There's a place for sandbox and there's a place for themepark. Neither is better.
Personally there's just no chance I'd be playing Eve or AA when it comes out. It's not that either are bad, on the contrary I think they're fantastic and I love reading news of what's happening in Eve. But mining asteriods, running stations or playing the market just isn't for me, I have neither the time nor freedom to devote that much attention.
Can people at least respect that some like me like themepark and can find enjoyment in just the simple fact of logging in and trying out different new clothes?
i would totally agree with you ... in my opinion iwould go a step further and say almost no game is bad ... everyone is not supposed to like everything ... just cause you like or dont like some thing doesnt make it good or bad. Again to each to their own.
Hence i dont mind people saying i didnt like this or i liked that .. what annoys me is that when people say this is wrong and this way is right , this is Good and this is bad.
Personally, I'm not saying anything is right or wrong. I'm questioning whether GW2 can provide long-term enjoyment to those who expect that from it.
I'm also arguing why I'm very sceptical.
For my part, I'd want GW2 to be absolutely perfect to everyone playing it. I enjoy it when people are happy.
But if it's not - then maybe there's some merit in discussing how it could be improved - or how people might avoid setting themselves up for disappointment.
That's because I find that a lot of people who seem to despise games like WoW and SWtOR today - are the very people who bought into the hype and let themselves be convinced they would be fantastic. Why else would anyone literally despise these games now?
I guess what the OP means by "End Game" is gear grind treadmill in private instanced dungeons with 10-20 man raiding ... for the information provided ... there is none of that. The game releases with 8 dungeons with 4 modes ... so in total 32 variations of dungeons. where 24 modes of them will be the so called Hard Modes. Again the so called Low Level Dungeon will not be a waste for high level players. As in advantages for a level 80 to go to a level 30 instance are 1. Its still a skill challenge as you are demoted to 30ish. 2. you get gear from the dungeon appropriate to your level and not the mobs level. So even in a lvl 30ish instance will drop lvl 80 gear if you are 80 and if your partner is lets say 50 he gets lvl 50 gear.
Other possible End game are if a big Raid is your choice ... there will big Epic Dragons and such as already shown by Anet in the world. A guild of 15-20 lets say will have to drive the map quest in a particular direction with dynamic events .. like lets say kill mini bosses .. to reach the final boss. This boss will take minimum 10 people to kill with great coordination as there are multiple objectives and stratergies involved like in any high end final bosses of Raids ... though Random people can join your guild to help along not reducing your involment or diminishing you challenge in anyway. This again is Area wide and at every Zone .. higher zones having higher complexity content and not change in difficulty terms. lets say an lvl 20 zone final boss in terms of difficulty will be same as lvl 60 but not in complexity. Again a lvl 20 zone final boss will drop loot appropriate for your lvl and not its lvl ... so you get to improve your characters gear if you 75 while being in a lvl 20 zone.
Controlled enviroments are only provided ( for the information provided) only for 5 man parties. So if you are looking for 10+ raiding private controlled enviroment content ... to the current knowledge there are none.
And then what i would do when i hit 80 other than what i have already mentioned ... there are too many things to do ... map completions .. achievements ... Daily weekly monthly achievements ... Puzzles ... character gear modification (making them look more epic .. by getting awesome skin for gear from varied zones and also Dyes (there are over 300 dyes at launch and you start off with around 18) ... unlocking all support skills through all skill challemges ... gainging skill points and turning them into awesome looking legendaries ... these are some of the things you can do .. and i have just mentioned the PVE part of it.
See this is where someone like me gets confused with what the guildwars bandwagon wants and doesnt want, so far it seems to me they have simply changed the way you grind for exp making it more immersive to a degree but its still an exp grind from 1-80, after rift i found 'dynamic' things got boring after a week or 2 so im not sure if its really as entertaining as you think after 2 or 3 weeks of these "dynamic" events no one has played more than a few weekends where your always still in the " OMG THIS GAMEIS SO COOL MODE"
secondly.... i really feel like these masses of people who are SO AGAINST a gear grind are just replacing it with achievement/skin etc grind, there will be the same ammount of egotistical morons flexing their elite epeens about gear skins and achievements as a gear based endgame.... really seems to me like its no different just different goals, personally i dont see it as a good replacement, the idea of keeping everything "even" with no gear grind or real ability to outgear people by being better are PVE or PVP turns me off. I find it amusing that people are against others being able to "get OP gear" which if they had the skill and commitment they could also gain, its hillarious that the fanboys here make it out like the people in the best WoW arena gear were handed it by killing poorly geared noobs or that having the best gear possible from uber hard modes (i know they dont exist so much anymore) doesnt take alot of time, skill and orginisation. To me 99% of the fanboys and haters of WoW were never in a good solid guild with mature peole that did stuff together, when i was in that environment i didnt even notice the other sht going on in the server. I agree that raiding shouldnt be like a job but i still feel that people who are willing to put in 30+ hours a week raiding ultra hard content should get amazing gear BETTER than the people who dont/cant , the whole equality is what throws me most making one persons 2 hour effort as good as the next guy who spent 20 hours just feels wrong to me and it will be intersting to see how in 6 months down the track the fanboys and community are, prob just a (wait for it) WoW clone yep i said it, you already look as bad if not worse than all the blizzard fanboys and GW1 had plenty of elitist jerks so when it comes time for all the fanboys and haters to look in the mirror i hope their worlds dont crumble too badly..
I'm not really sure what your point is in all of this.
Hmmm. Let's see.
My point.
Okay, my point is that while you keep harping on the poor endgame design choices of GW2, there's actually no endgame system that has managed to hold the majority of the players playing intensely for any appreciable period of time (Say, over a year).
... and most certainly not the particular style you're championing.
So basically with GW2, it's a 'let's wait and see because it's all baseless conjecture at this point as to how well it can hold enough people's attention' attitude that seems the most meaningful to take... they're trying something new. Past 'I don't think that was a wise game design decision', or 'I think that game design decision is great!', the only really meaningful test is once the game is actually out. There's been no widescale test to see how this works out.
On the other hand, if I wanted to point out why create your own content tools apparently can't engage and hold people, I can just giggle and point at things like Xsyon and Wurm Online. Even the almighty SWG was not able to maintain most of its buyers playing. EVE Online has some really dedicated players, it's true, but far more people have tried and quit it than play consistently (And at least three themeparks I can name offhand beat it for numbers, and I'm probably missing others).
You need more than content creation tools in an MMORPG for any appreciable amount of people to remain engaged, you need a game that those people really want to play, as well. Because, well... look at the games that mostly just brought content creation tools.
