Jump to content

  • Curse Sites
Help
- - - - -

The Effect of Quasi-Living for the Success of an MMO.


  • Please log in to reply
82 replies to this topic

#1 Sheepski

Sheepski

    Seraph Guardian

  • Moderators
  • 1240 posts
  • Location:Manchester
  • Server:Gandara

Posted 19 December 2012 - 08:21 PM

I saw this post: http://massively.joy...-mean-for-rift/ in relation to Rift's recent staff redundancies.

However the paragraph that caught my eye was:

"But a recent post over at Terra Nova fits well with the discussion of RIFT possibly going free-to-play. In the article, author Edward Castronova posits that SWTOR struggled and went free-to-play because it didn't develop a world, just a game. He went on to say that MMOs in general have paid so much attention to the game side of things that they've neglected the experience of the virtual world itself, the place space where there is downtime and you can "just be." He points to EVE and argues that it successfully creates a world in which you can quasi-live."

In my opinion at least, this would indicate that in the opinion of the author, a defining feature of a game and whether it'll be successful, in the long term, is whether the game world is live-able. If this is the case, the future of Gw2 has got to be bright, surely?

Many MMO's focused on the content and forgot about creating an awesome world, and thus suffered declining subs and player base. However Gw2 has one of the best ambient environment, landscapes, use of space/land mass and living cities/outposts etc of any game I've played. A-net can improve the content available to satisfy the player base (assuming you believe there's anything wrong) but if a game lacks the environment, there's not a lot you can do, besides completely re-design it.

Question, feedback or issue? Pm me!


#2 FoxBat

FoxBat

    Vigil Crusader

  • Members
  • 3975 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 08:30 PM

View PostSheepski, on 19 December 2012 - 08:21 PM, said:

In my opinion at least, this would indicate that in the opinion of the author, a defining feature of a game and whether it'll be successful, in the long term, is whether the game world is live-able.

subscription games. You need a fair number of players to be absolutely addicted to keep paying a monthly sub. F2P/cash shop models can vary some.

Quote

Many MMO's focused on the content and forgot about creating an awesome world, and thus suffered declining subs and player base. However Gw2 has one of the best ambient environment, landscapes, use of space/land mass and living cities/outposts etc of any game I've played.

Have you seen the utter desolation of EVE? "Livable" as far as the author is concerned has next to nothing to do with how the place looks. On the other hand, the utter absence of other players outside of lion's arch should be a big concern for "livable," because whatever the cause, evidently most of the game world isn't.

Edited by FoxBat, 19 December 2012 - 08:31 PM.


#3 Sheepski

Sheepski

    Seraph Guardian

  • Moderators
  • 1240 posts
  • Location:Manchester
  • Server:Gandara

Posted 19 December 2012 - 08:34 PM

View PostFoxBat, on 19 December 2012 - 08:30 PM, said:

subscription games. You need a fair number of players to be absolutely addicted to keep paying a monthly sub. F2P/cash shop models can vary some.



Have you seen the utter desolation of EVE? "Livable" as far as the author is concerned has next to nothing to do with how the place looks. On the other hand, the utter absence of other players outside of lion's arch should be a big concern for "livable," because whatever the cause, evidently most of the game world isn't.

Hmm maybe it'd affect subscription based games more, as people need to justify their monthly payments so having a better/nice environment to just chill out in my be a subconscious factor to staying/quitting.

However Gw2 was always developed in the same framework as a subscription game, rather than with a f2p model, so the comparison can still be made.

And nah I haven't played EVE before.

Edited by Sheepski, 19 December 2012 - 08:35 PM.

Question, feedback or issue? Pm me!


#4 Matsy

Matsy

    Golem Rider

  • Members
  • 3105 posts
  • Location:United Kingdom
  • Guild Tag:[zzZ]
  • Server:Desolation

Posted 19 December 2012 - 08:34 PM

The sub is the only thing stopping me from playing RIFT.
Bought the game, played for the free month + 1 extra before I was reluctant to pay anymore, was a blast :)

Edited by Matsy, 19 December 2012 - 08:34 PM.


#5 Illein

Illein

    Golem Rider

  • Members
  • 2039 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 08:37 PM

View PostSheepski, on 19 December 2012 - 08:21 PM, said:

I saw this post: http://massively.joy...-mean-for-rift/ in relation to Rift's recent staff redundancies.

However the paragraph that caught my eye was:

"But a recent post over at Terra Nova fits well with the discussion of RIFT possibly going free-to-play. In the article, author Edward Castronova posits that SWTOR struggled and went free-to-play because it didn't develop a world, just a game. He went on to say that MMOs in general have paid so much attention to the game side of things that they've neglected the experience of the virtual world itself, the place space where there is downtime and you can "just be." He points to EVE and argues that it successfully creates a world in which you can quasi-live."

In my opinion at least, this would indicate that in the opinion of the author, a defining feature of a game and whether it'll be successful, in the long term, is whether the game world is live-able. If this is the case, the future of Gw2 has got to be bright, surely?

