Curse

Zehnchu · Jan 04, 2010, 05:50 AM // 05:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by a-kyle

Do you think Guildwars is suffering from the death penalty (ie, -15%+)

LOL,

on a serious note, I see all these QQ threads or QQ reply's stating "GW is dead" how is it dead? Lions Arc is usually busy, like packed, most major cities in the game are packed.

even smaller towns and outposts are still a bit full, theirs a couple wheres theirs like 5-6 people.

my guild is usually full, and active. so some one please tell me how GW is dead.... because to me, its alive, it has a heart beat that is still beating strong, might get anxiety and have heart attacks around the holidays with the massive peak in numbers, but its still beating strong in my opinion.

Its not dead but it thriving either...

Regulus X · Jan 04, 2010, 06:02 AM // 06:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin Alvito

"Dead" is a relative term when used by players.

HA and GvG are "dead" compared to activity levels in previous years. By the same standard, PvE is "dead" other than perhaps a few dungeons and some elite missions.

A few things caused that. Normal fatigue with an old game, for one. In PvP, some dubious balance decisions, deteriorating servers and lack of balance updates also hurt. The wikis, heroes and overpowered PvE skills make it difficult to find a group for anything other than group farming in PvE, because heroes are just too good.

Elite networks are probably harder to break into than they used to be. You'd think that it would be reverse as elite players start having trouble forming groups, but many would rather not play than take a chance on unknown quantities likely to fail these days.

There are a lot of tools that players didn't have early in the game's run that make playing the game well easy. The wikis organize a very large amount of information into an easily accessible space, which makes it possible to hit the ground running yet makes truly "casual" group play difficult. The wikis have raised players' expectations of other players quite a bit.

Finally, the game is now a "discount" game and the player base skews young as a result. That has its drawbacks.

The game is different and less populated. I think that a lot of those changes are for the worse. Others disagree. Calling it "dead" is a reach IMO. "Dying" might be more accurate, but if it's "dying" it's suffering a pretty long terminal illness.

Another one of those crystal-clear, outstandingly accurate posts that I like to see. My hat goes off to you my good sir! Well-spoken.

Mustache Mayhem · Jan 04, 2010, 06:10 AM // 06:10

seems anyone named martin is usually smart.. yet to meet a jerry that isn't fat though

game is on discount.. might get some new players before gw2- hope that pre-order for november is right

JNKnkr · Jan 04, 2010, 08:07 AM // 08:07

Dead refers to on the ground, beaten, shot up and torn apart, lacking any motion, breathing or functionality... so no, GW is not dead, it just lacks the audience that it used to have, but the audience is still rather large and people still continue to buy it and play, and probably will for a while.

Gennadios · Jan 04, 2010, 08:12 AM // 08:12

I'll echo the sentiment of some other players. GW isn't dead, but my alliance and friends list very much is.

There are around 10 active people from a list that was in it's 30's initially. It may not be much, but it's enough to get just about any content done.

Angelina Collins · Jan 04, 2010, 09:16 AM // 09:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malice Black

GW was your first online game I take it?

Not, really, I played many online games before guild wars, and never had any type of update that reduced the effectivness of skills or equipment, of course after guild wars, a couple games I did buy, the software company followed in Anet's example of nerfing skills or equipment, primarily for PvP online play. For those games, in which I only play the non online version of the game, I uninstalled them, then reinstalled the game, and refused to update the game further.

I don't mind updates as long as they enhance the product I originally bought, but when they de-enhance the product, I feel cheated, and lied to, not to mention ripped off.

A good example would be, imagine spending good money on an HD T.V., it got good reviews and such, even can be updated, yet instead of making it sharper in the update, the manufacter changes the DP to a lesser resolution because a couple networks complained that they would have to spend more money on their programming to keep up with this type of T.V. Also imagine that you don't even view those channels, but still have to suffer for it. Granted that is a hypothetical, that would never happen, but still that is the way I look at it.

I paid for a particular product, updating it to make it better is great, but down grading it to satify a small minority of users is an insult.

They should of printed a warning in big red letters, saying that you are not buying the game, but leasing space, and we reserve the right to change any aspect of the game as we see fit. Then as the consumer, I could make a intelligent decision as to wether I want to buy their product or wait till it's cheaper and see what changes they make.

The Josip · Jan 04, 2010, 09:45 AM // 09:45

I can't believe we still have incompetent non-creative people complaining how skill balance ruined their game because, gasps, once in 6 months they had to change a skill or two on their skillbar.

