The last day dawns on the Kingdom of Ascalon. It arrives with no fanfare, no tolling of alarms. Those who will remember, will speak fondly of the warm morning breeze. People carry on with their daily lives, unaware that in a short while… everything they have ever known will come to an end.
lol still beating around not admitting VERTICAL PROGRESSION is what made WOW and what has kept WOW what it is today....the leader of the pack. Now once again you can dance around all the jargon of this and that about casual play of WOW but it is still a vertical progression game and since casuals are playing it by the millions then you have to admit vertical progression is part of the recipe that is keeping the casuals playing.
This is like saying that the alpha wolf of a pack is the alpha because it howls, or that the queen of ahive is the queen because she eats honey (not royal jelly - ordinary honey). When WoW release, 100% of its direct competitors also used vertical progression, and now it's still used by the greater majority. If everyone else is doing it, it's not what puts you on top.
What gives WoW its position is a combination of the following:
1) It used a well-known franchise with a large starting fanbase, giving it a target audience that were near-guaranteed to take it up if they had any interest whatsoever in a vertical progression MMO.
2) For all their faults, Blizzard is near-unmatched in making highly polished, professional games with all the bells and whistles. Nine months after release Guild Wars 2 is still weighed down with well-known bugs (including traits that simply don't work), aggravating control issues, and complete lack of a viable group finding feature in a modern MMO - it's unlikely that Blizzard would have allowed such a state of affairs to last nearly so long.
3) While WoW has become the poster child for hopeless grind, gaming addiction, and other undesirable MMO traits, it's still a darn sight less vertical-progression-focused than what came before it. Compared to what else was on the market when it released, WoW actually differentiated itself by making a substantial move away from the mountainous vertical progression of its predecessors. This is how its seen as being more casual than it's predecessors... because it IS.
4) Size builds momentum. When you're the biggest in the market, that means it's going to be your game that people pick up because their friends already played it or simply because they've heard it's the biggest in the market.
These are the reasons why WoW is on top - and none of which have vertical progression in them.
If you look through the MMOs that have come even close to WoW's success, the overall trend you'll notice is that they set themselves distinctly apart from WoW. Not simply by having a strong licensed franchise of its own to start from or some gimmick that WoW can simply steal - they have some fundamental distinction that calls to players that are turned off by WoW's fundamental mode of operation. In the case of Guild Wars, this has always been a substantially reduced focus on vertical progression.
The result? Well, I noticed a few years back that whenever the Blizzard fanboys wanted to claim the superiority of WoW over some other MMO(-type) game, it was Guild Wars they kept coming back to. Why? Because in Western markets, it was the only credible and stable competitor for a fantasy MMO, keeping it on their radar rather than flaring up over a couple of months and disappearing like all the other MMOs that just tried to copy what worked for other MMOs. When Warhammer Online, D&D Onlne, LOTRO and scores of other vertical-progression-based MMOs were crushed beneath WoW's iron heel, it was Guild Wars that stubbornly persisted like a thorn slipping through a crack in the boot even in the face of near-abandonment by its own company.
Why? Because it didn't just try to copy WoW's success. It did something different, and in doing so, it claimed for its own a portion of the market that was dissatisfied with WoW, and part of the reason for that dissatisfaction is that not everyone likes vertical progression.
Seriously, if your claims were accurate, we wouldn't even be having this discussion because from what you're saying, everyone agrees that vertical progression is the best thing for an MMO. But we're disagreeing with you because many people think it's not the best thing for their MMO, and that's why their not playing WoW in the first place. If your game is going to be based off the same assumptions that WoW is, your game had better be so kittenly awesome that it's not only accepted by the people who try it as being better than WoW, but that it also overwhelms the massive incumbent advantage that WoW already has.
The truth is... it sounds like vertical progression, grinding (arbitrary term of difficulty) content to get all the (arbitrary term of quality) gear so you can move on to (arbitrary term of the next level of difficulty) content is your thing. There are lots of games on the market that supply that, including WoW. You're literally spoiled for choice.
