Originally posted by Krytycal Not to mention their next project, Defiance, is looking good too.
with firefall and planetside 2 coming this game has no chance.
but i admit for a newbie company they did good with rift and are probably the fastest company out there making content
if they keep up like this their next mmorpg will be bomb
The first line in this makes me laugh. You do realize Rift has made it through Star Wars, TERA, TWS, and GW2 (MoP around the corner). What happened to Star Wars? Oh yeah, they made an awful game and it is going f2p already. TERA and TWS are dying very fast. GW2 is new and shiny, but already people are finding that there is a lack of things to do at 80.
Don't sit here and say it has no chance when it has held a stable playerbase through the launch of 4 AAA games two of which were hyped enough to be the second coming.
Two things wrong with this post:
1. The person you quoted wasn't talking about Rift. He was talking about 3 games in a different genre. defiance, Firefall and PS2 are MMOFPS and the crossover between that genre and mmorpg is fairly minimal.
2. Rift has not held a stable playerbase through 4 AAA games. 56 active NA servers down to 7 or 8. That is not a sign of stability. Rift might have a stable core of 100k or so players that have been there from day 1 and arent going anywhere, but the playerbase overall is certainly not stable.
First off, this is a Rift forum and thread talk about Rift. So even if he was talking Defiance it is an awful point. PS2 and Firefall will launch long before Defiance and lose steam.
Stable does not equal just needing a huge playerbase. Sure a decent playerbase is part, but having a dev team that listens and pumps out quality/quantity content is another huge part. Not to mention no noticable downsizing of the dev team.
I would love to hear where the 100k playerbase number came from though. Also servers have dropped like almost any game other than WoW after the launch rush, but servers also hold a higher amount of players per server than they did at launch.
Rift, like almost all other WoW clones, is dead in the water. It already had to merge servers. It's growing is done.
It cannot become the best themepark, as the best themeparks are in the past, EQ, DAoC...and modern day themeparks like GW2 have much MUCH more to offer. It does not stand on WoW for supports. A good game should stand on its own.
It's the best Themepark for teh people who have decided to subscribe to it.
What other qualifications does it need to be considered "The Best?"
And what does GW2 offer that is so much better than Rift?
I guess it was only amatter of time before someoen came in and said It cant cuz.....GW2
Let's see what GW2 has to offer in a few months when all those people who are playing it wrong, can't seem to figure out how to play it right and leave for games lik MoP and Storm Legion, and Final Fantasy and many others.
Originally posted by Krytycal Not to mention their next project, Defiance, is looking good too.
with firefall and planetside 2 coming this game has no chance.
but i admit for a newbie company they did good with rift and are probably the fastest company out there making content
if they keep up like this their next mmorpg will be bomb
The first line in this makes me laugh. You do realize Rift has made it through Star Wars, TERA, TWS, and GW2 (MoP around the corner). What happened to Star Wars? Oh yeah, they made an awful game and it is going f2p already. TERA and TWS are dying very fast. GW2 is new and shiny, but already people are finding that there is a lack of things to do at 80.
Don't sit here and say it has no chance when it has held a stable playerbase through the launch of 4 AAA games two of which were hyped enough to be the second coming.
Two things wrong with this post:
1. The person you quoted wasn't talking about Rift. He was talking about 3 games in a different genre. defiance, Firefall and PS2 are MMOFPS and the crossover between that genre and mmorpg is fairly minimal.
2. Rift has not held a stable playerbase through 4 AAA games. 56 active NA servers down to 7 or 8. That is not a sign of stability. Rift might have a stable core of 100k or so players that have been there from day 1 and arent going anywhere, but the playerbase overall is certainly not stable.
First off, this is a Rift forum and thread talk about Rift. So even if he was talking Defiance it is an awful point. PS2 and Firefall will launch long before Defiance and lose steam.
Stable does not equal just needing a huge playerbase. Sure a decent playerbase is part, but having a dev team that listens and pumps out quality/quantity content is another huge part. Not to mention no noticable downsizing of the dev team.
