Curse

Aleks · Apr 03, 2007, 11:56 PM // 23:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by twicky_kid

After leaving GW for WoW I am torn about the monthly fees. So much more support is given to WoW by blizzard. There are events constantly. Changes made to the game on a regular basis. An official forum (not downing guru here would be nice if we had an official forum for GW).

Yes, and by having an official forum the guild wars community would have all its "eggs in one basket" and fansites would die down... The community is better without an official forum.

Quote:

Originally Posted by twicky_kid

Lots of storage and character slots right out of the box.

Now try to play with one of your friends on a different server in WoW. Please...

Quote:

Originally Posted by twicky_kid

Server maintenance is done more often on WoW servers. Maintenance cost money to do. How many times have we had server maintenance in GW? I can probly count the times on 1 hand. Even though the server is down its in early AM hours and doesn't bother me. When I log on I know I'm getting on a server that works. Unlike the 500+ ping I have on GW regularly while I have a less than 100 on WoW servers.

Now, correct me if I'm wrong... But isn't it better if the servers don't require as much maintaining? I don't know if you guys remember but GW actually maintainanced their servers once. Count it. Once. Plus don't forget your characters are on a global database, if one server goes down, there are others until it comes back up. More than you can say for WoW...

Quote:

Originally Posted by twicky_kid

I have ran into less immature and bitchy people on WoW. When you pay for something you tend to appreciate it more.

GW isn't full of bitchy people. These "bitchy" people exist in every game, whether you pay for it, or not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by twicky_kid

No monthly fees basicly means smaller budget to work with and any small miscalculation in the budget means the players suffer.

Not if you selll 3 million copies...

Quote:

Originally Posted by twicky_kid

Like the celestrial tournament being handled by very few Anet employees. Izzy being the only employee working on skill balances. Those kind of things really affect the quality of the game. Something I personally believe is what has led to the overall quality of GW declining.

Who ever said GW was declining? Oh and by the way, Izzi has also balanced Starcraft and other great games. And he was the only employee there too... I think he is doing a fine job.

Quote:

Originally Posted by twicky_kid

Monthly fees do have their benifits. No monthly fees is a benifit in itself but brings many problems along with it.

Like what? A full wallet?

Quote:

Originally Posted by twicky_kid

More money = better game.

Uhmm... No... That's not true.

Thallandor · Apr 04, 2007, 03:21 AM // 03:21

Dont kid yourselves, GW will never match in numbers in subscribers compared to WoW, free to play after buying the box or not.

It is partly due to how the game is designed. unlike WoW, GW isnt designed as a digital drug, it doesnt encourage you to play for hundreds of hours on end for bandwidth and pratical reasons, which is largely the reason for the low level cap and large number of goldsink and cosmetics in GW.

And due to this reason alone, GW(1/2) will never be as popular as WoW free or not.

wetsparks · Apr 04, 2007, 04:14 AM // 04:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thallandor

Dont kid yourselves, GW will never match in numbers in subscribers compared to WoW, free to play after buying the box or not.

It is partly due to how the game is designed. unlike WoW, GW isnt designed as a digital drug, it doesnt encourage you to play for hundreds of hours on end for bandwidth and pratical reasons, which is largely the reason for the low level cap and large number of goldsink and cosmetics in GW.

And due to this reason alone, GW(1/2) will never be as popular as WoW free or not.

That makes no sense what so ever. One game incourages you to play thousands of hours to be be good and stay good, sacrificing normal life, and that will make it more popular than a game where you can have your character be as powerful as the next guy in less than 20 hours, have a real life, and you dont pay a monthly fee?

The reason that WoW has more people that GW is because they advertise their game on TV and on websites across the internet, come from a company in Blizzard that has a reputation of puting out good games, and the Warcraft brand itself is over 10 years old.

Compared to a game in GW that has been on the market for 2 years, the only marketing they have done is by doing interviews with magazines like PCGamer and other gaming magazines doing reviews on the game. Not to mention that the company that made the game is virtually brand new, few years older than the game itself. Yet somehow they sold 3 million copies of their game compared to 8.5 million for WoW.

