Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Why GW2 will not have to compete with WoW.
crewthief
Member Posts: 235
This is my opinion, I don't expect everyone to agree...but it is an opinion grounded in logic.
First off, the payment model. GW2 is buy-to-play, in other words...you purchase the box, and you can play it immediately and not worry about a monthly sub. WoW, on the otherhand, is pay-to-play. You have to buy the box and then pay a monthly subscription fee in order to play. I am not here to bash WoW or any other game, simply stating the facts. With the payment model GW2 is using, gamers can still play WoW (or any other sub based game), while playing GW2 and not feel any sense of financial obligation to play one or the other.
Second, and perhaps most importantly; GW2 is doing things quite a bit differently from what has been called, 'the WoW model'. When an MMO attempts to copy the WoW model the developer puts itself in a position of having to compete with WoW. No other developer up to this point has been able to employ the WoW model as well as Blizzard. Games that use that model are inevitably held up to the standard, which of course is WoW. So...for a game using the WoW model to be highly successful, it has to actually employ that model better than WoW does. Otherwise, those that are looking for that style of MMO are simply going to play the superior version. Which in many, many cases over the past several years has been WoW. This is why, in my opinion, you aren't going to beat Blizzard at their own game. This bring me to GW2. Because Anet is doing things so very differently from WoW, they are establishing their own place in the market. Gamers that want something different from WoW (which there are alot of) will likely flock to GW2 for those differences. They won't have to 'settle' for lack of options. In short, with the way Anet is developing GW2, it will be possible for WoW and GW2 to coexist without affecting eachothers playerbases.
What remains to be seen is how players respond to these differences. In my mind, that will determine what happens to WoW and whether or not GW2 takes from its playerbase.
TL;DR - GW2 is targetting a different playerbase.
Sorroe, Human Mesmer
Jade Quarry Server
Comments
I agree - GW2 is targeting a different playerbase: mainly MMO players.
Re: SWTOR
"Remember, remember - Kakk says 'December.'"
I think that WoW can coexist with GW2 for quite a time. I guess that all of hardcore Raiders (at least the ones that want 25-man raids and that all that stuff) will stick to WoW. Which, i think, is a good thing. Because, i find that elitist type of community pretty disgusting (dunno if spelled right).
PvP gear farmers will complain how the classes in GW2 are unbalanced etc. and they will go back to their ussual every-day PvP Arena grind.
However, as you said, GW2 will catter to people (me also, being one of them) who want to try something different.
Main MMO at the moment: Guild Wars 2
Waiting for: Pathfinder Online
I heard that too, guess Im in the right place!
Its like Ive been saying all along, GW has always been about PvP, and WoW has never been about PvP, so we got 2 entirely different games.
I found a thread on us.battlenet.net, link
Just wait when WoW starts to copy GW2.
Quote ( Grimmrage, 85 Orc Shaman ):
For me, from what I can see in the videos and press, things I'd like to see in WoW (that are seen in the GW2 pre-beta buzz):
1.) dynamic zones
2.) organic questing
3.) active combat with things like active dodging, rolling, etc.
4.) targetless healing
5.) interactive skills (shooting arrows through another player's fire = fire arrows, for example)
6.) more emphasis on 5man dungeons as "tests of skill"
7.) more open world "events"
8.) a focus on the "world" instead of instances
9.) large scale "AV style" pvp
10.) less focus on "endgame" gear grinds.
11.) competitive obtective based pvp (instead of arena deathmatches).
12.) organic objectives in large scale pvp (build/defend that siege weapon) instead of carrying flags and huttballs.
13.) more compelling animations where what happens on the screen matters more than having a NASA styled UI
14.) Dropping the holy trinity is probably not viable in WoW, but I like how the way GW2 did it in that it seems to make gameplay look more dynamic (no more just stand in place and press a memorized button sequence).
15.) Not having "raids" as the premier content. I have nothing against raids per se, but raiding has essentially snuffed out the oxygen from the rest of the wow pve game.
16.) multi-tapping of resource nodes... no more ninjaing
17.) shared interests in pve... no more kill steals.
18.) organic encouragment to play together... hopefully no more artificial measures like LFD, LFR
WoW still has many years ahead of itself. Blizzard isn't sitting idly twiddling their thumbs letting such a massive cash cow drain away. Take EQ for example. They released an expansion Dec 2011. We can all agree that it's not the biggest mmo out there but the fact that it still has content update is a testament to just how much longevity a game can have even without the masive playerbase. The most important thing is that people want to play it.