I would love to hear where the 100k playerbase number came from though. Also servers have dropped like almost any game other than WoW after the launch rush, but servers also hold a higher amount of players per server than they did at launch.
I dont mean Rift only has 100k users. I mean Rift has 100k users + the people that come around and try the game for a few months here and there (or even 6-12 months at a time), 100k + the people that probably wont be around in a year (but may be replaced by others). Yeah, the 100k is just a guess with no basis behind it. Given that people generally agreed the game had ~300k subscribers last fall its a safe estimation that its around 200k now, and Im basically saying half of its playerbase are lifers, which is actually a good thing.
A stable player base is one like EvE's, which remains more or less constant over time. And EvE is the only game i can think of with a stable player base right now. But Rift's playerbase has cleary declined over the course of the year, and hasnt stopped yet so therefore it is not stable. But again, no game's playerbase is stable in this era, all games have shown significant decline over the past year and a half.
And as for the servers, we know they raised the cap by 200 or so. If they raised it any more than that (which is unlikely because they havent added new real estate for these people to inhabit since then,) is irrelevant, because the servers arent filling up anyway. They have consolidated a higher portion of their NA servers since launch than EQ2 has its entire lifetime. Rift's retention is poor for a game that most people like and say positive things about it. Only Vanguard has a higher percentage of people that say they like the game but didnt play it for long (TSW might be in this category too).
Originally posted by Krytycal Not to mention their next project, Defiance, is looking good too.
with firefall and planetside 2 coming this game has no chance.
but i admit for a newbie company they did good with rift and are probably the fastest company out there making content
if they keep up like this their next mmorpg will be bomb
The first line in this makes me laugh. You do realize Rift has made it through Star Wars, TERA, TWS, and GW2 (MoP around the corner). What happened to Star Wars? Oh yeah, they made an awful game and it is going f2p already. TERA and TWS are dying very fast. GW2 is new and shiny, but already people are finding that there is a lack of things to do at 80.
Don't sit here and say it has no chance when it has held a stable playerbase through the launch of 4 AAA games two of which were hyped enough to be the second coming.
Two things wrong with this post:
1. The person you quoted wasn't talking about Rift. He was talking about 3 games in a different genre. defiance, Firefall and PS2 are MMOFPS and the crossover between that genre and mmorpg is fairly minimal.
2. Rift has not held a stable playerbase through 4 AAA games. 56 active NA servers down to 7 or 8. That is not a sign of stability. Rift might have a stable core of 100k or so players that have been there from day 1 and arent going anywhere, but the playerbase overall is certainly not stable.
First off, this is a Rift forum and thread talk about Rift. So even if he was talking Defiance it is an awful point. PS2 and Firefall will launch long before Defiance and lose steam.
Stable does not equal just needing a huge playerbase. Sure a decent playerbase is part, but having a dev team that listens and pumps out quality/quantity content is another huge part. Not to mention no noticable downsizing of the dev team.
I would love to hear where the 100k playerbase number came from though. Also servers have dropped like almost any game other than WoW after the launch rush, but servers also hold a higher amount of players per server than they did at launch.
I dont mean Rift only has 100k users. I mean Rift has 100k users + the people that come around and try the game for a few months here and there (or even 6-12 months at a time), 100k + the people that probably wont be around in a year (but may be replaced by others). Yeah, the 100k is just a guess with no basis behind it. Given that people generally agreed the game had ~300k subscribers last fall its a safe estimation that its around 200k now, and Im basically saying half of its playerbase are lifers, which is actually a good thing.
A stable player base is one like EvE's, which remains more or less constant over time. And EvE is the only game i can think of with a stable player base right now. But Rift's playerbase has cleary declined over the course of the year, and hasnt stopped yet so therefore it is not stable. But again, no game's playerbase is stable in this era, all games have shown significant decline over the past year and a half.
