Originally posted by CaptainRPG Originally posted by spydermr2 No, Guild Wars isn't for the "casual gamer", but a very limited subset of gamers who want to be able to PvP freely and has a general game that doesn't take much effort. Usually the phrase 'casual gamer' and PvP DON'T go together, so it's unusual to see someone lumping them together. Actually, Guild Wars site indicates this and any GW fanboy will tell you that GW is for the casual gamer. Not to mention, it has level 20 cap limit and you can level up very fast. It only takes a weekened to get to level 20 and three days to a week to beat the game. There is a huge lack of content. You cannot taken up a talent to make money as money and equipment are not a big part of the game. The PvE is easy, so easy in fact, that you can use henchmen for the majority of the game. The game relies heavily on PvP, very good PvP, which eventually gets old. I'm not deluded you to the fact it was a long term game, but GW isn't.
I think we're trying to say the same thing (or not), though I think it goes to what the definition of "casual gamer" is. I regard myself as a "casual gamer", though that may not be the case depending on how you look at the words. I make a distinction between "casual gamer" and the FPS-minded who just want to "get in and blast things". To me, GW is exactly a progression from the Diablo2-type game, with a dash of Unreal Tournament tossed in -- NOT something a casual RPG gamer is looking for at all. Nor do I think that "casual gamer" automatically means "easiest, dumbed-down, etc." GW is the perfect game for what I regard as the FPS-minded, the PvP-minded -- you don't even have to play the world at all, just go straight in and auto-level to level 20 in the PvP area and go to it. Couldn't be more "unreal tournament"-ish, more FPS-minded than that.
And back on topic: WoW, unsatisfying. Any comments on my suggestions earlier regarding an attempt to redefine the "endgame" and what it means (and how 'bout redoing the endgame so it isn't an "end"-game at all, aka no "end" to it). Looking for thoughts, will probably compile those suggestions into a post in the main forum later.
I think we're trying to say the same thing (or not), though I think it goes to what the definition of "casual gamer" is. I regard myself as a "casual gamer", though that may not be the case depending on how you look at the words. I make a distinction between "casual gamer" and the FPS-minded who just want to "get in and blast things". To me, GW is exactly a progression from the Diablo2-type game, with a dash of Unreal Tournament tossed in -- NOT something a casual RPG gamer is looking for at all. Nor do I think that "casual gamer" automatically means "easiest, dumbed-down, etc." GW is the perfect game for what I regard as the FPS-minded, the PvP-minded -- you don't even have to play the world at all, just go straight in and auto-level to level 20 in the PvP area and go to it. Couldn't be more "unreal tournament"-ish, more FPS-minded than that.
A casual gamer is one who plays 1 to 2 hours a day or every other day. They don't play commonly and have little skill. They either don't have time to play games or they are in the process of withdrawing from games. A Hardcore gamer is one who plays 4 to 8 hours a day everyday. They may play in a collective gaming period or periodically through the day. Hardcore gamers have very good gaming skills and often look for a challenge.
The game is nothing like Unreal Tournament since that game requires resourcefulness and lack of team work. Combat in most FPS are not team based when it comes to PvP and you take guys on your own. (Though you can play on a team.) GW is a game where you rely on your team and for the team to have anti- for your build.
The fact that you can skip the PvE and go straight to PvP is what makes this game for the casual gamer and the causal gamer wants to skip the "filler." Where as in WoW you have to work your way towards the endgame PvP content and PvP is limited early in the game as you can't just jump to level 60 in one day like Guild Wars. Even the PvP servers require you to level up.
So it's really not a matter of definition, it's just you changing the defintion of words or phrases to fit your argument. And no, WoW doesn't need anything else added. If you're bored, buy another game to occupy your time. You'll never find a game to satisify you. Because once it gains more content, more people like yourself are going to say it isn't a enough.
I normally play about 2-3 hours/day, though that does go up on weekends. The reference to Unreal Tournament was solely as reference, to the FPS-minded. And strangely enough, all of the Unreal Tournament sessions I've played were in COOPERATIVE modes, which by definition encouraged team-play to achieve the objectives.