Many MMO's focused on the content and forgot about creating an awesome world, and thus suffered declining subs and player base. However Gw2 has one of the best ambient environment, landscapes, use of space/land mass and living cities/outposts etc of any game I've played. A-net can improve the content available to satisfy the player base (assuming you believe there's anything wrong) but if a game lacks the environment, there's not a lot you can do, besides completely re-design it.

Then again "just being" in Guild Wars 2 in its current incarnation doesn't reward me, doesn't satisfy me, doesn't please me the least bit. So I'd say if that was the quintessential milestone of a modern MMO, it'd not look too bright.

Why? Because if I "just am" in Guild Wars 2 - I am not getting the stuff I want. It's as easy as that. I constantly have to motivate myself to go out and do something, as the game itself doesn't do that for me a lot, I feel.

I think he thinks more along the terms of I don't know - doing other things than just playing, there are some MMOs out there that have a more community driven environment. Where chatting is still a major part of the game or where you're offered the opportunity to buy a place of your own to shape and build upon and build in-game items in general. That for me is "liveable" - because I make my own goals in a way, it'd definitely attract me to new games, if it had a bit of a sandboxy element to it that makes it "liveable" - that makes it more like a virtual reality and less like a game.

I don't know, always fascinated me and I think that's what he meant when he said they focus too much on MMOs being "games" in particular.

#6 Krazzar

Krazzar

    Legend of the Norn

  • Members
  • 7988 posts
  • Server:Sanctum of Rall

Posted 19 December 2012 - 08:42 PM

View PostIllein, on 19 December 2012 - 08:37 PM, said:

Then again "just being" in Guild Wars 2 in its current incarnation doesn't reward me, doesn't satisfy me, doesn't please me the least bit. So I'd say if that was the quintessential milestone of a modern MMO, it'd not look too bright.

Why? Because if I "just am" in Guild Wars 2 - I am not getting the stuff I want. It's as easy as that. I constantly have to motivate myself to go out and do something, as the game itself doesn't do that for me a lot, I feel.

I think he thinks more along the terms of I don't know - doing other things than just playing, there are some MMOs out there that have a more community driven environment. Where chatting is still a major part of the game or where you're offered the opportunity to buy a place of your own to shape and build upon and build in-game items in general. That for me is "liveable" - because I make my own goals in a way, it'd definitely attract me to new games, if it had a bit of a sandboxy element to it that makes it "liveable" - that makes it more like a virtual reality and less like a game.

I don't know, always fascinated me and I think that's what he meant when he said they focus too much on MMOs being "games" in particular.

You can "quasi-live" in EvE because of all the time taxes, if you don't "quasi-live" in EvE you don't get anything done.  I would disagree with that term somewhat because it's more like a "quasi-occupation".  Does this really apply to GW2 which has been touted as a game first?  Is it any surprise when the devs said it's simply a game for the sake of being a game that it turns out to be just that? You'd think there would be outcry if that weren't the case, but now it seems people need to have time taxes to keep them playing. Don't complain about grind because you're now saying that's what keeps a game "alive". Fractals proves that, it's been called the most grindy aspect of the game yet it makes LA highly populated.

Don't forget people aren't using the social tools given to them for the most part either. As I said years ago, a lack of strict structure is going to be a problem for many that aren't used to making choices and actually figuring out what they like to do. Seems most of the populous prefers to not have a choice.

Edited by Krazzar, 19 December 2012 - 08:44 PM.


#7 Baron von Scrufflebutt

Baron von Scrufflebutt

    Golem Rider

  • Members
  • 3265 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 08:43 PM

I kind of feel that the star of GW2 is the world. The only problem is that what the player does in this world is pretty darn bland.

#8 Sheepski

Sheepski

    Seraph Guardian

  • Moderators
  • 1240 posts
  • Location:Manchester
  • Server:Gandara

Posted 19 December 2012 - 08:43 PM

View PostIllein, on 19 December 2012 - 08:37 PM, said:

Then again "just being" in Guild Wars 2 in its current incarnation doesn't reward me, doesn't satisfy me, doesn't please me the least bit. So I'd say if that was the quintessential milestone of a modern MMO, it'd not look too bright.

Why? Because if I "just am" in Guild Wars 2 - I am not getting the stuff I want. It's as easy as that. I constantly have to motivate myself to go out and do something, as the game itself doesn't do that for me a lot, I feel.


I feel though that your issues with the game are to do with the content, and thus rewards; which was the part I suggested that they can at least work on and improve.

How does just "being" in this game compare for you, to other MMO's that you've played?

Personally I spend a lot of time in towns/cities in games as I have a short concentration span and this game is for me the best environment to be. There's lots of variety, "living" cities, beautiful landscapes and interesting NPC's to watch/listen to etc. Whereas in the other games, they've just been pretty boring and standing in town was an afk activity.

