Players are a lot more inclined to look back at a game if they dont have to re-sub. GW1 is proof of that.
More, but how much more? So much more that the game doesn't need to worry about retention at all? I think that's only true of some players, but no idea how many.
This is true, but I could apply what you just said to your initial post and it would be just as true. You don't know that "a lot of players" avoid a game once they've moved on entirely.
Hence the question mark. I'm not trying to prove anything. I'm trying to get some discussion going here, because its something I'm curious about.
Ofcourse retention matters man. If people log in and see there aren't enough players to play with then they will quit the game too. IMO GW2 will end up being something you log on, play in like 5 bgs and then log off. Since there's no reward or proper endgame or timesinks i dont see players playing this as their main game. Oh and if MOP comes out after GW2 then i see it taking a massive hit activity wise. But that goes for all MMOs.
With no subscription I think more people would be inclinded to check back or play when they feel like it. Since people don't unsubscribe they might get bored and quit for a bit but the door is always freely open... I don't think retention is really an issue at all with that business model.
Why even create an "MMO" if you do not plan to keep people playing for long periods? This thinking makes no sense to me, of course retention matters, the whole point of an MMO is to keep people playing (sub or not), that's the whole point of the genre.
Your right but not having to pay 15$ a month is a huge reason to play the game. I probably wouldn't have played Guild Wars half as much if it had a sub to keep up.
I agree there, the no monthly charge does add some incentive, but the rest lies in the quality of the game as well as community. I think the PVP population will always be healthy, it's PVE I'm not so sure about, for this world structure to work it will need players IMO, even considering the content scales down to just one soloer.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
And yet there are so many subsciption based games out there that fail to retain the majority of their players for a substantial amount of time and they all seem to end up going F2P now.
Well, yeah. I'm not trying to knock the B2P model AT ALL. I'm just thinking either way, retention is still important. Personally, I agree with Distopia, that it's even part of what makes MMOs worth playing, regardless of payment model. If I think the game is just going to dead-end at lv.50, I won't have much interest in even getting there.
Lol i know what you were referring too, but any way when someone thinks retention in mmos they think raids and pvp lmao.
Even though Gw 2 has em sept not gear grind and more than just difficulty changes(they have DEs and different layouts and stories) and already established pvp they have traits to get and titles to achieve, cosmetic gear to get, and much more.
By the way if y'all want to use core for a indicator even though I don't even go by it Gw 1 is still high in hours played.
You can buy it yourself and look how packed it is in cities course though I don't know about merges and what not and over sea people play it as well. But it's still above other games that copied the classic endgame.
Course WoW is on top far as the classic endgame they have but if we are to be honest that's not what made em great at that time but what made em great at that time is not one someone can use to make em great [now] lol.
So in a sense the endgame being the game itself in Gw 2 still has a means for retention in endgame it's just not gear/stat base.
Now this is the last post from me in this thread because there is no need to go any further, it's common sense but we are human we can choose when to use it and when not to use it.
I'll let time do the talking for me, if I'm wrong that it's possible to succeed and hold retention without copying the classic endgame I will admit that because I'm not afraid to do so and I hopye you guys quote me on this.
I still like how they are at least attempting to do this showing that they are not using the old formula that was a successor in its time but to create their own.
Funcom seems to be doing that as well and so is developers of ArchAge.
Also if this appears in one big paragraph I'm sorry I'm on my phone at the moment. Again time will have the best showcase and answer when it comes. Take care.
I might get banned for this. - Rizel Star.
I'm not afraid to tell trolls what they [need] to hear, even if that means for me to have an forced absence afterwards.
P2P LOGIC = If it's P2P it means longevity, overall better game, and THE BEST SUPPORT EVER!!!!!(Which has been rinsed and repeated about a thousand times)
Common Sense Logic = P2P logic is no better than F2P Logic.
I wouldn't say it has 'no end game', it just doesn't have raiding. GW1 has tuns of post-cap content, but not raiding. In terms of the question, I don't think Retention does matter so much. I've been playing GW for half a decade on and off and I've only ever spent about $60. That includes a re-purchase through steam for convenience when the trilogy and GWEN was on sale (got them for about $20) and four or five purchases from the store, mostly outfits but also missions and bank space. Even with this openness you'd think the number of active players would vary wildly, but there are enough 'big fans' who have stuck with GW and played it consistantly for years. I think GW2 will be much the same. It might not have the retention of say WoW, but it doesn't need it. As long as enough people buy the title at release (and it looks to be very successful in that respect) it doesn't matter how many people play it at any time. I expect to be the type of player who sticks with the game for years, but if I just come back for expansions, or play a dozen hours a month or less, in the end it's my purchases that matter. Franklly I think a lot of poeple don't really quite yet understand just how liberating it will be not having to pay $15 a month. You'll never feel that (like with WoW), you are almost forced to keep playing simply because of the money you've invested over the years. Like any other game you might play it for a few weeks at launch, quit or move on to another game and just come back, any time you like. I think having no subscription fee is also why the MMOGs that have gone free* (reduced accounts, limited slots.. like AoC, LotRO, DCUO) have seen sharp upturns in new accounts. Retention may still be a problem but if you know you can just return to a game, for free, any time you want.. I think folks will find they end up playing the game more often over the long term, then games they are burnt out in but return only because of the thousands of dollars they've spent over half a dozen years in their 'main MMOG'. I have friends who have played WoW for 8 years, with multiple accounts, tuns of extra purchases like pets, character name changes, server changes, mounts.. you name it. It all adds up to several thousand dollars spent and he won't leave simply because of that investment. No matter how bored he gets, he simply will not leave the game. With GW2, he'll never have that feeling again.
