This has got to be the most underrated MMO ever...why?

[JVJD.4912]

Lack of gear progression is the biggest reasons everything is build based

This means players who depends on gear rather than skill  to get their daily fix of  I stomp you so I am better than you don't play ,let that be pve, pvp or wvw.  Infact the reverse happens and hits these players in the gut very badly. 

[Vayne.8563]

5 hours ago, SEED.9051 said:

I mean anets version of a MMO is playing dress up.... so you win if I don't wanna swipe my CC. You are only thinking of the old definition of P2W. It's 2021, and you have to open your mind to what others perceive as unfair.

Actually, you don't get to define what pay to win is in the first place.  As an example, my wife has a ton of gold which she farms, and she buys gems with it and gets everything on the gem store, without spending money (lately anyway).  She's bought thousands of gems with gold recently. Hell even I bought 4000 gems with gold recently.

There are a bunch of people who never spend a penny on the gem store and still get gem store items. They're simply trading time/energy/commitment for cash spent.  Admittedly I prefer to spend cash than grind most of the time, because that's what I prefer. But I never sell gems to get gold.  

The idea that looking a certain way is an advantage in game is ludicrous, even if you play fashion wars. Outfits are not mix and match, thus not really fashion wars (and they're mostly what's available in the gem store).  And most of the weapons are too ostentation (read glowly/over the top) for my tastes. 

With a number advantage you can look and say this number is higher than that number.  With a cosmetic "advantage" well that's just a matter of taste. No individual item in the gem store is objectively better than an item that you get in game (even ignoring the fact that farming gold gets you that gem store item anyway).

Guild Wars 2 just isn't a p2w game.

[shrew.3059]

7 hours ago, SEED.9051 said:

Its because 99% of the games playerbase is super casual and fragile. From some of the threads I've seen on these forums,  a lot of the community wants a toggle so they never have to see another player running around (in some compacity). 

 

When it comes down to it, the game just doesn't feel like a MMO. Very little progression, all DLC is sigleplayer story-driven content (seriously, story BS in a MMO), all the cool sh*t is bought with a CC instead of earned via drops from raids/dungeons, and the game world is a squared box segmented load screen simulator. Pretty much QoL on top of QoL with no sense of achievement. Its a MMO and needs to have slight annoyances of living in a world to make it feel like....living in a fantasy world. What we got rn is just a game.

 

Not to mention a P2W cash shop that sells in-game currency.... yeah, not cool.

 

The old MMO model is just not sustainable. You can’t scale a community based on a minority of players being worshipped for time spent in a video game. Complaints about “players can ignore each other” are really a complaint about the lack of social reward for vertical progression. Players don’t log in to see your amazing new dungeon set like in old school WoW, because they want to play their own game, not make strangers feel special. Consider who the “fragile” ones might be in this case.

[Gehenna.3625]

9 hours ago, Klowdy.3126 said:

Well, after actually looking into it, turns out the average person isn't going to spend $200 on a legendary weapon, and there isn't a single set of legendary gear that doesn't force gameplay. I think the P2W aspect has been greatly exaggerated, especially since it seems like legendary gear is a convenience, and not more powerful than the gear I already have. Even if someone did spend $1,000 on making legendary gear, they couldn't do it without some form of gameplay. Also, paying millions of dollars into this game can never give an advantage of any kind over someone that spends the time in game. 

I think you confuse people by setting weapons and gear apart from each other. Weapons are gear. What you mean with gear apparently is armor sets. But everything you equip on a character like armor sets, sigils, runes, weapons, backpacks, earrings, rings, and amulet all fall under the header of gear.

[Klowdy.3126]

1 hour ago, Gehenna.3625 said:

I think you confuse people by setting weapons and gear apart from each other. Weapons are gear. What you mean with gear apparently is armor sets. But everything you equip on a character like armor sets, sigils, runes, weapons, backpacks, earrings, rings, and amulet all fall under the header of gear.

Nah, that guy is talking pay to win in this game, where all you're doing is gaining a big convenience. I was speaking of armor, but it's all semantics to the point. Someone could spend a million dollars in this game, and never have an advantage over a person that enjoys playing, and has for years. That's part of the beauty of horizontal progression.