I think when/if they merge the servers, and add in the remaining activities in towns, then maybe there will be more to "do" in the cities; if people are even bothered lol.

Question, feedback or issue? Pm me!


#9 Feathermoore

Feathermoore

    Underdog

  • Super Moderators
  • 3836 posts
  • Guild Tag:[AWWW]
  • Server:Crystal Desert

Posted 19 December 2012 - 08:49 PM

The ability to "quasi-live" is more connected to the game's ability to foster player interaction than the environment. EVE is a good example. Sure the game is pretty (the nebulas are freaking amazing now but it wasn't so hot when it started), but the main reason the game is really a second life is because of how connected the players are. It is difficult to play EVE without interacting with other players on a daily basis just to do every day logistics. The players have created an entire world that even extends outside the game (gambling, banks, intermediaries, and brokers for example) that revolve around connecting players.

GW2... doesn't have this. The game actually inhibits players from developing a world in of themselves. The game is beautiful, and the world is full of stuff, but the players just aren't there. I am not going to party up with some random person I find in the Shiverpeaks that saves me when I am in trouble. We just run off on our own ways. Players don't seem to stick together much after PUGs either.

It is something that Anet seriously needs to revisit. Guesting is a feature that needs to be brought in as soon as possible to foster this as well. Player interaction is what makes an MMO work. And a F2P needs it just as much as a subscription.

Quasi living is about having a connection to the game, not about the ability to love the game world. Player interaction, and a connection to the character you are playing as are central to this.

Edited by Feathermoore, 19 December 2012 - 08:50 PM.

Little Mabel won't be able to be here it's our worst fear. She's busy working on her garden that she's growing up in space.


Why hello there forumite. Would you like me to review some moderation you did not agree with? Never fear! PM is here! Want to be a better poster? Check on this link! And this one!


#10 Kymeric

Kymeric

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1981 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 08:52 PM

I remember from the very start of Rift, people were praising how polished it was, but repeating that vague phrase, "it feels soulless".

I had the same feeling about it.  The world has some interesting designs, interesting characters, but this vague feeling that it is a hollow veneer.  I don't get that feeling about Tyria at all.  I find it very immersive, though it'd be difficult for me to point out why, in comparison to Rift.

GW2 satisfies me precisely because I can just go live in the world, finding something to do without it being part of a defined journey from point a to point b.

#11 Kymeric

Kymeric

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1981 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 09:00 PM

View PostFeathermoore, on 19 December 2012 - 08:49 PM, said:

GW2... doesn't have this. The game actually inhibits players from developing a world in of themselves. The game is beautiful, and the world is full of stuff, but the players just aren't there. I am not going to party up with some random person I find in the Shiverpeaks that saves me when I am in trouble. We just run off on our own ways. Players don't seem to stick together much after PUGs either.

I've seen this written a lot, but it hasn't been my experience.  Last night I was exploring into Orr for the first time, trying to find a temple where I could purchase some Karma gear.  The event log said the temple was held by the pact, but I'd never been there before, so I was a bit lost.

Ran into some other players and asked them, and they said they were hoping I could tell them the same thing.  We ran around together for a while exploring.  They let me know their guild was on the way shortly to do a guild event clearing the area and invited me to join.  Eventually I found the Cathedral of Victory, and there were a bunch of players hanging out ready to defend it, which we did until it got to be too much.  One of the players was throwing out advice on how to handle things as they came.

This morning I was exploring and ended up clearing a flame legion fort with another player.  We ran into each other again at a nearby event, and chatted a bit.  We stuck together and hit events until I had to log off.

Is it just my server?

I'd say the number one thing that limits more interaction is that it's hard to text chat while dodging and moving.  If they could somehow implement in-game voice chat for your local area people would be chatting and getting to know each other all the time.

#12 Sheepski

Sheepski

    Seraph Guardian

  • Moderators
  • 1240 posts
  • Location:Manchester
  • Server:Gandara

Posted 19 December 2012 - 09:05 PM

View PostFeathermoore, on 19 December 2012 - 08:49 PM, said:

The ability to "quasi-live" is more connected to the game's ability to foster player interaction than the environment. EVE is a good example. Sure the game is pretty (the nebulas are freaking amazing now but it wasn't so hot when it started), but the main reason the game is really a second life is because of how connected the players are. It is difficult to play EVE without interacting with other players on a daily basis just to do every day logistics. The players have created an entire world that even extends outside the game (gambling, banks, intermediaries, and brokers for example) that revolve around connecting players.

GW2... doesn't have this. The game actually inhibits players from developing a world in of themselves. The game is beautiful, and the world is full of stuff, but the players just aren't there. I am not going to party up with some random person I find in the Shiverpeaks that saves me when I am in trouble. We just run off on our own ways. Players don't seem to stick together much after PUGs either.

It is something that Anet seriously needs to revisit. Guesting is a feature that needs to be brought in as soon as possible to foster this as well. Player interaction is what makes an MMO work. And a F2P needs it just as much as a subscription.