And as for the servers, we know they raised the cap by 200 or so. If they raised it any more than that (which is unlikely because they havent added new real estate for these people to inhabit since then,) is irrelevant, because the servers arent filling up anyway. They have consolidated a higher portion of their NA servers since launch than EQ2 has its entire lifetime. Rift's retention is poor for a game that most people like and say positive things about it. Only Vanguard has a higher percentage of people that say they like the game but didnt play it for long (TSW might be in this category too).
No sense in throwing around numbers if there is no concrete source behind it to back it up.
Eve did not build it's solid player base over night. So that is another lame point. Of course Rifts playerbase will dip with incredibly hyped titles coming out this past year. Don't you get it? It is not always going to be like that each year. They made it through a rough year to be in the MMO market and are coming out with a massive expansion.
I'd like the source for the Vanguard tidbit as well.
No sense in throwing around numbers if there is no concrete source behind it to back it up.
Eve did not build it's solid player base over night. So that is another lame point. Of course Rifts playerbase will dip with incredibly hyped titles coming out this past year. Don't you get it? It is not always going to be like that each year. They made it through a rough year to be in the MMO market and are coming out with a massive expansion.
I'd like the source for the Vanguard tidbit as well.
The fact you are trying to pin an 18 month long decline (with a short growth period in late jan/early feb due to SWTOR sucking) on the release of eaxctly ONE major MMO, that was poorly recieved, between Rift's launch and GW2's launch is just ridiculous. TERA and TSW were hardly major players (nor were they expectd to be).
The source is just having my eyes open. If you want to ignore whats around you, go ahead. If you want to disagree with my 100k guess thats fine, that was just a guess. But if you cant see there is an abnormal amount of people that liked Rift but no longer play it then you arent looking around you. I brought up Vanguard because weve been hearing for a while now how its this gem of an MMORPG, yet no one plays the damn thing. At least Rift has more players online each night than my accounting classes, Vanguard couldnt claim that before the F2P.
No sense in throwing around numbers if there is no concrete source behind it to back it up.
Eve did not build it's solid player base over night. So that is another lame point. Of course Rifts playerbase will dip with incredibly hyped titles coming out this past year. Don't you get it? It is not always going to be like that each year. They made it through a rough year to be in the MMO market and are coming out with a massive expansion.
I'd like the source for the Vanguard tidbit as well.
The fact you are trying to pin an 18 month long decline (with a short growth period in late jan/early feb due to SWTOR sucking) on the release of eaxctly ONE major MMO, that was poorly recieved, between Rift's launch and GW2's launch is just ridiculous. TERA and TSW were hardly major players (nor were they expectd to be).
The source is just having my eyes open. If you want to ignore whats around you, go ahead. If you want to disagree with my 100k guess thats fine, that was just a guess. But if you cant see there is an abnormal amount of people that liked Rift but no longer play it then you arent looking around you. I brought up Vanguard because weve been hearing for a while now how its this gem of an MMORPG, yet no one plays the damn thing. At least Rift has more players online each night than my accounting classes, Vanguard couldnt claim that before the F2P.
4 AAA MMOS is not one major release sorry. You say silly things. I can't even take this seriously anymore.
4 AAA MMOS is not one major release sorry. You say silly things. I can't even take this seriously anymore.
I count 2. SWTOR and GW2. And GW2 isnt really relevant, because we are discussing what happened before its release. So 1 major MMO release.
Are you *really* going to try to call TERA a major MMO release? Seriously?
here is a list of ALL the major MMO releases since 2004 (in Rift's region)
LOTRO
WAR
AoC
Rift
SWTOR
GW2
minor MMO releases:
Aion (again, in Rift's region)
DDO
STO
DCUO
TERA
TSW
Releases that tanked due to known awful product:
Vanguard
FFXIV
Im sure Im missing a few minor ones, but the 6 above are the major ones.