[Gehenna.3625]

59 minutes ago, Klowdy.3126 said:

Nah, that guy is talking pay to win in this game, where all you're doing is gaining a big convenience. I was speaking of armor, but it's all semantics to the point. Someone could spend a million dollars in this game, and never have an advantage over a person that enjoys playing, and has for years. That's part of the beauty of horizontal progression.

Well your point was clear but throughout your posting I was like, wait, is he talking about gear in general or just armor sets or what? So thanks for clearing that up for me 🙂 

[SEED.9051]

Okay, guys I get it....I even mentioned it in the OG I posted here. You will defend Gw2 P2W cause the fanboy in you is triggered to do so.... fragile. That doesn't keep it from being P2W!

 

It really doesn't matter how you want to spin it, the game isn't doing as well as it should be.... for some reason.  And me judging the MMOs that do not offer the P2W aspect that Gw2 does are also performing better than Gw2.

 

The most successful MMOs are about vertical progression, even playing field, and a need for community (aka no singleplayer story telling). Take ALL of that away and you get.... this game. Which is destined to underperform. This game is a selfish version of what MMOs are supposed to be. You cant tell me this is not a reason for it not being as successful as others.

Edited October 12, 2021 by SEED.9051

[battledrone.8315]

24 minutes ago, SEED.9051 said:

Okay, guys I get it....I even mentioned it in the OG I posted here. You will defend Gw2 P2W cause the fanboy in you is triggered to do so.... fragile. That doesn't keep it from being P2W!

 

It really doesn't matter how you want to spin it, the game isn't doing as well as it should be.... for some reason.  And me judging the MMOs that do not offer the P2W aspect that Gw2 does are also performing better than Gw2.

 

The most successful MMOs are about vertical progression, even playing field, and a need for community (aka no singleplayer story telling). Take ALL of that away and you get.... this game. Which is destined to underperform. This game is a selfish version of what MMOs are supposed to be. You cant tell me this is not a reason for it not being as successful as others.

but the core game WAS successful. selling roughly 100k full price games every month since launch.

it was so successful, that they decided to make an expansion. they have "hidden" the vertical progression, but its still 

here. you start on your feet, fill up an XP bar=gliding. then you filll up another xp bar=better glider

it is the very essence of vertical progression.

as for P2W, its in all mmos. sometimes illegaly, but its still there.

 

Edited October 12, 2021 by battledrone.8315

[Gibson.4036]

21 minutes ago, battledrone.8315 said:

 

it was so successful, that they decided to make an expansion. they have "hidden" the vertical progression, but its still 

here. you start on your feet, fill up an XP bar=gliding. then you filll up another xp bar=better glider

it is the very essence of vertical progression.

 

So you're defining vertical progression as filling up an XP bar?

The typical understanding is:

Vertical: The things you do get stronger. Bigger numbers.

Horizontal: You have more things you can do.

So, yeah, I guess there's a short vertical progression from "glide" to "glide faster until your endurance bar runs out", but that's as far as a it goes. You're not on a treadmill of faster and faster and faster gliding with each new zone in the game.

And yes, some of the horizontal progression has been hidden vertical. New especs are stronger than core, so it looks like "new ways to do things", but it is also "bigger numbers!" That vertical is a pretty short step, though, as it doesn't keep going.

And I still can't see the P2W in GW2. There's definitely pay or be annoyed (small mat storage, the endless need to buy salvaging and gathering gizmos). Wish it was purely cosmetic. But it isn't P2W.

[Gehenna.3625]

4 hours ago, SEED.9051 said:

Okay, guys I get it....I even mentioned it in the OG I posted here. You will defend Gw2 P2W cause the fanboy in you is triggered to do so.... fragile. That doesn't keep it from being P2W!

You'll hate SWTOR with your definition of P2W. This game has many cosmetic choices in the game. In SWTOR 99% of the cosmetics come from the cash shop. Oh and that game has vertical progression.