Quasi living is about having a connection to the game, not about the ability to love the game world. Player interaction, and a connection to the character you are playing as are central to this.

While I do agree with the points you raise, I'd say that it's not totally about the connections with other people, well at least not for me. It's also about the connections to the world, and I feel Gw2 has plenty of them, and with more character customisation options through different armour/weapon skins, personalities etc than most other games, I feel more of a connection to the character(s) also.

It is a shame that there's no real incentive for people to work together in a lot of the game world; as you mentioned with PuGs or running around zones, but for me that's a unwelcome side effect from having far better mechanics in place. I'd much prefer to have my own nodes, personal loot tables, no need for groups to get kills, solo-able content for the most part etc, than having something like Aion or Rift where co-operation is vital and the old style systems, but a better connected community. I join a guild/make friends for that, and rarely bother about the wider community.

However if Anet could introduce more ways to foster that spirit of community obviously it would greatly benefit the game, as long as it isn't at the cost of their mechanics that have helped develop the genre that one step further than the rest.

Question, feedback or issue? Pm me!


#13 Feathermoore

Feathermoore

    Underdog

  • Super Moderators
  • 3836 posts
  • Guild Tag:[AWWW]
  • Server:Crystal Desert

Posted 19 December 2012 - 09:08 PM

View PostKymeric, on 19 December 2012 - 09:00 PM, said:

snip

I am not saying these things don't happen. I am saying the basic game design doesn't encourage it. There is no reason for you to ever enter a party with a random person in the open world, not being in one is just as effective as being in one. This makes interplayer communication less likely as talking is annoying. Crafting can be done completely alone (as opposed to EVE where it requires a chain of players or alts to make things) and trading even involves no interaction. Multiple guild systems is great for staying in contact with multiple groups of people... except that I can only talk to one group of them at a time.

These things don't seem to matter as they are so small, but this group of small features is what fosters and encourages connections. Being able to create your own chat channels to keep in contact with different groups is such a simple, yet powerful tool. Crafting and trading systems that require the input of multiple players and other systems that cohesively bring players together that have similar goals is a powerful system that builds connections.

GW2 doesn't help the players come together. That doesn't mean you can't, or that it doesn't happen. It just means that the game doesn't foster such interactions that are crucial for the longevity of a game. Some of the "features" even inhibit such a community from developing.

Quote

While I do agree with the points you raise, I'd say that it's not totally about the connections with other people, well at least not for me. It's also about the connections to the world, and I feel Gw2 has plenty of them, and with more character customisation options through different armour/weapon skins, personalities etc than most other games, I feel more of a connection to the character(s) also.

The world is important (EVE's is the most expansive I have encountered), but it is more important that the players can actually become a part of the world. Not just immersion, but actually develop their own structure. I gave the examples of chat, trade, crafting, and grouping. Here are some other simple features that foster this feeling.

GW1 sent out messages to the entire game whenever a party won in the HoH. Everyone saw that and certain names/groups became well known even among people who didn't have a connection there. Simple stuff like this fosters a sense of community that transcends individual groups. Alliances claiming outposts in factions did this as well. You just looked at the map and saw these groups of players and how they were impacting the world.

Individual players become infamous or famous which increases this sense of a living world. GW2 has nothing to help this happen. It can happen on its own, but the games that have it the best are the ones that actively foster it.

Edited by Feathermoore, 19 December 2012 - 09:19 PM.

Little Mabel won't be able to be here it's our worst fear. She's busy working on her garden that she's growing up in space.


Why hello there forumite. Would you like me to review some moderation you did not agree with? Never fear! PM is here! Want to be a better poster? Check on this link! And this one!


#14 Sheepski

Sheepski

    Seraph Guardian

  • Moderators
  • 1240 posts
  • Location:Manchester
  • Server:Gandara

Posted 19 December 2012 - 09:36 PM

Yep, I liked the idea of the infamy gained in HoH and owning cities, and there's plenty of opportunities in expansions/new content to add taht sort of thing. I don't think there was much at Gw1 launch on that line (possibly HoH). Hopefully they can add more mechanics as such anyway.

Question, feedback or issue? Pm me!


#15 Kymeric

Kymeric

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1981 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 10:14 PM

View PostFeathermoore, on 19 December 2012 - 09:08 PM, said:

GW2 doesn't help the players come together. That doesn't mean you can't, or that it doesn't happen. It just means that the game doesn't foster such interactions that are crucial for the longevity of a game. Some of the "features" even inhibit such a community from developing.

Gotcha.

I don't envy MMORPG developers at all.  The player-base wants a game that is solo-friendly and also encourages community.  It's a difficult thing to solve, design-wise.

Certainly there is content that asks for more community.  The temples.  WvW.   People complain about WvW being a zergfest, but it has the potential to be more if the community can get organized enough.  People complain about the temples never being open, but don't want to participate in taking them.  I hope they keep finding ways to make it easier and easier to come together to do this content.