I've played since MUDs, most of the "major" titles and many of the lesser-knowns. I can't refer to myself in EITHER of your defintions (hardcore or casual). To me, and again this is IMO, "casual" gamers are looking for an experience that is immersive, challenging, and well-developed -- just not one that is structured specifically to require enormous time commitments. That sort of structuring has nothing to do with creating an immersive, well-thought-out environment and everything to do with catering to self-fulfilling concepts of "hardcore" and "casual" (which in these forums seem to be at each other's throats, for no other reason than they look at the other playstyle as somehow "infringing" on the rightness of their own playstyle).
The one I'm most offended at is the idea you presented, and that I've seen elsewhere, that somehow because someone doesn't play long hours/day, they aren't skilled; and that only those who do play long hours/day are "skilled". That's your very offensive phrasing. Personally, I've been playing MMORPGs of all sorts for so long that I can't refer to myself as unskilled in any aspect (cooperative play, be it in formal groups, RAID, open PvP, or PvE). But then again, I'd define someone's skills not by how much time they put in per day but how well they play or how much experience they have TOTAL.
To be blunt, I've grouped with many, many people who were so-called "hardcore" by your definition that didn't have a CLUE how to work with others. And I've grouped and Raided with folks who were new to both ideas and who learned quickly and turned out to be very good at it. I've stalked folks in UO who were new who turned out to come up with some amazing tactics against me; and slaughtered so-called "hardcore" idiots who had their "one" style of play and that was it. Put a lot of time in, but they learned "their role" and didn't think creatively about anything.
Hence my original comment: "casual" versus "hardcore" seems to be in the eyes of the beholder. Worse, too many on both sides slander the other's so-called skills blindly and childishly.
I normally play about 2-3 hours/day, though that does go up on weekends.
Everyone play doubles their time on weekends. Even hardcore games will spend the whole day in the house.
The reference to Unreal Tournament was solely as reference, to the FPS-minded. And strangely enough, all of the Unreal Tournament sessions I've played were in COOPERATIVE modes, which by definition encouraged team-play to achieve the objectives.
Halo also incoporates COOPERATIVE play. Almost every game has a online feature with co-operative play. Unlike GW's CO-OP is a necessity to bigger problems. You are limited in skills, attributes and weapons in GW where as UnReal Tournament you can switch between weapons and have nigh same attributes. You can't even compare the two by there different styles of gameplay and for you to state that GW holds a candle to Unreal is just shallowness on your part.
I've played since MUDs, most of the "major" titles and many of the lesser-knowns. I can't refer to myself in EITHER of your defintions (hardcore or casual). To me, and again this is IMO, "casual" gamers are looking for an experience that is immersive, challenging, and well-developed -- just not one that is structured specifically to require enormous time commitments. That sort of structuring has nothing to do with creating an immersive, well-thought-out environment and everything to do with catering to self-fulfilling concepts of "hardcore" and "casual" (which in these forums seem to be at each other's throats, for no other reason than they look at the other playstyle as somehow "infringing" on the rightness of their own playstyle).
Looking from your history, you're hardcore gamer who has been disappointed by a serious of games that didn't give you the full experience of an rpg. Not that they were bad, but the lack an aspect you wanted, which I explained early that no game will have everything you want. Everyone gets tired of a game, matter no how good it is, and they ask for more.
Every game, except WoW and a few other MMOgames, lacks that one thing that makes RPGs good, which is that's longevity. The ability to hold the players interest for a long period of time.
You can call yourself whatever you like, but your history says it all.
The one I'm most offended at is the idea you presented, and that I've seen elsewhere, that somehow because someone doesn't play long hours/day, they aren't skilled; and that only those who do play long hours/day are "skilled". That's your very offensive phrasing. Personally, I've been playing MMORPGs of all sorts for so long that I can't refer to myself as unskilled in any aspect (cooperative play, be it in formal groups, RAID, open PvP, or PvE). But then again, I'd define someone's skills not by how much time they put in per day but how well they play or how much experience they have TOTAL.