OP has it right on the money though. Gw doesn't compete with wow because GW is not looking for subs. Now of course there are obviously going to be overlapping groups. Some people keep playing WoW with their friends, others enjoy the IP (I love the WarCraft IP, its the system that let me down), some who are looking for something a little different can spend their next game purchase to try Gw2 instead of some gimmicky new fps/console game and still keep their investment alive in WoW.
As an ex WoW player I can say I am interested in pandaria solely for the idea of things to do outside of raiding. The pokemon game for example will promote travel/exploration/social interaction and questing (possibly going back to find pets) once again. That IS a good and exciting idea. However I don't feel it has enough new ideas to warrant my full attention.
My gripe with it is that I would have to pay another box price to play it then subsequently pay until they release the raids which should already be on new continent. When I buy an expansion I expect the expansion content. Not 5 months of paying so I can access content I have already paid for.
Play for fun. Play to win. Play for perfection. Play with friends. Play in another world. Why do you play?
How has WoW never been about PvP?? They have more PvP specific game play options than any other MMO on the market along with competitive PvP tournaments held annually by Blizzard.
People say some wacky stuff on these forums.
Then you were not there when WoW was released, no BG's, no PvP systems at all. There was suppose to be world PvP, but that was a lie, it never existed. The most we saw was some fights at Tauren mill, and they were extremely laggy, and no rewards for fighting.
The PvP was added much later on, and they have expanded on it, sort of, but WoW is still a raiders game, always has been and probably always will be.
And then there are people like you, who ask people to prove what they say, but never offer proof themselves, always keeping people on the defensive, its a common tactic among people who have no clue.
Its simply the wrong question to provide answers to, because the payment model simply nullify it.
So instead of asking if GW2 competes with any other MMO (because it really doesn't,) then ask if any other MMO can avoid competing with GW2.
Thats the interesting question , and 1 i think most MMO's compagnies are fearing the answer to right now.
To say WoW has never been about PvP is probably an indicator of how attentive said player was in game. Each expansion introduced a new large PvP zone connected with end game raiding - Wintergrasp and Barradin...the new one are the ones I played. I hated the arenas but damn I loved those open zone battles.
Play for fun. Play to win. Play for perfection. Play with friends. Play in another world. Why do you play?
Sure, WoW didn't have instanced BG's when it was released but what games did back in 2004? Blizz added BG's and PvP specific rewards shortly after launch (I believe in patch 1.5) which means they've had quite a bit of PvP specific content for close to 7 years now.
Good day sir!
Every PC game competes with WOW. They compete for your time.
When people are really into an MMO, they tend to buy less games. I had this happen to me with some MMOs, like AO, WOW and EVE. For months, I bought no other game, because all gaming time was being invested in those MMOs - and normally I do buy and play a lot of games.
You COMPLETELY missed the point of the different playerbases being targetted by WoW and GW2. Yes, they overlap, and the payment model will help with that. Reread the post and get back at me.
Sorroe, Human Mesmer
Jade Quarry Server
You know which group I'd love to be able to track... those that own and currently play WoW that also purchase GW2 due to it's subscription-free model and the fact it's the newest, shiniest etc. Basically, I'd be curious to see how play time starts initially split between the two and how that ratio drifts one way or the other over time.
Oderint, dum metuant.
You are the gamer being directly targetted by GW2, as am I. For me, the WoW model is completely and utterly worn out...but for those players that still enjoy that model, AND want to play something different, GW2s payment model could provide a happy medium for them.
Sorroe, Human Mesmer
Jade Quarry Server
It wasn't in the form of a question...it was a statement. Why GW2 will not have to compete with WoW.
Depending on the success of GW2 then yes, it very well could become the next standard to which other MMOs are held.
Sorroe, Human Mesmer
Jade Quarry Server
That is an added layer of the gaming markets competition...being your time. Good point Solarine.
Sorroe, Human Mesmer
Jade Quarry Server
Threads like these usually operate on a couple of premises that I disagree with.