I know I said I wasn't going to post in this thread any more but I must say the mini games in Gw 1 are fun as hell, that beetle thing gave me hours of fun itself. If they put it in Gw 2. I bet it'll be dope a hell. I mean I already like the tavern brawl mini game as well. Like I notice Anet don't bullshit on mini games and events. I just got the game last weekend but I was surprised.
I might get banned for this. - Rizel Star.
I'm not afraid to tell trolls what they [need] to hear, even if that means for me to have an forced absence afterwards.
P2P LOGIC = If it's P2P it means longevity, overall better game, and THE BEST SUPPORT EVER!!!!!(Which has been rinsed and repeated about a thousand times)
Common Sense Logic = P2P logic is no better than F2P Logic.
Sure retention matter, what shouldn't matter are all the artificial mechanism put in place by developers to force retention onto the player psychology. But retention as a success sign do matter, its so much better to play a successful game, it better for the dev team also who is supposed to be able to poor more work in to it and/or future sequel (but was not the case for most big titles). It's just healthier for everyone, the players, the developers, everyone.
Players are a lot more inclined to look back at a game if they dont have to re-sub. GW1 is proof of that.
More, but how much more? So much more that the game doesn't need to worry about retention at all? I think that's only true of some players, but no idea how many.
This is true, but I could apply what you just said to your initial post and it would be just as true. You don't know that "a lot of players" avoid a game once they've moved on entirely.
Hence the question mark. I'm not trying to prove anything. I'm trying to get some discussion going here, because its something I'm curious about.
Yeah I get what you're saying, but as none of us are privy to those numbers, you can only go by the trend and past experiences. Even companies who give out active player numbers tend to bloat, exaggerate and twist just what their retention is, so I'd take those numbers with a grain of salt. Just the same, F2P games and GW1's B2P model didn't have problems with retention or, if they did/do, it hasn't affected profits. F2P gaming probably makes more money than P2P these days unless you have WoW's numbers, which none this side of the ocean do.
So question for you, are you really worried about sub retention, or are you more concerned that without it developers will let content stagnate? Whether or not GW2 will end up a ghost town remains to be seen, but many past P2P MMOs will show you that that has nothing to do with what people are paying and more with what they are paying ~for~. If it's content, you have even less reason to worry since offering content is the only way for them to make money, so I'm pretty sure they'll all but throw it at us at a reasonable schedule. I'm sure they do indeed want a "thriving" game and offering new and repeatable content is how they aim to create that.
As for the endgame thing you mentioned briefly in your first post, the point isn't so much that GW2 has no "endgame" - a term coined by people that have exhausted the content of the game and no longer get any benefit from it thus must be given something else to do - but rather that the game isn't supposed to end. If the entire game is as doable at cap as it is as a noob, that seems like a lot more reasons than people have ever had before to continue playing.
"Forums aren't for intelligent discussion; they're for blow-hards with unwavering opinions."
And yet there are so many subsciption based games out there that fail to retain the majority of their players for a substantial amount of time and they all seem to end up going F2P now.
Well, yeah. I'm not trying to knock the B2P model AT ALL. I'm just thinking either way, retention is still important. Personally, I agree with Distopia, that it's even part of what makes MMOs worth playing, regardless of payment model. If I think the game is just going to dead-end at lv.50, I won't have much interest in even getting there.
Well MMO retention comes in the form of group-oriented goals and GW2 will have a good amount of that. In the end, all the really matters is whether the game remains engaging enough for players to return to and GW2 will definitely be that for the average PvP'er, achievement whore, alt-holic, etc. I could care less about the typical hardcore raider who wants retention in the form of the gear treadmill, or those that want "X" sandbox feature. GW2 will be the kind of game where a person can play it for a while, drop it for the next big thing (like Skyrim), and it will still be there to return to, without having to resub, just to check what's new (Had that problem with Rift lately).
Weird things can affect retention rates in games. The act of forking out cash, signing up some new u'name and password in another form, downloading a bunch of data, learning the game (esp. mmos that crucial starter area - lol)...
But yes retention is important, if ppl are going away is it because of some of the steps above? Or is it that the game did not find it's market/target audience or just plainly it should never have been made or it's a really bad game?
If ppl are sticking around after all the above, then something's working. I think GW2 has a ton of features/design that suggests on both accounts ppl may find it a better overall experience by comparison to other mmos - and that initself is worth sticking with to begin with. Circular but true. It seems you can CHOOSE a variety of game modes at any stage of the game, this is the best thing imo about this mmo, I don't think about PvE: "Oh for the love of all that is sacred & holy, I've now got to go back and grind another level/fetch quest/loot drop roll, when I'm done with this current pvp coffee break... & where is everybody??"
I've seen a few comments about GW2, to the effect of something like, since it's B2P, it doesn't need an endgame, it doesn't need retention, it doesn't need any of that, because they aren't invested in keeping players subscribing month after month. They can focus on just making the leveling experience fun, and that's enough.
Don't recall seeing that comment, certainly not a common one.
