Curse

DreamWind · Oct 28, 2008, 05:44 AM // 05:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

CoD4's single-player gameplay has next to no replay value outside of higher difficulties. Same with Knights of the Old Republic. The Final Fantasy series doesn't even have any other replay options besides different character set-up. Notice how all of these games have been massively successful? It matters less in how long that journey is rather how fun it is.

True I can agree with that. The problem here is that Guild Wars had the potential to be both a good single player experience and a long term replayable game. Instead it is very easily arguable that the game turned into a very mediocre single player game with almost no replayablity due to management decisions Anet made with it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

The only thing that can be blamed is that ANet wasn't able to maintain their PvP side of the game. Nothing to do with the way PvE was handled.

It has everything to do with the way PvE was handled. The game became a PvE focused game. The game directly became a game with far less replay value, and that is why threads about the downfall of Guild Wars even exist. Both sides of the game were worse because of the other existing though...and in this case PvP got the shit end of the stick because PvE got far more focus in the eyes of the creators. I don't want to get into that debate though (beating dead horse).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sword Hammer Axe

Hmm not really. Unless they started asking for fees which would have more people fleeing from GW than buying it. In the end they would have a huge game with millions of players but with no extra releases they would not earn any money. And money is needed to keep it up. With new installments GW can earn a lot more money than with fees.

You act as if every successful game in history had a monthly fee or constant content updates....

Quote:

Originally Posted by pamelf

PvP only has longevity for those who like PvP. For those who don't it's just boring. If the game were more PvP focused you would have a very different game, a probably a much smaller player base to begin with as a huge number of guild wars players are PvE only.

PvP offers replayability only to a handful of people.

Whats your point? Guild Wars PvE was supposed to be just like any single player game...beat it and play another game. It was never a typical MMO. And PvP did have a large playerbase...some of it including PvE players. The problem happened when management decisions caused constant mass exoduses of leavers from PvP (and PvE to a lesser extent). The community should have grown but Anet directly prevented it from happening.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

With each expansion receiving solid reviews, I think it's safe to say that ANet gets their games sold just by the pitch alone.

Sometimes I wonder if the reviewers are playing the same game we are. I think maybe the game gets solid reviews because it can be a good one time play through which is what most reviewers do. After that it goes way downhill though as the flaws with the game really become exposed with more playtime. For people like me who have played since the beginning, the flaws are magnified by 10000 because I know what this game used to be and what it has become, and its like night and day.

pamelf · Oct 28, 2008, 06:28 AM // 06:28

Dreamwind, I find it truly ironic that you are now arguing that people are leaving both sectors of the game, PvP and PvE but you were very vocal in going against an idea that would keep pretty much all PvE only players playing. It's almost like you revel in this supposed guild wars decline - at least from a PvE point of view.

G4ymBoy · Oct 28, 2008, 07:09 AM // 07:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister_Smiley

3yrs and i still have yet to see this "downfall" you speak of.

OFT from a fellow 3yr Proph 4ever.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Sometimes I wonder if the reviewers are playing the same game we are. I think maybe the game gets solid reviews because it can be a good one time play through which is what most reviewers do. After that it goes way downhill though as the flaws with the game really become exposed with more playtime. For people like me who have played since the beginning, the flaws are magnified by 10000 because I know what this game used to be and what it has become, and its like night and day.

So yur an old player and yur a little jaded i know that feeling, I bought GW 3yrs ago because i knew of the artist team and loved the work before i saw the game and those same artists are making gorgeous designs and that what made me stay to play more not "end game PvE" or PvP, it was all the artist's fault. I feel that the composers and artists are what got this game the reviews it deserved, plus no fee is nice.

If these flaws are so magnified to you then stop posting and stop playing why argue on a forum for a game this bad...

