Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
So, at least is it better than SWTOR?
noncley
Member UncommonPosts: 718
in Guild Wars 2
That was the last 'Game of the Decade' which turned out to be a bust? How is GW2 shaping up so far? Does it live up to the hype?
Comments
This game cannot - I repeat - CANNOT fail. What free to play games do you know are a complete bomb? Look at Lord of the rings Online, Look at DC Unierse these games are packed with players now.
Also, look at the orginial guild wars.
Dude, don't worry lol
There are some launch issues, but it is damn fun. Big groups joining up on the fly and smashing into dynamic events, which makes the enemies scale up into epic fights...very fun.
Please stop calling it free to play. Can I play it whout paying? No I can't. While I like Guild Wars, it's definately not free to play.
Let's play Fallen Earth (blind, 300 episodes)
Let's play Guild Wars 2 (blind, 45 episodes)
A game has to be played for people to not like it.
At least there is no ability delay, but they need to fix camera movement.
I'm also missing the roles in rpg as everyone are just spamming abilities at large encounters. It feels more like an action mmo than rpg but that is fine. It will probably suit my wife
I lasted 2-3 days in SW:TOR. I've lasted longer in this so I'd say it's better.
That's not really a statement I would expect from someone who has been a member here since '09.
I want a mmorpg where people have gone through misery, have gone through school stuff and actually have had sex even. -sagil
Man people love being correct...Okay...lets all call it Buy to play...which is essentially free to play. You buy to play it for free....buy2play4free? f**k it...ill just call it F2P youll just have to get over it.
Its as much of a statement as you need. A game flops from not enough people paying the monthly fee, yet they still bought the game. I still stand by what I said about other F2P games that are booming with players and have been around for years before they even turned F2P.
You just pay for the box price. That's all.
You could spend more money in the micro transaction shop but everything in there can be required through play. You can exchange ingame currency (coins) into the shop currency (gems) if you really don't want to spend any more money on it.
On top of that, everything is the shop is concidered optional and are more for the looks of your character. Special town clothing, some armor skins, some mild experience boosts (but no power boosts) and minipets for example. It's not pay 2 win at all.
So yeah, just buy the game 50€ and that's it. No monthly subscription fee!
It still sold well and made Blizzard a lot of money.
Let's play Fallen Earth (blind, 300 episodes)
Let's play Guild Wars 2 (blind, 45 episodes)
Well OP, based on general consensus at this time then YES. GW2 seems to satisfy more people that purchased it than SWTOR managed to do. We all know this. So, I am not sure why that’s important to point out. It seems to me that SWTOR has had enough salt rubbed into its wounds within its own forum here on site. O.o
It's kind of the inverse of SWToR. The personal story seems to be a minor part of the game, and the world story is a major part of the game. Also, the world story doesn't suck.
More of GW2's game is 'good' compared to SWToR. What I mean is that 80% of GW2's game is really, while 50% of SWToR's game was really good. I used real numbers, but you can insert your own numbers there. The important part is that GW2's % of good game is higher than SWToR's % of good game.
Now, SWToR's class story lines weren't just good, they were great. It wasn't enough though. That percentage of bad game was too high for the class story to overcome.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
To be fair, this game should be judged by the same criteria that SWTOR was, if it doesnt have 1M subscribers a month after 90 days.... it is a failure. At that point, all it can do is drop sub fees, and use microtransactions instead. Oh, wait, this is how it started. So, by the 'current' definition of failure, it has already failed.
I rememeber when having 300k people play a game was big news (pre-wow) and considered a huge sucess. Heck, if you hit 100k, you still were not a failure. Games didnt fail until they failed to break even, and were closed. There are still plent of those today, and that seems like a more reasonalbe definition.
GW2 isnt a failure, just like SWTOR wasnt a failure. They will both do well, and be enjoyed by many, for years.
Just because something sells well doesn't mean it's good. I'm pretty sure we can all agree the last 10 iterations of the Transformers are not particularly good movies, yet they still sell well, same with McDonalds, etc.
Diablo 3 sold so well due to a combination of massive hype, its predecessors and the fact that it was made by Blizzard. The sales numbers had very little to do with the actual game itself, which most people can agree was a complete fail when it launched.
