I wish guild wars was pay to play - Guild Wars Guru archive powered by Guild Wars Legacy

Doomlord_Slayermann

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Jul 2005

Chicago IL

Dark Phoenix Risin [DPR]

W/P

18 Aug 2006 at 16:51 - 41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metanoia

"No, serious PvPers do not make up the majority of the GW population but that is not at all what you said in your original post."
"Yes, you did say it was no longer a skill-based game, although from your second post it is evident that that was not the meaning of your first."
I apologise, I should have explained it better the first time. Although, I don't see the point of replying with "but I didn't understand the first time". Feigning ignorance is no way to prove a point, assuming you have one.

"Just because you can't think of a use for them does not make them "filler"."
Izzy himself has acknowledged the plethora of 'useless' skills. Insinuating that I am merely inept for not finding a situation where Savage Pounce is more useful than Beastial Pounce is rather obtuse.

Just because you don't make yourself clear does not meant that I am at fault for not understanding.

Many of the skills are not optimised for PvP, rather they are for use in PvE, with the better ones eventually becoming available later in the game. This was much more true of Prophecies with skills being quest rewards, but it still lives on somewhat in Factions. These skills suck in PvP, but that does not unbalance the game. It gives new characters the tools to work for those really good skills. That does not make low-end skills "filler".

Xenophon Ualtar

Frost Gate Guardian

Join Date: Jun 2005

18 Aug 2006 at 17:02 - 42

Like many others have said, if GW becomes PtP I will stop playing it. Both my wife and I are gamers. We also have a limited budget due to living in a very expensive area and have in 2 year old son. We both play GW at the same time so that of course means we need 2 copies of the game. We preordered both Prophecies and Factions so we spent the full 50 dollars on 2 copies of both games. Therefore we spent $200 on GW so far. Compare that to WoW where it would cost roughly $300 for just one of us to buy and play it. I think that we have come out ahead on that deal.

Sir Skullcrasher

Furnace Stoker

Join Date: Jun 2005

California

15 over 50 [Rare]

W/Mo

18 Aug 2006 at 17:06 - 43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ninna

GW players pay much cheaper than WoW

18 Months of playing Guild Wars
- Prophecies, Factions $100.00 (assuming buying GW on release)
- 3 extra slots $30.00
======================
approx total price: $130

18 months of playing WoW
- World of Warcraft: $50.00 (assuming buying WoW when 1st released)
- 15.00/mo or 13/mo if you buy 6 months in chunks ($225)
======================
approx total price: $275 (*double* the cost of what Ive spent on GW)

both games have an expansion due this year, that will cost you another $50.00 (Nightfall/Burning Crusade)

the most critical difference is
- GW players dont have to pay anything to keep playing content they already bought

I remember Gaile said that you don't need to buy the new chapter everytime it is released. Rather, it is there for those who want to get the new contents and storyline.

Metanoia

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Feb 2006

18 Aug 2006 at 17:21 - 44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doomlord_Slayermann

Just because you don't make yourself clear does not meant that I am at fault for not understanding.

Many of the skills are not optimised for PvP, rather they are for use in PvE, with the better ones eventually becoming available later in the game. This was much more true of Prophecies with skills being quest rewards, but it still lives on somewhat in Factions. These skills suck in PvP, but that does not unbalance the game. It gives new characters the tools to work for those really good skills. That does not make low-end skills "filler".

The term "useless" included in the PvE enviroment, too. Was that my fault for not specifically stating I was talking about PvE, too? Or perhaps yours for assuming PvE was excluded by default?

When I see "we've added X amount of new skills!" when it's been acknowledged that a significant proportion of them are "useless" (Izzy's words, not mine), then yes. I would consider them "filler" to have made it into the final product to meet a quota.

Note: This isn't to say they shouldn't have been added at all. It just means that they are "filler" until they're reassessed and balanced accordingly. Unfortunately, the rate at which new skills are being introduced to the game is so great that I doubt the older skills are ever going to get the re-balance they deserve and thus, will remain "fillers" indefinitely.

Mordakai

Grotto Attendant

Join Date: Aug 2005

Kyhlo

W/

18 Aug 2006 at 17:42 - 45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaguya

It has been pointed out many times, that you are playing as much per month for playing GW, as you would be paying to play WoW.

50 bux every six months comes to 8.3 bux a month, add on any chara slots you might want to buy, and whatever tricks they have up their sleeve for the future, the price is somewhere close to WoW.