(sorry if it a double post)

maraxusofk · Oct 28, 2008, 09:34 AM // 09:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moonlit Azure

I'm blind to what? That a consumable from EoTn is secretly decaying the game? Maybe some people abuse it, but its not the cause of this "decline". Many of those items saved me in a tight situation.

Theres always people in every game that are bent on believing that the game is slowly declining. Maybe to you it is but in the grand scheme of things Guild Wars is thriving. Maybe not in the future due to GW2, but a game NEEDS to add more content to draw more people in. Its basic marketing, like it or not.

And I've been playing since Prophicies, and I offered more information than you realize.

This isn't without saying that I do dislike some of the new changes. I love Prophecies and all the good ole days. But time waits for nobody..

this is the biggest load of crap i have read within the entire thread. u say time waits for nobody, but u believe guild wars is not declining at all? u say u played prophecies during the good ole days? ur forum join date is dec 2007. if u like gw as much as u professed and u played during the early days u would have either a guru account or a gwo account from alot farther than less than a year. nobody who has played gw seriously since before factions came out would say this game is thriving compared to the early days. maybe u were a casual gamer who didnt notice much bout the game then. ive sat thru this game all the way until march and have felt every fricking change in both pve and pvp. the design philosophy behind this game has fundamentally changed greatly. the game was designed to wean new players into pvp. as it became apparent that players couldnt handle serious pvp and more and more stayed in pve land during proph days, anet made factions to help this along, wut wit pve missions having a slight competitve edge. that failed so along comes nf. they took a short sighted approach and added crap like inscriptions and heroes, all of which made the game funner at first, but quickly removed wut was great about guild wars in the early days, a cooperative online rpg. items were no longer hard to get, people became disenchanted with their drops if they were anything less than perfect. that in of itself removed the magic of id'ing new items one would get. pvp became less of a focus, as evident by nf's design approach of introducing broken skills and gradually nerf them, compared to factions approach of cautiously upping skills as to not create a giant impact.

anet's philosophy has changed alot through the years. if u happen to like anet's changes, great! have fun playing this game. however, the gw of today is in no way even a shadow of what it used to be. back in the day, almost everyone was happy with the game, the hardcore and the casual. the simple fact that there are veterans that claim the game has deteriorated speaks volumes.

Angelic Upstart · Oct 28, 2008, 09:46 AM // 09:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by maraxusofk

this is the biggest load of crap i have read within the entire thread. u say time waits for nobody, but u believe guild wars is not declining at all? u say u played prophecies during the good ole days? ur forum join date is dec 2007. if u like gw as much as u professed and u played during the early days u would have either a guru account or a gwo account from alot farther than less than a year. nobody who has played gw seriously since before factions came out would say this game is thriving compared to the early days. maybe u were a casual gamer who didnt notice much bout the game then. ive sat thru this game all the way until march and have felt every fricking change in both pve and pvp. the design philosophy behind this game has fundamentally changed greatly. the game was designed to wean new players into pvp. as it became apparent that players couldnt handle serious pvp and more and more stayed in pve land during proph days, anet made factions to help this along, wut wit pve missions having a slight competitve edge. that failed so along comes nf. they took a short sighted approach and added crap like inscriptions and heroes, all of which made the game funner at first, but quickly removed wut was great about guild wars in the early days, a cooperative online rpg. items were no longer hard to get, people became disenchanted with their drops if they were anything less than perfect. that in of itself removed the magic of id'ing new items one would get. pvp became less of a focus, as evident by nf's design approach of introducing broken skills and gradually nerf them, compared to factions approach of cautiously upping skills as to not create a giant impact.

anet's philosophy has changed alot through the years. if u happen to like anet's changes, great! have fun playing this game. however, the gw of today is in no way even a shadow of what it used to be. back in the day, almost everyone was happy with the game, the hardcore and the casual. the simple fact that there are veterans that claim the game has deteriorated speaks volumes.

I would agree with that, GW pre Factions was when the game was at its best.
Now its just gone bad..........

