How happy are you with Guild Wars 2 right now?

[Grim West.3194]

Except for WvW the game is very good. But I came to GW2 for the WvW. As good as GW2's PvE is, I find all PvE ultimately boring.

[Sol.6213]

Super unhappy with the game right now.

 

Mounts are the big focus for PoF but the camera bob and zoom on mounting and dismounting makes me completely ill. You have to unmount to do every damn thing so either don't mount or don't do anything.

 

Boon corruption and boon strip are too plentiful making conditions almost unavoidable. No counter play means no fun. As a side note, Stability corrupts to Fear, better have a stun break ready or don't do anything and Resistance corrupts to Chill so good luck preventing conditions while your skills gain 66% cool down.

 

Power relies on Precision and Ferocity and Condi only relies on itself (or if you must, it does get more effective with duration) creating a stat imbalance that apparently is difficult to design for.

 

Condition damage stacks far too quickly making it almost as much of a burst as full power builds. They should build damage over time and they are far from that.

 

More unblockable things means less counter play, which again, is no fun.

 

Ranged damage, in general, is over tuned and could diminish with distance, making melee builds more effective, more common, and more fun.

 

The visual clutter is absolutely and completely out of control and unnecessary and needs to be toned down about 90%. It's super ridiculous and guess what.. no fun.

 

Pets need to adopt a percentage of the stats of the character. They can still be unique based on their abilities. The current method allows too much min maxing of high stats creating very defensive characters with very offensive pets (and really the reverse for PvE).

 

Damage is possibly just too high in general. If you don't run a "save my butt" trait (saves you at 25% health somehow) you can easily die before you can (reasonably) respond. On the other hand, bunker builds that can't be killed are not fun either. The time to kill balance, of all professions, is really messed up.

 

Edit: Build diversity is terrible. Old trait system was more diverse. The "new" trait system was probably(?) an attempt at simplifying trait combos to promote balance but all it has done is create very specific meta builds which are... no fun.

[Ayumi Spender.1082]

I think I'm in the "somewhat unhappy" camp the last few days and I'm not really sure why.

No, it's not those stupid mount skins as if anything there was only one I slightly wanted but have no real care for getting and considered the other 29 (or 30 if you count the Mecha Ram) as ugly.

 

Really like PoF, but I'm kind of at that point of, "I'm having trouble finding things to do to keep me active unless friends are on."

And for those that know me (you don't so that doesn't help), that's a bad sign. The last 17 years that I've been playing online games, at least 80% of that time I usually solo it out when I can (excluding games that forced me to have to find players to play with... like FFXI after level 10) so it shouldn't be an issue here.

Even made a new character to try out. Gave Engineer about 2X chances in the past to impress me into playing it and thought maybe now I can give it another go to peak my interest. Did one map and just went "eh..".

 

Not sure why I'm in this kind of mood either though.

Oh and the Living Story won't really help me pull back in as I still haven't gotten around to the other stories as of yet due to procrastinating on that a lot.

[Reaper Alim.4176]

> @Ara.4569 said:

> I want "balance" team (and the higher ups that allowed designers to balance the game) fired. They should be sued. That's how happy I am.

> Worst balance I have ever seen in a game, and I played a lot of Korean P2W.

>

> I'm pretty sure ANet is dead once GW2 is over. No future. The few talented people that remains should leave.

 

I highly doubt ANet will be dead after GW2 dies. From what I hear ANet has been successfully expanding into the mobile industry. But GW2 more than likely will be, the last MMORPG that ANet makes.

[Ayumi Spender.1082]

> @"Reaper Alim.4176" said:

> > @Ara.4569 said:

> > I want "balance" team (and the higher ups that allowed designers to balance the game) fired. They should be sued. That's how happy I am.

> > Worst balance I have ever seen in a game, and I played a lot of Korean P2W.

> >

> > I'm pretty sure ANet is dead once GW2 is over. No future. The few talented people that remains should leave.

>

> I highly doubt ANet will be dead after GW2 dies. From what I hear ANet has been successfully expanding into the mobile industry. But GW2 more than likely will be, the last MMORPG that ANet makes.

 

That... sounds like they would be dead.

Mobile industry?

[TexZero.7910]

> @"Ayumi Spender.1082" said:

> > @"Reaper Alim.4176" said:

> > > @Ara.4569 said:

> > > I want "balance" team (and the higher ups that allowed designers to balance the game) fired. They should be sued. That's how happy I am.