..but, is a subscription really that much different than wanting people to buy xpacs? Or even to have a thriving game that will keep selling more and more boxes, due to its popularity? I mean, of course being B2P is a big difference in some ways, but in terms of retention?
yep, xpac you pay for the expansion if you decide you want it. sub you play the publisher in advance. the former gives power toe the consumer. a good developer embraces this. Its obvious what is better for game players (not shareholders)
Just seems to me that for a lot of players, once they leave an MMO, they move on, without really looking back. Even if there isn't a sub to worry about. So I'm just wondering if retention might really be just as important for GW2 as it is for any other MMO. They do still want a thriving game, that's going to sell expansions, and whatever else, right?
Retention is important for any game, the only difference with GW2 is that it is does not use peer pressure and the 'must keep up with gear' addiction cycle to motivate, it relies on the expansions entirely, it relies on the game being good through every expansion.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
I think sub based games need retention in the form of people playing frequently. I think if people do quit a sub game they might come back eventually, or they might not at all.
I think what GW2 needs is people to think of it positively. Even if someone puts it down for a while for whatever reason, they might come back if an expansion looks good (or simply just because they can come back without any hassle).
I think it's very important to ArenaNet that people feel this way. For example, look at the way they're talking about adding new dynamic events continuously from day one. It's so that the game feels fresh when people replay a zone and see 10 or 20 events they didn't see before. That's not content they're being paid for, and if all they cared about were box sales they wouldn't do it. But it is the kind of thing that will make people think that ArenaNet values their players, who will then reward them in return.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it."-Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
When leveling, the promise of the next level is enough to keep players interested as long as the journey is compelling enough. When you reach the max level; however, you no longer have the promise of reaching another character level to keep you going. As a result, most of everything that constitutes "endgame" in modern MMORPGs revolves around artificial mechanics that encourage sub retention, hence endlessly grinding dungeons in WoW for better gear which then allows you access to higher end dungeons which give you better gear which give you access to gear in raid zones. Heck, in WoW, you're even limited as to how many badges you can earn per week in order to prevent you from speeding too fast through the content. Raiding itself is a prime example of stupid mechanics designed for no other purpose than to keep you paying them money every month. The very idea that you go into an area with 10-20 other players in hopes that the one item for your class drops and that you are the one out of 3 other players of the same class that wins the roll. It seems that if developers were interested in making the game rewarding rather than a grind where you just keep treading the hampster wheel, they have thought up a better loot method.
With Guild Wars 2, I've heard a lot of talk from Arenanet about how they just want to make a fun game that doesn't have the traditional MMORPG grind, but what I have not heard from them is any talk about how they still intend to keep players longterm even without these traditional retention mechanics. I think it's great that they seek to get away from that, but if they want to do it successfully, they're going to have to come up with a better way to retain players and not simply not caring whether or not they retain anyone. I see GW2 as a collection of minigames, glorified public quests, PvP, and dungeons -- something that sounds like a lot of fun for a month or two but also something I can see myself exhausting shortly afterwards much like the original Guild Wars. Rolling alts and doing who knows what other menial tasks which have kept the 2,000 people still playing Guild Wars for all these years when the game has been pretty much forgotten by pretty much everyone else simply isn't going to suite me, and unless they do a better job with meaningful content at the level cap, GW2 really won't be a long term destination for most people -- especially the community of this website.
When leveling, the promise of the next level is enough to keep players interested as long as the journey is compelling enough. When you reach the max level; however, you no longer have the promise of reaching another character level to keep you going. As a result, most of everything that constitutes "endgame" in modern MMORPGs revolves around artificial mechanics that encourage sub retention, hence endlessly grinding dungeons in WoW for better gear which then allows you access to higher end dungeons which give you better gear which give you access to gear in raid zones. Heck, in WoW, you're even limited as to how many badges you can earn per week in order to prevent you from speeding too fast through the content. Raiding itself is a prime example of stupid mechanics designed for no other purpose than to keep you paying them money every month. The very idea that you go into an area with 10-20 other players in hopes that the one item for your class drops and that you are the one out of 3 other players of the same class that wins the roll. It seems that if developers were interested in making the game rewarding rather than a grind where you just keep treading the hampster wheel, they have thought up a better loot method.
With Guild Wars 2, I've heard a lot of talk from Arenanet about how they just want to make a fun game that doesn't have the traditional MMORPG grind, but what I have not heard from them is any talk about how they still intend to keep players longterm even without these traditional retention mechanics. I think it's great that they seek to get away from that, but if they want to do it successfully, they're going to have to come up with a better way to retain players and not simply not caring whether or not they retain anyone. I see GW2 as a collection of minigames, glorified public quests, PvP, and dungeons -- something that sounds like a lot of fun for a month or two but also something I can see myself exhausting shortly afterwards much like the original Guild Wars. Rolling alts and doing who knows what other menial tasks which have kept the 2,000 people still playing Guild Wars for all these years when the game has been pretty much forgotten by pretty much everyone else simply isn't going to suite me, and unless they do a better job with meaningful content at the level cap, GW2 really won't be a long term destination for most people -- especially the community of this website.
wow very well put man. I agree with you that i don't see Guild Wars 2 having anything long term for players to stick around. GW2 is gonna end up having the same fate as GW 1 IMO.
. I think it's great that they seek to get away from that, but if they want to do it successfully, they're going to have to come up with a better way to retain players and not simply not caring whether or not they retain anyone. I see GW2 as a collection of minigames, glorified public quests, PvP, and dungeons
wow very well put man. I agree with you that i don't see Guild Wars 2 having anything long term for players to stick around. GW2 is gonna end up having the same fate as GW 1 IMO.
