When GW2 fails, what's next mmo you're going to be irrationally hyped about?

xpiher

Originally posted by evilastro

Archage will be the next big overhyped game, which will finally give sandboxers a taste of their own medicine.

 

Archage doesn't have full loot, I don't even think it has partial loot so a good chunk of the sandbox community won't like it.

minime2

Well i dont really get hyped about mmo's but as GW 1 was no failure i dont see GW2 being one either . But SWTOR definately is the biggest failure i have seen in last 10 years .

Caliburn101

Originally posted by Emerwyn

Yeah I'm curious about this, because it's the same every year. Conan, Warhammer, Aion, ToR, Rift, Diablo 3, etc.

 

It's like everyone is bored of whatever they're playing and they wish so hard for a new game to end their boredom that they just exercise an irrational hype towards a game that ends up dying out in 1-3 months. Not to say the games per se fail, as they usually have a good number of sales and/or subscriptions, but then suddenly the game wasn't so good and everyone's getting hyped about the next thing.

 

So, since I'm getting a bit weary of seeing so much pointless overhyping about GW2, and that's making me feel like not playing it at all, I'm going to ask:

 

What game are you looking forward to getting overhyped after GW2?

Actually I have a question for you.... allow me to paraphrase....

When GW2 succeeds, what's the next mmo you're going to be irrationally critical about?

ereyethirn

Everyone is saying arche age and im getting sick of it so I htought I'd but in. There are actually 2 for me the first is planetside 2 which simply looks amazing! which just looks simply amazing, and the othher is wildstar. Sure some people will bag the graphics for being cartoony but the game itself looks very nice! But I will give guild wars 2 a go in the mean time and I do think I'll be playing it for a long time, however it will be more of a casual game on the side for me rather than my main mmo.

DKLond

Originally posted by dekou

Originally posted by DKLond

Unprecedented beta access? Ehm, no.

How many times have betas been the entire foundation for games being fantastic before release? It's happened with more MMOs than I care to count.

No amount of beta access will reveal how the game works in the long-term.

I was in the SWTOR beta. I disliked its WoW 0.9 combat and thought that pretty cutscenes alone wouldn't be able to carry it, but it'll be a decent game overall. I was right and got flamed a lot.

I was in TERA beta and saw lots of half-naked women.

I was in TSW beta. I disliked its combat and animations, but thought that its story and ambience are fantastic, combat might get better later on and it'll be a good game overall. Looks like I was right.

I was in the GW2 beta. It wasn't perfect, but it was awesome.

So yes, I think GW2 will be very successful. It won't kill WoW, but that's ok. The beta showed us almost every skill in the game and the majority of PvP content. Compare that to something like SWTOR's beta, which wasn't able to show Illum, because that whole planet was a pathetic failure.

I'm not denying that people think they know everything about GW2 based on the betas. But they don't. You haven't seen any of the later zones - and you can't really know how entertaining the formula will be in the LONG TERM. You can have GREAT fun for weeks - without knowing anything about long term sustainability. You've seen design elements and you've seen skills - but you can't know what the actual PvE CONTENT will be like throughout the game. You just assume everything is at the same level throughout the game, but it remains an assumption.

It's the exact same with games like SWtOR - where a LOT of people said they were having tons of fun for months after release. I'm not saying YOU did, but the hype was absolutely massive and it took quite a while before it dawned on people that the game might have AWESOME cutscenes - but still needed more than that.

I'm saying GW2 has great short-term PvE and if you're into PvP for the masses (or structured PvP like all the others) - then you will likely enjoy it for a while. But we have absolutely no way of knowing what this supposedly new formula does for long-term viability. All we can do is guess based on what we think we might enjoy - and my guess is that a lot of people will be disappointed after 3-6 months. But that's because I don't - personally - see the greatness in the game.

Naturally, if you see greatness - then it's only natural to assume it will be a fantastic game, both short-term and long-term - but it's still nothing but guesswork.

Caldrin

Originally posted by ereyethirn
Everyone is saying arche age and im getting sick of it so I htought I'd but in. There are actually 2 for me the first is planetside 2 which simply looks amazing! which just looks simply amazing, and the othher is wildstar. Sure some people will bag the graphics for being cartoony but the game itself looks very nice! But I will give guild wars 2 a go in the mean time and I do think I'll be playing it for a long time, however it will be more of a casual game on the side for me rather than my main mmo.

There are not super huge amount of hype for either of those tho...