I realize this whole major/minor thing is very subjective....but calling a game like TERA a major MMO release is really stretching the word major. TSW, maybe, but it only sold 200k copies. These games did not alter *any* games playerbases in the least.
No sense in throwing around numbers if there is no concrete source behind it to back it up.
Eve did not build it's solid player base over night. So that is another lame point. Of course Rifts playerbase will dip with incredibly hyped titles coming out this past year. Don't you get it? It is not always going to be like that each year. They made it through a rough year to be in the MMO market and are coming out with a massive expansion.
I'd like the source for the Vanguard tidbit as well.
The fact you are trying to pin an 18 month long decline (with a short growth period in late jan/early feb due to SWTOR sucking) on the release of eaxctly ONE major MMO, that was poorly recieved, between Rift's launch and GW2's launch is just ridiculous. TERA and TSW were hardly major players (nor were they expectd to be).
The source is just having my eyes open. If you want to ignore whats around you, go ahead. If you want to disagree with my 100k guess thats fine, that was just a guess. But if you cant see there is an abnormal amount of people that liked Rift but no longer play it then you arent looking around you. I brought up Vanguard because weve been hearing for a while now how its this gem of an MMORPG, yet no one plays the damn thing. At least Rift has more players online each night than my accounting classes, Vanguard couldnt claim that before the F2P.
The question wasn't that Rift suffered a decline in numbers, the question was even thogh there was such a decline, how does the remaing subscribers (That I'd chalenge the number to be a multiple of your guess) doesn't make Rift stable or profitable?
No sense in throwing around numbers if there is no concrete source behind it to back it up.
Eve did not build it's solid player base over night. So that is another lame point. Of course Rifts playerbase will dip with incredibly hyped titles coming out this past year. Don't you get it? It is not always going to be like that each year. They made it through a rough year to be in the MMO market and are coming out with a massive expansion.
I'd like the source for the Vanguard tidbit as well.
The fact you are trying to pin an 18 month long decline (with a short growth period in late jan/early feb due to SWTOR sucking) on the release of eaxctly ONE major MMO, that was poorly recieved, between Rift's launch and GW2's launch is just ridiculous. TERA and TSW were hardly major players (nor were they expectd to be).
The source is just having my eyes open. If you want to ignore whats around you, go ahead. If you want to disagree with my 100k guess thats fine, that was just a guess. But if you cant see there is an abnormal amount of people that liked Rift but no longer play it then you arent looking around you. I brought up Vanguard because weve been hearing for a while now how its this gem of an MMORPG, yet no one plays the damn thing. At least Rift has more players online each night than my accounting classes, Vanguard couldnt claim that before the F2P.
The question wasn't that Rift suffered a decline in numbers, the question was even thogh there was such a decline, how does the remaing subscribers (That I'd chalenge the number to be a multiple of your guess) doesn't make Rift stable or profitable?
1. Again, the 100k isnt the total number of subs (which is likely somewhere around double that, but nobody knows for sure besides Trion). I would wager a lot of money that Rift's sub base is somewhere between 150-275k, likely about 200k though.
2. But the number of remaining subscribers could just as easily decline as they have been the last few months. By definition this isn't stable. The game isn't going anywhere, so in that way its stable. Will it go freemium? Who knows, I think a cash shop SoE style would be more likely. The fact that they have considered it points out that profitability is at least a concern. I think its very likely that Rift gets a nice boost is November, what happens beyond november is anyone's guess though. Note though that the player base was described as stable, not Rift itself. Even though I think alternate payment models might be needed in the future to keep up the development pace, Rift is one of the least likely MMOs to close in 2013 so while its playerbase isnt stable, the game itself is.
And the whole Guardians and Defiant hate each other -> they can become mercenaries -> they can group together in arbitray other factions -> they are cool with each other now is just silly.
From a lore and gamplay standpoint it makes sense to do it.
Yes Rift is one of the best post 2005 MMO themeparks out there. I generally prefer sandboxes but Rift is one of the few themeparks that I keep returning. As for adding new content Trion is second to none.