Of course the player may not buy the expansions and keep playing, but..

No, there is no "but."

You could just buy Prophecy, and NEVER SPEND a single dollar on Guild Wars ever again, and still be playing Prophecy. And promise you there are people who are doing that right now. That's the key difference between Guild Wars and any other MMORG (or CORPG) on the market. You do not have to spend any more money on the product in order to play. Period.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaguya

And of course Blizzard, or any other company running a MMO takes more money from the players than they need to run the game. The companies need to make profit, after all. You don't make profit by getting just enough money from your customers to keep the servers up.

Exactly. Which is why Anet needs to make their successive chapters as good as possible, otherwise, the whole thing sinks.

bpphantom

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: May 2005

Canukistan

The Eyes of Ashtabula [Eyes]

18 Aug 2006 at 17:55 - 46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kakumei

Blizzard's best (and only enjoyable) product was Starcraft. Blizzard is nowhere near the best game company in existence.

I feel the need to add Diablo 1 and 2 to that. But yeah, I agree. And their customer service blows.

Yay ANet and NCS

Xenrath

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Oct 2005

W/Me

18 Aug 2006 at 18:33 - 47

Sure enough this thread descends into PvE vs PvP. You can argue all you like what it's "meant" to be, what it is is trying to cater to both. If it was meant to be PvP then why have they spent months upon months creating a PvE world, mobs etc. How long does it really take to develop a new skill? I'd hazard a guess probably not that long.

There was some official interview a while back about how they were "surprised" how popular PvE really was, and I do believe Nightfall will cater more to that side, given the (apparent) general disappointment with Factions.

Should it be pay per month? No. Aside from the whole release something every few months, which many people will buy anyway (more so if they're in a guild, which probably most players are!). As it is, neither side of the coin would imho justify a monthly fee. Who'd seriously pay monthly just for some new skills and the odd new class now and then (PvP) or for smaller game worlds than the original (Factions) which can be completed in a few days?

On a seperate note it's amusing to see people knocking Blizzard and WoW, despite it being tremendously successful as a business. The same people likely to defend Anet "it's a business, not a charity" line heh can't have it one way for one company and another for another. That said, I don't think it's just down to it being monthly fee, a whole slew of other factors come into it too e.g. marketing/advertising, resources etc. You have games in different genres, for example Halflife/Counterstrike which sold by the truckload and their success isn't down to a monthly fee either.

2ndName

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: May 2006

18 Aug 2006 at 18:38 - 48

If you think about it, GW is somewhat Pay to Play. If they follow the new chapter per 6 months deal, that is about $8.50 per month. The good thing about it is that, you can CHOOSE not to purchase the next exp and still be able to play. Even better yet, you can take a break for 5 months, come back and still be able to play without paying.

I like this model better. Gives the player options.

And yeah, the whole WoW vs GW thing has got to stop. They are two totally diferent games. I tried both, and GW suits my playstyle. I like the character models here more and I am a sucker for that. It really depends what the player wants. If everything was like WoW, then it would suck to be the end user.

MSecorsky

Furnace Stoker

Join Date: Jun 2005

So Cal

The Sinister Vanguard

Me/

18 Aug 2006 at 18:42 - 49

IF it went PtP, a huge HUGE amount of players would leave. Regrettably, I probably would as well. I can justify a new chapter ever six months to my dear wife, but not a monthly credit card hit.

No monthly fee actually targets the married crowd quite nicely when the other spouce doesn't play.

Kaguya

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Jan 2006

Moon

Mo/

18 Aug 2006 at 18:52 - 50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ninna

both games have an expansion due this year, that will cost you another $50.00 (Nightfall/Burning Crusade)

We've had/have coming two expansions this year. WoW is getting just one. WoW prolly will go quite a while without getting any expansions, while we will be few next expansions twice a year.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ibex333

And tricks? What tricks? Even if there is trickery, there's definately not as much as there is in the case of greedy Blizzard.

"and whatever tricks they have up their sleeve for the future", I thought the context of my "tricks" was clear right after char slots. Tricks being what new stuff you will be able to buy from the shop. All that adds to the price of the game.

While I might have ( :b ) exaggerated the price difference, there are people who have paid a lot more than the base price. We have people who have bought the Collector's edition for Proph and Factions, those alone come up to 140 bux over a year, and say they got 4 new slots now, so they come up to 180 bux over a year. Get Nightfall collector's edition on top of that and you break 250 bux. Not to mention some peeps who have two accounts.

