Game plan to keep players when CU launches?

[Malediktus.9250]

I see nothing wrong with a subscription model. 10-15 dollars a month will not break anyone's bank (at least not from people who can afford a gaming pc). After seeing how the gemshop turned out in GW2 I doubt I will ever start a new MMO that is not using a subscription model. "Microtransaction" based games can burn in hell

[Strider Pj.2193]

> @"Malediktus.9250" said:

> I see nothing wrong with a subscription model. After seeing how the gemshop turned out in GW2 I doubt I will ever start a new MMO that is not using a subscription model. "Microtransaction" based games can burn in hell

 

The gem shop has nothing that adds to the game play.

 

Going to a sub game because it would be expected to have more support is one thing. I just can't see an elective gen shop as being a reason to jump?

[Aenaos.8160]

Still a long way to go till CU releases,op.

But realistically,and if CU ends up achieving the technological goals it's set,it will be the game of choice for RvR.

Anet should not try to compete with a dedicated RvR game head on,but rather focus on ease of access and a more casual experience.

The focus here is PvE,and that's how it should stay.

The sub won't be an issue.

I don't mind buying a sub,and I guess the audience that's into this type of game won't mind paying for a sub either.

And as a RvR enthusiast I certainly won't mind subscribing to a game that's is designed from the engine up specifically for the purpose of RvR.

I can even look the other way on the many QoL hindrances.

Not to mention that many features that seem as too restrictive,like realm exclusive classes,I find them to be great RPG elements

that add depth to a game.

[Malediktus.9250]

> @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

> > @"Malediktus.9250" said:

> > I see nothing wrong with a subscription model. After seeing how the gemshop turned out in GW2 I doubt I will ever start a new MMO that is not using a subscription model. "Microtransaction" based games can burn in hell

>

> The gem shop has nothing that adds to the game play.

>

> Going to a sub game because it would be expected to have more support is one thing. I just can't see an elective gen shop as being a reason to jump?

Game with focus on cosmetics having all the good cosmetics in the shop? How does that not affect the game? Even legendary armors look worse than the less than 10 Dollar Outfits. Same with all ~50 mount skins we have less than half a year after PoF release are gemstore only. Garbage system.

The game just feels super unrewarding without statistical progression and all relevenat cosmetics coming from gemshop.

[zinkz.7045]

> @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

> > @"Malediktus.9250" said:

> > I see nothing wrong with a subscription model. After seeing how the gemshop turned out in GW2 I doubt I will ever start a new MMO that is not using a subscription model. "Microtransaction" based games can burn in hell

>

> The gem shop has nothing that adds to the game play.

>

> Going to a sub game because it would be expected to have more support is one thing. I just can't see an elective gen shop as being a reason to jump?

 

P2W is not the only issue with gem stores.

 

In a sub model every player is of value, the incentive for the company is to put resources into all areas of an MMORPG to keep players happy and keep those subs rolling in, if you compare that to a F2P (or even B2P) where the cash shop is a major (or the major) source of revenue, then that incentive you have under a sub model decreases.

 

Because with cash shops you have certain categories of players who make up a disproportionate amount of the spending such as new players, very casual players and "whales", so the incentive for where to put resources, decisions on how things are designed, etc becomes skewed towards these groups, which overall results in a lower quality game and player loss, but player loss matters less when it is for example veteran players who spend far less than these groups.

 

Which is one of the reasons a 15 year old MMORPG is still the most successful and games like GW2 are also rans, and why the quality drops in most MMORPGs that go F2P from a sub model, even when they make more money than they did toward the end of the sub era (at least for a while) under F2P.

[Ardenwolfe.8590]

Thank you for posting this. Had no idea about Camelot Unchained, also have no love for it or that type of game anymore, but I do know some friends and family who loved Dark Age of Camelot. We'll see how this game plays out, but hype is nothing.

 

Proof before praise.

 

Edit: Here is a YouTube video with more information:

[Swamurabi.7890]

So how many of you would continue playing WvW in unbalanced matchups if you also had to pay a sub?

[Strider Pj.2193]

> @"Malediktus.9250" said:

> > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

> > > @"Malediktus.9250" said:

> > > I see nothing wrong with a subscription model. After seeing how the gemshop turned out in GW2 I doubt I will ever start a new MMO that is not using a subscription model. "Microtransaction" based games can burn in hell

> >

> > The gem shop has nothing that adds to the game play.

> >

> > Going to a sub game because it would be expected to have more support is one thing. I just can't see an elective gen shop as being a reason to jump?

> Game with focus on cosmetics having all the good cosmetics in the shop? How does that not affect the game? Even legendary armors look worse than the less than 10 Dollar Outfits. Same with all ~50 mount skins we have less than half a year after PoF release are gemstore only. Garbage system.

> The game just feels super unrewarding without statistical progression and all relevenat cosmetics coming from gemshop.

 

I just don't see it. A sub is just not worthy. Not today. I'll play a game on a phone before that.

[STIHL.2489]

Anyone that would leave GW2 for for CU, has already made that choice,.Anet should instead focus on making the best game they can make, and not worry about what other games are out there.

[Dawdler.8521]

> @"Aeolus.3615" said:

> > @"Killthehealersffs.8940" said:

> > > @"Aeolus.3615" said:

> > > > @"davidiven.9408" said:

> > > > lol ash of creation, that game will be kitten in large scale pvp cuz of unreal engine 4

> > >

> > > Project TL(lineage remade) was using gw2 engine and they had to drop it and go for unreal4 engine as well.