#16 Lucas Ashrock

Lucas Ashrock

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Banned
  • 1000 posts
  • Location:Asia, always around

Posted 20 December 2012 - 01:33 AM

No doubt the game has a beautiful graphic. it's stunning sometimes, expecially particular places the first time you was there.
But ye, if you don't give content to the player to make him part of it, interact with it, be "part of the life within" well, it's just a bunch of pixel and preprogrammed npcs , your char is fancy with a cool armor, logging for the todo of the day, and logoff. What gw2 is today, reason because we see the world kinda empty (add the fractal thinghy now). And when just legendary or daily and fractal daily is what's left.. well... :zzz:
I can tell the same about ffXIV. So superb world to kill you staring at it for hours. Until you realize the gameplay is junk :zzz:

Edited by Lucas Ashrock, 20 December 2012 - 01:35 AM.


#17 Arquenya

Arquenya

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1204 posts
  • Location:Netherlands
  • Guild Tag:[DVDF]
  • Server:Gandara

Posted 20 December 2012 - 01:37 AM

View PostFeathermoore, on 19 December 2012 - 08:49 PM, said:

The ability to "quasi-live" is more connected to the game's ability to foster player interaction than the environment. EVE is a good example. Sure the game is pretty (the nebulas are freaking amazing now but it wasn't so hot when it started), but the main reason the game is really a second life is because of how connected the players are. It is difficult to play EVE without interacting with other players on a daily basis just to do every day logistics. The players have created an entire world that even extends outside the game (gambling, banks, intermediaries, and brokers for example) that revolve around connecting players.

Quasi living is about having a connection to the game, not about the ability to love the game world. Player interaction, and a connection to the character you are playing as are central to this.
Yes I think that's one of the two major things that makes a game a homely place. I never understood why ANet decided to remove things like guild halls, alliances, GvG but also direct player trading from the game. And dungeons generally require so little time and teamwork that you hardly have time to get to know each other. And so on. WoW for instance also had things like duels and fishing, ways to interact and communicate with others.

Another thing is a "living, breathing world". Perhaps I'm a bit of a RP person at heart, but I still think that LA or Divinity aren't as homely as Stormwind or Ogrimmar. I'm very happy that the number of inhabitants has increaased a lot, though; in GW:Prophecies you had the idea that there were like 20 people living in the whole of Ascalon and like 50 in the kingdom of Tyria.
But I still miss things like small, lively outposts and "quest hubs". There's hardly taverns (with for example, mini-games), or even the ability to be sitting on chairs, which I find very immersive. The list of emotes is very small, even a lot smaller than in GW.

So yes I agree that there's enough options to improve the world of GW2 into a more social, living world.

#18 Illein

Illein

    Golem Rider

  • Members
  • 2039 posts

Posted 20 December 2012 - 08:15 AM

View PostKrazzar, on 19 December 2012 - 08:42 PM, said:

You can "quasi-live" in EvE because of all the time taxes, if you don't "quasi-live" in EvE you don't get anything done.  I would disagree with that term somewhat because it's more like a "quasi-occupation".  Does this really apply to GW2 which has been touted as a game first?  Is it any surprise when the devs said it's simply a game for the sake of being a game that it turns out to be just that? You'd think there would be outcry if that weren't the case, but now it seems people need to have time taxes to keep them playing. Don't complain about grind because you're now saying that's what keeps a game "alive". Fractals proves that, it's been called the most grindy aspect of the game yet it makes LA highly populated.

Don't forget people aren't using the social tools given to them for the most part either. As I said years ago, a lack of strict structure is going to be a problem for many that aren't used to making choices and actually figuring out what they like to do. Seems most of the populous prefers to not have a choice.


I am not actually complaining, I like the game for what it is - tremendously so, but in terms of quasi-living as the OP's quote of that article described - I just don't see it to be THAT game.

Fractals definitely make LA seem more alive than it was before, but if we're honest - LA never really was the issue. I just claimed that Guild Wars 2 doesn't offer its players a lot of choices in terms of what they can do - it's either follow the trodden path or starve. Wish it had a few more sandboxy elements to it, but of course - they never advertised it as such, never promised such etc. pp. so one really can't make them reproaches. Just something I miss, generally in MMOs these days and which applies to the OP I think.

View PostSheepski, on 19 December 2012 - 08:43 PM, said:

I feel though that your issues with the game are to do with the content, and thus rewards; which was the part I suggested that they can at least work on and improve.

How does just "being" in this game compare for you, to other MMO's that you've played?

Personally I spend a lot of time in towns/cities in games as I have a short concentration span and this game is for me the best environment to be. There's lots of variety, "living" cities, beautiful landscapes and interesting NPC's to watch/listen to etc. Whereas in the other games, they've just been pretty boring and standing in town was an afk activity.

I think when/if they merge the servers, and add in the remaining activities in towns, then maybe there will be more to "do" in the cities; if people are even bothered lol.