Of course GW has the possibility of "just not buying" the expansion, but the fans and hardcore GW'ers will buy the expansions, or just buying the basic packs, leaving the collector sets and other junk aside you'll be playing cheaper than WoW would be. But GW still is not free.

Anyways, the whole GW financing system has been talked over and over again in multiple threads, ANet thinks it works, good for them. Blizzard has their own finances, and it works, good for them.

natuxatu

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Apr 2006

Wisconsin

Rt/Mo

18 Aug 2006 at 18:55 - 51

I too wish it was pay to play to keep away a lot of the kiddies who once a fee hit and their parents kept bring it up when they want a new toy would either take the game more seriously and quit. Plus it would mean more money for Anet which could hopefully lead to more content. So yeah I honestly wish it was pay to play.

MSecorsky

Furnace Stoker

Join Date: Jun 2005

So Cal

The Sinister Vanguard

Me/

18 Aug 2006 at 18:58 - 52

Quote:

Originally Posted by natuxatu

I too wish it was pay to play to keep away a lot of the kiddies who once a fee hit and their parents kept bring it up when they want a new toy would either take the game more seriously and quit. Plus it would mean more money for Anet which could hopefully lead to more content. So yeah I honestly wish it was pay to play.

The reduction in player base would more than offset the added income via monthly fees.

Doomlord_Slayermann

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Jul 2005

Chicago IL

Dark Phoenix Risin [DPR]

W/P

18 Aug 2006 at 18:58 - 53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xenrath

Sure enough this thread descends into PvE vs PvP. You can argue all you like what it's "meant" to be, what it is is trying to cater to both. If it was meant to be PvP then why have they spent months upon months creating a PvE world, mobs etc. How long does it really take to develop a new skill? I'd hazard a guess probably not that long.

It would take as much time as it would to look at the different gameplay types for possible abuses, and ArenaNet must not have a foolproof method for this yet. Anyways, you can always tweak a skill after you see it in action. PvE is definitely more design-intensive if you really want to do a good job and not just chuck some hills and trees around and then throw monsters in at random (which is not unknown to happen in the less well-budgeted computer games).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metanoia

Dang, I wish I'd thought of declaring myself the "winner" and covering my ears first.

Your "points" as to the justification of underpowered skills are moot as there's no particular correlation between power and location, especially in GW:Factions. Again, I refer you to Izzy's own comments on 'useless skills' which took into account both PvE and PvP, which you assumed only applied to PvP. This leads me to believe that you're arguing without actually knowing of the source material - WoC #41 (iirc).

What would have been the point of me acknowledging random speculation based off of ignorance to the thoughts of an actual skill-balancer, which already discredit such frivolous claims?

In Factions the correlation is very weak (especially because of the changes made to the unlocking system), but it does exist. Prophecies, as I said before, is the part of the game that bears that resemblance most strongly, and I think you will find quite a number of underpowered skills there.

I never assumed anything as to PvE or PvP. Underpowered skills are simply irrelavant to PvP. In PvE, you get better ones and then forget about the underpowered ones.

And then... well, you just flame me without making any actual points. I do not listen to WoC and do not ever intend to, so if you want to show me just how "ignorant" I am, then FFS enlighten me by actually stating your points instead of making a fool of yourself by throwing out flames.

TiNkLeR

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: Jun 2006

Portugal

18 Aug 2006 at 19:06 - 54

GW without monthly fee? It would be ruined.

Loviatar

Underworld Spelunker

Join Date: Feb 2005

18 Aug 2006 at 19:08 - 55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaguya

While I might have ( :b ) exaggerated the price difference, there are people who have paid a lot more than the base price. .

when you admit you exagerate something it only shows you know you are wrong.

you have to go by what the most buyers are getting not the hardcore extreme.

2 chapters a year equals 100 dollars as slots are optional as are wow plushie action toys

cost of 1 year of GW is 100 dollars.

cost of wow to start is currently 40 dollars to buy the game plus 15 dollars a month.

40 +180 equals 220 dollars.

the second year for GW is also 100 dollars for a 2 year total of 200 dollars

the second year of wow is 180 dollars again for a 2 year total of 400 dollars.

twice as much is more than a slight exageration

Cyan The Archer

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Dec 2005

Denmark

R/

18 Aug 2006 at 19:11 - 56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skyy High

and you have an enormous player base, including many people who have never played a RPG before (read: Warcraft III players that got sucked into WoW).