Currently playing: AoC, RIFT, Champions Online, DDO, LORTO, STO and Tribes: Ascend Have Played: TSW, SWG, AO, EVE, WOW, EQ, EQ2, SW:TOR, GW,CoH, DCUO, RotMG, WAR,
Originally posted by BrotherD Yes Rift is one of the best post 2005 MMO themeparks out there. I generally prefer sandboxes but Rift is one of the few themeparks that I keep returning. As for adding new content Trion is second to none.
While I currently agree, there is a lot riding on this expanison. Right now, Rift is in a position where they have an opportunity to re invent their themepark. This new expansion will either make or break them. I only hope it's not a re-hashed "Same-Old". On the other hand, if they've done well with Storm Legion, Rift has a real opportunity to be a sustained player. Otherwise it's going to be that "Other game" that stays alive by cranking out content.
Originally posted by BrotherD Yes Rift is one of the best post 2005 MMO themeparks out there. I generally prefer sandboxes but Rift is one of the few themeparks that I keep returning. As for adding new content Trion is second to none.
While I currently agree, there is a lot riding on this expanison. Right now, Rift is in a position where they have an opportunity to re invent their themepark. This new expansion will either make or break them. I only hope it's not a re-hashed "Same-Old". On the other hand, if they've done well with Storm Legion, Rift has a real opportunity to be a sustained player. Otherwise it's going to be that "Other game" that stays alive by cranking out content.
This is spot on. I can't think of an expansion that has ever been so crucial for a game. If it pulls a Cataclysm and keeps everything the same its chance of growth is done. On the plus side, the way they are doing housing sounds absolutely awesome. The negative is that there isnt any indication (that Ive seen) of a change in the general currency grindathon philosophy.
Its going to be 'sustained' either way in that it will have enough fans to stay running for years and years and receive development, but it will be an afterthought to the average MMORPG player kind of like EQ2 is now if SL isnt great.
Ehh the only bad thing I can see about the expansion is that with the 3x more land, there already are zones where you don't see too many people. 3x more land = more spaced out people, so it might be kinda lonely eh? other than that, I love all the new features, the Hunt Rifts they are introducing, bosses, etc. I've just been playing for the fishing lately, lol(only playing the lite version on my spare time).
How can you say the character customization is ugly? I don't know many other games with decent configuration(even WoW has like 5 features; hair, skin, facial hair, accessories, anything else? Can't think of anything.. Fun game, WoW got old. and yeah, raiding is raiding, what can people really expect from end game content? I mean Tera tried a different approach and isn't doing well, a lot of people I've heard are complaining about GW2's lack of end game... I'm not really sure what people expect from an MMORPG thats group based like this.
The grinding in the game is going to be slightly better I think too. Quests won't REQUIRE you to "collect x pelts", etc, they are making it so if you WANT to do something like kill x bears or something, you can. Monsters will have icons over their head or something if they offer a quest you can get, and when you kill them, the quest automatically turns in. It's not even required or standard, so they seem to be offering a different type of leveling. Also, Hunt Rifts are being pushed as being a main way to level I believe. They offer their own gear, currency, etc.
No I'm not a fan boi, I literally have one level 20 char and I'm on the Lite version. Just think people should try to give better feedback then "THIS GAME SUCKS, UGLY CUSTOMIZATION, GRINDY, BORING END GAME"..
Finally, a dev that gets it. First expansion out the gate adds player housing and triples the land mass. Trion is making all the right decisions with this game and I gotta give them props.
The Theory of Conservative Conservation of Ignorant Stupidity: Having a different opinion must mean you're a troll.
Oh my lord thank you to see more threads like this one. Well thats one expansion i've been waiting for long time. I can play mop, storm legion, new darkfall, warz and elder scolls And still i will find time for eve online. Yes it is one of the best theme park mmo's and maybe the only one which is close with quality to wow
Comments
First off, this is a Rift forum and thread talk about Rift. So even if he was talking Defiance it is an awful point. PS2 and Firefall will launch long before Defiance and lose steam.