Cry me a river. A person who play long hours is more likely to have skill than a player who plays occasional because those who play long hours find out about secrets, becomes an expert with certain dungeons and has ways to exploit the game. You're telling me a person who plays 1 to 2 hours every other day knows more than player who plays 4 every everyday? It's not based on experience at all. I play well in groups (listening and cooperating) since I've party with people in the past, but when I play a new game I don't know what I'm doing I have to learn like everyone else.
To be blunt, I've grouped with many, many people who were so-called "hardcore" by your definition that didn't have a CLUE how to work with others. And I've grouped and Raided with folks who were new to both ideas and who learned quickly and turned out to be very good at it. I've stalked folks in UO who were new who turned out to come up with some amazing tactics against me; and slaughtered so-called "hardcore" idiots who had their "one" style of play and that was it. Put a lot of time in, but they learned "their role" and didn't think creatively about anything.
You never group with such people so you don't have to lie. Hardcore gamers conquer games, Casual gamers piss on them. Casual groups don't know what they are doing and are more likely to leave if they have what they want or if everyone else screws up. In a hardcore group, you either get left behind or kicked out of the party. I saw less people leave groups in WoW than in GW, which pretty tells you what kind of game GW is. It's very solemn, if ever that a hardcore gamer leave a group (In any game) unless the groups were idiots/causal gamers.
Hence my original comment: "casual" versus "hardcore" seems to be in the eyes of the beholder. Worse, too many on both sides slander the other's so-called skills blindly and childishly.
You have no such analogy. It just you making up definitions to give ground to your argument. You aren't the first person I've met whose done this.
You never group with such people so you don't have to lie.
-- end of quote --
Um, do me a favor, but don't, not knowing me, tell me I'm lying about something. I wasn't, and haven't. There's no need for that sort of garbage. Over the years I've grouped with just about every type of player out there. And to be blunt, I prefer grouping with folks who are still learning. They tend to be the ones who AREN'T hard-and-fast in their playstyles and that makes for a more interesting time. It's dull as dishwater to see the repetitive "we gotta get you, the healer, and you, the DPS guy, and you, the warrior" over and over again. Mix it up, get inventive. Love games that actually encourage a mixture of styles and doesn't just pigeonhole tasks/purposes/ "roles" into the standard fare.
Again, we don't agree on the definition of casual versus hardcore. I don't regard unskilled = casual or hardcore = skilled. Too many idiots who play tons of time and haven't a creative tactic in their body. They can play rote, but put them in a situation that requires something new or that could be taken from a different perspective and they're useless. Doesn't mean all hardcore is like that, just like not all "casual" are "unskilled". You make far too many massively sweeping generalisations that you seem to think are absolutes.
Wasn't going to keep replying, but calling me a liar was going too far. Disagreements on things are one thing, but there is no call for taking things to that personal a level, especially when you do not know me nor have any reason, other than your own high horse, to even make such a dishonorable comment.
I think we're trying to say the same thing (or not), though I think it goes to what the definition of "casual gamer" is. I regard myself as a "casual gamer", though that may not be the case depending on how you look at the words. I make a distinction between "casual gamer" and the FPS-minded who just want to "get in and blast things". To me, GW is exactly a progression from the Diablo2-type game, with a dash of Unreal Tournament tossed in -- NOT something a casual RPG gamer is looking for at all. Nor do I think that "casual gamer" automatically means "easiest, dumbed-down, etc." GW is the perfect game for what I regard as the FPS-minded, the PvP-minded -- you don't even have to play the world at all, just go straight in and auto-level to level 20 in the PvP area and go to it. Couldn't be more "unreal tournament"-ish, more FPS-minded than that.
A casual gamer is one who plays 1 to 2 hours a day or every other day. They don't play commonly and have little skill. They either don't have time to play games or they are in the process of withdrawing from games. A Hardcore gamer is one who plays 4 to 8 hours a day everyday. They may play in a collective gaming period or periodically through the day. Hardcore gamers have very good gaming skills and often look for a challenge.
The game is nothing like Unreal Tournament since that game requires resourcefulness and lack of team work. Combat in most FPS are not team based when it comes to PvP and you take guys on your own. (Though you can play on a team.) GW is a game where you rely on your team and for the team to have anti- for your build.