I definitely like the art style of the game above all other MMOs I played, their attention to detail is second to none - but being idyllic and pretty is only a small portion of "liveable". Without player interaction it'll always just remain a beautiful backdrop instead of an immersive environment as such.

#19 Baron von Scrufflebutt

Baron von Scrufflebutt

    Golem Rider

  • Members
  • 3265 posts

Posted 20 December 2012 - 08:35 AM

View PostKrazzar, on 19 December 2012 - 08:42 PM, said:

As I said years ago, a lack of strict structure is going to be a problem for many that aren't used to making choices and actually figuring out what they like to do. Seems most of the populous prefers to not have a choice.
I am choosing not to craft. I am choosing not to do the PS. I am choosing not to use waypoint travel. I am choosing not to buy gear. I am choosing not to use the cash shop.
And the game sometimes ends up being pretty darn shitty because of it.

Now, I could be doing those things, but I don't want to be doing them. And since the game is giving me the freedom not to do them, I do not do them.
It's fantastic that we are given this freedom, but A.Net seems to have forgotten to check what kind of a game one ends up with if one opts out of certain options. GW2 needs some of the options that players can currently opt out of, because without them, it's not particularly good.

Edited by Protoss, 20 December 2012 - 02:23 PM.


#20 Krazzar

Krazzar

    Legend of the Norn

  • Members
  • 7988 posts
  • Server:Sanctum of Rall

Posted 20 December 2012 - 08:52 AM

View PostProtoss, on 20 December 2012 - 08:35 AM, said:

I am choosing not to craft. I am choosing not to do the PS. I am choosing not to use waypoint travel. I am choosing not to buy gear. I am choosing not to use the cash shop.
And the game sometimes end up being pretty darn shitty because of it.

Now, I could be doing those things, but I don't want to be doing them. And since the game is giving me the freedom not to do them, I do not do them.
It's fantastic that we are given this freedom, but A.Net seems to have forgot to check what kind of a game one ends up with if one opts out of certain options. GW2 needs some of the options that players can currently opt out of, because without them, it's not particularly good.

Forcing yourself to grind for everything does sound pretty bad. Purposefully handicapping yourself then complaining about it sounds pretty dumb.

You could be just playing the game, but you don't want to, so the game plays you.
Freedom comes with responsibility, it's not up to Anet to tell you exactly how to play. There are many avenues to getting gear without spending any real money, choosing to ignore all of them is a choice you can make but you have to then take responsibility for that choice. If that choice isn't what you wanted why did you make it and why do you continue to make it? Anet isn't forcing you to make choices you don't want, in fact, you're arguing the fact they don't do that is a negative.  

But please continue on the tyranny against Protoss by Protoss and how your choices are Anet's fault.

#21 Baron von Scrufflebutt

Baron von Scrufflebutt

    Golem Rider

  • Members
  • 3265 posts

Posted 20 December 2012 - 09:33 AM

View PostKrazzar, on 20 December 2012 - 08:52 AM, said:

Forcing yourself to grind for everything does sound pretty bad. Purposefully handicapping yourself then complaining about it sounds pretty dumb.

You could be just playing the game, but you don't want to, so the game plays you.
Freedom comes with responsibility, it's not up to Anet to tell you exactly how to play. There are many avenues to getting gear without spending any real money, choosing to ignore all of them is a choice you can make but you have to then take responsibility for that choice. If that choice isn't what you wanted why did you make it and why do you continue to make it? Anet isn't forcing you to make choices you don't want, in fact, you're arguing the fact they don't do that is a negative.  

But please continue on the tyranny against Protoss by Protoss and how your choices are Anet's fault.
I am sorry, did you just describe my freedom to play the game the way I want, as long as it stays in the realm of options A.Net has given me, as "handicapping oneself"?
And how is that different to what I have been saying? Except for the "purposefully"-part, of course, since I do not go out to have a shitty game experience.


EDIT:
Also, since you failed to understand the idea - the problem isn't what I AM doing, at least not in its core. The problem is the effect of the things I am NOT doing and how I am unable to negate this effect with the things I am doing (or, not be able to negate it sufficiently). The things I am free to not do, seem to be things that A.Net expects me to do anyway.
How is that freedom?

Edited by Protoss, 20 December 2012 - 02:24 PM.


#22 Mastruq

Mastruq

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 206 posts

Posted 20 December 2012 - 10:02 AM

Players are very goal driven in MMOs, any minute you dont take a step towards a new item/level/achievement/kill/win is a wasted minute.

That's what is killing the genre imo. And it also has effected GW2 because while it can be fun to just hang out exploring an area with a friend on TS and doing the events you come across, nobody does that. Instead they sit in LA and shout fotm14lf2m until they get bored and log off. So either Anet finds ways to make roaming the world doing events (be it pvp or pve)  worthwhile to the goal-chasers, or the population will dwindle until only those that actually have fun in the game without a carrot to run after are left. I'm fine with the latter actually, although it would probably require server merges because (imo) most of todays players are goal-chasers.