The fate of GW1 was a dedicated player base that play the game because they love the game, that enjoy the in game world working towards long term RPG-style goals - titles, specialised looking gear (not stats)
mmorgs need to get back to the core, virtual world, social, rpg. This is what GW2 offers, and if GW1 can keep peeps for years...
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
...Rolling alts and doing who knows what other menial tasks which have kept the 2,000 people still playing Guild Wars for all these years when the game has been pretty much forgotten by pretty much everyone else simply isn't going to suite me, ...
wow very well put man. I agree with you that i don't see Guild Wars 2 having anything long term for players to stick around. GW2 is gonna end up having the same fate as GW 1 IMO.
So where do you pull those numbers from? As a player that still has friends playing GW, I go back from time to time just to see who's on and say hi. GW is consistantly populated in virtually every area. Last weekend there were over 140 instances of one town active. If each instance can support 100 people, then that denotes that 14,000 players were in 1 town at the same time. And I'm really not sure if each instance is limited to 100 people even. Sure, thats not millions, but it's pretty surprising how many people are still playing GW.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
...Rolling alts and doing who knows what other menial tasks which have kept the 2,000 people still playing Guild Wars for all these years when the game has been pretty much forgotten by pretty much everyone else simply isn't going to suite me, ...
wow very well put man. I agree with you that i don't see Guild Wars 2 having anything long term for players to stick around. GW2 is gonna end up having the same fate as GW 1 IMO.
So where do you pull those numbers from? As a player that still has friends playing GW, I go back from time to time just to see who's on and say hi. GW is consistantly populated in virtually every area. Last weekend there were over 140 instances of one town active. If each instance can support 100 people, then that denotes that 14,000 players were in 1 town at the same time. And I'm really not sure if each instance is limited to 100 people even. Sure, thats not millions, but it's pretty surprising how many people are still playing GW.
Yep and as players we dont even need millions of people in the community thats a false measure of happiness. What we all want is a happy community, job done ^^
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
When leveling, the promise of the next level is enough to keep players interested as long as the journey is compelling enough. When you reach the max level; however, you no longer have the promise of reaching another character level to keep you going. As a result, most of everything that constitutes "endgame" in modern MMORPGs revolves around artificial mechanics that encourage sub retention, hence endlessly grinding dungeons in WoW for better gear which then allows you access to higher end dungeons which give you better gear which give you access to gear in raid zones. Heck, in WoW, you're even limited as to how many badges you can earn per week in order to prevent you from speeding too fast through the content. Raiding itself is a prime example of stupid mechanics designed for no other purpose than to keep you paying them money every month. The very idea that you go into an area with 10-20 other players in hopes that the one item for your class drops and that you are the one out of 3 other players of the same class that wins the roll. It seems that if developers were interested in making the game rewarding rather than a grind where you just keep treading the hampster wheel, they have thought up a better loot method.
With Guild Wars 2, I've heard a lot of talk from Arenanet about how they just want to make a fun game that doesn't have the traditional MMORPG grind, but what I have not heard from them is any talk about how they still intend to keep players longterm even without these traditional retention mechanics. I think it's great that they seek to get away from that, but if they want to do it successfully, they're going to have to come up with a better way to retain players and not simply not caring whether or not they retain anyone. I see GW2 as a collection of minigames, glorified public quests, PvP, and dungeons -- something that sounds like a lot of fun for a month or two but also something I can see myself exhausting shortly afterwards much like the original Guild Wars. Rolling alts and doing who knows what other menial tasks which have kept the 2,000 people still playing Guild Wars for all these years when the game has been pretty much forgotten by pretty much everyone else simply isn't going to suite me, and unless they do a better job with meaningful content at the level cap, GW2 really won't be a long term destination for most people -- especially the community of this website.
I know how you feel because I feel the same
I like the premise of GW2 and all but im really worried with the endgame, or lack thereof (atleast for PvE)
Im just not all that worried because my endgame in all mmos is PvP, and GW2 seems to cover that up with tournaments,e-sport focus and the potentially fun WvWvW
But for PvE I just dont see anything there, dungeons that will not make you leave with empty hands will not keep the PvE'rs in for much time, I just can't recommend the game for hardcore PvE'rs because I simply can't see what they will do, just as I would not recommend GW1 for the dungeons (which in fact I never touched)
"It has potential" -Second most used phrase on existence "It sucks" -Most used phrase on existence
It's very important to ArenaNet that when an expansion launches, players who have played the previous game think, hey, that was fun, I should buy the expansion and go back to it. It's not important at all to them they keep you playing continuously. What this means is that if they have two months worth of content, they can let you play through it in two months and then quit. They don't have to spread the content out and make you do a bunch of stupid grinding to get access, so that it takes you a year to play through two months worth of content.
...Rolling alts and doing who knows what other menial tasks which have kept the 2,000 people still playing Guild Wars for all these years when the game has been pretty much forgotten by pretty much everyone else simply isn't going to suite me, ...
wow very well put man. I agree with you that i don't see Guild Wars 2 having anything long term for players to stick around. GW2 is gonna end up having the same fate as GW 1 IMO.