No, I want an MMO that's perpetually interesting and can last for a long time.
Sounds like you want a sandbox. Then again, as many sandbox fans around here as there are, a themepark beat all of them and no sandbox will ever be as popular as WoW.
By the way, this quote sums up what I think of your expectations...
For my part, I'd want GW2 to be absolutely perfect to everyone playing it.
You do realize that's never going to happen, not with any game, and probably not with one that's trying new things. People don't like change.
No, I want an MMO that's perpetually interesting and can last for a long time.
Sounds like you want a sandbox. Then again, as many sandbox fans around here as there are, a themepark beat all of them and no sandbox will ever be as popular as WoW.
I'm not really sure what your point is in all of this.
Hmmm. Let's see.
My point.
Okay, my point is that while you keep harping on the poor endgame design choices of GW2, there's actually no endgame system that has managed to hold the majority of the players playing intensely for any appreciable period of time (Say, over a year).
... and most certainly not the particular style you're championing.
So basically with GW2, it's a 'let's wait and see because it's all baseless conjecture at this point as to how well it can hold enough people's attention' attitude that seems the most meaningful to take... they're trying something new. Past 'I don't think that was a wise game design decision', or 'I think that game design decision is great!', the only really meaningful test is once the game is actually out. There's been no widescale test to see how this works out.
On the other hand, if I wanted to point out why create your own content tools apparently can't engage and hold people, I can just giggle and point at things like Xsyon and Wurm Online. Even the almighty SWG was not able to maintain most of its buyers playing. EVE Online has some really dedicated players, it's true, but far more people have tried and quit it than play consistently (And at least three themeparks I can name offhand beat it for numbers, and I'm probably missing others).
You need more than content creation tools in an MMORPG for any appreciable amount of people to remain engaged, you need a game that those people really want to play, as well. Because, well... look at the games that mostly just brought content creation tools.
Oh, so not agreeing with GW2's "no power progression" (in rough terms) is the same as me keeping on harping about it being poor?
Ok, then.
I'm not sure what you require for conjecture to be anything but "baseless" - but it seems you completely discount experience and basic understanding of human psychology. Those are my strengths, as far as gaming is concerned.
I'm also not sure why you need the game to be out before you can comment on the things it does and doesn't do. That's on you though. I like to be prepared and I like to understand what I can expect when I invest - both in terms of time and in terms of money. I don't buy games I know absolutely nothing about - and I certainly wouldn't want to invest myself in a game that doesn't appeal to me through its design choices. Doesn't mean I won't give it a shot - but I think it's very healthy to have a level-headed approach that draws from personal experience.
I've never said that providing content-creation tools will magically create a fantastic game by itself. So, you're using a very poor strawman.
Most games that have attempted to provide these tools have been poorly executed and had a VERY small budget. Especially since WoW came out. That's because investors all went crazy when they saw the potential profit - and almost no developer could get real funding for stepping outside that model.
Yes, EvE Online has a LOT of dedicated players. It's one of the most established MMOs alive today - and it has proven that player-created content and a player-driven experience can be perpetually interesting. In fact, when you consider how primitive and "non-flashy" the moment-to-moment gameplay is in EvE - it should be abundantly clear that such a design paradigm can be very powerful.
If you don't have the imagination to go beyond low-budget and over-reaching games made mostly by inexperienced and poorly organised developers - then that's your personal position.
I think imagination is what drives games forward - and you can't start with a fantastic and innovative design without first thinking about it.
Then again, look towards ArcheAge for a big budget game that's attempting to actually move the genre forward. Maybe that's "real" enough for you.
[I put it in quotes, because fun means different things to different people. I like doing content - but I don't like repeating content.
I don't like doing it for loot - and I certainly don't like doing it just for the sake of doing it.
When I say long-term rewards - I mean rewards that will sustain motivation in the long-term, for those interested in power.
You see, it's my theory that every gamer in the world loves power progression - they just don't like repeating identical content or "grinding" for it. But taking away the power progression will not magically make GW2 interesting to play in the long-term.
That's my point.
At least, I don't see how.
I know a lot of people point to the loot treadmill as the evil of themepark MMOs - but it's really not the loot, it's the treadmill in itself. It's the tired old design being repeated over and over. But power progression was never the problem - it was the grindy nature of having to repeat content - which is something ALL content-driven MMOs will suffer from.
Content can never last - and it will ALWAYS exhaust itself.
That's why the only way to provide a fully satisfying long-term MMO experience is to give content-creation to the players. GW2 doesn't do that.]
No, I want an MMO that's perpetually interesting and can last for a long time.
Sounds like you want a sandbox. Then again, as many sandbox fans around here as there are, a themepark beat all of them and no sandbox will ever be as popular as WoW.
By the way, this quote sums up what I think of your expectations...
For my part, I'd want GW2 to be absolutely perfect to everyone playing it.
You do realize that's never going to happen, not with any game, and probably not with one that's trying new things. People don't like change.
It may sound like I want a sandbox, but I actually don't put games into such rigid categories.
But, if we really need to limit ourselves to these two paradigms - then what I actually want is an EVOLUTION of both genres, merged with the best of both worlds.
As in, I want the immersive and content-driven experience of the themepark, combined with the freedom and player-driven content of the sandbox. Then, I want both elements taken much further.
I don't recall saying I expected any game to be perfect. But I don't see the problem in striving for evolution in a genre that could REALLY use it.
It's key not to lock yourself down in the history of gaming - and to try using your imagination to go beyond.
No one is talking about "beating WoW" - though I have absolutely no doubt that will eventually happen. One day, when a game truly breaks this tired old barrier of the overly used themepark model - we'll see a game played by 15-20-25 million people. That's inevitable.
I'm not really sure what your point is in all of this.
Hmmm. Let's see.
My point.
Okay, my point is that while you keep harping on the poor endgame design choices of GW2, there's actually no endgame system that has managed to hold the majority of the players playing intensely for any appreciable period of time (Say, over a year).
... and most certainly not the particular style you're championing.
So basically with GW2, it's a 'let's wait and see because it's all baseless conjecture at this point as to how well it can hold enough people's attention' attitude that seems the most meaningful to take... they're trying something new. Past 'I don't think that was a wise game design decision', or 'I think that game design decision is great!', the only really meaningful test is once the game is actually out. There's been no widescale test to see how this works out.
On the other hand, if I wanted to point out why create your own content tools apparently can't engage and hold people, I can just giggle and point at things like Xsyon and Wurm Online. Even the almighty SWG was not able to maintain most of its buyers playing. EVE Online has some really dedicated players, it's true, but far more people have tried and quit it than play consistently (And at least three themeparks I can name offhand beat it for numbers, and I'm probably missing others).