Sure PS2 might be building a little now and we should hopefully see beta this month.. wildstar i have seen very little about.. so far neither have had huge amounts of hype.. but it might change..

k-damage

There we go ... Yet another maniacly depressed guy who can't stand people to feel excitement, and had to create a thread about it.

 

edit : lol, registered in 2006, but only 14 posts so far, including those here. Such despair, it's sad.

teotius

Rift failed? Its like most top quality MMO currently available lol...

1vald2

I just find it so ridiculous why people want to see games "fail" all the time. Let the people who like the game have fun. I leave WoW players in their WoW world, SWTOR players in their SW universe. So leave us GW2 players in our dream world. I don't see why someone has to bash on a game just because it didn't meet their expectations. 

As a side note I have to admit I am a complete guild wars 2 fan boi but I won't call it the second coming of jesus just because I like it so much. It's a game for goodness sake, have fun while it lasts. We humans need something new every now and then so just savour it for now, instead of wasting your time being depressed and all doom&gloom. 

Usually I don't answer to these troll posts, but somebody has to stand up against these trolls. It's sad enough that new-comers to GW2 read about the game and find these troll posts, making them unsure whether it's actually a game worth trying or not.

 

Caliburn101

Originally posted by DKLond

Originally posted by dekou

Originally posted by DKLond

Unprecedented beta access? Ehm, no.

How many times have betas been the entire foundation for games being fantastic before release? It's happened with more MMOs than I care to count.

No amount of beta access will reveal how the game works in the long-term.

I was in the SWTOR beta. I disliked its WoW 0.9 combat and thought that pretty cutscenes alone wouldn't be able to carry it, but it'll be a decent game overall. I was right and got flamed a lot.

I was in TERA beta and saw lots of half-naked women.

I was in TSW beta. I disliked its combat and animations, but thought that its story and ambience are fantastic, combat might get better later on and it'll be a good game overall. Looks like I was right.

I was in the GW2 beta. It wasn't perfect, but it was awesome.

So yes, I think GW2 will be very successful. It won't kill WoW, but that's ok. The beta showed us almost every skill in the game and the majority of PvP content. Compare that to something like SWTOR's beta, which wasn't able to show Illum, because that whole planet was a pathetic failure.

I'm not denying that people think they know everything about GW2 based on the betas. But they don't. You haven't seen any of the later zones - and you can't really know how entertaining the formula will be in the LONG TERM. You can have GREAT fun for weeks - without knowing anything about long term sustainability. You've seen design elements and you've seen skills - but you can't know what the actual PvE CONTENT will be like throughout the game. You just assume everything is at the same level throughout the game, but it remains an assumption.

It's the exact same with games like SWtOR - where a LOT of people said they were having tons of fun for months after release. I'm not saying YOU did, but the hype was absolutely massive and it took quite a while before it dawned on people that the game might have AWESOME cutscenes - but still needed more than that.

I'm saying GW2 has great short-term PvE and if you're into PvP for the masses (or structured PvP like all the others) - then you will likely enjoy it for a while. But we have absolutely no way of knowing what this supposedly new formula does for long-term viability. All we can do is guess based on what we think we might enjoy - and my guess is that a lot of people will be disappointed after 3-6 months. But that's because I don't - personally - see the greatness in the game.

Naturally, if you see greatness - then it's only natural to assume it will be a fantastic game, both short-term and long-term - but it's still nothing but guesswork.

Nothing like confining yourself to a carefuly selected set of facts to illustrate your point.....

You 'forget' the huge amount of time taken to build the game; the early-stated design philosophy; the quality and consistency of what has been said would be in-game and what has been proven to be in-game.

Your naysaying is based on an assumptions which ignore these relevant issues - that the 'endgame' and other regions in the gameworld aren't geing to be as good as the areas already shown. You are assuming that the areas they have shown us are the ONLY ones in which they have spent time, exercised their design philosophy and where any consistency exists.

This is an illogical point of view based on the evidence to date - never mind extrapolating the likely quality of the content based on ANet's reputation, their massive lead-time, the flexibility of their development-finance model and the many times they have said - 'it will be ready when it's ready'....

On the contrary, many other recent MMO's have promised much, shown little, been rushed out, had mimimal betas or betas in which significant concerns were not addressed.

Not one of these things are true of GW2.

You are not seeing the wood for the trees....

Purutzil

Disagree with the fail part, but still brings up the point that games will be irrationally hyped. Its a pretty good way to end up making a game people view to be some heavenly paradice turn out into the darkest depths of hell. What is worst? It typically is actually pretty good, the hype just takes anything good away and makes it look that much more dule.