Quote

It really doesn't matter how you want to spin it, the game isn't doing as well as it should be.... for some reason.  And me judging the MMOs that do not offer the P2W aspect that Gw2 does are also performing better than Gw2.

And it matters even less how you want to spin it. But erm, aside from WoW, what other games that are so successful don't offer cosmetics in their cash shops? FFXIV does so they're P2W in your view.

Quote

The most successful MMOs are about vertical progression, even playing field, and a need for community (aka no singleplayer story telling). Take ALL of that away and you get.... this game. Which is destined to underperform. This game is a selfish version of what MMOs are supposed to be. You cant tell me this is not a reason for it not being as successful as others.

There isn't enough room on the MMO market to have many successful MMOs though. What if Anet realises this and aimed for a niche market where they target the audience that is averse to vertical progression? (Actually that is what they did). So, and here comes the kicker, they probably weren't aiming for biggest MMO in the world and maybe, just maybe didn't have a massive budget like Blizzard and Square Enix had to back up their game. So you're barking up the wrong tree is what I'm saying.

Edited October 12, 2021 by Gehenna.3625

[shrew.3059]

4 hours ago, SEED.9051 said:

Okay, guys I get it....I even mentioned it in the OG I posted here. You will defend Gw2 P2W cause the fanboy in you is triggered to do so.... fragile. That doesn't keep it from being P2W!

 

It really doesn't matter how you want to spin it, the game isn't doing as well as it should be.... for some reason.  And me judging the MMOs that do not offer the P2W aspect that Gw2 does are also performing better than Gw2.

 

The most successful MMOs are about vertical progression, even playing field, and a need for community (aka no singleplayer story telling). Take ALL of that away and you get.... this game. Which is destined to underperform. This game is a selfish version of what MMOs are supposed to be. You cant tell me this is not a reason for it not being as successful as others.

 

Name-calling? Check.

Armchair critique of ANet’s business strategy? Check.

Arguing this game would be better if it was another game? Check.

Yep, it’s the GW2 Forums.

 

Fragile is believing delusion could be the only reason someone would disagree with you. Or maybe your back-of-the-envelope business conjectures just aren’t that compelling?

[SEED.9051]

10 minutes ago, Gehenna.3625 said:

You'll hate SWTOR with your definition of P2W. This game has many cosmetic choices in the game. In SWTOR 99% of the cosmetics come from the cash shop. Oh and that game has vertical progression.

SWTOR is even worse than Gw2, agreed! Both are P2W in some aspect. Ironically, both are heavy story focused and both have seemingly underperformed..... so seems you could make more of an argument in that regard.

13 minutes ago, Gehenna.3625 said:

aside from WoW, what other games that are so successful don't offer cosmetics in their cash shops? FFXIV does so they're P2W in your view.

 WoW sells some cosmetics too! Where it all comes down to P2W is how much they offer to earn in-game in comparison to the offerings of the CS. 99% of all the cool cosmetics to obtain in Gw2 are through the CS....you cant even get mount skins via loot drops in dungeons, world bosses, raids, etc. Where as WoW and FFXIV both have multiple ways to obtain cool cosmetics in-game (mage tower in WoW was some of the most fun way to earn a skin and XIV always has cool cross-over events too to earn mounts and other cool gear) Gw2 would've just pushed it to the CS. No cool limited event to challenge yourself for a cool reward, just give us more $$$!

21 minutes ago, Gehenna.3625 said:

There isn't enough room on the MMO market to have many successful MMOs though. What if Anet realises this and aimed for a niche market

I'm sure they did. Unfortunately, they are now hard up for some consistent cash flow to keep the game afloat. Which leads to an even greater IRL influence on the game and players.

 

So I guess it's underrated because anet didn't want to grab MMO players and instead opted to cater to a niche playerbase that rather play shared world games solo.  Would explain the very anti-social nature of the game actually.

[SEED.9051]

Just now, shrew.3059 said:

Name-calling? Check.

Fragile isn't name calling lol

 

What I mentioned earlier in the OG? Check!

[xoxin.8326]

1 minute ago, SEED.9051 said:

 WoW sells some cosmetics too!