You need more than content creation tools in an MMORPG for any appreciable amount of people to remain engaged, you need a game that those people really want to play, as well. Because, well... look at the games that mostly just brought content creation tools.
Ummm that's not true. I guarantee most WoW players have played for mulitple years and have had active accounts all through those years. My wife was a five year vet before she quit and she logged in daily as did most of her guild and I am sure she is not exceptional.
Then again, look towards ArcheAge for a big budget game that's attempting to actually move the genre forward. Maybe that's "real" enough for you.
Maybe! Personally, I think that most people can't remain engaged in a game for as long as MMORPGs traditionally try to engage people.
It's why people end up hating them so much.
The only reason I've ever stayed in MMORPGs for longer than a couple months is actually because of roleplay. Which is SORT of like being in a sandbox, except you're doing all the hard work and all the programmers have to do is program a /me and /say command. It's sort of like.... all the infinite creation potential of a sandbox but more so. (And less so. Simultaneously)
I actually don't dislike sandboxes, I like the IDEA of them. (Though I'd only play them for a certain amount of time... just the same as with a themepark, really.... and I don't really think I'm alone, and pretty much an observation of player habits in MMORPGs shows I'm certainly not alone) I just mostly dislike the idea that every game should be a sandbox to be a better game.
I think that's too small of a way of looking at MMORPGs. I've actually argued before that a large portion of the sandbox crowd would be better served by forging onwards and creating a new game genre name, so rather than complaining 'This game isn't an MMORPG or would be a better MMORPG if it was more like a sandbox' (When it fits every part of the MMORPG acronym), it could switch to "This isn't a good virtual world simulator game' (Or whatever the cool new name for it is.
Then you coul dhave all the various MMORPGs that cater to various sorts of people, and then you could have people happy with their brand new Virtual World Simulators or whatever.
I actually think there's a place for all sorts of types of game designs. Even types of game design I really dislike.
What I think you're missing is that in your desire for a certain type of game (Sandbox heavy, from the sounds of it), you're not noticing that GW2 has 'fantastic and innovative game design' just in ways you might not particularly CARE for.
It's doing a great job of the best feature I've ever seen in an MMORPG. 'Making it easy to play with my friends'. There's not a better feature a game could advertise for me than an ability for me to play with my friends. GW2 is moving the genre in a direction, it might just not be the direction you personally consider forward.
The fact that it's using the non constant-treadmill endgame design is a movement. For many people, they believe it's forward. Just not for you.
Ummm that's not true. I guarantee most WoW players have played for mulitple years and have had active accounts all through those years. My wife was a five year vet before she quit and she logged in daily as did most of her guild and I am sure she is not exceptional.
More people have quit WoW than have continued to play it.
The fact that so many people are playing it now is just an amazing testament to how many people have tried it.
Yes, lots of people are insanely dedicated to WoW, but that's not the average experience for the average person who bought it. Otherwise the sub numbers would be very much higher.
Ummm that's not true. I guarantee most WoW players have played for mulitple years and have had active accounts all through those years. My wife was a five year vet before she quit and she logged in daily as did most of her guild and I am sure she is not exceptional.
More people have quit WoW than have continued to play it.
The fact that so many people are playing it now is just an amazing testament to how many people have tried it.
Yes, lots of people are insanely dedicated to WoW, but that's not the average experience for the average person who bought it. Otherwise the sub numbers would be very much higher.
You have a point?
The game is still played by 9 million players. You were talking about a lack of longevity.
I mean, look at the big picture, how is GW2 any different?
Great, now instead of repeating the same dungeons over an over for gear, you now do it because "it's fun".
So? you are still doing the EXACT same thing you did on pretty much ever other mmo made in the last years.
Once you finish all the content, there is nothing to do.
Unless you actually enjoy to do the same content forever.
GW2 lacks player made content, which is why if it had a sub, 70% of it's playerbase would be gone in a year.
It's still going to be the same, but since it's B2P there won't be any way to prove it.
"Dogs are the leaders of the planet. If you see two life forms, one of them's making a poop, the other one's carrying it for him, who would you assume is in charge."
"The idea behind the tuxedo is the woman's point of view that men are all the same; so we might as well dress them that way. That's why a wedding is like the joining together of a beautiful, glowing bride and some guy" -Seinfeld
You don't need to be skeptical DKLond, I play GW to this day, only 30/50 on HoM cause I don't care to go for 100% vanquish or title. Where do I find the fun? Obviously not anything you'd consider fun of course, I mean how can trying to mix-match your armor and redye them be fun right?
You don't need to doubt what others say they find fun. If you like EU you don't need to doubt it when a Civ fan tell you they like Civ just because Civ doesn't try very hard to emulate history. Or with a more real life example, if you cook yourself you don't need to doubt when someone say they like going to restaurants. Sure by cooking yourself you get to create and experiment with an infinite number of dishes, but others may just like to be able to sit down and have nice food.
Are there going to be people who will be disappointed with GW2? Yes, and I'd say lots. But dare I say it won't be people in this thread who have a clear idea of what GW2 has and what they want from it.
Eve has a lot of dedicated players, and it is precisely that dedication why I'm not playing it.
Then again, look towards ArcheAge for a big budget game that's attempting to actually move the genre forward. Maybe that's "real" enough for you.
Maybe! Personally, I think that most people can't remain engaged in a game for as long as MMORPGs traditionally try to engage people.
It's why people end up hating them so much.
The only reason I've ever stayed in MMORPGs for longer than a couple months is actually because of roleplay. Which is SORT of like being in a sandbox, except you're doing all the hard work and all the programmers have to do is program a /me and /say command. It's sort of like.... all the infinite creation potential of a sandbox but more so. (And less so. Simultaneously)
I actually don't dislike sandboxes, I like the IDEA of them. (Though I'd only play them for a certain amount of time... just the same as with a themepark, really.... and I don't really think I'm alone, and pretty much an observation of player habits in MMORPGs shows I'm certainly not alone) I just mostly dislike the idea that every game should be a sandbox to be a better game.
I think that's too small of a way of looking at MMORPGs. I've actually argued before that a large portion of the sandbox crowd would be better served by forging onwards and creating a new game genre name, so rather than complaining 'This game isn't an MMORPG or would be a better MMORPG if it was more like a sandbox' (When it fits every part of the MMORPG acronym), it could switch to "This isn't a good virtual world simulator game' (Or whatever the cool new name for it is.