> > > Worst balance I have ever seen in a game, and I played a lot of Korean P2W.

> > >

> > > I'm pretty sure ANet is dead once GW2 is over. No future. The few talented people that remains should leave.

> >

> > I highly doubt ANet will be dead after GW2 dies. From what I hear ANet has been successfully expanding into the mobile industry. But GW2 more than likely will be, the last MMORPG that ANet makes.

>

> That... sounds like they would be dead.

> Mobile industry?

 

Yes mobile industry as in mobile games which NCSoft walked away with nearly 493 million dollars this quarter from.

But remember the games industry is dying and could never make a profit.

[lokh.2695]

I have a small wishlist of things I'd like to have in a different way or have ANet put some work in, but I'm sure everyone has that. I'm happy with the game's mechanics, I love fractals and PvP but I'm also in a spot where there's not much left to do for me(lots of AP, Legendaries, Skins, Titles and general Bling) so things get repetitive every now and then.

I'd mostly like, if they reworked some of the core stuff. Skins, for example let's take CoF armor. Back in the days, we were told that dyeble particle effects would be hard to do with the engine in place. This problem has been solved as many gemshop skins or skins in-game show. So why not redo the skills to have a dyeable slot for the flames. They could rework Dungeons, as has been requested many times. Stuff like that.

 

Have a nice day :)

[Ayumi Spender.1082]

> @TexZero.7910 said:

> > @"Ayumi Spender.1082" said:

> > > @"Reaper Alim.4176" said:

> > > > @Ara.4569 said:

> > > > I want "balance" team (and the higher ups that allowed designers to balance the game) fired. They should be sued. That's how happy I am.

> > > > Worst balance I have ever seen in a game, and I played a lot of Korean P2W.

> > > >

> > > > I'm pretty sure ANet is dead once GW2 is over. No future. The few talented people that remains should leave.

> > >

> > > I highly doubt ANet will be dead after GW2 dies. From what I hear ANet has been successfully expanding into the mobile industry. But GW2 more than likely will be, the last MMORPG that ANet makes.

> >

> > That... sounds like they would be dead.

> > Mobile industry?

>

> Yes mobile industry as in mobile games which NCSoft walked away with nearly 493 million dollars this quarter from.

> But remember the games industry is dying and could never make a profit.

 

I mean, that's fine and all. Just mean less business for me myself to do with them.

More power to them. I would too go where the money is. I'm just no where a mobile person.

[Athrenn.9468]

Aside from my personal opinions about the quality of storytelling from Season 3 to Path of Fire...

 

>! (just as a 'brief' note (okay, maybe not brief at all), my problem with the last two story arcs is that the villain felt one dimensional, the pacing was unfocused and the big identity reveal was not foreshadowed properly. Writers need to play fair with their audience and their plot twists are poorly executed. That, and they tried to pack too many villains into six episodes, thus resulting in the anticlimactic resolution of the White Mantle, Jormag and Primordus plot threads in a way that was unsatisfactory. The writers need to just focus on one good antagonist and flesh out the PC's conflict with them rather than telling a bunch of separate and unrelated stories at the same time and rushing through all of them.)

 

...my main problem with Guild Wars 2 right now is that I feel kept in the dark about what I'm getting for the money I already paid. Normally a company who's selling you a product will tell you, "For $30, you get 11 new maps, 9 story episodes, 9 elite specializations, 4 raid wings, 1 new PvP game types, Etc. Etc." To me, that is what an honest business practice looks like. You tell me what you're offering and I'll tell you whether I want to buy it. That is not what I've been seeing post-Heart of Thorns.

 

How many maps do I get for $30? Sure, there's the 5 base maps of the expansion, but how many Living World episodes do I get for my money's worth? I don't count LW as a free add-on that the 'generous' developers are giving me, they count as part of the expansion and I want to know how many episodes I'm getting. When Wrath of the Lich King was in presales, Blizzard told everyone up front what we were getting: 8 new zones, level increase, deathknight class, 1 new PvP game types, and a specific amount of raid wings and dungeons. That is the kind of honest dealing I expect from the industry.

 

How many new raid wings am I getting and when will they be ready for release? There is no guarantee how much content we'll be getting or even when, just that it will come out when they say it's ready. When WotLK was released, most raids we're there and ready to go immediately. Again, that is what the industry standard should be in my opinion.