#23 Featherman

Featherman

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1028 posts
  • Location:Frolicking in Kalos

Posted 20 December 2012 - 10:35 AM

I suppose the greatest weakness of GW2 would be how its systems inadvertently subvert methods for individual achievements.

For PvE legendary skins had the potential to boost a person's renown, but the method of obtaining them isn't at all impressive. In fact it's the polar opposite of impressive because there's no challenge or difficulty, only grind. It may just be me, but instead of being in awe of the people who have obtained legendaries, I shudder at the thought of going through the same ordeal and simply write these skins off as something I would never, ever bother with.

sPvP is bleeding players left and right and has almost become a niche activity. There aren't enough players left for the top PvPers who stuck around to build a reputation with. The lack of leaderboards and overall structure of the experience exacerbate this. I doubt more than 1/20 of the total playerbase could name the half of the current teams in their regions.

There's no room for individual achievement in WvW, but ironically this is where the game succeeds most in allowing players to build their reputation because the communities formed there are more close-knit.

Edited by Featherman, 20 December 2012 - 08:47 PM.


#24 Evans

Evans

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 424 posts
  • Location:Belgium

Posted 20 December 2012 - 10:50 AM

View PostProtoss, on 20 December 2012 - 09:33 AM, said:

I am sorry, did you just describe my freedom to play the game the way I want, as long as it stays in the realm of options A.Net has given me, as "handicapping oneself"?
And how is that different to what I have been saying? Except for the "purposefully"-part, of course, since I do not go out to have a shitty game experience.


EDIT:
Also, since you failed to understand the idea - the problem isn't what I AM doing, at least not in its core. The problem is the effect of the things I am NOT doing and how I am unable to negate this effect with the things I am doing (or, not be able to negate it sufficiently). The things I am free not to do, seem to be things that A.Net expects me to do anyway.
How is that freedom?

Well that's a bit of a strange line of thought.
I can choose not to move my character at all, i am free to do that. But if I do so, I won't get anything done. So Anet is taking away my freedom by forcing me to do what I don't want to do...?

Sorry it's just how Krazzar says. If you don't want to do any of those things, you don't have to, but you can't expect to get everything there is to the game either then. You don't want to buy armor, get any from the story, get it from the cash shop or craft it yourself. Well your options are getting limited then.

Luckily for you Anet still gave you the freedom of doing dungeons for it, finish area's and use karma. Yay for freedom!

#25 Bottoms_Up

Bottoms_Up

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 201 posts
  • Location:NZ
  • Server:Yak’s Bend

Posted 20 December 2012 - 11:08 AM

View PostFeathermoore, on 19 December 2012 - 09:08 PM, said:

GW1 sent out messages to the entire game whenever a party won in the HoH. Everyone saw that and certain names/groups became well known even among people who didn't have a connection there. Simple stuff like this fosters a sense of community that transcends individual groups. Alliances claiming outposts in factions did this as well. You just looked at the map and saw these groups of players and how they were impacting the world.

Individual players become infamous or famous which increases this sense of a living world. GW2 has nothing to help this happen. It can happen on its own, but the games that have it the best are the ones that actively foster it.

There is currently a thread on the official forums about how to get PvEers into WvW. In it the disconnect between the PvE and WvW worlds was mentioned, even to the point that many PvEers probably don't realise that they are getting world bonuses off the backs of the WvWers. Imagine if the towns had criers that would announce important events that occur in WvW, say like when the home borderlands garrison is lost or won, or when a map is completely won by your side. Like the examples you mention, this could be just one thing that might help to connect two strands and populations of the game and overall improve its social space.

#26 Baron von Scrufflebutt

Baron von Scrufflebutt

    Golem Rider

  • Members
  • 3265 posts

Posted 20 December 2012 - 11:18 AM

View PostEvans, on 20 December 2012 - 10:50 AM, said:

Well that's a bit of a strange line of thought.
I can choose not to move my character at all, i am free to do that. But if I do so, I won't get anything done. So Anet is taking away my freedom by forcing me to do what I don't want to do...?

Sorry it's just how Krazzar says. If you don't want to do any of those things, you don't have to, but you can't expect to get everything there is to the game either then. You don't want to buy armor, get any from the story, get it from the cash shop or craft it yourself. Well your options are getting limited then.

Luckily for you Anet still gave you the freedom of doing dungeons for it, finish area's and use karma. Yay for freedom!

Not playing the game is the ultimate freedom in that case, right?
If you are playing GW2 with the intention of not moving or not wanting to kill shit, then you probably should be playing a different game.
Things like crafting, personal story, using the cash shop, waypoint fees, ... those things are supposedly optional. That's where the freedom to play the game the way you want ACTUALLY comes from. I mean, it's hard to force people to do content and then go around telling how much freedom the game gives you.
And what I am saying is that players that opt out of these "optional" elements might be in for a fairly shitty game.