So where do you pull those numbers from? As a player that still has friends playing GW, I go back from time to time just to see who's on and say hi. GW is consistantly populated in virtually every area. Last weekend there were over 140 instances of one town active. If each instance can support 100 people, then that denotes that 14,000 players were in 1 town at the same time. And I'm really not sure if each instance is limited to 100 people even. Sure, thats not millions, but it's pretty surprising how many people are still playing GW.
yeah it still has a small number of playerbase. GW2 will end up the same IMO. Theres nothing to keep players playing for a long time. Most will be like you log in once in a while to check in on things but that is about it. But thats IMO ofcourse. WoW is still holding 10.2 million subs after 7 years (15 dollars a month) will GW2 reach 10% of that (active players)? doubtful. But it will have a small community like every other MMO. EQ 1 is still going on
...Rolling alts and doing who knows what other menial tasks which have kept the 2,000 people still playing Guild Wars for all these years when the game has been pretty much forgotten by pretty much everyone else simply isn't going to suite me, ...
wow very well put man. I agree with you that i don't see Guild Wars 2 having anything long term for players to stick around. GW2 is gonna end up having the same fate as GW 1 IMO.
So where do you pull those numbers from? As a player that still has friends playing GW, I go back from time to time just to see who's on and say hi. GW is consistantly populated in virtually every area. Last weekend there were over 140 instances of one town active. If each instance can support 100 people, then that denotes that 14,000 players were in 1 town at the same time. And I'm really not sure if each instance is limited to 100 people even. Sure, thats not millions, but it's pretty surprising how many people are still playing GW.
So Guild Wars was released a year after WoW and according to your estimate, it is only played by around 14,000 people?
Whether it's 2,000, 14,000, or 20,000, it only shows that GW's long term retention rate was pretty poor.
Again, let me emphasize that if what you want is a nice, casual little game you can pick up and play whenever you feel like it without feeling like you've fell too far behind the curve, I say good for you, but such a game really doesn't deserve the amount of hype it's getting. As a result, I'm afraid that the hype train may have picked up a bit too much steam.
When leveling, the promise of the next level is enough to keep players interested as long as the journey is compelling enough. When you reach the max level; however, you no longer have the promise of reaching another character level to keep you going. As a result, most of everything that constitutes "endgame" in modern MMORPGs revolves around artificial mechanics that encourage sub retention, hence endlessly grinding dungeons in WoW for better gear which then allows you access to higher end dungeons which give you better gear which give you access to gear in raid zones. Heck, in WoW, you're even limited as to how many badges you can earn per week in order to prevent you from speeding too fast through the content. Raiding itself is a prime example of stupid mechanics designed for no other purpose than to keep you paying them money every month. The very idea that you go into an area with 10-20 other players in hopes that the one item for your class drops and that you are the one out of 3 other players of the same class that wins the roll. It seems that if developers were interested in making the game rewarding rather than a grind where you just keep treading the hampster wheel, they have thought up a better loot method.
With Guild Wars 2, I've heard a lot of talk from Arenanet about how they just want to make a fun game that doesn't have the traditional MMORPG grind, but what I have not heard from them is any talk about how they still intend to keep players longterm even without these traditional retention mechanics. I think it's great that they seek to get away from that, but if they want to do it successfully, they're going to have to come up with a better way to retain players and not simply not caring whether or not they retain anyone. I see GW2 as a collection of minigames, glorified public quests, PvP, and dungeons -- something that sounds like a lot of fun for a month or two but also something I can see myself exhausting shortly afterwards much like the original Guild Wars. Rolling alts and doing who knows what other menial tasks which have kept the 2,000 people still playing Guild Wars for all these years when the game has been pretty much forgotten by pretty much everyone else simply isn't going to suite me, and unless they do a better job with meaningful content at the level cap, GW2 really won't be a long term destination for most people -- especially the community of this website.
I know how you feel because I feel the same
I like the premise of GW2 and all but im really worried with the endgame, or lack thereof (atleast for PvE)
Im just not all that worried because my endgame in all mmos is PvP, and GW2 seems to cover that up with tournaments,e-sport focus and the potentially fun WvWvW
But for PvE I just dont see anything there, dungeons that will not make you leave with empty hands will not keep the PvE'rs in for much time, I just can't recommend the game for hardcore PvE'rs because I simply can't see what they will do, just as I would not recommend GW1 for the dungeons (which in fact I never touched)
'PVe is not about loot , or at least it never used to be. it is about RPG,social and loot within this context. GW1 dungeons are really good (and this comes from somnoe who spent probably close to 8k hours in WOW dungeons and raids at all levels) got to let the loot cycle thing go and get back to what fun is about - imagination, and socialisation and working towars long term goals. Another aspect, in themepark instances = reward. INGW1 and 2 instrances = reward. Thw sole difference is that rewards are not stat orientated and devalue all previous content. You really have to try it, it is soo refreshing.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
...Rolling alts and doing who knows what other menial tasks which have kept the 2,000 people still playing Guild Wars for all these years when the game has been pretty much forgotten by pretty much everyone else simply isn't going to suite me, ...
wow very well put man. I agree with you that i don't see Guild Wars 2 having anything long term for players to stick around. GW2 is gonna end up having the same fate as GW 1 IMO.
So where do you pull those numbers from? As a player that still has friends playing GW, I go back from time to time just to see who's on and say hi. GW is consistantly populated in virtually every area. Last weekend there were over 140 instances of one town active. If each instance can support 100 people, then that denotes that 14,000 players were in 1 town at the same time. And I'm really not sure if each instance is limited to 100 people even. Sure, thats not millions, but it's pretty surprising how many people are still playing GW.