 

I think it's my right as a customer to know how much content I'm getting and when I'll be getting it if they're already asking me to reach for my wallet. That's how honest business should be conducted, not this 'surprise-you-later' model where I'm not even told how many episodes of LW I'm getting until the penultimate episode goes live, thus telling me that there's only one more episode to go.

 

Right now, I am very unimpressed by ArenaNet's business model and the recent mount scandal only made it worse. I want the developers to tell me upfront what they're selling, for how much and I'll be the judge of whether it's worth my time and money to buy it. That's what an honest deal looks like in my opinion and what they should be striving for. I don't want this mount adoption nonsense where I'm not allowed to choose the one skin I want and instead have to gamble away my gems just for a chance at getting it. To me, that is where I draw the line. Customers have a right to demand transparency. ArenaNet should be able to tell us exactly what we're getting for the money we're putting down the moment we come up to the checkout and ask to see their products.

 

So to wrap it all up, here is what I am asking from ArenaNet in point form:

 

* Tell your playerbase upfront how many Living World episodes/maps they can expect to come with their purchase of the expansion. You're not just doing us a 'kind service', you're being transparent with us about what we're getting for the money that you're asking from us. Five maps worth of content is not a generous sum compared to other games; in Wrath of the Lich King, there were eight zones worth of content and quests including new dungeons, raids, and 1 new PvP game type. This is what I expect as the industry standard for transparency.

* If you can't deliver new raids, dungeons, or PvP game types with the expansion's release, tell us when we can expect to have them and what the content will be like. If other developers can bundle their new content together for the expansion's release then you should be able to either meet or beat their standard.

* Do better with communication overall. If you're going to promise us new raids with the expansion, tell us something about those new raids so that we're not throwing money blindly at a product that we can't even see. Transparent business practices reassure your customers that you have nothing to hide from them.

* If you can manage all of the above, please take some time to see my above point about where your story is failing. It's not the most important part of the product you're selling, but it's important enough to me that I've been disappointed by the quality of villain characterization, pacing and foreshadowing consistently.

[Arngrim.9274]

I haven't logged in for over a month. I played the expansion, finished the story, then just couldn't find any motivation to do anything else. I think my time in Tyria is over.

[Ellisande.5218]

> @Erasculio.2914 said:

> > @Vayne.8563 said:

> > No they didn't drop the ball twice. They did what they were doing to keep the doors open. You think box sales alone are going to run this game. If you give away stuff, people will buy less of it. And unlike the one glider skin we get by default which was total crap, the five mount skins we get were really good out of the box. Sometimes I think people are living in a bubble and don't see what's going on with other MMOs

>

> I disagree.

>

> I think that, the more we go in the direction of "games as services" as opposed to "games as a single product bought by players", the more developers rely on the good will of the players to be successful. Players are not going to use a service from a company they do not trust in.

>

> Now, the Gem Store objectively makes the game worse for the players. It's a way for resources that could have been made available in game for free to be monetized. There's a tacit agreemente between the players and ArenaNet, in that the players are willing to tolerate the Gem Store because it helps to fund the game... But that's up to a point.

>

> The weapon skins, for example - a lot of weapon skins are made available through the Gem Store. But, a lot of weapon skins are also available in game, and players can use gold (although a significant sum) to buy exactly the skin they want from the Trading Post.

>

> Then we got the gliders. The basic glider we get by playing the game looks like a kitchen towel, and can barely be dyed. Almost all other gliders are only available through the Gem Store, and players can't buy them from the Trading Post, only through gems or gem conversion. This was a step further in the direction of "let's make the game worse for players so ArenaNet will profit".

>

> Then, we got the mounts. The basic mounts we got by playing the game cannot be dyed, and all other mounts are available either through the Gem Store at a very high price (the Forged Jackal) or through a random loot box system. They also cannot be traded in the Trading Post. This was one more further step in the direction of "let's make the game worse for players so ArenaNet will profit".

>

> If ArenaNet keeps walking too far in that direction, they will lose their players' goodwill. Under the "games as service" mentalty, that's a death sentence - a game in which players don't trust is not a game they're going to pay, or even continue playing.

>

> How much farther can ArenaNet push until a significant number of players push back? I don't know. You, Vayne, also doesn't know. The worst thing is, ArenaNet themselves don't know. Right now their strategy appears to be to keep pushing until there's a disaster - like the idea of trying to see how much weight a bridge can hold by placing so many trucks on top of it that it breaks.