 

I don't get irrationally hyped fortunately. GW2 I was looking at hesitantly as a 'possible buy due to 1 time fee' I played it once and since I didn't have crazy expectations I found it entertaining. The 'game to end all games?' hell no, but it wasn't bad. A decent game by far that could be entertaining to play occasionally.

Emerwyn

Come on, don't get down to insulting, you only show how immature you are and insult yourself through it.

 

I've seen some good answers, like Caliburn101's- "What's the next successfull MMO you're going to be irrationally critical about?". Even though he might have not meant it the same way as I, it comes to say the same thing.

 

 

Requiamer

...

seridan

Originally posted by Emerwyn

Come on, don't get down to insulting, you only show how immature you are and insult yourself through it.

Your thread title is immature don't you think?

Emerwyn

Originally posted by seridan

Originally posted by Emerwyn

Come on, don't get down to insulting, you only show how immature you are and insult yourself through it.

Your thread title is immature don't you think?

 

I still have hard time to get over how when you express a disagreeing opinion a lot of people come to think that you are trolling since, obviously, they are representatives of the universal truth and nobody can have diferent opinions. A disagreeing opinion must be either a retard or a troll. Obviously.

Eir_S

Originally posted by Emerwyn

Come on, don't get down to insulting, you only show how immature you are and insult yourself through it.

 

I've seen some good answers, like Caliburn101's- "What's the next successfull MMO you're going to be irrationally critical about?". Even though he might have not meant it the same way as I, it comes to say the same thing.

 

Don't get all sanctimonious, your thread is insulting.

Caliburn101

Originally posted by Emerwyn

Come on, don't get down to insulting, you only show how immature you are and insult yourself through it.

 

I've seen some good answers, like Caliburn101's- "What's the next successfull MMO you're going to be irrationally critical about?". Even though he might have not meant it the same way as I, it comes to say the same thing.

 

 

Oh I meant it 'that way' - but that is the point isn't it?

The default statement of the thread is to belittle contrary opinions to their own right from the get-go. There is no question or encouragment of debate - just a statement saying effectively;

"You are a fool to think GW2 will be good and GW2 will definately fail...."

Two absolutes there - fans are fools and the game is a fail - all my paraphrase does is to turn that on it's head.

I would just like to see some criticism of what the game IS (as currently observed) rather than what the game is or isn't going to be - with some intelligent reasoning behind it....

To put it in particle physics terms .... I am by nature an 'anti-troll'....

seridan

Originally posted by Emerwyn

Originally posted by seridan

Originally posted by Emerwyn

Come on, don't get down to insulting, you only show how immature you are and insult yourself through it.

Your thread title is immature don't you think?

 

I still have hard time to get over how when you express a disagreeing opinion a lot of people come to think that you are trolling since, obviously, they are representatives of the universal truth and nobody can have diferent opinions. A disagreeing opinion must be either a retard or a troll. Obviously.

I still have a hard time to get over how when you express a disagreeing over someone's opinion people come to think that you are a fanboy or someone that just follows the hype. Funny what you can do with words.

Maybe you didn't read your own post then? Or forgot what you wrote. Let me remind you what you posted:

When GW2 fails, what's next mmo you're going to be irrationally hyped about?

You assume that the game will fail (without giving any reasons) and you assume people are "irrationally" hyped about it, which of course isn't true, why do you find it so hard to believe that people are actually liking the game and are having fun with it? It's funny how people like you defend different opinions but are the same people who don't agree with them, you are doing the exact same thing you say others do to you. Just think about it....

DKLond

Originally posted by Caliburn101

Originally posted by DKLond

Originally posted by dekou

Originally posted by DKLond

Unprecedented beta access? Ehm, no.

How many times have betas been the entire foundation for games being fantastic before release? It's happened with more MMOs than I care to count.

No amount of beta access will reveal how the game works in the long-term.

I was in the SWTOR beta. I disliked its WoW 0.9 combat and thought that pretty cutscenes alone wouldn't be able to carry it, but it'll be a decent game overall. I was right and got flamed a lot.

I was in TERA beta and saw lots of half-naked women.

I was in TSW beta. I disliked its combat and animations, but thought that its story and ambience are fantastic, combat might get better later on and it'll be a good game overall. Looks like I was right.

I was in the GW2 beta. It wasn't perfect, but it was awesome.

So yes, I think GW2 will be very successful. It won't kill WoW, but that's ok. The beta showed us almost every skill in the game and the majority of PvP content. Compare that to something like SWTOR's beta, which wasn't able to show Illum, because that whole planet was a pathetic failure.