This reminds me of Command & Conquer: Renegade, but it was just made FPS instead of a MMORPG.

_______

I wouldnt be able to pay the monthly fee for Guild Wars, because my parents hate paying online and im too lazy to go down and buy a card to play the next month.

gabrial heart

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Jan 2006

Las Vegas

Beautiful Peoples Club [LIPO]

Mo/Me

18 Aug 2006 at 19:37 - 57

WOW was successful when it was released, which was long before GW. I would say a rather large pool of players (even the ones that are still paying for the game) are inactive. Even so, GW reported 2 million players (not account creation) that even with a change in the way they tally users, it is still growing. WOW has seen a huge decrease in sales since it's bursting release, in which GW has broken many of WOW's previously held sales records.

I've played WOW limitedly and to me it's a screwy game, with far to many buttons and far to much open-world competition. I truly feel that gw's simple interface, gameplay, graphics and overall feel make it a far better gaming enviroment.

There's no absolute arguement here, the MAJORITY if not all of the GW player base WILL disappear if they introduce a monthly fee, which is what is being discussed i have no doubt and neither does a-net.

Sir Skullcrasher

Furnace Stoker

Join Date: Jun 2005

California

15 over 50 [Rare]

W/Mo

18 Aug 2006 at 19:44 - 58

I would pay to play Guild Wars!

lacasner

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Jun 2006

18 Aug 2006 at 19:48 - 59

Quote:

Originally Posted by gabrial

hearthere's no absolute arguement here, the MAJORITY if not all of the GW player base WILL disappear if they introduce a monthly fee, which is what is being discussed i have no doubt and neither does a-net.

This only proves that Guild Wars in itself isn't sufficient enough to hold its own ground even with a small monthly fee, well at least thats how you think. It seems like your saying "The only people who play Guild Wars are the WoW rejects who refuse to cough up a couple bucks to play WoW." I'm not saying that is a bad opinion, because there might be some truth to it, I really don't know the Guild Wars playerbase enough to say.

EPO Bot

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Aug 2006

Mo/N

18 Aug 2006 at 19:54 - 60

Well, despite thinking Wow is the better game, i still feel the pain of reading the Diablo2 forums when Blizzard introduced casting delays and element immunities in monsters. Never seen such a whiny bunch of morons in one place. Being a blizzard memeber must be a pain since they live in level 12 of developer hell...
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/05/01

Loviatar

Underworld Spelunker

Join Date: Feb 2005

18 Aug 2006 at 20:00 - 61

Quote:

Originally Posted by lacasner

This only proves that Guild Wars in itself isn't sufficient enough to hold its own ground even with a small monthly fee, well at least thats how you think. It seems like your saying "The only people who play Guild Wars are the WoW rejects who refuse to cough up a couple bucks to play WoW." I'm not saying that is a bad opinion, because there might be some truth to it, I really don't know the Guild Wars playerbase enough to say.

lets take this a bit further.

lets say GW adds 10 dollars to their pricing per month and the people scatter saying hell no i wont pay this much for what i am getting.

NOW TRY THIS

WOW does exactly the same thing and goes 10 dollars higher from 15 dollars a month to 25 dollars a month.

do you think 25 dollars a month might seriously dent the wow account numbers?

EPO Bot

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Aug 2006

Mo/N

18 Aug 2006 at 20:05 - 62

It will do some damage, but there will still be enough players to get extra profit from the price hike. Really,the addictiveness of WoW is another reason i play GW instead: It eats your soul.

blakk

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: May 2005

The Marble Clan [KING]

R/Mo

18 Aug 2006 at 20:08 - 63

well my original thought was this if anet decided to make guildwars pay to play from the begining, i wonder what they would have implemented. I wonder what they would have done. this is building off what we have seend in prophecies,and factions. personally i think they have done a stellar job so far.

Dave83

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Jul 2005

England

SeS

Me/Mo

18 Aug 2006 at 20:10 - 64

WoW - great game, better than Guild Wars imo. I played GW's, went to WoW. Came back to GW's and everything seemed so much more basic.

This does'nt meen Blizzard get my praises though. £9 a month for constant and massive lag spikes - no exaggeration! Every day over several months. This is on the Venture Co european server, a low pop realm. 'We are working on the problem' is their constant reply. Now for six months and from a change of better to worse this shows me they really dont give a crap about the people they are taking money off. Guild wars on the other hand, I can play on an American server - from the UK, lag free, for free. Though it's not as good a game I still love it and thats why I have alot more respect for Anet.