As stated in another thread, because of the success of GW1, ANET has just recently hired marketing people now to try to push the game to a more mainstream customer base. More recognition for the game, along with no monthly fees, should bring more sales for ANET. If a game sold 3 million copies pretty much based on one person telling his buddies about it, it should be able to sell millions more with a little bit of marketing.

Thallandor · Apr 04, 2007, 04:38 AM // 04:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by wetsparks

That makes no sense what so ever. One game incourages you to play thousands of hours to be be good and stay good, sacrificing normal life, and that will make it more popular than a game where you can have your character be as powerful as the next guy in less than 20 hours, have a real life, and you dont pay a monthly fee?

The reason that WoW has more people that GW is because they advertise their game on TV and on websites across the internet, come from a company in Blizzard that has a reputation of puting out good games, and the Warcraft brand itself is over 10 years old.

Compared to a game in GW that has been on the market for 2 years, the only marketing they have done is by doing interviews with magazines like PCGamer and other gaming magazines doing reviews on the game. Not to mention that the company that made the game is virtually brand new, few years older than the game itself. Yet somehow they sold 3 million copies of their game compared to 8.5 million for WoW.

As stated in another thread, because of the success of GW1, ANET has just recently hired marketing people now to try to push the game to a more mainstream customer base. More recognition for the game, along with no monthly fees, should bring more sales for ANET. If a game sold 3 million copies pretty much based on one person telling his buddies about it, it should be able to sell millions more with a little bit of marketing.

As mentioned before playing WoW can be addictive and it is designed as such, GW isnt (for better or worse) as you might already be well aware. What is the motivation of play then in GW after a while. Some argue games are not meant to last forever which may be true for some people but then again why play it in the first place? (off topic)

So its all marketing then? Gameplay and business model doesnt matter? i am laughing hard now.

Ask Anet to implement a Monthly subscription for GW1 now and see how many fanbois will stay because of it's "unique and fanatastic and grindfree" gameplay. Maybe if Anet keep blasting the main media it will help to brainwash us into thinking its the right thing to do?

Lets face it, most of us are attracted to GW for its business model but that doesnt neccessary mean that you will be addicted to the game nor will the contents cater to the needs of everyone(no game does but try its best at least).

Read selectively if you want, i dont care. If you like to carry on and fill your head with illusions, its your money i could care less. Too bad you already bought the game, go ahead and use the online store to buy character slots to make up for the lack of storage problems for the last 2 years.

wetsparks · Apr 04, 2007, 06:28 AM // 06:28

The motivation for GW is to have fun. I never said it was perfect, no game is. It is also definitely not grind free, and I never said that. What I said was that the reason WoW has more players than GW is because they have a recognizable brand in Warcraft and in the companies name, Blizzard, and they market their game. You said that GW will never have the same amount of people, I said that it can, because it did so well with such very little marketing and no brand recognition.

And yes it is all about marketing. Ever heard of a game called Katamari Damacy? Probably not because it got about as much marketing as GW, yet it is hella fun to play. A game that you probably have heard of is Shadow of the Colossus, Sony pushed that game pretty hard and it got good critic reviews but not very many people bought it because, frankly, it isnt that fun to play.

Quote:

Ask Anet to implement a Monthly subscription for GW1 now and see how many fanbois will stay because of it's "unique and fanatastic and grindfree" gameplay.

If ANET did implement a monthly fee then lots of people would stop playing because it isnt Guild Crack, like World of Warcrack is. But then again, I never remember seeing a review saying "Buy this game because of the business model." Everyones business model is to make money. Period. Anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional. ANET wanted to get part of the market in online games, had the technology to limit bandwidth and server load, and so they didnt add a monthly fee to try to draw in some of the market. The Nintendo Wii is doing the same thing. Put out a cheaper system, with fun gameplay, and get part of the market while the rest of the people duke it out trying to make a billion dollars instead of a couple hundred million. Which is what GW is doing, instead of trying to get a billion dollars a year through monthly fees (which is what Blizzard is raking in) they decided that it would be best for them to rake in only a hundred million or so through game sales, like companies used to do before the online craze hit.