I'm not denying that people think they know everything about GW2 based on the betas. But they don't. You haven't seen any of the later zones - and you can't really know how entertaining the formula will be in the LONG TERM. You can have GREAT fun for weeks - without knowing anything about long term sustainability. You've seen design elements and you've seen skills - but you can't know what the actual PvE CONTENT will be like throughout the game. You just assume everything is at the same level throughout the game, but it remains an assumption.

It's the exact same with games like SWtOR - where a LOT of people said they were having tons of fun for months after release. I'm not saying YOU did, but the hype was absolutely massive and it took quite a while before it dawned on people that the game might have AWESOME cutscenes - but still needed more than that.

I'm saying GW2 has great short-term PvE and if you're into PvP for the masses (or structured PvP like all the others) - then you will likely enjoy it for a while. But we have absolutely no way of knowing what this supposedly new formula does for long-term viability. All we can do is guess based on what we think we might enjoy - and my guess is that a lot of people will be disappointed after 3-6 months. But that's because I don't - personally - see the greatness in the game.

Naturally, if you see greatness - then it's only natural to assume it will be a fantastic game, both short-term and long-term - but it's still nothing but guesswork.

Nothing like confining yourself to a carefuly selected set of facts to illustrate your point.....

You 'forget' the huge amount of time taken to build the game; the early-stated design philosophy; the quality and consistency of what has been said would be in-game and what has been proven to be in-game.

Your naysaying is based on an assumptions which ignore these relevant issues - that the 'endgame' and other regions in the gameworld aren't geing to be as good as the areas already shown. You are assuming that the areas they have shown us are the ONLY ones in which they have spent time, exercised their design philosophy and where any consistency exists.

This is an illogical point of view based on the evidence to date - never mind extrapolating the likely quality of the content based on ANet's reputation, their massive lead-time, the flexibility of their development-finance model and the many times they have said - 'it will be ready when it's ready'....

On the contrary, many other recent MMO's have promised much, shown little, been rushed out, had mimimal betas or betas in which significant concerns were not addressed.

Not one of these things are true of GW2.

You are not seeing the wood for the trees....

Actually, I'm not assuming anything. That's on you.

I'm simply making it clear that you can't actually know if all the content is as good as what you've seen - if you think what you've seen is good. That's not an assumption - that's 100% pure logic.

As for their reputation and business model - those things have absolutely nothing to do with what you can or can't know with any amount of certainty.

You "trust" the gameplay model - and you probably liked Guild Wars as well. That's fine - but it's still anything but certainty. It's just you hoping their promises will be kept - and that you will find the game perpetually entertaining.

As for other games and other betas - I would be careful saying they were "rushed out" - compared to GW2. GW2 isn't even out yet - so we have NO way of knowing whether it's going to be rushed or not.

The betas have had several performances issue across the board, and until we're actually playing the full version - we don't know what the full experience will be like. Plenty of bugs and quirks - like is the case with all betas. Massive balancing changes and tweaks to classes - a mere month before full release. I see nothing new here, it's the same as all the other betas.

They've shown early area content - not the later zones. Note that I'm not calling them "endgame" as you like to pretend. I'm just saying we haven't seen anywhere near all the content or dynamic events.

WvW has been shown, yeah, and I wasn't impressed to put it mildly. Then again, the entire concept isn't for me - so I'll just refrain from commenting. But if people really expect to spend months and months playing that same map with a 2-week reset for "prestige loot", well, to each his own.

I hope it works out for you, I really do.

Eir_S

Originally posted by Emerwyn

Originally posted by Eir_S

Originally posted by Emerwyn

Come on, don't get down to insulting, you only show how immature you are and insult yourself through it.

 

I've seen some good answers, like Caliburn101's- "What's the next successfull MMO you're going to be irrationally critical about?". Even though he might have not meant it the same way as I, it comes to say the same thing.

 

Don't get all sanctimonious, your thread is insulting.

 

It is not.

 

If you read it as insulting, it's because you feel adressed, so the shame's on you.

Suggesting that I will be irrational is not insulting, you're right.  Get a clue.

Kyleran

Originally posted by Icewhite

Originally posted by Takius

How the hell would you even measure "failure" for GW2?

Why, the same way we always do.  No objective criteria whatsoever.

It's a fair question, normally we try to watch sub numbers, unfortunately most companies appear embarrassed by this figure (usually for good reason I suspect) and leave us to empirical observation of things such as emply servers, server merges and guesstimates on the active player base.