What Majoho said about being able to play WoW and be addicted to it, but not enjoy it is to me pretty much hitting the nail on the head. You cant enjoy a game when you're in the middle of an important fight then freeze for two minutes then all of a sudden you are dead and get BS'd out of a kill and die at the same time (then have to run tem minutes to find your corpse) and this happens randomly and often.

Metanoia

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Feb 2006

18 Aug 2006 at 20:22 - 65

Quote:

Originally Posted by blakk

well my original thought was this if anet decided to make guildwars pay to play from the begining, i wonder what they would have implemented. I wonder what they would have done. this is building off what we have seend in prophecies,and factions. personally i think they have done a stellar job so far.

Well, I don't think we'd recognise it if we saw it. A lot of the hype originally for Guildwars was "the MMORPG for MMORPG-haters". They took out a lot of the addictive elements, designed to keep people paying their subscriptions, that most MMORPGs have.

It would have been interesting if it turned out to be a generic MMORPG but retained the skill-based system over the level/item system of most games. It wouldn't be very practical or anything, but imagine if skills were as 'unique' as items are in such games.

Random note: iirc the alpha test for GW did actually have 'skill scrolls' that you could find/trade. I kind of miss that.

Kcp

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: Dec 2005

OBF

N/

18 Aug 2006 at 20:27 - 66

Quote:

Originally Posted by EPO Bot

Nonsense. If GW was pay to play, everyone, including myself would defect to WoW because Blizzard is the best game company in existence and no one can possibly argue that fact. I do think Anet isa great contender, but the only trumph card they have to fend of the briliance of blizzard is the no montly fees for a mmorpg, wich is a powerfull argument to pick it over WoW.

If brilliance equates to in-game item sellers, hacks, bots, and total negligence towards your customers then blizzard is godlike.

I'm sorry there's no way in hell I would pay to play factions every month other then the initial cost to purchase the key. Even if it was "pve" based....there's barely any pve in it. it's like the same 4 monster types per side throughout each territory. What pve they did give us was pretty weak in terms of difficulty, and totally watered down compared to prophecie's level of gameplay.

gabrial heart

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Jan 2006

Las Vegas

Beautiful Peoples Club [LIPO]

Mo/Me

18 Aug 2006 at 20:33 - 67

Quote:

Originally Posted by lacasner

This only proves that Guild Wars in itself isn't sufficient enough to hold its own ground even with a small monthly fee, well at least thats how you think. It seems like your saying "The only people who play Guild Wars are the WoW rejects who refuse to cough up a couple bucks to play WoW." I'm not saying that is a bad opinion, because there might be some truth to it, I really don't know the Guild Wars playerbase enough to say.

In a way yes, although i think rejects isn't the right word. A-net with GW has promised a continuing saga of games without monthly fees and to alter that notion at some point would put a halt on GW's future. Secondly, the economy in general just isn't able to support very many monthly fee based games. There is a growing number of people that simply cannot afford tacking on extra costs (even if it's only 10-15 monthly fee). Consumer and government national debt in the trillions just doesn't bode well and a HUGE majority of the population is deeply in debt.

Irregardless of those facts, I still find GW to have a superior gaming enviroment and a far better comradery among it's population then any of the other on-line games I've played. Would i play WOW for free? Given the game it's evovled into right now, no. But i'm sure that enviroment would be drasticaly different if it was a free to play game.

I think it's a prettty good sign that GW has surpassed it's goals for sales. I also notice that it ties right in with the overall economy structure among those with lower incomes being more inclined to and are among the majority in which support a game like GW. This isn't a bad thing concidering (even in the US) the majority earn poverty level to lower middle class money and are able to scrimp for entertainment.

gabrial heart

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Jan 2006

Las Vegas

Beautiful Peoples Club [LIPO]

Mo/Me

18 Aug 2006 at 20:45 - 68

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metanoia

Well, I don't think we'd recognise it if we saw it. A lot of the hype originally for Guildwars was "the MMORPG for MMORPG-haters". They took out a lot of the addictive elements, designed to keep people paying their subscriptions, that most MMORPGs have.

It would have been interesting if it turned out to be a generic MMORPG but retained the skill-based system over the level/item system of most games. It wouldn't be very practical or anything, but imagine if skills were as 'unique' as items are in such games.