Frankly I think you skipped over most of my post because you pretty much backed up what I said while trying to flame me. People got WoW, and Blizzard has done whatever they can to keep people playing to keep getting that monthly fee. The people at ANET said they don't care if you take a few months off of playing the game because they don't have to worry about the monthly fees coming in, they will throw their weekend events to keep whoever is on at the time busy and work on the next games.

And about my money that I've spent, and you obviously have also judging by the pic you have next to your name, is money well spent. I paid $150 dollars for three games that I have gotten 1200+ hours out of and counting. The only other game that I might have put anywhere close to that much time into was Diablo 2, and that was over a six year period instead of a one year period. And storage space? That's a laugh, just because I'm a member of this fan site doesn't mean I'm a pack rat like the majority of people here.

guinevere · Apr 04, 2007, 10:10 AM // 10:10

First of all,

If GW2 adds a monthly fee, they would lose a decent chunk of players. We're sort of used to this concept. As for instance, I can play WoW if I like, but my boyfriend can't because it would be a waste of his money. He is working with the military here and well, with the things going on and our country stupid enough to follow that 50 star flag to mars... imo that is. Also because I know the net is safe and all, but I simply refuse to get a creditcard, just to play some game. If Anet decides to add a fee, they need to work on its payment options since those are way too limited.

Anyway, GW2 is like 1-2 years away from now, and WoW surely has been working on a graphical upgrade or a will roll out some new add-ons within this period of time. The storage issue GW vs WoW, well it's because some people are overdoing it with 'weapons'. I play PvE/PvP on a regular basis, and I do admit, having to use your PvP char as storage mule ISN'T my way of perfect storage but it works. Bigger storage will probably come with GW2. I just wish we could storage armor/mini pets in a different way, but I'm guessing I'll never see that.

Meanwhile I'll just scan the magazines and guru for more info on GW2 and happily await it's first 'add-on'. Work my tail off there and move on to GW2, but I guess I'll never uninstall GW1 till Anet pulls the plug off it

I like to play online a couple times a week with friends and just have fun in a way you wouldn't or couldn't get outside

I hope they make the new game just as fun as gw1 has been for most(all?) of us.

Caith-Avar · Apr 04, 2007, 10:36 AM // 10:36

Well... if monthly-fee was a reason of WoWs success, where are the hundreds of other - partially equally old, partially older - games of that kind WITH a fee? I don't see the fee as the big pro. Although there always are implications.

Such as the treadmill. The concept of artificially slowing down things or making you pay (ingame-)currency for speeding up things (like faster travel), which technically is again "using up time spent (to get the currency)". Additionally, this empowers addiction, as it enables you to put incentives on reaching certain goals (for example: Mounts allowing for quicker travel as well, once you reach level x and have enough currency to buy it).
It makes more sense when there is a monthly fee.
It can be used for content-stretching as well, granted, but a circular released game, such as guild wars, or a completely story-driven game would have much more negative effects, such as the disruption of the pacing the story has, or the fact that such a system doesn't allow for short playing instances, maybe making you cease playing after a week in which you didn't have the two hours you feel to need to get anything accomplished, not returning.
Here, again, the fee has a "positive" effect.
You try to make it worthwhile. An incentive to restart even after stopping. Also, you usually have to pay some fee to not having your account deleted due to inactivity (if you choose to cease paying. But honestly - subscriptions are one of the oldest tricks in the world. People do not unsubscribe easily. Not because it is made hard by the company - not necessarily.) Thus making you pay, thus making you play to have it remaining worthwhile.

So:
Fee - traditional benefits. Then again, the success of Blizzards battle.net games (and the fact that most other games now apply the prinicple of no fee there as well) shows clearly how well the shift in paradigmas went on that front (most critics that time brought the exactly same arguments as now). Because I happen to be one of those that remember the big fuss about Blizzards "great platform" that would require "no fee", contrary to what most other platforms (if they existed) would do.