They also sell gold for modern WoW. 

[SEED.9051]

5 minutes ago, xoxin.8326 said:

They also sell gold for modern WoW. 

Yes, P2W indeed! I mention in a earlier post that WoWs gameplay is no longer what it used to be. About the time they started pushing more of a story focus, more P2W crept its way into that game. WoW has been sh*t since Cata (legion was good mostly tho) IMO

Edited October 12, 2021 by SEED.9051

[shrew.3059]

1 hour ago, SEED.9051 said:

WoW has been sh*t since Cata (legion was good mostly tho) IMO

 

Those days are gone. They aren’t coming back. GW2 was never designed to be a WoW-killer and it isn’t going to turn into a WoW-clone at this point.

[mythical.6315]

I don’t agree with convenience items being P2W not do I agree with cosmetics falling under that either. You don't “win” anything with cosmetics and especially with what looks and doesn’t look good being highly subjective. 

[Chip.9267]

This game will never be pay to win becouse you can convert gems to gold and gold to gems. So you can get everything just plaing the game. 

[Klowdy.3126]

3 hours ago, shrew.3059 said:

 

Those days are gone. They aren’t coming back. GW2 was never designed to be a WoW-killer and it isn’t going to turn into a WoW-clone at this point.

Honestly, I'm moving away from the WoW style MMO. I'm done with tab targeting, and auto attacking. I have really been enjoying new world, so much that I've gotten way over leveled for my MSQ from leveling all the weapons and skills (though the gear professions are falling behind). That game reminds me a lot of this one in many ways with the combat, exploration (mostly just a beautiful world I feel compelled to see), and the big PvP events (which reminds me more of GW2 than ESO for sure). I think games would do better just trying to be as great as they can be, and not focus on "killing WoW." That's why I love this game so much, too. It just tries to do it's own, GW2 thing, and it isn't like all those clones, and I'll be very excited to explore all the new maps in beautiful Cantha.

[Cyndercat.7615]

Game is good but it has problems.

The big 3 imo:

Firstly being an MMO but not catering to typical MMO audiences will always keep it niche. This isnt necessarily bad but GW2 doesn't deliver the type of content MMO players look for. 

Bad Management. The game has flip flopped on how it wants to deliver content and what business model it should use so many times its painful. It leads to rushed, unfinished content like IBS and so so many game systems and modes which are developed, used once then forgotten.

Living story: While some living story content itself can be great, its often super casual throwaway content with very limited replay-ability. Since 90% of resources go to LW, this leaves other modes neglected with almost no updates, sometimes for years and makes gw2 really lack an endgame. There is a massive hidden upfront cost for new players when purchasing episodes. 

 

In addition to these ongoing problems, gw2 launched with tons of issues that caused it to lose a big chunk of its players and made potential players never consider gw2 again.

- PVP launched unfinished with no ladder or matchmaking

- No endgame PVE on launch

- Server stability was horrible making wvw unplayable and the first living story even worse

- Choice to add a 'gear treadmill' and give away RNG legendary weapons soon after launch.

-Deleting living world s1 content leaving nothing for returning players.

 

 

 

Edited October 13, 2021 by zombyturtle.5980

[battledrone.8315]

13 hours ago, Gibson.4036 said:

So you're defining vertical progression as filling up an XP bar?

The typical understanding is:

Vertical: The things you do get stronger. Bigger numbers.

Horizontal: You have more things you can do.

So, yeah, I guess there's a short vertical progression from "glide" to "glide faster until your endurance bar runs out", but that's as far as a it goes. You're not on a treadmill of faster and faster and faster gliding with each new zone in the game.

And yes, some of the horizontal progression has been hidden vertical. New especs are stronger than core, so it looks like "new ways to do things", but it is also "bigger numbers!" That vertical is a pretty short step, though, as it doesn't keep going.