So Guild Wars was released a year after WoW and according to your estimate, it is only played by around 14,000 people?
Whether it's 2,000, 14,000, or 20,000, it only shows that GW's long term retention rate was pretty poor.
Not to mention that people boast GW1* sold over 7 million (all the expansions combined) and only 200k players is really bad retention rate. (yes this thread is about retention). Even EVE still holding more players after all these years (p2p).
...Rolling alts and doing who knows what other menial tasks which have kept the 2,000 people still playing Guild Wars for all these years when the game has been pretty much forgotten by pretty much everyone else simply isn't going to suite me, ...
wow very well put man. I agree with you that i don't see Guild Wars 2 having anything long term for players to stick around. GW2 is gonna end up having the same fate as GW 1 IMO.
So where do you pull those numbers from? As a player that still has friends playing GW, I go back from time to time just to see who's on and say hi. GW is consistantly populated in virtually every area. Last weekend there were over 140 instances of one town active. If each instance can support 100 people, then that denotes that 14,000 players were in 1 town at the same time. And I'm really not sure if each instance is limited to 100 people even. Sure, thats not millions, but it's pretty surprising how many people are still playing GW.
So Guild Wars was released a year after WoW and according to your estimate, it is only played by around 14,000 people?
Whether it's 2,000, 14,000, or 20,000, it only shows that GW's long term retention rate was pretty poor.
Again, let me emphasize that if what you want is a nice, casual little game you can pick up and play whenever you feel like it without feeling like you've fell too far behind the curve, I say good for you, but such a game really doesn't deserve the amount of hype it's getting. As a result, I'm afraid that the hype train may have picked up a bit too much steam.
retention is a word used by marketing morons and managers. Fun and happiness percentage of player base is a true reflection. I could not care a shit if 10 million or 1 million players play my game. What i care about is that I play by and large with people who love the game we play.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Gw2 isnt being made to retain players. You can pick up where you left off at anytime and remain competitive. You can ay this alongside other mmos. The devs have said it themselves. Of course if you want to stay in this world as your permanent home go for it. All you need is a few people to get everything done in this game anyway.
I sit on a man's back, choking him and making him carry me, and yet assure myself and others that I am very sorry for him and wish to ease his lot by all possible means - except by getting off his back.
Comments
Ofcourse retention matters man. If people log in and see there aren't enough players to play with then they will quit the game too. IMO GW2 will end up being something you log on, play in like 5 bgs and then log off. Since there's no reward or proper endgame or timesinks i dont see players playing this as their main game. Oh and if MOP comes out after GW2 then i see it taking a massive hit activity wise. But that goes for all MMOs.
Currently Playing: SSFIV AE, SFxTekken, SWTOR, WoW. Waiting for: GW2, Resident Evil 6.
Where did you get the notion that retention doesn't matter? Without other players to play with, what's the point of an MMO?
If anything, GW2 will have a higher retention rate due to the B2P model.
I agree there, the no monthly charge does add some incentive, but the rest lies in the quality of the game as well as community. I think the PVP population will always be healthy, it's PVE I'm not so sure about, for this world structure to work it will need players IMO, even considering the content scales down to just one soloer.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Well, yeah. I'm not trying to knock the B2P model AT ALL. I'm just thinking either way, retention is still important. Personally, I agree with Distopia, that it's even part of what makes MMOs worth playing, regardless of payment model. If I think the game is just going to dead-end at lv.50, I won't have much interest in even getting there.
Lol i know what you were referring too, but any way when someone thinks retention in mmos they think raids and pvp lmao.
Even though Gw 2 has em sept not gear grind and more than just difficulty changes(they have DEs and different layouts and stories) and already established pvp they have traits to get and titles to achieve, cosmetic gear to get, and much more.
By the way if y'all want to use core for a indicator even though I don't even go by it Gw 1 is still high in hours played.
You can buy it yourself and look how packed it is in cities course though I don't know about merges and what not and over sea people play it as well. But it's still above other games that copied the classic endgame.
Course WoW is on top far as the classic endgame they have but if we are to be honest that's not what made em great at that time but what made em great at that time is not one someone can use to make em great [now] lol.
So in a sense the endgame being the game itself in Gw 2 still has a means for retention in endgame it's just not gear/stat base.
Now this is the last post from me in this thread because there is no need to go any further, it's common sense but we are human we can choose when to use it and when not to use it.
I'll let time do the talking for me, if I'm wrong that it's possible to succeed and hold retention without copying the classic endgame I will admit that because I'm not afraid to do so and I hopye you guys quote me on this.
I still like how they are at least attempting to do this showing that they are not using the old formula that was a successor in its time but to create their own.
Funcom seems to be doing that as well and so is developers of ArchAge.
Also if this appears in one big paragraph I'm sorry I'm on my phone at the moment. Again time will have the best showcase and answer when it comes. Take care.
I might get banned for this. - Rizel Star.
I'm not afraid to tell trolls what they [need] to hear, even if that means for me to have an forced absence afterwards.
P2P LOGIC = If it's P2P it means longevity, overall better game, and THE BEST SUPPORT EVER!!!!!(Which has been rinsed and repeated about a thousand times)
Common Sense Logic = P2P logic is no better than F2P Logic.
