Curse

korcan · Apr 14, 2009, 12:22 AM // 00:22

I don't play much now. I think I've logged a handful of times in the past year, but this game was awesome when it came out.

I'm a graphics nerd, so the "fact" this game looked awesome compared to games on other platforms at the time was a bonus.

Where are all the Guild Wars clones? The game sold really well, so support for these types of games is definitely out there. Guild Wars basically created a new genre and no one has developed a game for the genre since.

I can't stand MMOs, so I'd be disappointed if GW2 caters to more of the "grind" crowd. I'm looking at all you GWAMM-ers out there.

Personally, I'd love to see Bioware stop all work on anything Star Wars MMO related and shift their attention to this genre.

Lonesamurai · Apr 14, 2009, 12:33 AM // 00:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by korcan

Personally, I'd love to see Bioware stop all work on anything Star Wars MMO related and shift their attention to this genre.

Actually, the new Star Wars MMO using the Guild Wars business model would work brilliantly

Apollo Smile · Apr 14, 2009, 12:37 AM // 00:37

I haven't played anything like Guild Wars. Its pretty unique.

FoxBat · Apr 14, 2009, 12:42 AM // 00:42

I'm pretty sure Bioware IS making something closer to this genre PvE-wise than anyone else. A focus on narration, storyline, and customizable NPCs- traditional hallmarks of good single-player games. The business model remains to be seen, and the skill system is completely up in the air, though an "equip a limited subset of skills" approach seems unlikely.

Martin Alvito · Apr 14, 2009, 12:45 AM // 00:45

My suspicion is that while this is a profitable genre, it is not hugely profitable.

The development and maintenance costs are relatively high against what was sold. Compare to Left 4 Dead's 2.5 million retail copies (and God-only-knows-how-many on Steam) through the end of March - and Valve isn't bearing the server burden there. Yes, FPS games always sell well...but you get the idea.

Given that you're paying for the servers, you'd rather sell a million copies and have a quarter million subscribers paying you $15 per month for several years, than sell six million games at an average of say $40. Less server expense, about the same revenue stream, less development cost.

Guild Wars may now be a worthy intellectual property, and the company made money developing it, but the business model is not such a stunning success that companies are dying to copy the game.

moriz · Apr 14, 2009, 01:49 AM // 01:49

for GW's business model to really take off, they'll need to really aggressively push the ingame store for all its worth. effectively, it will make it similar to those "F2P" games that allows players to buy their way to leetness.

of course, that will have negative impacts elsewhere. it all goes down to how much they want to push it. if the upcoming update is any indication, they're starting to move down that path. here's hoping they stop before they allow you to buy gold and armor/skin unlocks.

now, if you're looking for another game at least marginally similar to GW...

there's granado espada. its art style is similar to GW, and its gameplay is also quite good, similar to a mix of GW and starcraft. however, that's where the similarity ends. it is highly equipment based and grindy as hell. it's totally free, but has the aforementioned store that sells everything from gold to really good equipment.

aTT!kus · Apr 14, 2009, 02:33 AM // 02:33

are there any upcoming MMO's '09/'10 that aren't monthly payments? i know most of the highly anticipated ones will carry $15 fees. I'm fine with buying the game and then paying for names changes/extra slots/extra storage...things that don't give you an edge over other players

edit...not including GW2 of course

Spyder Shadowhunter · Apr 14, 2009, 02:46 AM // 02:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by FoxBat

"equip a limited subset of skills" approach seems unlikely.

Actually there was a game that used this kind of approach...

Fury online.. even so it closed down because ppl actually had to use their brains to be useful (and effective considering it was a pvp only mmo).. so basically only problem with it was that most "8-14 year old stupid little wammos" phailed miseraby in it.. so they left to play brainless sh*t mmos (yes i'm talking about wow) where they dont need brains just have to sit there 24/7 and grind like a braindead chicken... all in all without enough players they had to shut down the servers.. this is probably one of the reasons why others don't try to use it.

korcan · Apr 14, 2009, 02:59 AM // 02:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by moriz

for GW's business model to really take off, they'll need to really aggressively push the ingame store for all its worth. effectively, it will make it similar to those "F2P" games that allows players to buy their way to leetness.

of course, that will have negative impacts elsewhere. it all goes down to how much they want to push it. if the upcoming update is any indication, they're starting to move down that path. here's hoping they stop before they allow you to buy gold and armor/skin unlocks.

I just want a game where coop is the focus and finding a group isn't a pain in the ass.

Guild Wars has been out for 4 years now and it's basically evolved into a single player experience for the most part. Anyone that picks up the game now is really missing out on what made GW a great game at launch. The random pugging when I first started playing was by far the most fun I've ever had with an online game.

FoxBat · Apr 14, 2009, 03:02 AM // 03:02

Fury had a million other problems with it. A PvP-only RPG is a very hard sell right now, GW would've failed if they took that approach too. Fury just failed harder because it also sucked. Well, not even that. Very basic infrastructure was missing. Even games like starcraft and quake need a basic single-player bot campaign to teach people the ropes and get them hooked on the idea without being steamrolled in their first few matches. Still, it was the first game that was clearly inspired by GW's PvP side.

I personally love the basic premise of tons of skills of which only a few you can bring, but it's a very uncommon approach in RPGs right now. Bioware has never used it before and I don't see them embracing it for this particular project either.

UndeadRoadkill · Apr 14, 2009, 03:41 AM // 03:41

I would love a sci-fi (or sci-fantasy, if you prefer)-style game just like Guild Wars, I think that would be a blast.

pumpkin pie · Apr 14, 2009, 03:56 AM // 03:56

nothing come even close, to be honest, although, lately its one disappointment after another.

ressurrect tabula rasa and adopt Guild Wars play and business style

UndeadRoadkill · Apr 14, 2009, 04:05 AM // 04:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by pumpkin pie

ressurrect tabula rasa and adopt Guild Wars play and business style

I wanted to try that one, but I will not pay a subscription, so I never got into it. I heard it wasn't so good.