I think SWTOR was overhyped, not just overhyped like super mega ultra overhyped. People blasted through the content and got bored & returned to WOW.
LOTRO wasn't always F2P. It went F2P. However they keep making expansions so it must be doing ok.
If you think about it F2P is probably more profitable then subscription if people use the stores. In one game you pay 15 / month. The other one is free but it has a store. Hmm I want that useless cosmetic costume that makes me look like a lich for $10. Next day oh I need some more potions of l33tness for 5, its only 5 bucks np. Next day, oh I wanna buy that content I'm locked out of for $20. I bet people spent way more on the stores then a subscription.
The only thing abut it that is better is B2P.... Other than that:
"Thanks for the offer but I'll have to pass."
Guild Wars2 is much, much better than SWTOR (played for 3months).
On SWTOR I knew by the second day that the game was a big failure, on the other hand GW2 surprises me every turn. Last night I join in an event that turn out to be a small raid with 20~players fighting underwater in a series of tunnels that led to a big boss fight. I was amazed.
As is tsw
And no doubt tera, but I've not played it.
You would be hard pressed to make a mmo worse than swtor though imo.
Not very hard to make a game better than SWTOR... LOL
SAying that GW2 is nothing special, its your average themepark MMORPG witha few additions.. Its improves on other themepark MMORPGs I guess but nto by huge leaps..
There are some major issues the main ones being the utterly boring heart quests.. im ont gonna go into those on another post hehe..
World pvp is fun but can take quite some time to get into.. due to the massive q's..
Yup so its better than SWTOR
To be fair, Al Gore is better than SWTOR, but that's like comparing AIDs to feces being smeared on your car. Anything is better than AIDs my friend.
The Theory of Conservative Conservation of Ignorant Stupidity:
Having a different opinion must mean you're a troll.
I hear what you are saying. GW2 is the inverse of SWTOR, and understanding that really helps us to contrast the two games as representatives of certain design philosophies. In my opinion, you can't separate the "game" from the design philosophy. It doesn't make sense, to my mind, to say that swtor had great story but poor "game" because the philosophy that directed every choice they made in designing that game was that the story was the key to a truly successful MMO, the lead developers said as much.
When you design a game with "story first" as your philosophy, it means that the game is essentially going to be designed around the solo player, which is inherently at odds with the spirit of MMORPGs, that is why the game sucked. Yeah, you can point to lack of PvP or lack of grouping or lack of end game . . . but that is because those things don't have any story attached to them so the design philosophy neglected them. The problem with swtor, and many games before it, is that they seem to believe that players only think they want a MMO, but what they really want is a experience like Mass Effect only with other players around that they can chat with. On the other hand, GW2 feels like a true MMORPG to me, the first time I've felt this way since pre-WoW days.
In my book GW2's only real advantage over SWTOR is no sub. That's exactly why I bought it. And the only reason why I bought SWTOR was SW universe which I wanted to live through.
I never expected more than themepark and I knew exactly what game I'm going into when I started SWTOR. I enjoyed the 2 months I played it and was happy with it. That enjoyment I had is comparable to GW2 and enjoyment I am having right now. I'm talking mostly about PvE as themepark PvP kinda doesn't entertain me much longer than PvE. So PvE in GW2 is as far as I can see about the same deal as WoW, SWTOR, TERA, TSW.. you name it...
And PvP...
In WvW (well half of WvW is PvE to be completely honest) it's either instant action Zerg vs Zerg usualy found at one of main/centered keeps or roaming for small group/solo PvP. I ate so much of this in WAR I almost still feel inflated thus it mostly falls under same old.
Not to mention themepark ruleset which doesn't help much.
Than there's PvP in mysts (spvp). No need to waste words. Same old battlegrounds.
To make a conclusion, right now as GW2 stands in terms of content it won't become a new WoW, more like a new SWTOR. As I said the one big difference is absence of a sub. Meaning people will return back much more often, creating bigger overall community, especialy via the tournaments.
And that is good. And the game is not bad no.
Just that long term for me are games like Darkfall (AV sucks), EvE, etc..