
5 Persistence - They stay in a state until some players' actions change them back or change the content on the map in other areas for other players eg Enemy mobs in The Charr base Steeleye Span. Persistent <> Permanent.
6 Even Rewards - Contribution must exceed a minimum for a medal (interchangeable intangible rewards) which if reached any/all players will receive depending on if they earn bronze, silver, gold. No lottery.
Now a diagramatic representation of these features as eg's would really help.
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
Please read this article
It will educate you in how GW was dreamed up by Ex-Blizzard employees. Also to the guy that says O'Brien dreamt up WoW....please. He was the creator of Battle.net. A service that allows players to play online for free. A far cry from creating WoW. World of Warcraft was created by Rob Pardo, Jeff Kaplan and Tom Chilton.
"The idea, an online game without monthly fees, was born in 2000. The dot com boom was about to bust. Strain and the two other ArenaNet founders, Mike O’Brien and Patrick Wyatt, held big-time positions at Blizzard in Irvine, Calif. All had been involved, in one way or another, with the company’s string of successful franchises: “StarCraft,” the “Diablo” games and the “Warcraft” games.
O’Brien was the original creator and champion of Blizzard’s Battle.net, a free service that let gamers go head-to-head against each other online. Because it was free, it was an instant hit — and, as Strain puts it: “one of the single most important and positive decisions in the history of that company.”
But Battle.net was expensive to maintain. And Blizzard was looking ahead to “World of Warcraft,” an extension of its popular “Warcraft” games played completely online. It was a pricey proposition, requiring constant care and feeding. But the upkeep would be paid for by the $15 monthly subscription fees.
: If Traditional MMOs like “World of Warcraft” and “EverQuest” are based on this subscription system. And the whole design of these games is indivisible with the business model people are paying $15 a month, they want to get their money’s worth. So developers architect gameplay that rewards those who spend hours and hours online killing rats for experience points. For these players, time spent leveling up is a badge of honor."
Then they go on to explain what their idea of a mmo should be based on WHAT THEY SAW WITH WoW.
"But Strain, O’Brien and Wyatt wanted to do something different. They wanted to create, as Strain puts it, an “MMO for the rest of us.” Those folks who may have played their fair share of “Ultima Online” as teenagers, but were now looking for something that didn’t require five hours a day to feel satisfying.
“Our design goal when creating ‘Guild Wars’ was this: ‘If I’ve got 30 minutes before dinner, will I have fun playing this game?’” says Strain.
It took the trio a year and a half to build their “secret sauce,” a smart publishing system that would let them stream cool new stuff to players in real-time, rather than the massive downloadable patches used by traditional MMOs."
Just to let you know I didn't make up the ex-blizzard guys running things up:
By the time the first “campaign” — which is what ArenaNet calls the stand-alone installments of “Guild Wars” — rolled out in the spring of 2005, the game had generated good buzz. “Guild Wars” was — and is — stunningly beautiful and meticulously detailed. Ex-Blizzard guys were running the show. And, NCsoft believed in them. But still, some in the industry and the game press believed “Guild Wars” would fail.
Like I said all along. GW and GW 2 were created to work WITH WoW not work against it. ANd I don't have a problem with that. But if you really believe that a bunch of people that use to work for Blizzard didn't take any influence with them when they formed another company and made their mmo (not saying they used any ideas, just they figured a way to work around the behemoth) then you are the one not up on things.
"Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas."
Nicely done Ramonski, Thanks. The Only Reason I don't play sub games is...the almighty budget. Yeah, yeah, I know, "50 cents a day..."
What if i don't want to pay fifty cents a day for something i already paid for?
Apologies, that's more than one reason, I'm sorry I just contradicted myself. All I can say is, Companies like ArenaNet, and RealTime Worlds deserve support for trying (and thankfully sometimes succeeding) to provide Options to the market.
After lots of reading on sites like this one, and others I realize sub fees aren't entirely neccessary, but do have a place. So do cash shops. They have a place because different players examine those models and decide (which is their right) that "This model works best for me."