GW2 will be more challenging, of course it will sell 10 gazillion copies, so that will have made it a pretty big success right off the top.  Doubtful ANET will share the amout of revenue they make from the cash shop, so where does that really leave us.

I'd say one of the better indicators would be on the number of box sales of the expansions.  If people keep buying them, probably a good indicator of the long term success of the game.

Back to the OP. 

I'm going to be irrationally optomistic for Arche Age, hoping that it's the new "sandbox style" experience that I've been waiting for probably only to find out its more of a theme park a la Fallen Earth.

The Repopulation is the dark horse on my radar, unfortunately it screams of too much ambition for such a small shop.

 

seridan

Originally posted by Emerwyn

The message is "GW2 will succeed, as has Aion, ToR, Diablo 3, etc, but in two months you'll be again burntout and looking for another thing to get overhypoed about."

 

And to that I bring question: What's the point?

Why? Do you have inside information that we don't have? Or a crystal ball?

And to that I bring the question: What's the point of this thread?

Scalpless

Originally posted by DKLond

Originally posted by dekou

Originally posted by DKLond

Unprecedented beta access? Ehm, no.

How many times have betas been the entire foundation for games being fantastic before release? It's happened with more MMOs than I care to count.

No amount of beta access will reveal how the game works in the long-term.

I was in the SWTOR beta. I disliked its WoW 0.9 combat and thought that pretty cutscenes alone wouldn't be able to carry it, but it'll be a decent game overall. I was right and got flamed a lot.

I was in TERA beta and saw lots of half-naked women.

I was in TSW beta. I disliked its combat and animations, but thought that its story and ambience are fantastic, combat might get better later on and it'll be a good game overall. Looks like I was right.

I was in the GW2 beta. It wasn't perfect, but it was awesome.

So yes, I think GW2 will be very successful. It won't kill WoW, but that's ok. The beta showed us almost every skill in the game and the majority of PvP content. Compare that to something like SWTOR's beta, which wasn't able to show Illum, because that whole planet was a pathetic failure.

I'm not denying that people think they know everything about GW2 based on the betas. But they don't. You haven't seen any of the later zones - and you can't really know how entertaining the formula will be in the LONG TERM. You can have GREAT fun for weeks - without knowing anything about long term sustainability. You've seen design elements and you've seen skills - but you can't know what the actual PvE CONTENT will be like throughout the game. You just assume everything is at the same level throughout the game, but it remains an assumption.

It's the exact same with games like SWtOR - where a LOT of people said they were having tons of fun for months after release. I'm not saying YOU did, but the hype was absolutely massive and it took quite a while before it dawned on people that the game might have AWESOME cutscenes - but still needed more than that.

I'm saying GW2 has great short-term PvE and if you're into PvP for the masses (or structured PvP like all the others) - then you will likely enjoy it for a while. But we have absolutely no way of knowing what this supposedly new formula does for long-term viability. All we can do is guess based on what we think we might enjoy - and my guess is that a lot of people will be disappointed after 3-6 months. But that's because I don't - personally - see the greatness in the game.

Naturally, if you see greatness - then it's only natural to assume it will be a fantastic game, both short-term and long-term - but it's still nothing but guesswork.

I think that for an online game to be successful, it must get ALL the basic features right. Out of the four games I mentioned, only GW2 does that. TOR has mediocre combat and an awful engine. TERA has horrible quests. TSW has visually boring combat, but Funcom still has a chance to fix it. GW2 doesn't really have any glaring faults I can think of. It could be better in some ways, but all video games could.

The point, which I seem to be losing sight of, is that we've seen GW2's basic features and how they work. Yeah, late-game PvE areas could be garbage, but that's VERY unlikely, given ANet's track record. If anything, their newbie areas tend to be a bit boring. Of course, ANet can screw up. It's possible. Is it likely? Nope.

A lot of people are going to be disappointed or pretend to be disappointed, anyway, but that doesn't mean the game will be a failure.

Angzt

is there any reason for this thread but trolling?

Eir_S

Originally posted by Emerwyn

 

And to that I bring question: What's the point on being a fanboy? Why can't you just be nice instead of acting as some company's barking dog and jumping at the throat of anyone who dares say anything negative about the game that at that moment is target of your neverending devotion?

There you go again, acting self-righteous.  Look at another thread with 50+ replies called After GW2, what are other AAA MMORPGs to look forward to?

Do you see the differences between that thread and yours?  He even criticizes the game, but never does he insult the players nor does he instigate conflict by saying the game absolutely will fail like you did.

Maybe you're not a troll, maybe you just need to learn how to express yourself better.  Good luck.