#27 Evans

Evans

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 424 posts
  • Location:Belgium

Posted 20 December 2012 - 11:47 AM

View PostProtoss, on 20 December 2012 - 11:18 AM, said:

Not playing the game is the ultimate freedom in that case, right?
If you are playing GW2 with the intention of not moving or not wanting to kill shit, then you probably should be playing a different game.
Things like crafting, personal story, using the cash shop, waypoint fees, ... those things are supposedly optional. That's where the freedom to play the game the way you want ACTUALLY comes from. I mean, it's hard to force people to do content and then go around telling how much freedom the game gives you.
And what I am saying is that players that opt out of these "optional" elements might be in for a fairly shitty game.

Ah yes, absolutely right. However, I assume few play in such a way. It's like you say, if you don't like all of it's components, maybe it's a bad idea to get the package.

#28 beadnbutter32

beadnbutter32

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 618 posts
  • Location:Highway 61 Central US
  • Server:Henge of Denravi

Posted 20 December 2012 - 01:00 PM

Due to being cash shop based, you can't simply "be" in Tyria.  It is impossible at level 80 to earn a living. Crafts are worthless for earning income.  The only way to subsist is to be a 1% market mogul at the TP or spend hours grinding dungeon Ex speed runs.
Just hanging out is a sure way to starve.

Now that GW2 has dropped in popularity and is no longer in the 10 ten best seller lists, you can see the shortage of new players, and it won't be long before it goes free to play.

#29 Arquenya

Arquenya

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1204 posts
  • Location:Netherlands
  • Guild Tag:[DVDF]
  • Server:Gandara

Posted 20 December 2012 - 02:14 PM

View PostEvans, on 20 December 2012 - 11:47 AM, said:

Ah yes, absolutely right. However, I assume few play in such a way. It's like you say, if you don't like all of it's components, maybe it's a bad idea to get the package.
Well it's not that black and white.
  • Look for instance at EVE Online. Some people became dedicated manufacturers and traders and never engaged in PvE or PvP but built a strong name and group of like-minded people and logistical officers from big guilds around them.
  • Others set up a dedicated transport company to get stuff from A to B. Which can be quite challenging.
  • Then there's the miners that were just mining (and chatting away since it's the most mind numbing activity in any game imo) and got their money from that.
  • Other volunteered to help new players in the "new players" channel.
And so on. You may argue "but EVE is a sandbox" but that doesn't mean that games like GW2 couldn't have most of these things to offer players some options to specialize and interact with other players and build their specific community (ironically, you could almost speak of "guilds") at all. It has nothing to do with that.

In GW2 there's a lot of emphasis on just the fighting and gear acquisition, GW2 offers no real roles besides "combattant". If you don't, there's no daily or monthly rewards. The "tick off lists method" sometimes takes it too far, imo.
Other things like crafting require no dedication, basically everyone with a lvl80 can get it to 400 and then that's it; if getting 400 was just as hard as getting a full ascended/legendary set it would have been a lot different and would be catering a different type of players. There's no reward in doing other things than acquiring gear and money, or PvP for the sheer fun of it if that's your thing, it almost feels like you're punished for not doing what the game designers want you to do.

In GW2 it seems that the emphasis lays very much on the single player experience and the game seems to be designed to make any form of communication unneccessary. For instance the TP makes everything very anonymus; there's basically nothing much to bring people together or form sub-groups dedicated to some specific activities. No guild halls, mini-games, taverns, alliances and alliance chat, pet races, duels or other things that can bring people together.
It's a bit bland imo.

Edited by Arquenya, 20 December 2012 - 02:46 PM.


#30 blindude

blindude

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1142 posts

Posted 20 December 2012 - 02:21 PM

View PostArquenya, on 20 December 2012 - 02:14 PM, said:

Well it's not that black and white.
  • Look for instance at EVE Online. Some people became dedicated manufacturers and traders and never engaged in PvE or PvP but built a strong name and group of like-minded people around them.
  • Others set up a dedicated transport company to get stuff from A to B. Which can be quite challenging.
  • Then there's the miners that were just mining (and chatting away since it's the most mind numbing activity in any game imo) and got their money from that.
  • Other volunteered to help new players in the "new players" channel.
And so on. In GW2 there's a lot of emphasis on just the fighting and gear acquisition. If you don't, there's no daily or monthly rewards. The "tick off lists method" sometimes takes it too far, imo. Other things like crafting require no dedication, basically everyone with a lvl80 can get it to 400 and then that's it. There's no reward in doing other things than acquiring gear and money, or PvP for the sheer fun of it if that's your thing, it almost feels like you're punished for not doing what the game requires you to do.
gw2 is a themepark..different game so no comparison there.
I think you people should stop thinking too much and start doing things you enjoy even if that means stop playing.Its a game we should keep our heavy analysis for more important things.Unless you get a kick off doing just what you do in this forum so in that case my bad :P




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users