Replayability issues

Currently, replayability in GW is very low imo... you always start the same, and you go through the same exact missions and do the same exact quests and complete the same exact goals for each character. Everytime you take a new character through a campaign, you're basically put on rails, where you have to do a series of sequential tasks in order to progess further.

It's not so bad when you're playing a new profession for the first time, but when you're using ones you're used to, and doing the same mission again for the fourth time... it just becomes tedius and boring.

Aside from that, it also encourages solo-playing. Once you know exactly what to do, you'd rather just grab henches/heroes and get it over with. Think back to the first time you did a mission and you were completely clueless, and everything was new and a surprise... it's much more exciting and interesting that way, but unfourtunately the way this game is designed, that soon dissapears.

With Nightfall and factions we saw an improvement - you could choose two different paths. This was a step foward, but I was expecting Anet to expand upon the idea of choosing more than two paths in Nightfall, but alas we were still only given two choices. Yes, this improves replayability, but it's still a series of sequential quests and still a ride on rails.

I think for the next chapter, they should really focus on giving us many different paths through the game. Different starting areas, different "main" objectives through the story line (for example, the overall objective in nightfall is to defeat Abbadon, everything you do is a step towards that objective, there are other choices though - we could choose to side with abbadon, we could choose to simply flee and hide , each choice can lead us in a new direction and create a much more dynamic and devolped story).

Each path would open up new areas and new expereinces, and ultimately lead you to a different end than others.

That's what I'd like to see from C4, and would really make me want to buy it.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

I'd like to present a scenario which would more clearly define what I'm suggesting here, I am NOT suggesting this as a storyline, just something to show how the story could be so much more than the one track we're all on now.

Scenario:
You live in a land called Kansas in the south.

War has broken out between the East coast and West Coast, and is threatening the stability of the entire region. The evil lizard people from the north have taken advantage of the situation, and have managed to break past the weakended defenses of the northern strongholds, and are pushing into your homeland.

You must take action, you can:

-Fight for the West coast and clense the land of the rebellious east
-Fight for the east coast and crush the oppressive west
-Remain in your homeland and prepare to defend against the inpedning onslaught
-Launch a counter attack and lead a crusade deep into the north and strike the lizard people at the very heart of their society

It presents a much more interesting and dynamic experience, and you get the feeling of playing four different games each time you play through a different path. Don't comment on this "scenario", because it is not a part of my actual suggestion, just a tool to illustrate what I am saying.

As long as you can go back and make all the other choices once you finish the game to be able to complete all, I won't say no to this.

Personally, I don't think it's a bad idea. I think that as long as the forced linearity (the obstacles that prohibit a player to go different places) isn't in place, anything goes. Even without the idea that you have just shared, I felt that Prophecies had more replayability due to the freedom of going with/without missions and profession-specific quests as compared to the later chapters.

More paths means less people on each path.

I don't think it was designed to have replayability. Afterall, why should it? A game is a game, a book is a book. I don't go around reading the same book again expecting a different outcome, watching the same movie and expecting a different plot twist. It's simply a game to be played, and once it's beaten, there isn't much more, except GW's true intention, PVP. I don't know why so many fool themselves into having multiple PVE characters and somehow expecting to play a completely different game. Sure, playing a monk compared to playing a warrior will be slightly different, but get real, Nightfall is one game. If you want to have different game experiences then GO PLAY ANOTHER GAME! It's not like you're Anet's slave. Or are you?

You fail at flame baiting.

Comparing a game to a book is a stupid analogy. Games allow a whole different level of immersion, and a completely different experience. In a book, all you can do is turn the page, in a game you actually have the ability to make choices and shape the story for yourself, if the designers allow for it.

Also, you have no right to tell people how to play this game. PvP is boring and pretty unrewarding to me, so I don't bother with it. Futher, this thread is clearly about the PvE aspect of the game, so you even trying to force a PvP vs PvE war into here should mark your post subject to deletion.

Oh, and FYI there are books that allow different endings and alternate paths. But judging from your post, you don't read many books, so I don't expect you to know that...

- Oh, and is someone a little upset his thread got closed?

There's a lot more to Guild Wars than primary quests and missions. As well as the 200+ side-quests in NF alone (and I bet you haven't done all of those with a single character), there are skills to cap, places to explore, weapons/items to drop and craft and so on. Let alone Heroes to level-up. There are titles to gain and armours to craft. Buying some Vabbian or Obsidian armour will keep you going for some time. And I haven't even mentioned PvE yet.