Kumlekar · Oct 28, 2008, 09:48 AM // 09:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by masterjer1

Things in my mind and in a few friends on what has, over the years helped to bring about the downfall of our beloved Guild Wars. Feel free to add your takes whatever they may be.

1. Selective Salvaging. The ability to choose what you want to salvage from weapons, armor, drops, etc. This had a huge impact on the GW economy, driving down prices on just about everything, from perfect Fortitudes and Sundering to Superior Vigor runes and all runes in general. You could sell a perfect +30 sword hilt for 30k minimum and Superior Vigors were sold for over 90k at the trader. Now it's pathetic.

2. Assassins. Some claim that the introduction of the Assassin is also a major reason. With many abilities that weren't balanced for far too long and left to dominate many builds for overfarming. I guess the same could be said for the 55 monks that dominated solo farming for so long, but then you were limited to being a monk at least and could still be killed by simple mistakes.

3. Heroes. Plain and simple. A vast majority of people will play only with their heroes and will not group with other people. To many out there that actually want to group up out there, it is getting harder to find a group of real people. Causing alot of anti-socializing out there. A suggestion for this would be to not allow people to add henchmen to their group if they already have heroes in it, or to only allow a smaller number into the group ala HoH.

4. Loot Scaling. You know you miss those days when all drops were yours to be had. It was an honest way of farming and making some extra coin for yourself. You didn't have to spend trip after trip to fill up your inventory, it was done in 1 run. Those white drops added up when it came time to merch them.

5. PvE Skills. Face it, these skills are meant for PvE only for a reason. But to help make the general aspect of the game even easier? No wonder alot of people think PvE is too easy. Some of these skills should probably be classified as elite due to their power, or only allow 1-2 equipped instead of the 3 that can be equipped now. Killing a high level Infernal Wurn with a single cast of Pain Inverter may look pretty cool, but like I said, it makes it too easy.

6. Consumables. This is just plain dumb. Sure alcohol and sweets are a good thing. They didn't give you any advantage over the game. But all of the GWEN consumables do.

No idea what "downfall" your talking about, gw is still going strong, but make up your mind. First you complain farming is too easy because of sins, then you complain its not lucrative enough because of loot scaling?

Heros are probably my biggest complaint about any addition arenanet has made in the game. As someone stated at PAX, the NF slogan is, "a sunspear never fights alone", but thats exactly what heros make us do.

As for pve skills/consumables, I like the idea in theory, but in practice i agree with you. I'm sick and tired of seeing ursan bars. Seriously its 6 skills in one slot, way over powered even with the "nerf" I'd just like to see the gwen skills/ items restricted to gwen. (I'm actually kinda fine with sunspear/lightbringer/kurzick/luxon pve skills even if they are ridiculously powerful)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angelic Upstart

I would agree with that, GW pre Factions was when the game was at its best.

I still do agree with that though. (I started playing GW the january befroe factions)

Tijger · Oct 28, 2008, 09:54 AM // 09:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zinger314

I'll be blunt, but...

I told ya so.

A year ago.

Oh puhleeze, GW is still being played by a lot of people and unlike some games (Hellgate anyone) which some here shouted would p0wn GW and are now dead and buried or on their way its still going.

Its doing quite well for its age and its price tag, I'd say.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

By far less people. People should stop trying to deny the fact that the game is in serious decline. It is tired.

Yes, and? Every game declines over time but I think we can all agree that GW hasnt nosedived like a few other hyped games in the last few years.
HGL is shutting down, TR never came close to the succes of GW, Conan nosedived within 6 months etc etc.

So, all in all, GW has less players now, yes, its not dead or being shut down and for a lot of people its still a fun experience. If its not, move on.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kumlekar

I still do agree with that though. (I started playing GW the january befroe factions)

I started in July 2005, Factions came after a year and a half after Prophecies and I can assure you that I ran out of things to do long, long before Factions came out, SF was a nice stopgap but come on, without the follow-on chapters GW would have been dead and buried now.