And I still can't see the P2W in GW2. There's definitely pay or be annoyed (small mat storage, the endless need to buy salvaging and gathering gizmos). Wish it was purely cosmetic. But it isn't P2W.

gliding and mounts can block your progress if you dont have them at high enough level

they have the same effect as older mmos with zone levels, if youre not this high, youre not going further

this is the very definition of vertical progression

[shrew.3059]

3 hours ago, zombyturtle.5980 said:

Firstly being an MMO but not catering to typical MMO audiences will always keep it niche. This isnt necessarily bad but GW2 doesn't deliver the type of content MMO players look for. 

 

Focusing on “typical MMO audiences” is a losing strategy in the long run.

 

That approach is essentially trying to reproduce WoW in its glory days but requires you to be the sole market leader and lock in your player base, who will inevitably outgrow your product. Other MMOs have tried this but many have lacked staying power, because there are a limited but vocal amount of hardcore, play-all-day types that every WoW-clone must compete over.

 

Consider that if your game design is based on highly competitive, highly social, vertical progression and the limited number of people who desire this are split across competing games, you can lose the critical mass of players necessary to drive that community. These players seem relatively fickle in the beginning and will chase whatever trend (“New World is the best ever!”) until they realise things aren’t quite as they would like it. Unless you can lock them down during a time of little competition, you’ll never get the hardcore community you need. Because hardcore raiders are a minority in every big MMO, you need a high percentage of the total number of active raiders in your game.

 

Wildstar went all-in on this strategy and although I really liked that game, not enough people stuck with it. It died. Raiders aren’t profitable enough to drive the game on their own.

 

WoW redefined and polished the genre, and profited massively for this first mover advantage. It declined because inevitably all things decline, and the MMO mentality that “games are forever” is pretty naive. I would suggest that if your gripe with a game is that you can’t get more than a decade of gameplay and community out of it, you re-evaluate your expectations for what a game is and what your life should be built around. This is supposed to complement your life, not become it.

[mythical.6315]

3 minutes ago, shrew.3059 said:

Focusing on “typical MMO audiences” is a losing strategy in the long run.

Based on what data?

[shrew.3059]

16 minutes ago, mythical.6315 said:

Based on what data?

 

Based on the total percentage of a game’s population that could be identified as “hardcore”. Even in the most profitable MMOs, most players would be called “casual”. This data has been out there for awhile and has been discussed in pretty much every thread about raiding in every MMO worth mentioning.

 

There have been a number of debates about the relationship between these two numbers, for example, the extent to which hardcore population drives casual population. My suspicion is that it is a dangerous business proposition to depend on a very small player base that you essentially need to own for an extended period of time. Casuals can ebb or flow, but so long as they can always pick up and play as they want (and buy subs or cosmetics), the business model holds. Hardcore players need more stability and if they have a hard time getting a raiding group or if too much time passes without a carrot, they’ll start leaving and your raiding community death-spirals. The carrots also have to be frequent because raiders will play more often, and will leave once those carrots have been consumed. This is why WoW numbers after Cataclysm tended to be spiky after expansions; players would come in and devour all the content, and then leave.

 

This has always been a problem with MMO content creation: how do you keep people who play everyday locked in if they blow through your content almost as soon as you release it? You can make it super hard, but if it’s too hard for hardcore players to instantly beat, no casual will manage it. If you time-gate them, they’ll get impatient and leave. And if these are a minority of your customer base, how many resources should you expend to keep them?

 

Simply put: if you are going to cater to a small audience, that’s fine but they should be hugely profitable for you relative to the resources it takes to keep them engaged. “Small audience that requires a lot of attention” seems like a losing strategy in the long run. You need another, broader, customer base to support that: enter the casual.

Edited October 13, 2021 by shrew.3059

[Clyan.1593]

abyssmal marketing. i can't fathom how much money they constantly lose by not advertising this game adequately. mechanically this game is pure fun. it's so smooth, quick and neat, they truly hit the spot and i sometimes feel like they don't realize that. I feel like if they would introduce more team/group content this game could have a gigantic comeback. i always loved rushing dungeons and melting enemies, i just wish it had a bit more of the strike mission boss approach, maybe a bit less mechanics but with more punishment for mistakes. ahh. the dreams. 

Edited October 13, 2021 by Clyan.1593