The fact that you can skip the PvE and go straight to PvP is what makes this game for the casual gamer and the causal gamer wants to skip the "filler." Where as in WoW you have to work your way towards the endgame PvP content and PvP is limited early in the game as you can't just jump to level 60 in one day like Guild Wars. Even the PvP servers require you to level up.
So it's really not a matter of definition, it's just you changing the defintion of words or phrases to fit your argument. And no, WoW doesn't need anything else added. If you're bored, buy another game to occupy your time. You'll never find a game to satisify you. Because once it gains more content, more people like yourself are going to say it isn't a enough.
oh boy. So your definition of Casual is right and everybody's else is wrong? Also by YOUR opinion, WoW needs nothing added. Your opinion is not the Cosmic Truth and while i do like WoW and consider it a great game, it is clear some doesn't. This "some" are usually Hardcore players that prefer a much more punishing game than WoW is.
So, for the last time, we are NOT discussing is WoW good or bad, we are discussing an hypothesis, or theory: "Can elements be added to a special server to make the game good for gamers that wants a hard challenge and harsh punishments for them?". If you are not interested in discussing it, well then what are you posting here for?
Is not even about content but more about how to use the existing content in a different way.
Finally, in Guild Wars you CAN'T skip the PvE or then your PvP character has 0 skills.
Secondly 600K is a great amount for such a young MMorpg. Should i remind you and everybody else that Everquest, indiscussed king of N.American and European MMorpg market until WoW ,had 500K subscribers total?
And that EQ2 has 300K?
But the best data is the one you are putting forward: WoW: 3.5 millions people. Are they casual? Quoting from a WoW Dev:
So far it seems like the Honor System is designed for players who can devote large amounts of time to the game. What if I am a casual player who cannot devote so much time? Since the majority of players in WoW are casual gamers, the majority of player will be competing against players of a similar skill level and playtime. We expect many players to be surprised at how viable they will be in the Honor System.
So, by its own Devs, WoW IS a Casual game, at least from the Devs definition (the only one that really counts). That leads to the easy assumption that a good majority of those 3.5 mil are casual gamers as well---- so yes, majority of the market is made of Casual gamers. This should have been obvious since start, but it wasn't to CaptainRPG, so i explained it.
Have a nice Casual day.
"If you give a man a fish, you feed him for a day, if you teach him how to fish, you feed him for a lifetime"
oh boy. So your definition of Casual is right and everybody's else is wrong?
Look up the definition of Hardcore and Casual if you don't believe it. Hardcore gamers are loyal and devoted, so they are going to spend as much time as humanly possible. Casual gamer play game periodically.
And having also played with Hardcore gamers and Casual gamers in both pencil & paper and MMORPGs, Fightning games and FPS, both players have distinct characteristic and spend a certain amount of time on games.
Why do you think GW was such a let down, even to it's fans? A lot of people will tell you not to play GW no more than 2 hours or if you play too much, stop playing it for a few weeks to a month. The reason this is a GW is a game for the casual. It's not meant to be played by hardcore gamers.
So, for the last time, we are NOT discussing is WoW good or bad, we are discussing an hypothesis, or theory: "Can elements be added to a special server to make the game good for gamers that wants a hard challenge and harsh punishments for them?". If you are not interested in discussing it, well then what are you posting here for?
And for the last time, you need to not to make any suggestion to add content or idea because you'll still never be satisified.
Finally, in Guild Wars you CAN'T skip the PvE or then your PvP character has 0 skills.
This doesn't mean you'll suck since I have had winning streaks with premade builds. Not to mention a team of premade Warriors won tombs and another premade (I forgot their build) had also won GvG.
Secondly 600K is a great amount for such a young MMorpg. Should i remind you and everybody else that Everquest, indiscussed king of N.American and European MMorpg market until WoW ,had 500K subscribers total?
They didn't get 600k until 3 to 4 months after it launch. The first Everquest had up to 300k when it came out and WoW up to 500k. In 3 to 4 month WoW had 1 million players.