Random note: iirc the alpha test for GW did actually have 'skill scrolls' that you could find/trade. I kind of miss that.

It also had an attribute point refund cap, which i don't miss. LOL

Elwynn Swiftwind

Banned

Join Date: Jul 2006

Beep Beep Im A Jeep

R/Me

18 Aug 2006 at 21:06 - 69

Have you any idea how many people play this cause it's free?

Metanoia

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Feb 2006

18 Aug 2006 at 21:20 - 70

Well, Koreans already P2P I believe.

Coincidentally... according to Team-iQ's ladder, they make up a huge 2.7% of the top 1000 guilds. Okay, that's only for guilds in the top 1000 but perhaps it's an insight into the proportion of players as a whole?

Note: Europe 54%, America 33.1%, Japan 9.2%, Taiwan 1%.

elLOCOmutha

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: May 2005

Ascalon City, Tyria

Free Agent

W/

18 Aug 2006 at 22:01 - 71

Honestly thats why GW owns all...

If it went to pay to play me and alot of others wouldnt keep playing imo.

But the OP was right if they release a new chapter every month lol its basicly the same i guess...but not everyone buys all the chapters. Some people still play GW prophecies and will never buy anything else.

DarthGreg

Ascalonian Squire

Join Date: Sep 2005

LLJK

W/

18 Aug 2006 at 22:22 - 72

So many of you are ignorant of the true face of WoW in drawing your comparisons. The game is - first and foremost - an unenjoyable gear grind. There are great things about the game, but once you get to 60 after a couple fun months, and experience all the content, all that's left is to repeat that content over and over for months and months. And if you want the best gear, you have to resign your evenings over to a soulless raiding guild that can field 40 players 5+ nights a week. PvP incentives? You have to chain yourself to your computer for 12+ hours a day for months to just be in contention to get the gear that compares to raid gear.

If somehow you manage to break yourself of the compulsion to get better and better gear, there's nothing left to do in the game. You certainly don't want to raid Ahn'Qiraj for the 20th time, or Blackwing Lair for the 50th time, or Molten Core for the 100th time. It's not challenging, interesting, or fun anymore, but there willl still be gear there for you to get, oh yes. And PvP? After winning 350 rounds of Arathi Basin for the exalted rewards, do you really want to go back there? If you go solo you might get lucky with a good PUG group, but you more than likely won't. If you go with your buds you will win every time, where's the fun in that?

I don't know what Guild Wars is like in the end-game, but WoW turns into a soulless grind that only sustains itself on that carrot-and-stick model. It took me about 250 hours played to get my Orc Warrior to level 60, and over the past year I've increased that total to 2,500 hours. My guild has 50 other people that have done the same or worse, and for it we're the #1 PvE-progressed US Horde guild. Whoopdee-doo, not something I can even tell my family without feeling retarded.

Kaguya

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Jan 2006

Moon

Mo/

18 Aug 2006 at 22:42 - 73

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarthGreg

So many of you are ignorant of the true face of WoW in drawing your comparisons. The game is - first and foremost - an unenjoyable gear grind.

This applies to pretty much all mainstream MMO's, grind for level, grind to get phats, grind some more, then notice that you've spent truckload of time into grinding.

--guess this is more or less offtopic but, what the heck, I already wrote it :b

I spent a lot of time in Anarchy Online, getting the max level of 220 required killing multiple thousand of the same monster, that looks more or less like a rock. Usually in the very same place. Think best team I had was some weekend, when I spent 15 hours killing the same monster, in the same place. That was a weeked tho, and I was more HC-player back then too.

After all that, you are the max level, you then need to perfect your stuff. That requires another hundred hours doing a raid with annoying droprates and 50 people competing over the single drop..

GW lacks those two grinds, but there still is farming your butt off if you like playing PvE only, so that's really not for me, or then doing PvP, but there is the same thing, how many hundred rounds of Fort Aspenwood and Alliance Battles you can do until wanting to gouge your eyes out? Luckily for me atleast, playing the game with different professions is a very different experience and the gameplay changes a lot to keep it interesting. Problem is, when you have completed the game on all professions, and played few hundred rounds of PvP...

Suppose Anet manages to slap a new expansion just on that moment tho, mwe.

Inde

Site Contributor

Join Date: Dec 2004

18 Aug 2006 at 23:09 - 74

And this is now being closed as it's, once again, deteriorated into a WoW vs. GW debate thread and going into a debate that has been raged many times before.