Then you coul dhave all the various MMORPGs that cater to various sorts of people, and then you could have people happy with their brand new Virtual World Simulators or whatever.
I actually think there's a place for all sorts of types of game designs. Even types of game design I really dislike.
What I think you're missing is that in your desire for a certain type of game (Sandbox heavy, from the sounds of it), you're not noticing that GW2 has 'fantastic and innovative game design' just in ways you might not particularly CARE for.
It's doing a great job of the best feature I've ever seen in an MMORPG. 'Making it easy to play with my friends'. There's not a better feature a game could advertise for me than an ability for me to play with my friends. GW2 is moving the genre in a direction, it might just not be the direction you personally consider forward.
The fact that it's using the non constant-treadmill endgame design is a movement. For many people, they believe it's forward. Just not for you.
You should really try reading what I'm saying, instead of imagining it.
I've never said I wanted a constant-treadmill endgame design, and you know it. I actually said I hated that, and the dreadful tier replacement system used in most themeparks.
I'm saying that REMOVING the power progression is not going to make content last longer.
It's curing the disease by killing the patient.
Oh, and yes I DO see good parts of GW2. I've bought the game and I expect to have fun with it for a few weeks.
I think combat feels really good - and I really like the PvE flow of the game. It felt like I was constantly moving - and the world truly felt alive. That's great.
I think the game might be a significant step forward in the short-term department. But I don't have a binary mindset - where I can't criticise some significant elements of a game and yet still think it does some things right.
Also, I don't want a sandbox. I want a COMBINATION of the best parts of the sandbox and the themepark genre. Enough with the black/white thinking, please.
The game is still played by 9 million players. You were talking about a lack of longevity.
How many millions would be enough for longevity?
I see no logic or support for your claim.
Ah, no. Of course every type of game has longevity for SOME people.
Why, there are people who have put thousands upon thousands of hours into GW1.
There are people who have put that much into Minesweeper.
My point is that there's actually no type of gameplay design that can hold MOST people, especially when you get into a more time intensive level (There's a lot of people who just play WoW a LITTLE bit. I know, it's hard to believe, but it's true). WoW has such incredible subscriber numbers partly because so MANY people have tried it (Enough to make even those sub numbers pale), and partly because subscribers can mean anything from somebody who spends 0 hours a month playing, to somebody who spends 20+ hours a day playing.
I think any realistic MMORPG design should take into account the fact that most people simply aren't going to be hyperengaged by said game for ridiculous periods of time.
Alternatively, it should be designed for a niche, and focus on maintaining that niche.
(Even if WoW DID have a 50% retention rate (Which it doesn't), I don't think 'design a game like WoW' is a good idea, since there's a lot of factors that made WoW so popular, and trying to just copy it has proven to be a fairly unsuccessful idea so far)
So, basically, you repeat content with a variety of challenge settings for no real reward except aesthetic ones, right?
Exactly like all the other themeparks except for the power progression.
You do it for "fun" instead of the rewards, right? Because all other themeparks are boring because they also provide long-term rewards, right?
That's a pretty deceptive way of putting it. When you look at the PvE "endgame" in WoW, for example, what actually is there?
One raid. Period.
Whatever the latest raid released on the treadmill is the only one viable for your characters that have been raiding. The entire rest of the PvE game is rendered obsolete simply due to the ever accellerating power curve. You get to max level, run a few dungeons for "starter raid gear", then raid. Period.
GW2 is taking a different approach to endgame. The big question is this... why should how you've played the entire game on the road to max level suddenly completely change now that you're at max level? Seriously, think about that. While levelling, you explore, gain skill and skills, quest, constantly see new things... but at max level you do basically nothing but raid? Asinine. Instead, GW2 keeps you playing the game the way you have been and are used to. All dungeons are fully accessible and challenging. All zones remain a challenge to play in, and those zones will constantly be adding new dynamic events for you to experience when you visit them. The "endgame" island of Orr is like the game prior, new and more challenging dynamic events, and they ultimately lead to accessing the final dungeon to face Zhaitan himself.
So it boils down to this: What do you want your endgame to be in PvE? That one last raid, over and over until a piece of gear drops that you'll have a chance to roll on and hope you get, or... hey, I'm going to go over there and do that...?
You should really try reading what I'm saying, instead of imagining it.
I've never said I wanted a constant-treadmill endgame design, and you know it. I actually said I hated that, and the dreadful tier replacement system used in most themeparks.
I didn't say you said that.
I'm saying that REMOVING the power progression is not going to make content last longer.
That's... not exactly how game design works. It's a different design. Chocolate icecream isn't neapolitan icecream with the vanilla and strawberry removed.
Also, I don't want a sandbox. I want a COMBINATION of the best parts of the sandbox and the themepark genre. Enough with the black/white thinking, please.
That's why I said 'Sandbox heavy' actually. I did notice you mentioned Archeage, which is basically the poster boy for upcoming hybrid games. I think that type of game has its place. As do more sandbox focused games, and pure themeparks. Actually, that's one of the reasons I champion the B2P model, because I don't think themepark games should be considered a game type that automatically has recurring charge value. SOME people may want to play it a lot, but I personally don't. If you're charging a monthly fee, I think there should be a fairly heavy amount of content per month to justify it, or it should be catering to a very specific niche.
Of course, this is a purely selfish desire on my part, since basically I'm asking for a payment model that caters to MY whims and feelings on long term game longevity (I prefer to drop out of games when I want and come back in when I'm in the mood, with no extraneous steps like dropping or restarting subscriptions, because I'm not the sort who gets heavily engaged in an MMORPG).
As if GW2 is the only fun MMO that has ever been. WoW vanilla was really boring, right? It was a terrible game that forced people to play through the evil loot treadmill that kept them locked down with their keyboards.
This whole B2P = better content is not logical.
With a subscription based game, you're expecting people to keep playing - so you're even MORE obligated to keep the content as fun as possible. Yes, you have to provide long-term motivation - but you DO NOT provide that by making the actual content boring.
WoW and other quality themeparks have fantastic and fun content - it just can't last forever, even with variety.
That's why we need something fresh. GW2 is fresh enough - but it doesn't have the carrot (really) after level 80.
Ah, there's your problem. You're so busy looking for the carrot that you can't see the buffett in front of you.
GW2 being B2P means they constantly need to keep injecting more and more content to keep people interested enough to want to do two things... buy in the cash shop and buy the expansions. Gear treadmill games like WoW don't... they only need to keep you on the treadmill until they're ready to release the next treadmill. Huge difference. GW2 will also need to be sticking their new content all throughout the game where WoW can only tack it on the end.