GW2 will not be able to hold a player's attention for the same duration as a subcription based game
Players moving from a subscription based game to Guild Wars will maintain their existing sub
First, and this is speculation based on what I've seen, GW2 will have no trouble keeping a large number of players interested for a long time. It seems to have ample content, on par or exceeding, any new MMO, but also standing up well against established games. Explorable mode dungeons, OUTSTANDING PvP options, tons of activities (mini-games), wildly divergent profession gameplay, variable storylines (even when playing as exactly the same race and profession), content that can never be outleveled, stealth inclusions of free content and an agressive schedule of new expansion content (based on ArenaNet's prior behaviour), will all combine to keep a player busy. Then there's Tyria, glorious Tyria. Why take a vacation there when you can actually make it your home?
Second, I'm totally unconvinced that simply because GW2 is buy-to-play, players will choose to maintain their existing sub. Yes, perhaps for the first month, maybe even two, while they scope out the new kid on the block. But once they realize that GW2 really can provide them with a first class, "AAA" experience, they'll realize that there's little point in keeping a subscription to a game they no longer play.
Now, I'm basing this on my personal perspective and I realize that I don't share it with everyone. I'll tend to keep a sub running until I'm certain that whatever game I'm trying out will be able to keep me entertained for at least a few months. That's when I'll cancel. Sometimes I know this within a few hours, sometimes it takes a month. And then sometimes, I'm just lazy and forget to un-sub because I'm so entranced with my new obsession. But I will always stop paying for something I'm not using, nor intending on using. Not all gamers are going to think this way, but I believe the majority are pragmatic enough to want to save themselves a bit of money where they can.
A final consideration raised in the OP is that GW2 is just too different from a mechanics perspective to appeal to players who play other games based on more typical/traditional gameplay. That they will be unable or unwilling to adapt to such fundamental changes in the way the game plays and that they will not want to remain for the long-term. This will cause players to gravitate back to their original games, thus protecting those subscription bases. Again this is pure speculation, but I don't believe this, or at least I don't believe this will happen on so wide a scale that subscription numbers won't be clearly affected.
We are creatures of habit, but we also like nice things. You may have been driving that old Honda Civic for the last 15 years, know it inside and out, put thousands of dollars into over the years and maybe even love it. But most of us, once given the chance to drive a Ferrari, will never slide behind the wheel of that Civic ever again, love or no. This is especially true if you never have to pay for fuel or maintenance for that Ferrari.
Now some will surely go back. Maybe the sports car is a bit too fast or has a bit too much under hood. Maybe it's a bit too difficult to control or perhaps they just don't like the color. Or maybe they are just hardcore Honda purists. Whatever the reason, they'll spurn the flashy beast and go back to the tried and true. My contention is that those individuals are a minority. Most, if given the opportunity to have something better (again, a subjective description), they'll take it, even if it requires some adjustment on their part. Even if it means breaking an old habits.
So, GW2 will affect subscription numbers, similar to if it was a subscrtiption based game itself. People may have the money available to keep that subscription running, but my thought is that they won't once they settle on GW2 as a permanent or semi-permanent replacement. And the reason is simple -- it's spending money for nothing. Few of us can really afford to do that, especially these days.
It does not have to compete cause it is diffrent kind of game. Yeds it is also mmropg but it is diffrent.
Focused much more on e-sport and pvp than on grinding PvE dungeons which WoW (and Swtor , Rift,etc) is more focused on.
Of course GW2 will have PvE as well as WoW have PvP ,that does not change that at 'core' they have diffrent focus.
Similarly f.e. ArcheAge will also be diffrent from WoW and GW2 ,and GW2 is diff from WoW and AA.
Finally mmrogp's start to have some differentation and are not close to 100% carbon copies.
It is hard to come up to any conclusion because we don't know playing habits of gamers in general. I personally know people who can easily juggle 3 to 4 games a week without any problems. i myself can play upto 3 games a week. Right now i am subbed to EQ2 and Eve. I don't think it is a big deal to manage my time between two games
GW2 being B2P and having no gear grind won't make me feel i am lagging behind or being left out of the rat race. If anything GW2 would be my weekend game while i play TSW for weekdays.
Bite Me
The thread was in response to those gamers that think you can only play one or the other, OR that you have to 'beat WoW' in order to be successful on a large scale. You and I are in agreement, and yes...GW2 will be my only MMO.
You misinterpreted another point of mine. I wasn't saying that the mechanics will be so different that the game will appeal to a smaller pool of players. My point was, that for gamers such as you and I being fed up with the WoW model, the mechanics are different enough that it should hold our attention.
Sorry if the OP was unclear, it made sense in my head, lol.
Sorroe, Human Mesmer
Jade Quarry Server
This made me laugh.