The lack of skill balancing is what killed GW IMO. The lack of creative smart people too.

ps: And yes Angelina I'm an elitist. What the heck should I be, averagist? GW was always about balance. Complaining how it ruins your gameplay shows nothing but lack of understand of the game on one side, and disrespect for the rest of the community on the other side. If ANet went with your idea of never balancing skills (which is your ideal), the game would be horrid beyond imagination.

SolusX2 · Jan 04, 2010, 09:53 AM // 09:53

How radiacally such a simple game has changed in the style it is played it why it is dead. I had a 2 year break from guild wars, and I am absolutely amazed at how much has changed (speedclears to name) and how little (A-net updates). Like the 100s of devs before them, A-net simply showed they could not properly moderate a online game to the way they expected without offending a minority. So they made bad decisions again and again till it gets to the point where every update is basically "what did they f*** up this time".

From the release of Eotn things went bad, real bad. Eotn is Guild Wars greatest mistake, it's overall affect on PvE is remarkable. Eotn killed countless items rarity, made PvE extremely easy and introduced stupid and overall "PvE only skills". A-net made far too much content which in-turn led to constant updates in an attempt to balance the game without taking in considering what really needs to be changed. Titles, mini-pets, consumables and PvE skills are complete rubbish that in my opinion having never been implemented to the degree they are currently in. Guild Wars went from a fast-paced, easy and fun game to a grind-fest gimmick-stricken cesspool of evil. A-net isn't the only one too blame, BuildWiki contributed to the gimmick status of PvP while GuildGuru created a server dedicated to power-trading in which a number of the moderators are involved in.

Guild Wars is dead because the original appeal and fun is no longer in it. Pugging it, good times, fun and focused PvE turned into spamastan, speedclears, and a joke of a pvp system.

Considering A-net has given up on GW1, I expected big things from GW2, which I probably won't even purchase.

tasha · Jan 04, 2010, 09:57 AM // 09:57

Angelina, don't take my comments to mean that I agree with every update or move that ANet have taken (cos I don't), but I want to make a couple of points in response to your last post

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angelina Collins

I paid for a particular product, updating it to make it better is great, but down grading it to satify a small minority of users is an insult.

Back when you got the game, ArenaNet were holding tournaments (as game publicity) with cash prizes for those who won. Not only is it not satisfying to watch a game where someone is abusing a skill or combination of skills, its also not going to encourage someone to buy the game. When money is on the line too, things need to be something resembling balanced. Some of the early mechanics didn't work. Even if they did, having all the skills exactly the same and "right" for the last 4 years would have made a boring game. Nerfing skills can be good as well as bad.

Could they have done things better by having PvP and PvE skills as they do now? Probably. But the changes needed to be made one way or another.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angelina Collins

They should of printed a warning in big red letters, saying that you are not buying the game, but leasing space, and we reserve the right to change any aspect of the game as we see fit. Then as the consumer, I could make a intelligent decision as to wether I want to buy their product or wait till it's cheaper and see what changes they make.

They did. Its called the EULA. It also says on the box that your online experience may change during play.

------

OT: I'll agree with other people's sentiments about some guilds being dead but the game still having pockets of life. My guild is practically dead in Guild Wars, but very active on the forums and elsewhere. Side effect of this is its pretty much just me playing alone, but I still have a friends list and can find activity if I want it. Dead game? No, just old.

Batteries · Jan 04, 2010, 10:07 AM // 10:07

people just dont like change. someone mentioned not being able to find PuG groups going through a campaign but you CAN find pug groups doing other things...

EPO Bot · Jan 04, 2010, 10:08 AM // 10:08

I still pug the ZQ's every day. Not so bad for a corpse of a game.

Look chaps, you either play or leave. Get yourself some dignity and stop complaining about it ok? At this point, if you still play, you got your moneys worth in gameplay back a thousand times. Everything Anet tosses us if free stuff, or some fluff that you can buy if you somehow want it but doesn't have any impact on the game itself.

Ravious · Jan 04, 2010, 10:16 AM // 10:16

Re: HoM additions after GW2 is launched from the 24 June 2008 dev update

Guild Wars 2 Unlocks

Aside from the switch to account-based accomplishments, this has not changed. You will be able to add to the Hall of Monuments in the original Guild Wars even after the release of Guild Wars 2, and any newly unlocked accomplishments will then be visible in Guild Wars 2. We will provide more information about the exact rewards for each Hall of Monuments accomplishment as we get closer to the release of Guild Wars 2.

Artisan Archer · Jan 04, 2010, 10:33 AM // 10:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by IrishX

GvGers say GW is dead because it takes 15 minutes to find a match in the mid ranks, where only the top 10 used to have that problem.