But the best data is the one you are putting forward: WoW: 3.5 millions people. Are they casual? Quoting from a WoW Dev:
So far it seems like the Honor System is designed for players who can devote large amounts of time to the game. What if I am a casual player who cannot devote so much time? Since the majority of players in WoW are casual gamers, the majority of player will be competing against players of a similar skill level and playtime. We expect many players to be surprised at how viable they will be in the Honor System.
So, by its own Devs, WoW IS a Casual game, at least from the Devs definition (the only one that really counts). That leads to the easy assumption that a good majority of those 3.5 mil are casual gamers as well---- so yes, majority of the market is made of Casual gamers. This should have been obvious since start, but it wasn't to CaptainRPG, so i explained it.
Have a nice Casual day.
LOL! Anybody from the WoW forums will tell you that anything WoW says is false. (Like how they claim they would never nerf the Paladin) I was on the boards when they made such claims about gameplay. And you know what, developers will do the total opposite. Also they can't do a proper census on the time spent in the game away and as I mention, half the people play other MMORPGs when not playing WoW. The developer didn't even say it was a casual game, he say the majority of the people are casual player, which is a lie since the two biggest servers are PvE and PvP servers, who server often have problems with ganking, corpse camping, farming, grinding and repeating instances. Not to mention, they have had players discover bugs (Too many WoW videoes to disprove that), abuse exploits and have a series death due to long term gameplay. Lastly, for a fact, the busiest time for WoW is around the afternoon because that's when everyone gets out of school or out of work and this last until the 8pm to 10pm evening before going off to bed. So that's 4 to 6 hours.
Next time you pull some crap out like this make sure you include the times players played.
Just to note, I've played Guild Wars and it wasn't my cup of tea, but man in a WOW forum with the OP just saying why he doesn't like WOW without mentioning GW along comes a WOW fanboy who just can't pass up the chance to flame GW. I have never played WOW and most likeley never will. I'm not a PvP person and dislike loot so this game doesn't sound like its for me. I just get a chuckle out of the flame wars between these two games, each game has it good points but neither camp will admit it.
A well written post mate. The game is very lacking in content. The poor navigation system still astounds me. It is on par with games I played 10 years ago.
I've read thru this post and found out many things. It seems there are hardcore gamers and everyman gamers. I think you can be both. I've played a few games such as COH and DAoC and I understand why those games are appealing. I tried GW and liked it as well. My point is, variety is good, every game has it's good and bad points. I am glad everybody does not like the same game. To be honest, I like a game that is somewhat easy like WoW, but others do not. It seems those should play games like EQ2 or SB or Lineage. just because something is simple does'nt make it bad, How many people love AC/DC?, are the songs simple, yes. are they stillgreat? yes! I'm too lazy to take time to play a difficult game, it's that simple. Some want a challange, I don't. That does'nt make me wrong, it'just me. However some want a harder game and thats O.K. too. Sorry to ramble, I hope it makes sense.
Comments
I think we're trying to say the same thing (or not), though I think it goes to what the definition of "casual gamer" is. I regard myself as a "casual gamer", though that may not be the case depending on how you look at the words. I make a distinction between "casual gamer" and the FPS-minded who just want to "get in and blast things". To me, GW is exactly a progression from the Diablo2-type game, with a dash of Unreal Tournament tossed in -- NOT something a casual RPG gamer is looking for at all. Nor do I think that "casual gamer" automatically means "easiest, dumbed-down, etc." GW is the perfect game for what I regard as the FPS-minded, the PvP-minded -- you don't even have to play the world at all, just go straight in and auto-level to level 20 in the PvP area and go to it. Couldn't be more "unreal tournament"-ish, more FPS-minded than that.
And back on topic: WoW, unsatisfying. Any comments on my suggestions earlier regarding an attempt to redefine the "endgame" and what it means (and how 'bout redoing the endgame so it isn't an "end"-game at all, aka no "end" to it). Looking for thoughts, will probably compile those suggestions into a post in the main forum later.
A casual gamer is one who plays 1 to 2 hours a day or every other day. They don't play commonly and have little skill. They either don't have time to play games or they are in the process of withdrawing from games. A Hardcore gamer is one who plays 4 to 8 hours a day everyday. They may play in a collective gaming period or periodically through the day. Hardcore gamers have very good gaming skills and often look for a challenge.