DreamWind · Oct 28, 2008, 02:29 PM // 14:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by pamelf

Dreamwind, I find it truly ironic that you are now arguing that people are leaving both sectors of the game, PvP and PvE but you were very vocal in going against an idea that would keep pretty much all PvE only players playing. It's almost like you revel in this supposed guild wars decline - at least from a PvE point of view.

Nah....I'm simply of the opinion that the game used to be far better, and 90% of the changes made to it over the years have made it worse (including said things you mention). I'm not of the opinion that Guild Wars is "just another game that dies" like a lot of people here apparently are. I think it had far greater potential that was never reached.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mirokumatt

So yur an old player and yur a little jaded i know that feeling, I bought GW 3yrs ago because i knew of the artist team and loved the work before i saw the game and those same artists are making gorgeous designs and that what made me stay to play more not "end game PvE" or PvP, it was all the artist's fault. I feel that the composers and artists are what got this game the reviews it deserved, plus no fee is nice.

Yea...I can agree with that. I've always thought Anet had some great artists and graphics people and Jeremy Soule is good. I just think their game management side wasn't very good.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mirokumatt

If these flaws are so magnified to you then stop posting and stop playing why argue on a forum for a game this bad...

Eh I can't call it bad. I just think it was mismanaged. As for why I post here...it entertains me when I'm extremely bored.

Ctb · Oct 28, 2008, 02:34 PM // 14:34

Quote:

Population in-game spikes whenever there's a festival, or new content (even MOX got tons of people to come back and group up); that tells me that there is a huge following for GW just waiting for something cool to show up, and they'll be back for more. ANet's banking on GW2 being that "something cool."

Guild Wars 2 is also two years away, at best. More importantly, though, Guild Wars 2 will be a new game with a new price tag on it.

People don't have to pay to log in and see MOX or join in festival events. Those are additions to something they already own. Guild Wars 2 will be a brand new game and it will have to be purchased. I, personally, wouldn't bank on the support being strong enough from Guild Wars 1 to just shuffle people over to a new $50 game.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I'll repeat what I said elsewhere: Guild Wars 2 isn't going to be competing against Guild Wars 1, it will be competing against other game. People will evaluate it against new MMOs and new RPGs on the computer at the time it's released, not against the old game, because the old game will, by then, be a distant memory at this rate.

imnotyourmother · Oct 28, 2008, 02:44 PM // 14:44

Well the biggest thing for me is the hero's. They are VERY bad. REMOVE the hero's and you will have more people playing in PvE with Groups.

This game is NOT a MMORPG anymore. This game is a MMOORPG.

that is to say Massive Multi-Player Online OUTPOST Role Playing Game

Good luck killing GLINT these days. Henchies and Hero's are to STUPID to kill it

Bryant Again · Oct 28, 2008, 02:53 PM // 14:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

True I can agree with that. The problem here is that Guild Wars had the potential to be both a good single player experience and a long term replayable game. Instead it is very easily arguable that the game turned into a very mediocre single player game with almost no replayablity due to management decisions Anet made with it.

Note: it had the potential to be both a good single player experience and a long term replayable PvP game. You really, really have to make that distinction. Solo replayability is far from being anywhere near as similar to competitive replayability. You can't be vague, we don't want to mislead even more people. It's the same reason I don't call GW an MMO.

The game did not become a PvE-only focused game, the devs simply dropped the ball on maintaining the PvP side of the game. There was not a huge spiking difference in content and features in NF's PvE as opposed to Factions, in fact I'd say that there's less in the latter than the former.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Sometimes I wonder if the reviewers are playing the same game we are. I think maybe the game gets solid reviews because it can be a good one time play through which is what most reviewers do. After that it goes way downhill though as the flaws with the game really become exposed with more playtime. For people like me who have played since the beginning, the flaws are magnified by 10000 because I know what this game used to be and what it has become, and its like night and day.