>

> But what is undeniable is that they are moving in that direction - adding less to the game so they can add more, in a less player friendly way, to the gem store. It's not a surprise that players are complaining. It will be a surprise if ArenaNet continues to go in that direction without stopping before they fall into a big hole.

 

I only wish I could write in such a manner instead of writing in my super angry aggressive style.

[Ellisande.5218]

> @Kyon.9735 said:

> Considering that only PvE is in a decent place out of the 3 game modes that I play (PvP, WvW, PvE), I'm mostly unhappy then. But hey, Anet generates most money from PvE so they probably see no problem.

 

Untrue. PvE is in a poor place considering the lack of rewards for completing events or heart quests or doing anything that is fun.

 

1 silver 55 copper reward? It cost me 4 silver just to port!!!!!!!!!!!

[otto.5684]

If I answered this question before PoF release I would have rated it higher, but PoF is mediocre. The maps suck, the story was not good. The class balance adjustments were terrible.

 

Though there are many great things outside PoF maps, so we are kinda of in the middle of the road now. LS4 will determine how we progress from here and class balance...

[Ohoni.6057]

> @TexZero.7910 said:

> Yes mobile industry as in mobile games which NCSoft walked away with nearly 493 million dollars this quarter from.

> But remember the games industry is dying and could never make a profit.

 

If the entire industry shifts to mobile though, that would not exactly still be "living."

 

> @Ellisande.5218 said:

>1 silver 55 copper reward? It cost me 4 silver just to port!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Where are you porting from that costs more than 2 silver? An entirely different region?

[Kalibri.5861]

I'm furious to the point of no longer playing - just following the forums in the hope that some additional communication regarding an update to adoptions comes along. I still want to play because I love the game, but I haven't logged in since a day or two after the mount skin system was implemented.

 

Overall I love GW2, but I don't accept this and I think the only thing that will convince ArenaNet that I'm serious is my absence from their player active player count.

[Ben K.6238]

> @Ohoni.6057 said:

> > @"Reaper Alim.4176" said:

> > As a RvR and PvP oriented player. I am so happy with ANet. That %97 of my MMO time goes to ESO.

> >

> > GW2 is just so awesome. I mean what more can you ask for? Highly unbalanced links. Players who blatantly match manipulate and then brag about doing so. PvP matches that consist of highly unbalanced teams, to the point that result of the match is pretty much clear at the 0:00 mark. Highly spam based combat. Monetized WvW server imbalance.

> >

> > GW2 best MMORPG ever 10/10 Will more than likely never recommend it, to any of my RvR or PvP gaming buddies. Well done ANet you guys are awesome.

>

> Yeah, it's really not a PvP game, and the less resources they throw after the PvP aspects, the better.

 

Ironically, Guild Wars started as a PvP-based online RPG, and most of its combat mechanics and gear system design choices reflect this.

 

It's unfortunate that the PvP element has now devolved into dead weight. But when the PvP game mode isn't exciting to play or watch, and WvW offers little to no sense of player agency (little power to effect changes, and no meaningful result if you do) - it was never going to end well regardless of the balancing issues.

[Carlin Sanders.3587]

I'm still fairly happy with the game, since it still does a lot of things better than standard MMO's and even more than other F2P games.

 

Yeah they made a mistake in regards to how they handled the mount adoption license, especially the timing, but i'm willing to give Anet the benefit of the doubt. They're a bunch of smart dudes and they have both a boss and a bunch of investors on their backs expecting them to make money and not art. most of all they're human.

 

I know what real money grubbing looks like and i'm fairly certain most people here do too, especially in regards to much lower quality games that are also F2P. A lot of this is not just in regards to having choice stripped away from a prized cosmetic but also the possibility of a precedent that arenanet may continue to do - loot box-esque style gambling gem store items. I think this is what people are afraid of more.

 

but as I said, they're human beings like you and me and they're pretty smart humans too. i'll give them a pass for this since they know they made a mistake. it is if they do the same mistake again that will earn my ire.

 

plus a lot of forum goers here are often more jaded than the luxon sea 250 years ago, so I take a lot of the anger and crying here with a single grain of salt - which was extracted from said tears.

[TEKnowledgy.1760]

No better or worse really you don't have that option i still view bout same as i did the 1st day i started 5 years ago lol. im content I love and hate this game equally.