I'm not really sure what your point is in all of this.
Hmmm. Let's see.
My point.
Okay, my point is that while you keep harping on the poor endgame design choices of GW2, there's actually no endgame system that has managed to hold the majority of the players playing intensely for any appreciable period of time (Say, over a year).
... and most certainly not the particular style you're championing.
So basically with GW2, it's a 'let's wait and see because it's all baseless conjecture at this point as to how well it can hold enough people's attention' attitude that seems the most meaningful to take... they're trying something new. Past 'I don't think that was a wise game design decision', or 'I think that game design decision is great!', the only really meaningful test is once the game is actually out. There's been no widescale test to see how this works out.
On the other hand, if I wanted to point out why create your own content tools apparently can't engage and hold people, I can just giggle and point at things like Xsyon and Wurm Online. Even the almighty SWG was not able to maintain most of its buyers playing. EVE Online has some really dedicated players, it's true, but far more people have tried and quit it than play consistently (And at least three themeparks I can name offhand beat it for numbers, and I'm probably missing others).
You need more than content creation tools in an MMORPG for any appreciable amount of people to remain engaged, you need a game that those people really want to play, as well. Because, well... look at the games that mostly just brought content creation tools.
Meow.
Good post. While I don't know those games personally I can see Lond's point. He/she listed some really neat ideas however I have to agree with you as well. The themepark and sandbox, have to exist together and not only that but evolve to a point where they are cohesive and yet form a new subgenre under the MMOrpg banner.
My theory is that this new MMO will be integrated into things like facebook, your phone in general as you can see it spreading already..with the authenticators. In my futuristic vision most of the population will play this or watch this game sort of like gamer the movie. That I think is where we are headed. to the point where the game creates outside revenue in many different forms. Syfy channel is also creating a game that is an MMO and a TV show that coinside together. This is the evolution although on a lesses scale that we will eventually see in the future.
Archage...I keep hearing about this game. I'm sure it will have it's faults and praises as does GW2. However I think were too soon to see any real meaningful progress from GW2 or Archage past standard stuff.
Lond: the tone of your posts...they seem sort of weird. Almost arrogant or something. I apologize if I'm over analyzing you as I'm sure I'm thinking to deeply with it...just can't put my finger on it. How ever I do agree with your thoughts on progression. I think you need power as well as aethetics. But I think perhaps your looking at power but not aethetics as power..and I think they can be the same. Sort of like to get that legendary weapon you have to go through hoops and thus power is created via time investment, and achievement. But I do see what form of power you are referring to.
If your waiting for GW2 to do that for you I think you will be dissapointed and I'm curious to see how Archage does and I will keep an eye on it just because of this thread. I agree with your desire for that game however I don't think you will see the fruits until say I'm 50-70 years old and I'm 31 now so we have a ways to go..and even then it will still be budding.
Also take this point into consideration...this game will be for the masses so that means the outside world will be fairly crappy and all entities will be integrated into this game some how. When the game is a form of society then we will have a serious problem. You think I'm joking but take this into consideration. Next time you go to a bank, DMV or some place where you have to sit and wait...look around and watch how many people are on their phones, how many of them are texting or playing some game. Now look how many have brought a book...just think about that for a second.
The entire game from the moment you enter the world til the day you decide to stop playing will be what you consider 'end game'.
There is no "fuuuuuuuuuuuu I just need 3 more levels", or "fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu I just need one more piece of gear"
The chained events you're talking about, you can experience them from the beginning of the game, however they do get much more epic as the game goes on.
I was sold a million times over the first time I stumbled upon the Shadow Behemoth....that was an epic experience.
Originally posted by Arskaaa "when players learned tacticks in dungeon/raids, its bread".
I was sold a million times over the first time I stumbled upon the Shadow Behemoth....that was an epic experience.
Haha, me too. I finally got to battle him with a few close friends in the last BWE, and it was the MOST fun I've had in an MMO in years, and I didn't need to grind for months or check if I was "locked out" in order to do it, I just had to be in the right place at the right time and know my skills. This is the "hook". People who like fighting raid bosses simply for the challenge of doing so will not go unhappy in this game.
I was sold a million times over the first time I stumbled upon the Shadow Behemoth....that was an epic experience.
Haha, me too. I finally got to battle him with a few close friends in the last BWE, and it was the MOST fun I've had in an MMO in years, and I didn't need to grind for months or check if I was "locked out" in order to do it, I just had to be in the right place at the right time and know my skills. This is the "hook". People who like fighting raid bosses simply for the challenge of doing so will not go unhappy in this game.
My son (who's nine) and I were killing undead in this swamp (I think for a heart, not sure) when suddenly the Behemoth event starts. We just happened to have our camera view in the right direction as the Behemoth clawed up out of the mire right in front of us, giving us a perfect side-view. My son's like "Aaaaahhh! Holy crap!" (He later admitted to being a little scared. ) We joined up with the people fighting the Behemoth and had an absolute blast. That was BWE2 I think, and he still talks about it.
That's real endgame my friends, when the memories last you right to the end.
The game is still played by 9 million players. You were talking about a lack of longevity.
How many millions would be enough for longevity?
I see no logic or support for your claim.
Ah, no. Of course every type of game has longevity for SOME people.
Why, there are people who have put thousands upon thousands of hours into GW1.
There are people who have put that much into Minesweeper.
My point is that there's actually no type of gameplay design that can hold MOST people, especially when you get into a more time intensive level (There's a lot of people who just play WoW a LITTLE bit. I know, it's hard to believe, but it's true). WoW has such incredible subscriber numbers partly because so MANY people have tried it (Enough to make even those sub numbers pale), and partly because subscribers can mean anything from somebody who spends 0 hours a month playing, to somebody who spends 20+ hours a day playing.
I think any realistic MMORPG design should take into account the fact that most people simply aren't going to be hyperengaged by said game for ridiculous periods of time.
Alternatively, it should be designed for a niche, and focus on maintaining that niche.
(Even if WoW DID have a 50% retention rate (Which it doesn't), I don't think 'design a game like WoW' is a good idea, since there's a lot of factors that made WoW so popular, and trying to just copy it has proven to be a fairly unsuccessful idea so far)
What do you mean by "most" people and what evidence do you have to support such a claim?
Obviously, with 6+ billion people in the world - most people most definitely won't sit down and play the same game for years.
However, for this to make any sense at all - we're talking about enough people to support the development of a long-term MMO experience, and we've had several examples of that already. Some of the least popular MMOs still remain profitable - so you have no logic behind your point that I can see.
You're coming up with all kinds of strawman stuff to try and place me into a tiny little box called anti-GW2 people. But I don't belong there.