Of course it's easy to assume they're playing a different game: we're biased to hell and back again. I know this because I find the game awesome. For what it's worth, even with all its flaws (which can easily become magnified if the devs strike a personal point for certain customers), I consider it one of the most memorable and enjoyable games I've ever played.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ctb

Maybe I'm wrong, but I'll repeat what I said elsewhere: Guild Wars 2 isn't going to be competing against Guild Wars 1, it will be competing against other game. People will evaluate it against new MMOs and new RPGs on the computer at the time it's released, not against the old game, because the old game will, by then, be a distant memory at this rate.

I don't see why we wouldn't compare GW2 to other games currently on the market during it's time, unless you're saying this to point out something else?

FlamingMetroid · Oct 28, 2008, 02:54 PM // 14:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by imnotyourmother

Good luck killing GLINT these days. Henchies and Hero's are to STUPID to kill it

That's called you sucking

Its already been stated that alot of people like heroes, and would just go back to using 7 henchies if they had to. Force people not to use heroes, and you'll just have alienated a lot of the PvEers on top of all the PvPers who have already left.

DreamWind · Oct 28, 2008, 03:15 PM // 15:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ctb

Maybe I'm wrong, but I'll repeat what I said elsewhere: Guild Wars 2 isn't going to be competing against Guild Wars 1, it will be competing against other game.

Its going to be competing against both, which is probably the most difficult challenge it faces. Its going to be compared to GW1 and also probably compete with games like SC2/Sims3 or whatever other highly anticipated games are out...a tall mountain in both cases.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Note: it had the potential to be both a good single player experience and a long term replayable PvP game. You really, really have to make that distinction. Solo replayability is far from being anywhere near as similar to competitive replayability. You can't be vague, we don't want to mislead even more people. It's the same reason I don't call GW an MMO.

Theres no need to make the distinction. Good games just have replay value. They don't make a PvE/PvP distinction. I find it interesting that I almost never thought in terms of PvE/PvP in the beginning of GW, and now the gap is so wide.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Of course it's easy to assume they're playing a different game: we're biased to hell and back again. I know this because I find the game awesome. For what it's worth, even with all its flaws (which can easily become magnified if the devs strike a personal point for certain customers), I consider it one of the most memorable and enjoyable games I've ever played.

I'm in the same park as you...except I FOUND it awesome. I don't really anymore...now I find it very mediocre. I'm not lying when I say that those 90% of changes really screwed things up for me and a lot of others I know. It can't be underestimated.

Bryant Again · Oct 28, 2008, 03:30 PM // 15:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Theres no need to make the distinction. Good games just have replay value. They don't make a PvE/PvP distinction. I find it interesting that I almost never thought in terms of PvE/PvP in the beginning of GW, and now the gap is so wide.

No. You *have* to make that distinction because both single-player and multiplayer gamestyles are completely subjective. There are people out there who won't touch a game if it's multiplayer only, there are people out there who won't touch a game if it's singleplayer only. There are people out there who'll avoid a game where you have to kill other players, there are people out there who'll do the same thing if the game doesn't allow you to kill other people.

You could say the exact same thing to game genres: "Good games don't need classification". But we do anyways. Why?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

I'm in the same park as you...except I FOUND it awesome. I don't really anymore...now I find it very mediocre. I'm not lying when I say that those 90% of changes really screwed things up for me and a lot of others I know. It can't be underestimated.

Of course it can. WoW shows us that quite clearly: if you have a minority that's complaining, yet are still doing successful, things aren't as they seem. Same thing with Guild Wars.

Jeremy Untouchable · Oct 28, 2008, 03:31 PM // 15:31

All good things wind down.