[Erasculio.2914]

Right now we have more or less 480 votes. Based on the latest big polls we have had (the one about the [mount system](https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/14567/poll-mount-skins-distribution-a-serious-poll/p1) and the one about ArenaNet's [reply to the mount feedback](https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/15679/were-you-satisfied-with-arenanets-answer-about-the-mount-adoption-licenses/p1)), it looks like voting results tend to remain stable after we have more than a few hundred votes.

 

The current results are:

 

* I'm very happy with GW2 right now: **18%**

* I'm mostly happy, a few things could be better: **29%**

* I'm more or less happy. Things could be better, but they could be worse too: **24%**

* I'm mostly unhappy, a lot of things could be better: **16%**

* I'm very unhappy with GW2 right now: **10%**

* I have clicked on this poll but I don't want to vote for any of the above: **1%**

 

Now, I think it's interesting that the category with most voters is those of players who are happy with GW2 - 47% - as opposed to those who are not happy - 26% - and those who are on the fence - 24%. Of course this doesn't represent the entire GW2 community, but using it as a sample for the forum community...

 

...I think the idea that most people who come to this forum are those who don't like the game, while those who do like it are playing instead, is wrong.

 

I can think of a number of reasons to justify that:

 

* It may be true that more people come to the forum to complain than to compliment the game. However, I strongly disagree with the notion that complaining about GW2 means the player doesn't like the game. While I'm sure we have the eventual hater who's complaining just out of spite, a significant number of those complaining probably are players who like the game, care about it and want it to improve. Denying all complaints and saying the game is perfect as it is is arguably as damaging as the haters who complain because they want to see the world burn.

 

* I don't know about everyone else, but I usually use the forum when I'm doing something else on the internet and thus wouldn't be able to be playing the game. I think the idea that people who like the game don't use the forum because they would be playing instead is somewhat simplistic, in that it ignores a lot of the differences between reading a webpage and playing a game.

 

* I wouldn't be surprised if people who actually like the game enjoy talking about it, too. The forum isn't just a "feedback box" for complaints and compliments directed at ArenaNet - it's also a place for players to discuss new ideas, share builds, help others and so on. Wouldn't that kind of thing be attractive to those who actually enjoy GW2?

 

* Doesn't those who don't like the game just leave? Again, I know we eventually have haters who stick around purely out of spite. But wouldn't that be just the minority of the players who have left the game? Among those of you who are reading right now, how many of you have just left a game you didn't like and forgot about it, instead of remaining active at that game's community?

 

So I think most people here are happy. Which, I guess we can agree, is a good thing for everyone involved :)

[Carighan.6758]

I'm mostly unhappy, though not for the gem store reasons. It is a comparatively minor point. My key elements of complaint are:

 

* For a 5y old game, it feels like one freshly released. Tons and tons of open wounds and unfinished elements. Rarely does the team go back to re-do an existent element of the game world or game design, and considering how no zone becomes outdated here, that is all the more baffling.

* Balance patches happen rarely and more importantly are small in scope. Leading my right on to one of my biggest complaints:

* The state of class **design** (nevermind balance, which could only start being worked on afterwards) was amazing at launch. 5 years later it is barely better. I could say in some cases the elite specs have in fact made it worse, boxing in an already flawed core class design. What happened? Where are the extensive transformative and reforming reworks classes should have gotten at least once in those 5 years? For a game this old, it is uncommon for classes to still feel like their launch designs at all, yet many elements feel flat out unchanged here. It's all very stale on top of just not being refined at all.

* Elite specs, heralded as transformative modifications which upend the class design, only very very rarely do so. Granted, as said before this might as well be an issue with there being no design to turn on its head, but really I only see specs such as Druid, Scourge or Weaver even contesting in this area. Most elite specs are just upgraded versions of their base class with something new bolted on.

* The game design changed from working in existing zones to constantly shoving new zones in. This is fun in some regards, but already many many areas feel very stale and could **really** use a rework through a set of story elements which happen to transpire in it. This worked fine with Kessex Hills, why was it abandoned right after instead of continuing work on that zone and then later on others? It worked for LA, too!

* Now to touch upon the gem store, why is it that in a game where the only true endgame goal is to become prettier, all noticable designs come from the gem store? How useful is a MMORPG endgame **without much endgame content in the actual game**?

[TexZero.7910]

> @Ohoni.6057 said:

> > @TexZero.7910 said:

> > Yes mobile industry as in mobile games which NCSoft walked away with nearly 493 million dollars this quarter from.

> > But remember the games industry is dying and could never make a profit.

>

> If the entire industry shifts to mobile though, that would not exactly still be "living."