The game is nothing like Unreal Tournament since that game requires resourcefulness and lack of team work. Combat in most FPS are not team based when it comes to PvP and you take guys on your own. (Though you can play on a team.) GW is a game where you rely on your team and for the team to have anti- for your build.
The fact that you can skip the PvE and go straight to PvP is what makes this game for the casual gamer and the causal gamer wants to skip the "filler." Where as in WoW you have to work your way towards the endgame PvP content and PvP is limited early in the game as you can't just jump to level 60 in one day like Guild Wars. Even the PvP servers require you to level up.
So it's really not a matter of definition, it's just you changing the defintion of words or phrases to fit your argument. And no, WoW doesn't need anything else added. If you're bored, buy another game to occupy your time. You'll never find a game to satisify you. Because once it gains more content, more people like yourself are going to say it isn't a enough.
I normally play about 2-3 hours/day, though that does go up on weekends. The reference to Unreal Tournament was solely as reference, to the FPS-minded. And strangely enough, all of the Unreal Tournament sessions I've played were in COOPERATIVE modes, which by definition encouraged team-play to achieve the objectives.
I've played since MUDs, most of the "major" titles and many of the lesser-knowns. I can't refer to myself in EITHER of your defintions (hardcore or casual). To me, and again this is IMO, "casual" gamers are looking for an experience that is immersive, challenging, and well-developed -- just not one that is structured specifically to require enormous time commitments. That sort of structuring has nothing to do with creating an immersive, well-thought-out environment and everything to do with catering to self-fulfilling concepts of "hardcore" and "casual" (which in these forums seem to be at each other's throats, for no other reason than they look at the other playstyle as somehow "infringing" on the rightness of their own playstyle).
The one I'm most offended at is the idea you presented, and that I've seen elsewhere, that somehow because someone doesn't play long hours/day, they aren't skilled; and that only those who do play long hours/day are "skilled". That's your very offensive phrasing. Personally, I've been playing MMORPGs of all sorts for so long that I can't refer to myself as unskilled in any aspect (cooperative play, be it in formal groups, RAID, open PvP, or PvE). But then again, I'd define someone's skills not by how much time they put in per day but how well they play or how much experience they have TOTAL.
To be blunt, I've grouped with many, many people who were so-called "hardcore" by your definition that didn't have a CLUE how to work with others. And I've grouped and Raided with folks who were new to both ideas and who learned quickly and turned out to be very good at it. I've stalked folks in UO who were new who turned out to come up with some amazing tactics against me; and slaughtered so-called "hardcore" idiots who had their "one" style of play and that was it. Put a lot of time in, but they learned "their role" and didn't think creatively about anything.
Hence my original comment: "casual" versus "hardcore" seems to be in the eyes of the beholder. Worse, too many on both sides slander the other's so-called skills blindly and childishly.
You never group with such people so you don't have to lie.
-- end of quote --
Um, do me a favor, but don't, not knowing me, tell me I'm lying about something. I wasn't, and haven't. There's no need for that sort of garbage. Over the years I've grouped with just about every type of player out there. And to be blunt, I prefer grouping with folks who are still learning. They tend to be the ones who AREN'T hard-and-fast in their playstyles and that makes for a more interesting time. It's dull as dishwater to see the repetitive "we gotta get you, the healer, and you, the DPS guy, and you, the warrior" over and over again. Mix it up, get inventive. Love games that actually encourage a mixture of styles and doesn't just pigeonhole tasks/purposes/ "roles" into the standard fare.
Again, we don't agree on the definition of casual versus hardcore. I don't regard unskilled = casual or hardcore = skilled. Too many idiots who play tons of time and haven't a creative tactic in their body. They can play rote, but put them in a situation that requires something new or that could be taken from a different perspective and they're useless. Doesn't mean all hardcore is like that, just like not all "casual" are "unskilled". You make far too many massively sweeping generalisations that you seem to think are absolutes.