Yesterday evening I did 16 GvG's with my guild in under 6 hours. That comes down to an average of 22 minutes per match, including waiting time. We're rank 1k+. GvG is not dead.

The Josip · Jan 04, 2010, 10:48 AM // 10:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Batteries

people just dont like change

There's a scientific word for those: extinct species.

Anon-e-mouse · Jan 04, 2010, 10:54 AM // 10:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Josip

ps: And yes Angelina I'm an elitist. What the heck should I be, averagist? GW was always about balance. Complaining how it ruins your gameplay shows nothing but lack of understand of the game on one side, and disrespect for the rest of the community on the other side. If ANet went with your idea of never balancing skills (which is your ideal), the game would be horrid beyond imagination.

How about the sheer bloody arrogance that one VERY SMALL section of the players dictate how the other 99.9% of players play their game, when the reality is that what happens in PvP has very little if any impact on PvE'rs.

For once one of the best decisions Anet had was when they started splitting the skills into PvE and PvP versions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Josip

There's a scientific word for those: extinct species.

Change is relative, if the enviroment doesn't change, change doesn't have to happen and extinction is not even a distant problem... Crocodiles anyone? Couple 100 million years and counting.

The Josip · Jan 04, 2010, 11:27 AM // 11:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anon-e-mouse

How about the sheer bloody arrogance that one VERY SMALL section of the players dictate how the other 99.9% of players play their game, when the reality is that what happens in PvP has very little if any impact on PvE'rs

Stop talking nonsense. Look what no skill balance in PvE did. The fact that permas exist in GW just shows how silly GW is now.

The only reason why you blame PvP is that bad side-effect of skill imbalance is best seen in PvP. In PvE it's not so well seen although in PvE skill imbalance kills creativity and fun, but hey, if 90% of GW players don't mind playing with 1 skillbar for 3 years as long as it's overpowered - then who cares right? You're getting titles faster no? Well I call it BS. PvE should be balanced too, instead of every Wammo being able to do even HM dungeons (literary). When GW PvE was balanced, missions like THK were actually fun instead of being loooong travel quest.

BlackSephir · Jan 04, 2010, 11:40 AM // 11:40

Stale
No balance
No further balancing
No meaningful new content
No new maps
No nothing.

Anon-e-mouse · Jan 04, 2010, 02:18 PM // 14:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Josip

Stop talking nonsense. Look what no skill balance in PvE did. The fact that permas exist in GW just shows how silly GW is now.

This isn't about SF, or anything else. It's about a small narrow-minded group dictating to everyone else how THEY should enjoy playing a GAME.

If people want to use SF that's a choice they make. I don't use SF. I don't really do SC's, that's not to say I haven't done SC's just that I have more fun with a build that I made. I don't give a rats arse what PvP fan boys do, so long as it doesn't affect how I play MY game.

(back on topic) With the upcoming nerf, I wonder how much closer to the grave this game will become. We've seen it happen after Ursan, I'm darn sure we'll see it again after SF.

Martin Alvito · Jan 04, 2010, 02:39 PM // 14:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Regulus X

Another one of those crystal-clear, outstandingly accurate posts that I like to see. My hat goes off to you my good sir! Well-spoken.

Glad you liked it. Evidently the work on getting my writing back up to snuff is paying off.

Relic1337 · Jan 04, 2010, 03:59 PM // 15:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by a-kyle

Do you think Guildwars is suffering from the death penalty (ie, -15%+)

LOL,

on a serious note, I see all these QQ threads or QQ reply's stating "GW is dead" how is it dead? Lions Arc is usually busy, like packed, most major cities in the game are packed.

even smaller towns and outposts are still a bit full, theirs a couple wheres theirs like 5-6 people.

my guild is usually full, and active. so some one please tell me how GW is dead.... because to me, its alive, it has a heart beat that is still beating strong, might get anxiety and have heart attacks around the holidays with the massive peak in numbers, but its still beating strong in my opinion.

"Gw is dead" is referring more to pvp then pve.
You pvers can play this game as long as you want, but general pvp was killed off by all the mistakes anet has made.
There's really no way for you to fully understand it without being a top gvger/haer some point in time.

An obvious reason people think GW is dead is because of money.
Anet used to give away so much to high end GvGers and they even had a LAN(big tournament full of nerds all in one place) every year.

When Anet stopped doing this and created the "Automated Tournament System" which only gives away in game prizes, the pvpers claimed anet did not care about them anymore thus the reason why "Guild Wars is dead".