 

If the entire home movie industry shifts from VHS to DVD it will be dead too right ?

Wrong. A shift in medium does not kill an industry, the industry adapts and makes even more gross profits than ever. See books, why make a paperback when you can make an eBook and charge the same cost, cut staff and production cost entirely ?

 

 

 

[Ohoni.6057]

> @TexZero.7910 said:

>If the entire home movie industry shifts from VHS to DVD it will be dead too right ?

 

We aren't just talking about a platform shift here. If it were that simple then we wouldn't be talking about it in terms of profitability, because any mobile game could work just fine on any other platform from a "gameplay" perspective. The issue is that the "profitability" comes down to business model, which is "free to play, in theory, but LOADED with the most aggressive, pay-to-win, semi-mandatory microtransactions imaginable. For all the controversy around GW2 and Battlefront lately, highly successful mobile games get up to things that would make EA blush.

 

If we could get high quality, content-rich games on mobile, fine, but if the industry truly does move to mobile, not just the platform, but the ideology, then it means very simple Skinnerbox simulators with the bare minimum of content, tight limitations as to what you can actually accomplish at any given time (without paying them money to keep playing), and massive advantages to those who are willing to drop thousands of dollars on the game, making it impossible for anyone to keep up with the curve otherwise.

 

That's not a gaming environment I want to live in.

[Erasculio.2914]

> @TexZero.7910 said:

> Wrong. A shift in medium does not kill an industry, the industry adapts and makes even more gross profits than ever. See books, why make a paperback when you can make an eBook and charge the same cost, cut staff and production cost entirely ?

Errr... I think you two are talking about two different things.

 

You are talking about a change in medium, like from CDs to DVDs to blu-ray. Notice how those didn't change the content that was in them - the change from CD to DVD did not cause a change in music styles, for example.

 

Ohoni is talking about how mobile games are very different from console and many PC games, in that they are often far more predatory and aimed at a more casual playerbase. You would never see a game like the original Guild Wars on mobile, for example; it's not only a matter of medium, but also a matter of different kinds of content.

 

EDIT: and, of course, he said the same thing while I was writing this :p

 

[TexZero.7910]

> @Erasculio.2914 said:

> > @TexZero.7910 said:

> > Wrong. A shift in medium does not kill an industry, the industry adapts and makes even more gross profits than ever. See books, why make a paperback when you can make an eBook and charge the same cost, cut staff and production cost entirely ?

> Errr... I think you two are talking about two different things.

>

> You are talking about a change in medium, like from CDs to DVDs to blu-ray. Notice how those didn't change the content that was in them - the change from CD to DVD did not cause a change in music styles, for example.

>

> Ohoni is talking about how mobile games are very different from console and many PC games, in that they are often far more predatory and aimed at a more casual playerbase. You would never see a game like the original Guild Wars on mobile, for example; it's not only a matter of medium, but also a matter of different kinds of content.

>

> EDIT: and, of course, he said the same thing while I was writing this :p

>

 

Are they really that different anymore ?

 

Do you honestly believe that games are moving away from microtransactions anytime soon....Seriously when the mobile market itself can rake in 400+ Million for NcSoft, it's no wonder that said shady practices keep coming into your standard "PC game" market.

 

It's literally just going to shift the medium or in this case the perception of what a "game/Pc game" is and what is acceptable to sell to people. We can already see this occurring in the PC market with every game and their mother shipping 3 different versions, each game now includes various forms of microtranscations and if that wasn't bad enough can you reasonably explain why nearly every modern AAA title has some form of box involved ?

 

I certainly can, welcome to the new NORMAL PC games bois, where it's easier to strip content out and sell it later as DLC! or Micro-purchases.

[Ohoni.6057]

> @TexZero.7910 said:

> Are they really that different anymore ?

 

Yes. While you CAN make games very similar to console games on a phone, and in fact some ports are actually quite decent, they are not the ones that do terribly well in the marketplace. They are not those "hundreds of millions sold" games. You could put a game like GW2 on mobile, in some sense, but it would not do great, probably not nearly as well as on PC. That's not the point of "mobile gaming" when people use that term. When people say "mobile gaming, they *are* referring to the sort of predatory, gamble-heavy, resource-miserly games that abuse their customers at every opportunity.

 

And again, no, I do not see the industry voluntarily moving away from such profitable methods *just* because they are evil. It will take outside action, most likely governmental action, to reign them in.