DreamWind · Oct 28, 2008, 04:25 PM // 16:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

No. You *have* to make that distinction because both single-player and multiplayer gamestyles are completely subjective. There are people out there who won't touch a game if it's multiplayer only, there are people out there who won't touch a game if it's singleplayer only. There are people out there who'll avoid a game where you have to kill other players, there are people out there who'll do the same thing if the game doesn't allow you to kill other people.

Now you are treading into difficult territory. What about all the people who bought Guild Wars to be one thing and now find out it is something completely different?

All I am saying is Guild Wars could have had much more replay value than it has now, and a more PvP focused game could have easily done that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Of course it can. WoW shows us that quite clearly: if you have a minority that's complaining, yet are still doing successful, things aren't as they seem. Same thing with Guild Wars.

Completely different. People know what they are getting with WoW. Guild Wars did a complete 180 in terms of its game direction.

Bryant Again · Oct 28, 2008, 05:12 PM // 17:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Now you are treading into difficult territory.

Then I'll bring it right back out.

All I'm saying is you have to be specific with what gives the replay value. If I tell you to buy a game with the only details being "it's the best game evar", you're not likely to buy it. It's why we have games seperated into sports, action, adventure, racing, etc., why we mention if it requires an internet connection, and if it can be played offline. Details, details, details. If you're unclear about those details, you're likely going to disappoint someone. That's why you HAVE to be specific about where GW's "replay value" is coming/came from. I'll tell you right now that if that's all I knew, that it had replay value but not in what form, I would've been largely disappointed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Completely different. People know what they are getting with WoW. Guild Wars did a complete 180 in terms of its game direction.

It's not that, they simply lost focus on the other half of the game. Proph and Factions balanced both equally, shortly after ANet simply dropped the ball with PvP. Don't blame the PvE for the faults of the other.

And I'd retract that WoW statement immediately. No where on the boxes does it mention raid set-up times, lock outs, archetype imbalances, or daily maintenances.

Rocky Raccoon · Oct 28, 2008, 05:48 PM // 17:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ctb

Maybe I'm wrong, but I'll repeat what I said elsewhere: Guild Wars 2 isn't going to be competing against Guild Wars 1, it will be competing against other game. People will evaluate it against new MMOs and new RPGs on the computer at the time it's released, not against the old game, because the old game will, by then, be a distant memory at this rate.

If what you say is true, why are so many people all jacked up over the fact that Diablo III is on the horizon. People who have had a good experience with Guild Wars, and I believe that's a great majority of those who have played it, will be more than eager to try out GW2. The way you think we would never have any successful game franchises.

Snow Bunny · Oct 28, 2008, 05:48 PM // 17:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeremy Untouchable

All good things wind down.

StarCraft became more balanced with the addition of BroodWar. Extra content added extra maps, and units that while viable, did not seriously ruin balance. The Corsair, medic, and lurker all are very strong units that have positively contributed to gameplay and increased longevity.

Starcraft is 10 years old.

Guild Wars became increasingly less balanced with additions of Factions, NF, and EotN. Extra content added imbalanced skills, grind, and items that broke the PvE element. Ursan, Defense webs, sinsplit, and PvE consumables are all addons that have negatively detracted from gameplay and destroyed the game's fun.

Guild Wars is closing on 4 years, with a rapidly declining PvE playerbase, and no PvP playerbase to speak of.

Think about that.

maraxusofk · Oct 28, 2008, 05:54 PM // 17:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Risky Ranger

If what you say is true, why are so many people all jacked up over the fact that Diablo III is on the horizon. People who have had a good experience with Guild Wars, and I believe that's a great majority of those who have played it, will be more than eager to try out GW2. The way you think we would never have any successful game franchises.

the way u are thinking, it appears everyone who had a good experience with gw will move onto gw2, which is definitely NOT the case. like many others on this thread, i initially had a great experience. however, we have become disgusted by anet's recent decisions. as such, many of us will not move onto gw2, even if we found gw1 incredibly fun once upon a time.