I know I said I wasn't going to post in this thread any more but I must say the mini games in Gw 1 are fun as hell, that beetle thing gave me hours of fun itself. If they put it in Gw 2. I bet it'll be dope a hell. I mean I already like the tavern brawl mini game as well. Like I notice Anet don't bullshit on mini games and events. I just got the game last weekend but I was surprised.
I might get banned for this. - Rizel Star.
I'm not afraid to tell trolls what they [need] to hear, even if that means for me to have an forced absence afterwards.
P2P LOGIC = If it's P2P it means longevity, overall better game, and THE BEST SUPPORT EVER!!!!!(Which has been rinsed and repeated about a thousand times)
Common Sense Logic = P2P logic is no better than F2P Logic.
Sure retention matter, what shouldn't matter are all the artificial mechanism put in place by developers to force retention onto the player psychology. But retention as a success sign do matter, its so much better to play a successful game, it better for the dev team also who is supposed to be able to poor more work in to it and/or future sequel (but was not the case for most big titles). It's just healthier for everyone, the players, the developers, everyone.
Yeah I get what you're saying, but as none of us are privy to those numbers, you can only go by the trend and past experiences. Even companies who give out active player numbers tend to bloat, exaggerate and twist just what their retention is, so I'd take those numbers with a grain of salt. Just the same, F2P games and GW1's B2P model didn't have problems with retention or, if they did/do, it hasn't affected profits. F2P gaming probably makes more money than P2P these days unless you have WoW's numbers, which none this side of the ocean do.
So question for you, are you really worried about sub retention, or are you more concerned that without it developers will let content stagnate? Whether or not GW2 will end up a ghost town remains to be seen, but many past P2P MMOs will show you that that has nothing to do with what people are paying and more with what they are paying ~for~. If it's content, you have even less reason to worry since offering content is the only way for them to make money, so I'm pretty sure they'll all but throw it at us at a reasonable schedule. I'm sure they do indeed want a "thriving" game and offering new and repeatable content is how they aim to create that.
As for the endgame thing you mentioned briefly in your first post, the point isn't so much that GW2 has no "endgame" - a term coined by people that have exhausted the content of the game and no longer get any benefit from it thus must be given something else to do - but rather that the game isn't supposed to end. If the entire game is as doable at cap as it is as a noob, that seems like a lot more reasons than people have ever had before to continue playing.
"Forums aren't for intelligent discussion; they're for blow-hards with unwavering opinions."
Well MMO retention comes in the form of group-oriented goals and GW2 will have a good amount of that. In the end, all the really matters is whether the game remains engaging enough for players to return to and GW2 will definitely be that for the average PvP'er, achievement whore, alt-holic, etc. I could care less about the typical hardcore raider who wants retention in the form of the gear treadmill, or those that want "X" sandbox feature. GW2 will be the kind of game where a person can play it for a while, drop it for the next big thing (like Skyrim), and it will still be there to return to, without having to resub, just to check what's new (Had that problem with Rift lately).
Weird things can affect retention rates in games. The act of forking out cash, signing up some new u'name and password in another form, downloading a bunch of data, learning the game (esp. mmos that crucial starter area - lol)...
But yes retention is important, if ppl are going away is it because of some of the steps above? Or is it that the game did not find it's market/target audience or just plainly it should never have been made or it's a really bad game?
If ppl are sticking around after all the above, then something's working. I think GW2 has a ton of features/design that suggests on both accounts ppl may find it a better overall experience by comparison to other mmos - and that initself is worth sticking with to begin with. Circular but true. It seems you can CHOOSE a variety of game modes at any stage of the game, this is the best thing imo about this mmo, I don't think about PvE: "Oh for the love of all that is sacred & holy, I've now got to go back and grind another level/fetch quest/loot drop roll, when I'm done with this current pvp coffee break... & where is everybody??"
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
I think sub based games need retention in the form of people playing frequently. I think if people do quit a sub game they might come back eventually, or they might not at all.
I think what GW2 needs is people to think of it positively. Even if someone puts it down for a while for whatever reason, they might come back if an expansion looks good (or simply just because they can come back without any hassle).
I think it's very important to ArenaNet that people feel this way. For example, look at the way they're talking about adding new dynamic events continuously from day one. It's so that the game feels fresh when people replay a zone and see 10 or 20 events they didn't see before. That's not content they're being paid for, and if all they cared about were box sales they wouldn't do it. But it is the kind of thing that will make people think that ArenaNet values their players, who will then reward them in return.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." -Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
When leveling, the promise of the next level is enough to keep players interested as long as the journey is compelling enough. When you reach the max level; however, you no longer have the promise of reaching another character level to keep you going. As a result, most of everything that constitutes "endgame" in modern MMORPGs revolves around artificial mechanics that encourage sub retention, hence endlessly grinding dungeons in WoW for better gear which then allows you access to higher end dungeons which give you better gear which give you access to gear in raid zones. Heck, in WoW, you're even limited as to how many badges you can earn per week in order to prevent you from speeding too fast through the content. Raiding itself is a prime example of stupid mechanics designed for no other purpose than to keep you paying them money every month. The very idea that you go into an area with 10-20 other players in hopes that the one item for your class drops and that you are the one out of 3 other players of the same class that wins the roll. It seems that if developers were interested in making the game rewarding rather than a grind where you just keep treading the hampster wheel, they have thought up a better loot method.