Wasn't going to keep replying, but calling me a liar was going too far. Disagreements on things are one thing, but there is no call for taking things to that personal a level, especially when you do not know me nor have any reason, other than your own high horse, to even make such a dishonorable comment.
A casual gamer is one who plays 1 to 2 hours a day or every other day. They don't play commonly and have little skill. They either don't have time to play games or they are in the process of withdrawing from games. A Hardcore gamer is one who plays 4 to 8 hours a day everyday. They may play in a collective gaming period or periodically through the day. Hardcore gamers have very good gaming skills and often look for a challenge.
The game is nothing like Unreal Tournament since that game requires resourcefulness and lack of team work. Combat in most FPS are not team based when it comes to PvP and you take guys on your own. (Though you can play on a team.) GW is a game where you rely on your team and for the team to have anti- for your build.
The fact that you can skip the PvE and go straight to PvP is what makes this game for the casual gamer and the causal gamer wants to skip the "filler." Where as in WoW you have to work your way towards the endgame PvP content and PvP is limited early in the game as you can't just jump to level 60 in one day like Guild Wars. Even the PvP servers require you to level up.
So it's really not a matter of definition, it's just you changing the defintion of words or phrases to fit your argument. And no, WoW doesn't need anything else added. If you're bored, buy another game to occupy your time. You'll never find a game to satisify you. Because once it gains more content, more people like yourself are going to say it isn't a enough.
oh boy. So your definition of Casual is right and everybody's else is wrong? Also by YOUR opinion, WoW needs nothing added. Your opinion is not the Cosmic Truth and while i do like WoW and consider it a great game, it is clear some doesn't. This "some" are usually Hardcore players that prefer a much more punishing game than WoW is.
So, for the last time, we are NOT discussing is WoW good or bad, we are discussing an hypothesis, or theory: "Can elements be added to a special server to make the game good for gamers that wants a hard challenge and harsh punishments for them?". If you are not interested in discussing it, well then what are you posting here for?
Is not even about content but more about how to use the existing content in a different way.
Finally, in Guild Wars you CAN'T skip the PvE or then your PvP character has 0 skills.
Secondly 600K is a great amount for such a young MMorpg. Should i remind you and everybody else that Everquest, indiscussed king of N.American and European MMorpg market until WoW ,had 500K subscribers total?
And that EQ2 has 300K?
But the best data is the one you are putting forward: WoW: 3.5 millions people. Are they casual? Quoting from a WoW Dev:
So far it seems like the Honor System is designed for players who can devote large amounts of time to the game. What if I am a casual player who cannot devote so much time?
Since the majority of players in WoW are casual gamers, the majority of player will be competing against players of a similar skill level and playtime. We expect many players to be surprised at how viable they will be in the Honor System.
So, by its own Devs, WoW IS a Casual game, at least from the Devs definition (the only one that really counts). That leads to the easy assumption that a good majority of those 3.5 mil are casual gamers as well---- so yes, majority of the market is made of Casual gamers. This should have been obvious since start, but it wasn't to CaptainRPG, so i explained it.
Have a nice Casual day.
"If you give a man a fish, you feed him for a day, if you teach him how to fish, you feed him for a lifetime"
LOL! Anybody from the WoW forums will tell you that anything WoW says is false. (Like how they claim they would never nerf the Paladin) I was on the boards when they made such claims about gameplay. And you know what, developers will do the total opposite. Also they can't do a proper census on the time spent in the game away and as I mention, half the people play other MMORPGs when not playing WoW. The developer didn't even say it was a casual game, he say the majority of the people are casual player, which is a lie since the two biggest servers are PvE and PvP servers, who server often have problems with ganking, corpse camping, farming, grinding and repeating instances. Not to mention, they have had players discover bugs (Too many WoW videoes to disprove that), abuse exploits and have a series death due to long term gameplay. Lastly, for a fact, the busiest time for WoW is around the afternoon because that's when everyone gets out of school or out of work and this last until the 8pm to 10pm evening before going off to bed. So that's 4 to 6 hours.
Next time you pull some crap out like this make sure you include the times players played.
A well written post mate. The game is very lacking in content. The poor navigation system still astounds me. It is on par with games I played 10 years ago.