I've never said any game should strive for "most people" being "hyperactive" for "ridiculous" periods of time. I've said perpetually interesting in the long-term - and you've said absolutely nothing that would make that seem impossible. Hard? Sure, it takes talent and resources.
Comments
Personally, I'm not saying anything is right or wrong. I'm questioning whether GW2 can provide long-term enjoyment to those who expect that from it.
I'm also arguing why I'm very sceptical.
For my part, I'd want GW2 to be absolutely perfect to everyone playing it. I enjoy it when people are happy.
But if it's not - then maybe there's some merit in discussing how it could be improved - or how people might avoid setting themselves up for disappointment.
That's because I find that a lot of people who seem to despise games like WoW and SWtOR today - are the very people who bought into the hype and let themselves be convinced they would be fantastic. Why else would anyone literally despise these games now?
See this is where someone like me gets confused with what the guildwars bandwagon wants and doesnt want, so far it seems to me they have simply changed the way you grind for exp making it more immersive to a degree but its still an exp grind from 1-80, after rift i found 'dynamic' things got boring after a week or 2 so im not sure if its really as entertaining as you think after 2 or 3 weeks of these "dynamic" events no one has played more than a few weekends where your always still in the " OMG THIS GAMEIS SO COOL MODE"
secondly.... i really feel like these masses of people who are SO AGAINST a gear grind are just replacing it with achievement/skin etc grind, there will be the same ammount of egotistical morons flexing their elite epeens about gear skins and achievements as a gear based endgame.... really seems to me like its no different just different goals, personally i dont see it as a good replacement, the idea of keeping everything "even" with no gear grind or real ability to outgear people by being better are PVE or PVP turns me off. I find it amusing that people are against others being able to "get OP gear" which if they had the skill and commitment they could also gain, its hillarious that the fanboys here make it out like the people in the best WoW arena gear were handed it by killing poorly geared noobs or that having the best gear possible from uber hard modes (i know they dont exist so much anymore) doesnt take alot of time, skill and orginisation. To me 99% of the fanboys and haters of WoW were never in a good solid guild with mature peole that did stuff together, when i was in that environment i didnt even notice the other sht going on in the server. I agree that raiding shouldnt be like a job but i still feel that people who are willing to put in 30+ hours a week raiding ultra hard content should get amazing gear BETTER than the people who dont/cant , the whole equality is what throws me most making one persons 2 hour effort as good as the next guy who spent 20 hours just feels wrong to me and it will be intersting to see how in 6 months down the track the fanboys and community are, prob just a (wait for it) WoW clone yep i said it, you already look as bad if not worse than all the blizzard fanboys and GW1 had plenty of elitist jerks so when it comes time for all the fanboys and haters to look in the mirror i hope their worlds dont crumble too badly..
Hmmm. Let's see.
My point.
Okay, my point is that while you keep harping on the poor endgame design choices of GW2, there's actually no endgame system that has managed to hold the majority of the players playing intensely for any appreciable period of time (Say, over a year).
... and most certainly not the particular style you're championing.
So basically with GW2, it's a 'let's wait and see because it's all baseless conjecture at this point as to how well it can hold enough people's attention' attitude that seems the most meaningful to take... they're trying something new. Past 'I don't think that was a wise game design decision', or 'I think that game design decision is great!', the only really meaningful test is once the game is actually out. There's been no widescale test to see how this works out.
On the other hand, if I wanted to point out why create your own content tools apparently can't engage and hold people, I can just giggle and point at things like Xsyon and Wurm Online. Even the almighty SWG was not able to maintain most of its buyers playing. EVE Online has some really dedicated players, it's true, but far more people have tried and quit it than play consistently (And at least three themeparks I can name offhand beat it for numbers, and I'm probably missing others).
You need more than content creation tools in an MMORPG for any appreciable amount of people to remain engaged, you need a game that those people really want to play, as well. Because, well... look at the games that mostly just brought content creation tools.
Sounds like you want a sandbox. Then again, as many sandbox fans around here as there are, a themepark beat all of them and no sandbox will ever be as popular as WoW.
By the way, this quote sums up what I think of your expectations...
For my part, I'd want GW2 to be absolutely perfect to everyone playing it.
You do realize that's never going to happen, not with any game, and probably not with one that's trying new things. People don't like change.
No sandbox has ever been as popular as SWTOR.
That's a depressing thought.
Oh, so not agreeing with GW2's "no power progression" (in rough terms) is the same as me keeping on harping about it being poor?
Ok, then.
I'm not sure what you require for conjecture to be anything but "baseless" - but it seems you completely discount experience and basic understanding of human psychology. Those are my strengths, as far as gaming is concerned.
I'm also not sure why you need the game to be out before you can comment on the things it does and doesn't do. That's on you though. I like to be prepared and I like to understand what I can expect when I invest - both in terms of time and in terms of money. I don't buy games I know absolutely nothing about - and I certainly wouldn't want to invest myself in a game that doesn't appeal to me through its design choices. Doesn't mean I won't give it a shot - but I think it's very healthy to have a level-headed approach that draws from personal experience.
I've never said that providing content-creation tools will magically create a fantastic game by itself. So, you're using a very poor strawman.
Most games that have attempted to provide these tools have been poorly executed and had a VERY small budget. Especially since WoW came out. That's because investors all went crazy when they saw the potential profit - and almost no developer could get real funding for stepping outside that model.
Yes, EvE Online has a LOT of dedicated players. It's one of the most established MMOs alive today - and it has proven that player-created content and a player-driven experience can be perpetually interesting. In fact, when you consider how primitive and "non-flashy" the moment-to-moment gameplay is in EvE - it should be abundantly clear that such a design paradigm can be very powerful.
If you don't have the imagination to go beyond low-budget and over-reaching games made mostly by inexperienced and poorly organised developers - then that's your personal position.
I think imagination is what drives games forward - and you can't start with a fantastic and innovative design without first thinking about it.
Then again, look towards ArcheAge for a big budget game that's attempting to actually move the genre forward. Maybe that's "real" enough for you.
[Qutoe from above]
[I put it in quotes, because fun means different things to different people. I like doing content - but I don't like repeating content.
I don't like doing it for loot - and I certainly don't like doing it just for the sake of doing it.
When I say long-term rewards - I mean rewards that will sustain motivation in the long-term, for those interested in power.
You see, it's my theory that every gamer in the world loves power progression - they just don't like repeating identical content or "grinding" for it. But taking away the power progression will not magically make GW2 interesting to play in the long-term.
That's my point.