Me? I get literally nothing from replacing my +4 Sword of Awesomesauce to +5 Sword of Greater Awesomesauce That Is Fundamentally Identical To The +4 Sword Of Awesomesauce Except With A Larger Number so that I can progress from fighting monsters that were balanced with the +4 SOA in mind to monsters that were balanced with the +5 SOGATIFITT+4SOAEWILN in mind. Instead, I gain my enjoyment from overcoming challenges with tactics (not just repeating things I've already mastered until my numbers get high enough) and by trying new ways of doing things using new builds and professions.
Vertical progression doesn't just do nothing for my enjoyment, it actively hinders it. Having a requirement to collect gear to support a new build because my old gear wasn't compatible with that build is, to me, a barrier to fun, not a contribution to it. Needing to repeat what might have been hundreds of hours of grind to get a character of a new profession up to a point where it can meet the challenges my first character can is a major barrier to fun, possibly even dealbreaker-level.
It may be pat, but it's true - it sounds like the WoW-style of game is what works for you. Play one of them. There are enough of them on the market. Stop trying to hog the entire market and let me have the game that works for me. Please.
And finally, because it bears repeating, if you take just one thing from this post it should be this:
If your claim that vertical progression was what everyone liked was true, nobody would be arguing to the contrary. The very fact that so many people are disagreeing with you demonstrates better than any specific argument that your claim is flawed.
That said, the real thrust of this thread seems to be more about armour art - and in that respect, I'd just say, the more choice the better. Real choice, not just a half-dozen variations on the same basic theme.
Different people like different things, so they best way to keep everyone content is to have enough variety that whatever someone's tastes may be, there's something that fits.
I for one am super offended that Tyria makes a mockery of my European roots. I studied the great European castles and medieval architecture in school and I am extremely offended by ANETS use of such imagery in this game. I am also offended by the Charr as a race as I am a cat. Meow.
I always expect/hope a game to exist out of something like:
levelling, meant to slowly get to know the class and playstyle and get skills;
getting the best equipment and experiment with builds;
"master" the class and do the hardest/challenging stuff in the game (for whatever non-stats reward).
It feels natural, like going to school, learning things and in the end, work with it and apply your knowlegde and refine your player skills. Strangely, part 2 and 3 are the same in GW2 and there isn't really a part 3.
I loved the Factions approach where Step 1 was pretty much non-existent and the whole game consisted out of Step 2 & 3.
I'd have loved to have seen more of a disconnect between stats and skins.
Allow max stats exotics to be bought cheaply from a trader while allowing the skins to be the items of value acquired both from dungeon tokens and drops from chests/bosses rather than everything from the MF
Yes. I one hundred percent agree with you. Problem is that the champions and other group events that no one ever does don't have much of a reward. If they make the reward much greater it'll ruin the economy, so that's a risky thing to do. But if you add a completely unique item, the economy will only change according to that item alone. With GW2's skin system, you wouldn't even have to make it some super overpowered weapon. If it has a completely unique skin, people would still want to get it.
Sadly, this is something that Arenanet hasn't realized yet, which is strange seeing as unique weapons were a pretty huge deal in GW1.
GrandmaFunk, on 19 December 2012 - 04:29 PM, said:
Allowing enemy players to complete the puzzles gives them badges, which can be turned into siege weaponry, which does have an impact on the WvW battle.
Preventing enemies from gaining resources that can be used against your team in battle is perfectly legitimate.
The vast majority of people doing the jumping puzzle are there to collect badges for legendary weapons. You can buy siege weapons for much cheaper anyway. Pretending that people would actually spend badges on siege weapons and not on a legendary is an excuse to validate ganking one to two people attempting to complete the jumping puzzle because it's easier for you than actually fighting in a real battle. Besides, if you let everyone do it, you'll all have the same resource anyway so there is no actual loss.
Honestly, you are telling me that one or two people trickling in to do the jumping puzzle are really there to turn the tide of battle? Give me a break.