Stable does not equal just needing a huge playerbase. Sure a decent playerbase is part, but having a dev team that listens and pumps out quality/quantity content is another huge part. Not to mention no noticable downsizing of the dev team.
I would love to hear where the 100k playerbase number came from though. Also servers have dropped like almost any game other than WoW after the launch rush, but servers also hold a higher amount of players per server than they did at launch.
It's the best Themepark for teh people who have decided to subscribe to it.
What other qualifications does it need to be considered "The Best?"
And what does GW2 offer that is so much better than Rift?
I guess it was only amatter of time before someoen came in and said It cant cuz.....GW2
Let's see what GW2 has to offer in a few months when all those people who are playing it wrong, can't seem to figure out how to play it right and leave for games lik MoP and Storm Legion, and Final Fantasy and many others.
I dont mean Rift only has 100k users. I mean Rift has 100k users + the people that come around and try the game for a few months here and there (or even 6-12 months at a time), 100k + the people that probably wont be around in a year (but may be replaced by others). Yeah, the 100k is just a guess with no basis behind it. Given that people generally agreed the game had ~300k subscribers last fall its a safe estimation that its around 200k now, and Im basically saying half of its playerbase are lifers, which is actually a good thing.
A stable player base is one like EvE's, which remains more or less constant over time. And EvE is the only game i can think of with a stable player base right now. But Rift's playerbase has cleary declined over the course of the year, and hasnt stopped yet so therefore it is not stable. But again, no game's playerbase is stable in this era, all games have shown significant decline over the past year and a half.
And as for the servers, we know they raised the cap by 200 or so. If they raised it any more than that (which is unlikely because they havent added new real estate for these people to inhabit since then,) is irrelevant, because the servers arent filling up anyway. They have consolidated a higher portion of their NA servers since launch than EQ2 has its entire lifetime. Rift's retention is poor for a game that most people like and say positive things about it. Only Vanguard has a higher percentage of people that say they like the game but didnt play it for long (TSW might be in this category too).
No sense in throwing around numbers if there is no concrete source behind it to back it up.
Eve did not build it's solid player base over night. So that is another lame point. Of course Rifts playerbase will dip with incredibly hyped titles coming out this past year. Don't you get it? It is not always going to be like that each year. They made it through a rough year to be in the MMO market and are coming out with a massive expansion.
I'd like the source for the Vanguard tidbit as well.
The fact you are trying to pin an 18 month long decline (with a short growth period in late jan/early feb due to SWTOR sucking) on the release of eaxctly ONE major MMO, that was poorly recieved, between Rift's launch and GW2's launch is just ridiculous. TERA and TSW were hardly major players (nor were they expectd to be).
The source is just having my eyes open. If you want to ignore whats around you, go ahead. If you want to disagree with my 100k guess thats fine, that was just a guess. But if you cant see there is an abnormal amount of people that liked Rift but no longer play it then you arent looking around you. I brought up Vanguard because weve been hearing for a while now how its this gem of an MMORPG, yet no one plays the damn thing. At least Rift has more players online each night than my accounting classes, Vanguard couldnt claim that before the F2P.
Patching the game right now!
4 AAA MMOS is not one major release sorry. You say silly things. I can't even take this seriously anymore.
I count 2. SWTOR and GW2. And GW2 isnt really relevant, because we are discussing what happened before its release. So 1 major MMO release.
Are you *really* going to try to call TERA a major MMO release? Seriously?
here is a list of ALL the major MMO releases since 2004 (in Rift's region)
LOTRO
WAR
AoC
Rift
SWTOR
GW2
minor MMO releases:
Aion (again, in Rift's region)
DDO
STO
DCUO
TERA
TSW
Releases that tanked due to known awful product:
Vanguard
FFXIV
Im sure Im missing a few minor ones, but the 6 above are the major ones.