At least, I don't see how.
I know a lot of people point to the loot treadmill as the evil of themepark MMOs - but it's really not the loot, it's the treadmill in itself. It's the tired old design being repeated over and over. But power progression was never the problem - it was the grindy nature of having to repeat content - which is something ALL content-driven MMOs will suffer from.
Content can never last - and it will ALWAYS exhaust itself.
That's why the only way to provide a fully satisfying long-term MMO experience is to give content-creation to the players. GW2 doesn't do that.]
/agree
It may sound like I want a sandbox, but I actually don't put games into such rigid categories.
But, if we really need to limit ourselves to these two paradigms - then what I actually want is an EVOLUTION of both genres, merged with the best of both worlds.
As in, I want the immersive and content-driven experience of the themepark, combined with the freedom and player-driven content of the sandbox. Then, I want both elements taken much further.
I don't recall saying I expected any game to be perfect. But I don't see the problem in striving for evolution in a genre that could REALLY use it.
It's key not to lock yourself down in the history of gaming - and to try using your imagination to go beyond.
No one is talking about "beating WoW" - though I have absolutely no doubt that will eventually happen. One day, when a game truly breaks this tired old barrier of the overly used themepark model - we'll see a game played by 15-20-25 million people. That's inevitable.
Ummm that's not true. I guarantee most WoW players have played for mulitple years and have had active accounts all through those years. My wife was a five year vet before she quit and she logged in daily as did most of her guild and I am sure she is not exceptional.
Maybe! Personally, I think that most people can't remain engaged in a game for as long as MMORPGs traditionally try to engage people.
It's why people end up hating them so much.
The only reason I've ever stayed in MMORPGs for longer than a couple months is actually because of roleplay. Which is SORT of like being in a sandbox, except you're doing all the hard work and all the programmers have to do is program a /me and /say command.
It's sort of like.... all the infinite creation potential of a sandbox but more so. (And less so. Simultaneously)
I actually don't dislike sandboxes, I like the IDEA of them. (Though I'd only play them for a certain amount of time... just the same as with a themepark, really.... and I don't really think I'm alone, and pretty much an observation of player habits in MMORPGs shows I'm certainly not alone) I just mostly dislike the idea that every game should be a sandbox to be a better game.
I think that's too small of a way of looking at MMORPGs. I've actually argued before that a large portion of the sandbox crowd would be better served by forging onwards and creating a new game genre name, so rather than complaining 'This game isn't an MMORPG or would be a better MMORPG if it was more like a sandbox' (When it fits every part of the MMORPG acronym), it could switch to "This isn't a good virtual world simulator game' (Or whatever the cool new name for it is.
Then you coul dhave all the various MMORPGs that cater to various sorts of people, and then you could have people happy with their brand new Virtual World Simulators or whatever.
I actually think there's a place for all sorts of types of game designs. Even types of game design I really dislike.
What I think you're missing is that in your desire for a certain type of game (Sandbox heavy, from the sounds of it), you're not noticing that GW2 has 'fantastic and innovative game design' just in ways you might not particularly CARE for.
It's doing a great job of the best feature I've ever seen in an MMORPG. 'Making it easy to play with my friends'. There's not a better feature a game could advertise for me than an ability for me to play with my friends.
GW2 is moving the genre in a direction, it might just not be the direction you personally consider forward.
The fact that it's using the non constant-treadmill endgame design is a movement. For many people, they believe it's forward. Just not for you.
More people have quit WoW than have continued to play it.
The fact that so many people are playing it now is just an amazing testament to how many people have tried it.
Yes, lots of people are insanely dedicated to WoW, but that's not the average experience for the average person who bought it. Otherwise the sub numbers would be very much higher.
You have a point?
The game is still played by 9 million players. You were talking about a lack of longevity.
How many millions would be enough for longevity?
I see no logic or support for your claim.
I agree when DKLONG.
I mean, look at the big picture, how is GW2 any different?
Great, now instead of repeating the same dungeons over an over for gear, you now do it because "it's fun".
So? you are still doing the EXACT same thing you did on pretty much ever other mmo made in the last years.
Once you finish all the content, there is nothing to do.
Unless you actually enjoy to do the same content forever.
GW2 lacks player made content, which is why if it had a sub, 70% of it's playerbase would be gone in a year.
It's still going to be the same, but since it's B2P there won't be any way to prove it.
"Dogs are the leaders of the planet. If you see two life forms, one of them's making a poop, the other one's carrying it for him, who would you assume is in charge."
"The idea behind the tuxedo is the woman's point of view that men are all the same; so we might as well dress them that way. That's why a wedding is like the joining together of a beautiful, glowing bride and some guy"
-Seinfeld
You don't need to be skeptical DKLond, I play GW to this day, only 30/50 on HoM cause I don't care to go for 100% vanquish or title. Where do I find the fun? Obviously not anything you'd consider fun of course, I mean how can trying to mix-match your armor and redye them be fun right?
You don't need to doubt what others say they find fun. If you like EU you don't need to doubt it when a Civ fan tell you they like Civ just because Civ doesn't try very hard to emulate history. Or with a more real life example, if you cook yourself you don't need to doubt when someone say they like going to restaurants. Sure by cooking yourself you get to create and experiment with an infinite number of dishes, but others may just like to be able to sit down and have nice food.
Are there going to be people who will be disappointed with GW2? Yes, and I'd say lots. But dare I say it won't be people in this thread who have a clear idea of what GW2 has and what they want from it.
Eve has a lot of dedicated players, and it is precisely that dedication why I'm not playing it.
You should really try reading what I'm saying, instead of imagining it.
I've never said I wanted a constant-treadmill endgame design, and you know it. I actually said I hated that, and the dreadful tier replacement system used in most themeparks.
I'm saying that REMOVING the power progression is not going to make content last longer.
It's curing the disease by killing the patient.
Oh, and yes I DO see good parts of GW2. I've bought the game and I expect to have fun with it for a few weeks.
I think combat feels really good - and I really like the PvE flow of the game. It felt like I was constantly moving - and the world truly felt alive. That's great.
I think the game might be a significant step forward in the short-term department. But I don't have a binary mindset - where I can't criticise some significant elements of a game and yet still think it does some things right.
Also, I don't want a sandbox. I want a COMBINATION of the best parts of the sandbox and the themepark genre. Enough with the black/white thinking, please.
Ah, no. Of course every type of game has longevity for SOME people.
Why, there are people who have put thousands upon thousands of hours into GW1.
There are people who have put that much into Minesweeper.