Last but not least: Marketing
I don't know how it is where you guys all live, but here, in Germany, press coverage of WoW is much greater than of Guild Wars. Has been, all the time, even before the start. Big special articles on how the betas go on how the game is, on how it is continuing to grow etc., big interviews with players, posters (four of them, I think), four or five consecutive issues had 16 page strategy guides on WoW each... I mean, on one of the two biggest PC Gaming magazines over here. On Guild Wars? I am surprised that the exclusive GW2/GWEN article even made the title page (it only covers about 1/8 of it, but it is there) Prophecies? I think one article, 2 pages. And there was a beta access key in one issue, but not great advertising.
WoW has been hyped a lot. It had been there - for a large crowd - long before release. And after that, the avalanche effect set it. "We're the big successful game, we have x millions of players, we DOMINATE the market, come to us!" Success as a reason to make them even more successful.
It has been one-sided. I don't say that it had the only effect, I don't say it had a superior effect. It was a major factor of influence. As everything is.

I, for one, have started playing because of the premises: I really liked the idea of role-playing combined with aspects reminding of Magic: The Gathering. It has not disappointed me.
Then again, the fee was a factor for me. Although I always only see it negative, as a reason NOT to play, never positive, as a reason to play a game.

So finally, let me say: Tempus Fugit. Time flees. The world is changing. Battle.net started the revolution for "normal" internet platforms, more or less. Nowadays, you expect it. Archlord has already been converted from "fee" to "no fee". Maybe MMORPGs will follow up next. I don't know.

For me, Guild Wars has blown a hole into the mountain, and hopefully, GW2 will lay the tracks through it - a revolution. And yes, I actually DO like the gameplay. It has some unique parts to it. Although I miss being able to craft or do other "social" jobs (traders with "discount on NPCs"-skill ftw! - loved RO for that).

But keeping the Battle.Net in mind, and Archlord (which would be candidate for changing to if I wanted classical MMORPG gameplay) I can't help but think about the last German Emperor, Wilhelm II when it comes to people praising the benefits of a fee. The mentioned emperor is said to have stated:
"Ich glaube an das Pferd. Das Automobil ist nur eine vorübergehende Erscheinung." which I would translate into: "I believe in the horse. The automobile is only a temporary phenomenon."

No offense meant. It's just the association that comes to my mind.

Lonesamurai · Apr 04, 2007, 10:42 AM // 10:42

its funny how so many kids believe WoW to be the only MMO with a monthly fee to be a success... Lineage 2 for instance has well over 10million players worldwide and still goes strong... Lineage still has about that many too and people still pay to play it

The reason WoW is so popular is through advertising and the clever use of a well known brand

Superdarth · Apr 04, 2007, 10:46 AM // 10:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by MirageMaster

why is this useless thread here?

I agree.

Havnt we had enough "WoW is going to get killed by -Insert new MMORPG here-" stories already?

People have been looking for a WoW killer for a long time now and its getting old, i dont think Guild Wars 2 will kill it anymore then Guild Wars did or Dungeons and Dragons Online did.

Caith-Avar · Apr 04, 2007, 11:20 AM // 11:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Superdarth

I agree.

Havnt we had enough "WoW is going to get killed by -Insert new MMORPG here-" stories already?

People have been looking for a WoW killer for a long time now and its getting old, i dont think Guild Wars 2 will kill it anymore then Guild Wars did or Dungeons and Dragons Online did.

Agreed. It won't kill WoW. (Isn't and wasn't intended to anyhow, as stated from official side - interestingly, this doesn't prevent the "self defense mechanism" of many WoW players to trigger.) It may, however, change how the fee-issue is handled in future games.

But, @Lonesamurai
If lineage has way beyond 10 million players, how is WoW being talked about as the "most successful" with an approximate 6-8 million? Because of the time it has taken? I say it honestly: I don't know any numbers beyond those of GW or WoW. So I don't know for success.
I just state, that "having a fee" doesn't equal "having success". Because, frankly, not every game that has a fee is a success.

