maddoctor.2738 Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 > @"vesica tempestas.1563" said: > The vast majority of players in GW2 is casual. Got something to back-up that claim about "vast majority"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torolan.5816 Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 > @maddoctor.2738 said: > > @"vesica tempestas.1563" said: > > The vast majority of players in GW2 is casual. > > Got something to back-up that claim about "vast majority"? It better would be this way for GW2 to stay healthy. Hardcore gamers know how to work the market of a given game instead of playing along with comapny ideas, have a long term plan and surely are not impulse buyers. Just take a look at Eve Online as Example, a game that is absolutely brilliant in many ways but a total fail in other aspects. There were for example 3 hardcore alliances(goons and friends, the russian coalition and the PL to a certain degree as equalizer) that basically ruled this game and made active hunts on casuals. That is all good and funny when it is in the contect of a burn Jita campaign, but ganking big mining pots in a cheap ship surely is not good for player retention. And when this was it it´s worst, numbers of EO continually sunk. it got so much that even CCP, a very sandbox oriented company, saw the need to put a few brakes on said alliances and thier abilites to gank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
battledrone.8315 Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 > @maddoctor.2738 said: > > @"vesica tempestas.1563" said: > > The vast majority of players in GW2 is casual. > > Got something to back-up that claim about "vast majority"? ummm this is a F2P game now.. even if you could consider a F2Per as a hardcore player..would it make sense , to cater to him over the paying customers? or, do you really think, that there are so few F2Pers left, that the paying players have majority now? and if you are right, then this game is in serious trouble...wildstar shows , how that turns out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddoctor.2738 Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 > @Torolan.5816 said: > It better would be this way for GW2 to stay healthy. Hardcore gamers know how to work the market of a given game instead of playing along with comapny ideas, have a long term plan and surely are not impulse buyers. Yet you don't have any kind of data to prove anything. I disagree with your idea that the game needs more casual players to stay healthy. Casual players have the tendency not to play a lot (which is one of the definitions of "casual player"). Imagine if the game had only casual players that play once per week, although it would have lots of players, the game would be empty and boring. Which is why any kind of comparison on the actual active population is pointless. A game with players that play rarely, although they make the active population look higher, do not make a game better. They need the other players to fill it and make it populated. Those who play multiple hours every day are more like hardcore-casuals (a mix) so on a different category. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddoctor.2738 Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 > @battledrone.8315 said: > ummm this is a F2P game now.. even if you could consider a F2Per as a hardcore player..would it make sense , to cater to him over the paying customers? > or, do you really think, that there are so few F2Pers left, that the paying players have majority now? > and if you are right, then this game is in serious trouble...wildstar shows , how that turns out Actually catering to free 2 play players would be a very good move. After all we know for a fact that the conversion of free players was slow, at least at around the time of Heart of Thorns release. Catering to them is very important, but I don't think the game caters to them much (which is why the conversion is slow). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torolan.5816 Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 You are right, I don´t have numbers. I also consider myself a hardcore-casual too by your definition. My thought about is this: Once upon a time, online games were subscription only. It was unthinkable that companies would have made games free to play, how to finance employees and servers when nobody pays for them? Anyone with half a brain understood this reasoning. Then began the RL separation of money and work, aka there was more actual money than actual economy. Old, mainly keynesian models began to not only crumble but were swept away by the latest and probably cruelest incarnation of friendly appearing manchester capitalism. As you can probably guess, I am a supporter of you only spend what you have economy ideas myself and a firm believer that a market does not regulate itself enough to be healthy. Sadly for me, I am in the minority of this way of thinking, so new business models conquered the market. One of it, much to my personal wonder, was the idea of f2p games. Huh, I thought to myself, how does that work? How can a bunch of airheads who are quicker in the red than a powerplant without water, drop in and out and still finance finance anything? The answer is simple: impulse buying. The number of people who are really willing to impulsively pay small money out of money indeed outweighs the conservative and focused people who actually do accounting with their available money and actively support games for the sake of the game. If that were not the case, subscriptions would still rule. I am even surer in this approach as f2p opened up new markets of casual gamers with cellphones, and this already goes on for years. My own mother is over 60 years old and as conservative and dismissal as you can be regarding computer games, ut even she is playing classical tetris on a lap top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRandomGuy.7246 Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 "Pof is a good expansion. It just has no replayability." If an mmo expansion has no replayability then it is not good. Not good at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayakaru.6583 Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 > @Nash.2681 said: > > @TheRandomGuy.7246 said: > > > @Nash.2681 said: > > > **Mounts?