I realize this whole major/minor thing is very subjective....but calling a game like TERA a major MMO release is really stretching the word major. TSW, maybe, but it only sold 200k copies. These games did not alter *any* games playerbases in the least.
The question wasn't that Rift suffered a decline in numbers, the question was even thogh there was such a decline, how does the remaing subscribers (That I'd chalenge the number to be a multiple of your guess) doesn't make Rift stable or profitable?
1. Again, the 100k isnt the total number of subs (which is likely somewhere around double that, but nobody knows for sure besides Trion). I would wager a lot of money that Rift's sub base is somewhere between 150-275k, likely about 200k though.
2. But the number of remaining subscribers could just as easily decline as they have been the last few months. By definition this isn't stable. The game isn't going anywhere, so in that way its stable. Will it go freemium? Who knows, I think a cash shop SoE style would be more likely. The fact that they have considered it points out that profitability is at least a concern. I think its very likely that Rift gets a nice boost is November, what happens beyond november is anyone's guess though. Note though that the player base was described as stable, not Rift itself. Even though I think alternate payment models might be needed in the future to keep up the development pace, Rift is one of the least likely MMOs to close in 2013 so while its playerbase isnt stable, the game itself is.
From a lore and gamplay standpoint it makes sense to do it.
Currently playing: AoC, RIFT, Champions Online, DDO, LORTO, STO and Tribes: Ascend
Have Played: TSW, SWG, AO, EVE, WOW, EQ, EQ2, SW:TOR, GW,CoH, DCUO, RotMG, WAR,
While I currently agree, there is a lot riding on this expanison. Right now, Rift is in a position where they have an opportunity to re invent their themepark. This new expansion will either make or break them. I only hope it's not a re-hashed "Same-Old". On the other hand, if they've done well with Storm Legion, Rift has a real opportunity to be a sustained player. Otherwise it's going to be that "Other game" that stays alive by cranking out content.
This is spot on. I can't think of an expansion that has ever been so crucial for a game. If it pulls a Cataclysm and keeps everything the same its chance of growth is done. On the plus side, the way they are doing housing sounds absolutely awesome. The negative is that there isnt any indication (that Ive seen) of a change in the general currency grindathon philosophy.
Its going to be 'sustained' either way in that it will have enough fans to stay running for years and years and receive development, but it will be an afterthought to the average MMORPG player kind of like EQ2 is now if SL isnt great.
Ehh the only bad thing I can see about the expansion is that with the 3x more land, there already are zones where you don't see too many people. 3x more land = more spaced out people, so it might be kinda lonely eh? other than that, I love all the new features, the Hunt Rifts they are introducing, bosses, etc. I've just been playing for the fishing lately, lol(only playing the lite version on my spare time).
How can you say the character customization is ugly? I don't know many other games with decent configuration(even WoW has like 5 features; hair, skin, facial hair, accessories, anything else? Can't think of anything.. Fun game, WoW got old. and yeah, raiding is raiding, what can people really expect from end game content? I mean Tera tried a different approach and isn't doing well, a lot of people I've heard are complaining about GW2's lack of end game... I'm not really sure what people expect from an MMORPG thats group based like this.
The grinding in the game is going to be slightly better I think too. Quests won't REQUIRE you to "collect x pelts", etc, they are making it so if you WANT to do something like kill x bears or something, you can. Monsters will have icons over their head or something if they offer a quest you can get, and when you kill them, the quest automatically turns in. It's not even required or standard, so they seem to be offering a different type of leveling. Also, Hunt Rifts are being pushed as being a main way to level I believe. They offer their own gear, currency, etc.
No I'm not a fan boi, I literally have one level 20 char and I'm on the Lite version. Just think people should try to give better feedback then "THIS GAME SUCKS, UGLY CUSTOMIZATION, GRINDY, BORING END GAME"..
|:}
The Theory of Conservative Conservation of Ignorant Stupidity:
Having a different opinion must mean you're a troll.