I would, like you, rather say that brand/franchise, blizzards big name, the world of azeroth are greater factors than "there is a monthly fee" as reasons to buy/play a game, or for it to be successful, as well as a greater factor than "there is no monthly fee", for that matters.

Lonesamurai · Apr 04, 2007, 11:59 AM // 11:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caith-Avar

But, @Lonesamurai
If lineage has way beyond 10 million players, how is WoW being talked about as the "most successful" with an approximate 6-8 million? Because of the time it has taken? I say it honestly: I don't know any numbers beyond those of GW or WoW. So I don't know for success.
I just state, that "having a fee" doesn't equal "having success". Because, frankly, not every game that has a fee is a success.

due to the fact that its sold so much and is so massively recognised in teh press and by the average joe... hell, every grandmother has heard of WoW

later today i will be looking up all the MMO statistics for last year, I'll post them here if you want

Caith-Avar · Apr 04, 2007, 01:44 PM // 13:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lonesamurai

due to the fact that its sold so much and is so massively recognised in teh press and by the average joe... hell, every grandmother has heard of WoW

later today i will be looking up all the MMO statistics for last year, I'll post them here if you want

I am honestly interested in those statistics, but more out of personal curiosity. If you could PM them to me, I'd be grateful. It's just that, well, WoW is "THE game" for the press and for, as you said, the "average joe", at least as far as I can see it here. Even if they can not do anything else, those statistics could prove that the press around here is more focused on WoW than even I had imagined.

ensoriki · Apr 04, 2007, 04:04 PM // 16:04

How can you compete with a game that has a grind?

Like it or not, it may make no sense, people are ADDICTED to grind games.

Maplestory's success
Runescapes
FlyFF
Corum
Rappelz
Nostale
etc.

People are hooked on grinding, but when the grind gets to hard they move to another game and grind there.

If gw2 had an item... where you can STOP gaining experience and multiple arenas that go by 2 with an exception of a level 10 one it be kinda like this

You can train to level 20 put on your no exp item and pvp at level 20 forever

Get to level 80 put on the item pvp at level 80 if you wish forever.

Take off item when your ready to grind.

If gw2 had a maximum level of 100 it still be fine.

Lonesamurai · Apr 04, 2007, 04:10 PM // 16:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caith-Avar

I am honestly interested in those statistics, but more out of personal curiosity. If you could PM them to me, I'd be grateful. It's just that, well, WoW is "THE game" for the press and for, as you said, the "average joe", at least as far as I can see it here. Even if they can not do anything else, those statistics could prove that the press around here is more focused on WoW than even I had imagined.

When i've got them all, i'll post them...

From what I've found so far, lineage 2 currently has 2.5mil active subscribers, but well over 10million units sold...

Now compare to WoW that is a couple of years younger and has sold 8million units and currently has 5 to 7 million active subscribers...

Onarik Amrak · Apr 04, 2007, 07:04 PM // 19:04

Wow, I didn't know Lineage was so popular. Most of the players are from Asia right? I think WoW has probably netted a much larger ratio of players in the western countries than in Asian countries which is probably why it has so much exposure.

Lonesamurai · Apr 04, 2007, 07:40 PM // 19:40

Aye, although NCSoft (I'm reliably informed) have just installed two new Lineage 2 servers in their Euro data center...

And yes Alex Weekes from NCSoft told me that as i was trying to wrangle some juicy bits out of him for Guild Wars for my show...

Mordakai · Apr 04, 2007, 09:25 PM // 21:25

I like this thread. It's a good discussion of what makes MMORPGs successful, and more importantly, fun.

I really like how PCGamer ended their article:

"But then, as embittered games journalists, it's out job to be wary – ArenaNet has certainly proven the mettle of its model up to now. If the company continues to succeed, it may call the current play-to-play MMO-business paradigm into question – and ultimately, it may be more than Guild Wars that's reborn."