** I were against mounts from the very beginning and now after 1,5 months, I feel confirmed with my concerns. Yes, there's quite few complaint about them now, but why is that so? Probably because the way they were added they're a pure gimmick and don't hurt the game overall (since the game worked without them for 5 years and most of the content was designed without mounts being present, there was probably no other way to add them without kicking 5 years of content in the bin). Yet it seems that 90% of PoF revolves around mounts. That's 90% of a full price add-on revolving around a gimmick. > > > > All new maps were designed to make mounts feel useful. They are THAT useless. > That's the point. They have limited use in PoF areas and are a pure gimmick or convenience thing at best anywhere else. If they'd decided to split the PoF maps into 10-15 normal sized maps and not add mounts, nothing substantial had been lost, but at least the impression would be more like "even though the story is pretty short and only on par with a LS chapter at best, at least they added quite some new areas ". The same arguments work for gliders.. and pretty much any other method of mobility introduced post core game. Like the druids touch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vague Memory.2817 Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 I like the PoF Maps are much more fun than HoT because are in general flatter and easier to work out how to get from A to B, unlike HoT where it is difficult to work out how to get to certain places, events or even meet up with people. For PvP HoT had much better balanced elites specs compared to PoF and actually quite fun to play. Some of the PoF Elite specs are simply the imaginations of a 10 yr old that cause massive OP imbalance issues while others suck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shena Fu.5792 Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 More like disappointment than hate. Disappointingly shallow, unimpressive. Pof doesn't have deep impression, whether initial or lasting impression. That is, it doesn't do anything special that blows your mind or makes it unforgettable, nor invokes deep traumatic memories. it is superficially run of the mill map structure, superficial event structure, superficial atmosphere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slowpokeking.8720 Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 PoF's content is much better than HoT, much more casual friendly, some rewards could be buffed. The story was awful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayumi Spender.1082 Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 > @maddoctor.2738 said: > > @Torolan.5816 said: > > It better would be this way for GW2 to stay healthy. Hardcore gamers know how to work the market of a given game instead of playing along with comapny ideas, have a long term plan and surely are not impulse buyers. > > Yet you don't have any kind of data to prove anything. > I disagree with your idea that the game needs more casual players to stay healthy. Casual players have the tendency not to play a lot (which is one of the definitions of "casual player"). Imagine if the game had only casual players that play once per week, although it would have lots of players, the game would be empty and boring. > Which is why any kind of comparison on the actual active population is pointless. A game with players that play rarely, although they make the active population look higher, do not make a game better. They need the other players to fill it and make it populated. > > Those who play multiple hours every day are more like hardcore-casuals (a mix) so on a different category. I'm going to assume I'm a casually hardcore player as I'm not on the game collecting legendaries and ascended, usually trying to make class builds based on how my gameplay style is and not what someone tells me is the best (aka minion necro, pistol thief, longbow guardian, etc), but I play hours every day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haishao.6851 Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 > @Torolan.5816 said: > You are right, I don´t have numbers. I also consider myself a hardcore-casual too by your definition. > > My thought about is this: > Once upon a time, online games were subscription only. It was unthinkable that companies would have made games free to play, how to finance employees and servers when nobody pays for them? Anyone with half a brain understood this reasoning. Freemium MMO exist since the beginning of MMO in the late 90's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astra Lux.2846 Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 I think PoF is pretty good and a step in the right direction in a lot of ways. The only major complaints I've seen in-game are that the maps seem empty because everyone is so spread out and the fact that there are no huge metas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush is Right.9723 Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 The metas in HOT and the challenging content in HOT were awesome. Those last few areas like Lake Doric and others were too simple and boring. I did not buy POF yet as it totally sounds incomplete. I am not spending $30 for a mount as flying is awesome. I need world bosses, metas, and repeatable hard group content like in HOT even a new race would have been cool. To go backwards is not worth the money. GW1 was always more challenging in each new area including the crystal desert with those big dino things that three killed you. Big and beautiful is not worth anything. I will wait until they add more to POF or I just might never get it and look at the next expansion. The living story has gotten too hard anyway for single players and never was really all that interesting or rewarding. Mostly did it for mastery points only and never replayed it. Anet needs smaller better quality expansions that have small but distinct storylines and new challenges and masterys that encourage group play. At this point it seems Anet can't make up its mind. Is this a group MMO with group metas and groupplay like HOT or is it single player and areas that you play through once and done? I will continue to play HOT until they make up their mind. Right now, it seems Anet is tired and lacks direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mea.5491 Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 Most people who "hate" PoF are massively multiplayer fans who prefer group content over solo stuff. PoF definitely lacks good and rewarding group content, that's why some of us complain about PoF's single-player game feeling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vesica tempestas.1563 Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 > @Mea.5491 said: > Most people who "hate" PoF are massively multiplayer fans who prefer group content over solo stuff. PoF definitely lacks good and rewarding group content, that's why some of us complain about PoF's single-player game feeling. Unfortunately there was so much noise created by hot 'haters' that Anet listended and we got POF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mea.5491 Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 > @"vesica tempestas.1563" said: > > @Mea.5491 said: > > Most people who "hate" PoF are massively multiplayer fans who prefer group content over solo stuff. PoF definitely lacks good and rewarding group content, that's why some of us complain about PoF's single-player game feeling. > > Unfortunately there was so much noise created by hot 'haters' that Anet listended and we got POF. Exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torolan.5816 Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 > @Haishao.6851 said: > > > @Torolan.5816 said: > > You are right, I don´t have numbers. I also consider myself a hardcore-casual too by your definition. > > > > My thought about is this: > > Once upon a time, online games were subscription only. It was unthinkable that companies would have made games free to play, how to finance employees and servers when nobody pays for them? Anyone with half a brain understood this reasoning. > > Freemium MMO exist since the beginning of MMO in the late 90's > I should have indeed added western hemisphere. I started to play in the really early 2000s and the only f2p games I knew were from the asian markets, which I took as serious as the yellow danger gloom talks of workers here. Was thinking to eurocentric.^^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashen.2907 Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 > @"vesica tempestas.1563" said: > fortunately there was so much noise created by hot 'haters' that Anet listended and we got POF. Fixed. I kid. To each their own. I am sorry that PoF failed to satisfy some as much as HoT failed for me. I am aware of PoF's shortcomings, even though I enjoy it overall, and hope that LS4 addresses some of your, and others', concerns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vesica tempestas.1563 Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 > @Ashen.2907 said: > > @"vesica tempestas.1563" said: > > > fortunately there was so much noise created by hot 'haters' that Anet listended and we got POF. > > Fixed. > > I kid. To each their own. I am sorry that PoF failed to satisfy some as much as HoT failed for me. I am aware of PoF's shortcomings, even though I enjoy it overall, and hope that LS4 addresses some of your, and others', concerns. Each to they own is a good approach to gaming, for me I like HOT and POF and vanilla maps (a preference for HOT). In the last 10 years we have seen the increase in the I Hate X and demand Y and never make X again complaints by players who fail to realise that mmorpgs are about offering choice, and GW2 in particular ADDS to that choice with each content expansion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashen.2907 Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 > @"vesica tempestas.1563" said: > > @Ashen.2907 said: > > > @"vesica tempestas.1563" said: > > > > > fortunately there was so much noise created by hot 'haters' that Anet listended and we got POF. > > > > Fixed. > > > > I kid. To each their own. I am sorry that PoF failed to satisfy some as much as HoT failed for me. I am aware of PoF's shortcomings, even though I enjoy it overall, and hope that LS4 addresses some of your, and others', concerns. > > Each to they own is a good approach to gaming, for me I like HOT and POF and vanilla maps (a preference for HOT). In the last 10 years we have seen the increase in the I Hate X and demand Y and never make X again complaints by players who fail to realise that mmorpgs are about offering choice, and GW2 in particular ADDS to that choice with each content expansion. Well said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddoctor.2738 Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 > @"vesica tempestas.1563" said: > Unfortunately there was so much noise created by hot 'haters' that Anet listended and we got POF. And now they will listen to the PoF hate and give something new entirely. We'll see what that is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supz.9836 Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 Personally I like PoF a lot more than HoT, HoT was a lot more inaccessible for the casual player, I took a long break from gw2 and PoF bought me back and ive spent a lot more now on gems too (i.e I feel like I will continue to play for a while) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haishao.6851 Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 > @Torolan.5816 said: > > @Haishao.6851 said: > > > > > @Torolan.5816 said: > > > You are right, I don´t have numbers. I also consider myself a hardcore-casual too by your definition. > > > > > > My thought about is this: > > > Once upon a time, online games were subscription only. It was unthinkable that companies would have made games free to play, how to finance employees and servers when nobody pays for them? Anyone with half a brain understood this reasoning. > > > > Freemium MMO exist since the beginning of MMO in the late 90's > > > > I should have indeed added western hemisphere. I started to play in the really early 2000s and the only f2p games I knew were from the asian markets, which I took as serious as the yellow danger gloom talks of workers here. Was thinking to eurocentric.^^ For western games there was Tibia in 1997 that was freemium, and Planeshift and Runescape in 2000/2001. Then Entropia and EVE which I think had similar business model in 2003. There wasn't that many, but there was never that many western MMO anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now