Thank goodness Arena Net saw another way, and its working, and fitting my playstyle and budget. I am hoping fervently that other companies will come up with other models of design and revenue that will bring (and keep) people in this genre, because I think only now or in the near future is it really going to hit its stride as an entertainment medium.
It won't if you stay the fuck over in WoW' land !
In Geordie language 'hald ya gobs man'!!
You guy/gals are hyping this game up way too much. it would need to be 100% perfect with never ending content to even partially meet expectations.
You need to stop this... before this game releases and ultimately lets you down just like Aion did for those fans and FFXIV did recently for its followers.
Do not, I repeat, Do not over hype yourself out from enjoying the game!
Playing: Rift, LotRO
Waiting on: GW2, BP
thanks for the further explanation of the dynamix model. but i am still sceptical.
it all depends how complex these dynamic action are. will the lizards for example need just 1 hour to come back, or will it be days in a long chain of invasion and occupation. will there be dynamic events all over the zone in every damn zone, influencing each other in a way that it is hard to recognize whats really going on and forecast what will happen, whats to do and what will be the results of our action?
if the dynamic events are really all over the world, highly mashed and extremely complex, we will be in the middle of a living world. honestly, i doubt the have been able to do this. you would need a fully new kind of AI for this. and how to control it finally be the devs. or did they really stopped controlling and micro- designing every damn encounter? just let things hapen and see, how players deal with it? and if iot doesnt work, lauch a patch? now, this would be really old-style ind a new better way.
if its just a town here an there, invaded by mobs every hour always in the same manner and defended by players if available or not, then it will be just an artificial kind of respawn.
played: Everquest I (6 years), EVE (3 years)
months: EQII, Vanguard, Siedler Online, SWTOR, Guild Wars 2
weeks: WoW, Shaiya, Darkfall, Florensia, Entropia, Aion, Lotro, Fallen Earth, Uncharted Waters
days: DDO, RoM, FFXIV, STO, Atlantica, PotBS, Maestia, WAR, AoC, Gods&Heroes, Cultures, RIFT, Forsaken World, Allodds
http://www.massively.com/2010/09/09/quaggan-sad-a-look-back-at-the-guild-wars-2-dynamic-events-pane/
http://www.youtube.com/user/somepointlessstuff#p/c/B40CA9375390E1D1/0/5mjiRKkHwXk
This is not a game.
I'll add the best explanation fo the Dynamic Events system I've seen:
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1013691/Designing-Guild-Wars-2-Dynamic
It's a full 1 hour 13 minute presentation by 2 Arenanet developers explaining the system, broken down conveniently into 21 sub sections on the right hand side, which you can click to advance to that part of the video.
would say that is to expect too much, if you want to ruin the experience for yourself, am certain you could do by staying in the same event chain, it is event chains where you effect what happens next, but doubt they will take weeks or even days before it have to recycle.
their system is awesome because it creates the illusion of a changing world, and that it hopefully is a way of making quests more engaging, than the current way that NPCs hand you the quests.
I ll be happy suprised if the event cycles are as huge as you want them to be :P but also am certain that if you follow the pace of the game, it will work as intended, instead of sticking to 1 area, knowing its chains and be annoyed when you get back to start, no matter if it take 1, 2, 3 or w/e hours, before its back to start. I really do not expect an event chain to take hours before it restart tho.
its not a true changing world, we all know that, but imo its an awesome way to make the illusion of it - which it will if they made the game proper....also love the idea of the events changing depending how many ppl join in on it, which make having other people around a wanted thing rather than a pain, like in current MMOs that focus on solo gameplay - especially when they just launched.
The time it takes for events to revert to the beginning could be minutes, hours, days, months maybe even years depending on the event and if players are taking part in it.
This is not a game.
http://www.youtube.com/user/somepointlessstuff#p/c/B40CA9375390E1D1 that should answer all ur queries
. Enjoy.
Looking forward to EQL and EQN.
I missed that one before, thanks for the link, it was a lot of information and some of it were new to me at least.