Sure, none of the above ideas directly alter the primary story arc, but what I'm saying is that you don't have to complete the quests with each of your characters. There's little point imho. There's plenty of different things to do in Guild Wars, why not do something you enjoy doing?

Nice, perhaps, but not feasable without loosing too much content. - Bringing the replayablilty value down rather than up.

Each path would have to become lesser, shorter, less developed. It's a simple equation of work that goes into the game and how much people are willing to pay for that work.

Each mission, quest, and storyline fork in the game represent a certain amount of development resources.

I'd rather see the current situation of one well worked out storyline, represented by around 20-25 missions and 200 or so primary and side quests along that path to get from the beginning to the end of the story. (I'll admit, I've never counted how many quests there really are so the number 200 is a wild guess.)

Than what you propose, where by necessity if there were say four different paths...
Each path = 5-6 missions and perhaps 50 side and primary quests. The story itself watered out to fit into these 5-6 missions and quests.

Where in the current model it takes (at a guess) 40 hours of game play to get from start to finish. You'd have four 10 hour games bundled together - each 10 hour game representing one path.

Doesn't really spell out greater replayablity to me.

*Kowtows to A-Net*
Yes I am A-Net's slave.

Well, yes if they only have 6 months to devolpe it, but so far the release date for C4 is looking to be around August 07, which gives them over a year (it's already been in developement) to work on C4... they have a chance to do much much more this time around.

GW's main focus isn't roleplaying, no reason to try to work in that direction, Oblivion will win the match anyway.

No, GW is heavily emphasizing linearity.

Just like Diablo and D2 used completely linear model (several mandatory quests, and a selection of sidequests) where all quests were always identical, GW follows the same aproach.

GW is not, and tries to move completely away, freeform aproach to world.

Books are about story and character development. There were some gimmick books for children, but the fad didn't last long, since games took that over and can provide a much better experience.

The reason for strict linearity is in GWs design of character development. With all skills available all missions are simply too trivial. So the only apeal lies in working with limited skillsets. This is the main reason, why existing characters found Nightfall storyline too easy.

GW simply doesn't try to be a world game, but a linear storyline. Replayability comes from individuals, who work towards titles, or choose to develop several characters.

This is clearly indicated by the notorious cookie-cutter builds. All missions and some quests revolve only around *the* build and *the* strategy. PvE players simply detest any kind of variation or alternate aproaches, general request is to make missions in such a way that there's a common denominator solution for all.

Any attempt to provide even slightly diverse different content results in very negative feedback and produces very vocal response (see THK, SF, Shiro, Gyala hatchery, FoW, UW, DoA). Strategies aren't usually as welcome as providing a foolproof build. Competence of PvE players is also often questioned (frequently with a good reason).

So GW is stuck with providing the same old mould of missions in order to provide an enjoyable experience. Attempts to add truly repeatable missions, or missions that deviate from brute force aproach simply aren't popular.

While it wouldn't be impossible to provide different structure to missions revolving around challenges, it seems almost certain they'd be considered annoying unless they boiled down to cookie cutter build aproach. Anything else is simply despised.

All of the diversity and different aproaches are a noble idea. But what prevents them from realization isn't technical obstacles, but the playerbase itself, which has by now grown to expect this model, and changing it wouldn't be welcomed.

The repeatability of missions/quests without any randomness of choice has been historically proven to be a requirement for broad market audiences (strategy guides are a good example of that). Lame, but the sales figures support it.

GWs only replayability comes from titles, multiple characters and pvp.

^^ Irony.

But if you have a problem with lack of longevity, play pvp.

You fail at using the word "irony". You also fail at reading what you quoted...

I like how Hand of Ruin flames users instead of actually talking about the subject at hand. While typing this up I glanced up to his name and see Krytan Explorer and Profession: W/Mo and nearly fell out of my seat with laughter.

Rest of my stuff is in bold if you're thick headed.

I hope that answers/addresses any and all concerns you might have had. If not, please feel free to write your messages on a 2x5 in. piece of notebook paper in blue ink, then put it in your pocket and do a summersault off the roof of a tall building. If you're alive, then you're too thick-headed for your concern to bother me. If you're not, then good luck contacting me afterwards.