HawkofStorms · Apr 14, 2009, 04:09 AM // 04:09

Yeah, about the closest you will find currently to Guild Wars is several offline RPGs (yeah! Bioware!).

As for ascetics, Aion online looks pretty spiffy and sorta similar stylistically to GW. But that a very grindish MMO.

Minako Sawai · Apr 14, 2009, 04:58 AM // 04:58

I gave Tabula Rasa a try when it went free, thinking it might be something like a science fiction GW..... which sadly it wasn't. After giving it a few hours I knew that is not the type of game I like. Shame NCSoft dumped so much money into it, although I wish they could have done something to keep it going for those players that liked it.

I'd certainly be interested in a GW-play-style type game in a sci-fi type setting, just don't think we'll ever see it, unless ANet does something after GW2, assuming GW2 maintains that limited skills type play.

Aion looks interesting, the graphics are really nice, the game seems to run fast and smooth, and the grinding isn't that bad based on what people playing the Korean release and China open beta have said. If that was released here using the GW payment style I'd snap it up in a second. Having to buy it at $50 (or $70 for CE) with $15 a month in addition.... just doesn't seem like there is enough to it that I'd put that much money into playing it, unless they offer some type of lower yearly rate or lifetime type deal. Even then, I'm not sure it is something I'd want to play long term.

korcan · Apr 14, 2009, 05:05 AM // 05:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by HawkofStorms

Yeah, about the closest you will find currently to Guild Wars is several offline RPGs (yeah! Bioware!).

As for ascetics, Aion online looks pretty spiffy and sorta similar stylistically to GW. But that a very grindish MMO.

Single player RPGs aren't really my thing, but the stuff from Bioware and Bethesda are amazing. I just wish I could play something from those developers in this pseudo genre.

Guild Wars was awesome, so I hope GW2 doesn't turn into more of a traditional MMO.

The only thing that has me coming back to my PC for gaming are online focused games. Coop based online games are pure fun. I love playing console games, but they can't touch what the PC has to offer when it comes to online stuff.

Horde mode in Gears is close as is Nazi Zombies for CoD, but I'm getting sick of FPS/TPS games in general, except for Valve games of course.

Cooperative RPGs! I want more of them!

faraaz · Apr 14, 2009, 05:11 AM // 05:11

The Star Wars MMO will be the first one I'll even try which has a pay to play model...if only for the fact that it is being developed by Bioware. That company is the best in the industry.

zwei2stein · Apr 14, 2009, 05:28 AM // 05:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spyder Shadowhunter

Actually there was a game that used this kind of approach...

Fury online.. even so it closed down because ppl actually had to use their brains to be useful (and effective considering it was a pvp only mmo).. so basically only problem with it was that most "8-14 year old stupid little wammos" phailed miseraby in it.. so they left to play brainless sh*t mmos (yes i'm talking about wow) where they dont need brains just have to sit there 24/7 and grind like a braindead chicken... all in all without enough players they had to shut down the servers.. this is probably one of the reasons why others don't try to use it.

And that was devs fault. If you game has lowend tier where it does not that much to win, they will stick and learn to dominate it and move on. And as you said, without players, they had to shut down.

Besides, people who end up winning 8 player free for all match just by recreating "cripshot" would quit too.

To be honest, Fury had huge design problems that put off more serious people as well:

* Skill system was too weird, equip costs meant that you got your bang for buck by equipping three maxed skills to "spike" and ton and tons of weak utility (what was actuall limit, 64 skills?). Being able to get snare/sppedboost/ranged attack/selfheal/interrupt/shaddowsteps/every single counter/godknowswhatelse in each build was quite insane
* Resource system too alien to be comfortable. And since it was all basically adrenaline that rewarded button mashing with occasional 123 spike when you got stuff fully charged, you can imagine what matches were life "spam dart -> use heavies, repeat on next target"
* Equipment was strong. Soo strong so that anyone who spent equip point on maxing equip would win by default over someone who did not because of all the insane procs (fully equipped person could AFK and win. talk about imba)
* And not even mentioning "WTF is grind here".

Misa · Apr 14, 2009, 06:10 AM // 06:10

Aion looks a lot like gw

fb2000 · Apr 14, 2009, 10:00 AM // 10:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spyder Shadowhunter

Fury online.. even so it closed down because ppl actually had to use their brains to be useful (and effective considering it was a pvp only mmo).. so basically only problem with it was that most "8-14 year old stupid little wammos" phailed miseraby in it.. so they left to play brainless sh*t mmos (yes i'm talking about wow) where they dont need brains just have to sit there 24/7 and grind like a braindead chicken...

Highly complex PvP games (I havent played Fury at all, nor even seen it , just a couple of pics i think) tend to have small communities, which in turn translates to low returns, hence close to no company does that any more. Most of these "skilled" games are pretty much the results of modders/free time coders showing their love towards an old game - quake has some for example

. There are also those like Warsow, using freeware engines with quite limited graphics, but fairly complicated gameplay options (warsow isnt that to my taste tho :x dont like the ammo options

). If you think about it, most people these days care more about the way the game looks that its gameplay.

I've seen people diss amazing games with in my eyes quite decent graphics, just because "meh, this looks shit compared to xxxxx" (where xxxxx stands for a sucky game with a good engine..). I'm quite sure a lot of people bought GW because of its fairly good graphics at the time. It also tended somewhat to those of us liking a bit more complex gameplay (not the case any more imo, anet simplified everything so much)