My point is that there's actually no type of gameplay design that can hold MOST people, especially when you get into a more time intensive level (There's a lot of people who just play WoW a LITTLE bit. I know, it's hard to believe, but it's true). WoW has such incredible subscriber numbers partly because so MANY people have tried it (Enough to make even those sub numbers pale), and partly because subscribers can mean anything from somebody who spends 0 hours a month playing, to somebody who spends 20+ hours a day playing.
I think any realistic MMORPG design should take into account the fact that most people simply aren't going to be hyperengaged by said game for ridiculous periods of time.
Alternatively, it should be designed for a niche, and focus on maintaining that niche.
(Even if WoW DID have a 50% retention rate (Which it doesn't), I don't think 'design a game like WoW' is a good idea, since there's a lot of factors that made WoW so popular, and trying to just copy it has proven to be a fairly unsuccessful idea so far)
That's a pretty deceptive way of putting it. When you look at the PvE "endgame" in WoW, for example, what actually is there?
One raid. Period.
Whatever the latest raid released on the treadmill is the only one viable for your characters that have been raiding. The entire rest of the PvE game is rendered obsolete simply due to the ever accellerating power curve. You get to max level, run a few dungeons for "starter raid gear", then raid. Period.
GW2 is taking a different approach to endgame. The big question is this... why should how you've played the entire game on the road to max level suddenly completely change now that you're at max level? Seriously, think about that. While levelling, you explore, gain skill and skills, quest, constantly see new things... but at max level you do basically nothing but raid? Asinine. Instead, GW2 keeps you playing the game the way you have been and are used to. All dungeons are fully accessible and challenging. All zones remain a challenge to play in, and those zones will constantly be adding new dynamic events for you to experience when you visit them. The "endgame" island of Orr is like the game prior, new and more challenging dynamic events, and they ultimately lead to accessing the final dungeon to face Zhaitan himself.
So it boils down to this: What do you want your endgame to be in PvE? That one last raid, over and over until a piece of gear drops that you'll have a chance to roll on and hope you get, or... hey, I'm going to go over there and do that...?
Oderint, dum metuant.
Play for fun. Play to win. Play for perfection. Play with friends. Play in another world. Why do you play?
Ah, there's your problem. You're so busy looking for the carrot that you can't see the buffett in front of you.
GW2 being B2P means they constantly need to keep injecting more and more content to keep people interested enough to want to do two things... buy in the cash shop and buy the expansions. Gear treadmill games like WoW don't... they only need to keep you on the treadmill until they're ready to release the next treadmill. Huge difference. GW2 will also need to be sticking their new content all throughout the game where WoW can only tack it on the end.
Oderint, dum metuant.
Meow.
Good post. While I don't know those games personally I can see Lond's point. He/she listed some really neat ideas however I have to agree with you as well. The themepark and sandbox, have to exist together and not only that but evolve to a point where they are cohesive and yet form a new subgenre under the MMOrpg banner.
My theory is that this new MMO will be integrated into things like facebook, your phone in general as you can see it spreading already..with the authenticators. In my futuristic vision most of the population will play this or watch this game sort of like gamer the movie. That I think is where we are headed. to the point where the game creates outside revenue in many different forms. Syfy channel is also creating a game that is an MMO and a TV show that coinside together. This is the evolution although on a lesses scale that we will eventually see in the future.
Archage...I keep hearing about this game. I'm sure it will have it's faults and praises as does GW2. However I think were too soon to see any real meaningful progress from GW2 or Archage past standard stuff.
Lond: the tone of your posts...they seem sort of weird. Almost arrogant or something. I apologize if I'm over analyzing you as I'm sure I'm thinking to deeply with it...just can't put my finger on it. How ever I do agree with your thoughts on progression. I think you need power as well as aethetics. But I think perhaps your looking at power but not aethetics as power..and I think they can be the same. Sort of like to get that legendary weapon you have to go through hoops and thus power is created via time investment, and achievement. But I do see what form of power you are referring to.
If your waiting for GW2 to do that for you I think you will be dissapointed and I'm curious to see how Archage does and I will keep an eye on it just because of this thread. I agree with your desire for that game however I don't think you will see the fruits until say I'm 50-70 years old and I'm 31 now so we have a ways to go..and even then it will still be budding.
Also take this point into consideration...this game will be for the masses so that means the outside world will be fairly crappy and all entities will be integrated into this game some how. When the game is a form of society then we will have a serious problem. You think I'm joking but take this into consideration. Next time you go to a bank, DMV or some place where you have to sit and wait...look around and watch how many people are on their phones, how many of them are texting or playing some game. Now look how many have brought a book...just think about that for a second.
The entire game from the moment you enter the world til the day you decide to stop playing will be what you consider 'end game'.
There is no "fuuuuuuuuuuuu I just need 3 more levels", or "fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu I just need one more piece of gear"
The chained events you're talking about, you can experience them from the beginning of the game, however they do get much more epic as the game goes on.
I was sold a million times over the first time I stumbled upon the Shadow Behemoth....that was an epic experience.
Originally posted by Arskaaa
"when players learned tacticks in dungeon/raids, its bread".
Haha, me too. I finally got to battle him with a few close friends in the last BWE, and it was the MOST fun I've had in an MMO in years, and I didn't need to grind for months or check if I was "locked out" in order to do it, I just had to be in the right place at the right time and know my skills. This is the "hook". People who like fighting raid bosses simply for the challenge of doing so will not go unhappy in this game.
My son (who's nine) and I were killing undead in this swamp (I think for a heart, not sure) when suddenly the Behemoth event starts. We just happened to have our camera view in the right direction as the Behemoth clawed up out of the mire right in front of us, giving us a perfect side-view. My son's like "Aaaaahhh! Holy crap!" (He later admitted to being a little scared.
) We joined up with the people fighting the Behemoth and had an absolute blast. That was BWE2 I think, and he still talks about it.
That's real endgame my friends, when the memories last you right to the end.
Oderint, dum metuant.
What do you mean by "most" people and what evidence do you have to support such a claim?
Obviously, with 6+ billion people in the world - most people most definitely won't sit down and play the same game for years.
However, for this to make any sense at all - we're talking about enough people to support the development of a long-term MMO experience, and we've had several examples of that already. Some of the least popular MMOs still remain profitable - so you have no logic behind your point that I can see.
You're coming up with all kinds of strawman stuff to try and place me into a tiny little box called anti-GW2 people. But I don't belong there.
I've never said any game should strive for "most people" being "hyperactive" for "ridiculous" periods of time. I've said perpetually interesting in the long-term - and you've said absolutely nothing that would make that seem impossible. Hard? Sure, it takes talent and resources.