With Guild Wars 2, I've heard a lot of talk from Arenanet about how they just want to make a fun game that doesn't have the traditional MMORPG grind, but what I have not heard from them is any talk about how they still intend to keep players longterm even without these traditional retention mechanics. I think it's great that they seek to get away from that, but if they want to do it successfully, they're going to have to come up with a better way to retain players and not simply not caring whether or not they retain anyone. I see GW2 as a collection of minigames, glorified public quests, PvP, and dungeons -- something that sounds like a lot of fun for a month or two but also something I can see myself exhausting shortly afterwards much like the original Guild Wars. Rolling alts and doing who knows what other menial tasks which have kept the 2,000 people still playing Guild Wars for all these years when the game has been pretty much forgotten by pretty much everyone else simply isn't going to suite me, and unless they do a better job with meaningful content at the level cap, GW2 really won't be a long term destination for most people -- especially the community of this website.
wow very well put man. I agree with you that i don't see Guild Wars 2 having anything long term for players to stick around. GW2 is gonna end up having the same fate as GW 1 IMO.
Currently Playing: SSFIV AE, SFxTekken, SWTOR, WoW. Waiting for: GW2, Resident Evil 6.
The fate of GW1 was a dedicated player base that play the game because they love the game, that enjoy the in game world working towards long term RPG-style goals - titles, specialised looking gear (not stats)
mmorgs need to get back to the core, virtual world, social, rpg. This is what GW2 offers, and if GW1 can keep peeps for years...
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
So where do you pull those numbers from? As a player that still has friends playing GW, I go back from time to time just to see who's on and say hi. GW is consistantly populated in virtually every area. Last weekend there were over 140 instances of one town active. If each instance can support 100 people, then that denotes that 14,000 players were in 1 town at the same time. And I'm really not sure if each instance is limited to 100 people even. Sure, thats not millions, but it's pretty surprising how many people are still playing GW.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
I don't hate much, but I hate Apple© with a passion. If Steve Jobs was alive, I would punch him in the face.
Yep and as players we dont even need millions of people in the community thats a false measure of happiness. What we all want is a happy community, job done ^^
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
I know how you feel because I feel the same
I like the premise of GW2 and all but im really worried with the endgame, or lack thereof (atleast for PvE)
Im just not all that worried because my endgame in all mmos is PvP, and GW2 seems to cover that up with tournaments,e-sport focus and the potentially fun WvWvW
But for PvE I just dont see anything there, dungeons that will not make you leave with empty hands will not keep the PvE'rs in for much time, I just can't recommend the game for hardcore PvE'rs because I simply can't see what they will do, just as I would not recommend GW1 for the dungeons (which in fact I never touched)
"It has potential"
-Second most used phrase on existence
"It sucks"
-Most used phrase on existence
It's very important to ArenaNet that when an expansion launches, players who have played the previous game think, hey, that was fun, I should buy the expansion and go back to it. It's not important at all to them they keep you playing continuously. What this means is that if they have two months worth of content, they can let you play through it in two months and then quit. They don't have to spread the content out and make you do a bunch of stupid grinding to get access, so that it takes you a year to play through two months worth of content.
yeah it still has a small number of playerbase. GW2 will end up the same IMO. Theres nothing to keep players playing for a long time. Most will be like you log in once in a while to check in on things but that is about it. But thats IMO ofcourse. WoW is still holding 10.2 million subs after 7 years (15 dollars a month) will GW2 reach 10% of that (active players)? doubtful. But it will have a small community like every other MMO. EQ 1 is still going on
Currently Playing: SSFIV AE, SFxTekken, SWTOR, WoW. Waiting for: GW2, Resident Evil 6.
So Guild Wars was released a year after WoW and according to your estimate, it is only played by around 14,000 people?
Whether it's 2,000, 14,000, or 20,000, it only shows that GW's long term retention rate was pretty poor.
Again, let me emphasize that if what you want is a nice, casual little game you can pick up and play whenever you feel like it without feeling like you've fell too far behind the curve, I say good for you, but such a game really doesn't deserve the amount of hype it's getting. As a result, I'm afraid that the hype train may have picked up a bit too much steam.
'PVe is not about loot , or at least it never used to be. it is about RPG,social and loot within this context. GW1 dungeons are really good (and this comes from somnoe who spent probably close to 8k hours in WOW dungeons and raids at all levels) got to let the loot cycle thing go and get back to what fun is about - imagination, and socialisation and working towars long term goals. Another aspect, in themepark instances = reward. INGW1 and 2 instrances = reward. Thw sole difference is that rewards are not stat orientated and devalue all previous content. You really have to try it, it is soo refreshing.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
Not to mention that people boast GW1* sold over 7 million (all the expansions combined) and only 200k players is really bad retention rate. (yes this thread is about retention). Even EVE still holding more players after all these years (p2p).
Currently Playing: SSFIV AE, SFxTekken, SWTOR, WoW. Waiting for: GW2, Resident Evil 6.
retention is a word used by marketing morons and managers. Fun and happiness percentage of player base is a true reflection. I could not care a shit if 10 million or 1 million players play my game. What i care about is that I play by and large with people who love the game we play.
rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar
Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D
Gw2 isnt being made to retain players. You can pick up where you left off at anytime and remain competitive. You can ay this alongside other mmos. The devs have said it themselves. Of course if you want to stay in this world as your permanent home go for it. All you need is a few people to get everything done in this game anyway.
I sit on a man's back, choking him and making him carry me, and yet assure myself and others that I am very sorry for him and wish to ease his lot by all possible means - except by getting off his back.