> >

> > Maybe Ncsoft ask Arenanet to send some1 that is knowlegable with the engine to help them , and they refused :P

> > The conversation i believe went something like this :

> > You own the rights of the engine....but whatever idea we wanted to implant GW2 we had to cut it down to be implanted in other games first .

> > Then some yelling and then some kisses and then Amazon shows up in with a whip ...:P

> >

> >

>

> project TL exist cause nscsoft and testers felt that lineage eternal failed, the gw2 engine was (is) limited to a damage 111 output gameplay nothing more, in terms of mechanics wise is a complete gutted game engine w/o much space for progression.

> Wich imo is was made nsoft ending eternal and start TL cause they wanted to make stuff that was not simple possible on gw2 engine.

>

> http://massivelyop.com/2017/08/08/lineage-eternal-delayed-again-guild-wars-2-mobile-game-teased/

The article state it was first announced in 2011 (before GW2 was released) and had "focus tests" in 2015. The TL wiki state there was going to be a beta according to schedule in 2013, but it was delayed. All references I find state that it was using the **Guild Wars engine**, not the **Guild Wars 2 engine**. Using the original by then "mature" Guild wars engine when Anet arent gonna use it anymore matches with the original development time.

 

So, did it actually use the *vastly* superior GW2 modification of the GW engine? Or did it use the old GW engine?

 

Source pls cause now I am curious.

[Aeolus.3615]

> @"Dawdler.8521" said:

> > @"Aeolus.3615" said:

> > > @"Killthehealersffs.8940" said:

> > > > @"Aeolus.3615" said:

> > > > > @"davidiven.9408" said:

> > > > > lol ash of creation, that game will be kitten in large scale pvp cuz of unreal engine 4

> > > >

> > > > Project TL(lineage remade) was using gw2 engine and they had to drop it and go for unreal4 engine as well.

> > >

> > > Maybe Ncsoft ask Arenanet to send some1 that is knowlegable with the engine to help them , and they refused :P

> > > The conversation i believe went something like this :

> > > You own the rights of the engine....but whatever idea we wanted to implant GW2 we had to cut it down to be implanted in other games first .

> > > Then some yelling and then some kisses and then Amazon shows up in with a whip ...:P

> > >

> > >

> >

> > project TL exist cause nscsoft and testers felt that lineage eternal failed, the gw2 engine was (is) limited to a damage 111 output gameplay nothing more, in terms of mechanics wise is a complete gutted game engine w/o much space for progression.

> > Wich imo is was made nsoft ending eternal and start TL cause they wanted to make stuff that was not simple possible on gw2 engine.

> >

> > http://massivelyop.com/2017/08/08/lineage-eternal-delayed-again-guild-wars-2-mobile-game-teased/

> The article state it was first announced in 2011 (before GW2 was released) and had "focus tests" in 2015. The TL wiki state there was going to be a beta according to schedule in 2013, but it was delayed. All references I find state that it was using the **Guild Wars engine**, not the **Guild Wars 2 engine**. Using the original by then "mature" Guild wars engine when Anet arent gonna use it anymore matches with the original development time.

>

> So, did it actually use the *vastly* superior GW2 modification of the GW engine? Or did it use the old GW engine?

>

> Source pls cause now I am curious.

 

gw2 or gw1, it does not make much diference ^^ since gw2 is a fork of gw1 thas has been massivly tweaked over time, for theplayer the only big diference are the graphics

the game engine limitations are still imposed in its sucessor.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGaU0ZlWD0I

 

Humm this might be the engine that Anet took base to develop gw2 into still not fully the gw2 tweaked fork version.

 

()lol u can knock off mobs, on gw2 mobs knock u off while they are invunerable to be knocked of the map.....

[Turk.5460]

> @"Malediktus.9250" said:

> I see nothing wrong with a subscription model. 10-15 dollars a month will not break anyone's bank (at least not from people who can afford a gaming pc). After seeing how the gemshop turned out in GW2 I doubt I will ever start a new MMO that is not using a subscription model. "Microtransaction" based games can burn in hell

 

What?... Nothing in the gem store is required nor an improvement to actual gameplay. It has extremely minimal convenience items to buy (bag slots, storage expansion, gathering tools) and the rest is *stuff to make your character look neat* -which by the way, nobody but you will be looking at your character unless you specifically ask them to. I'm genuinely curious as to what you think the gem store did or currently does that inhibits or even remotely changes your or anyone else's playstyle...

[Strider Pj.2193]

> @"Turk.5460" said:

> > @"Malediktus.9250" said:

> > I see nothing wrong with a subscription model. 10-15 dollars a month will not break anyone's bank (at least not from people who can afford a gaming pc). After seeing how the gemshop turned out in GW2 I doubt I will ever start a new MMO that is not using a subscription model. "Microtransaction" based games can burn in hell

>

> What?... Nothing in the gem store is required nor an improvement to actual gameplay. It has extremely minimal convenience items to buy (bag slots, storage expansion, gathering tools) and the rest is *stuff to make your character look neat* -which by the way, nobody but you will be looking at your character unless you specifically ask them to. I'm genuinely curious as to what you think the gem store did or currently does that inhibits or even remotely changes your or anyone else's playstyle...

 

This ^^

 

Gen store is optional. A sub is not.

[Aeolus.3615]

> @"STIHL.2489" said:

> Anyone that would leave GW2 for for CU, has already made that choice,.Anet should instead focus on making the best game they can make, and not worry about what other games are out there.

 

gw2 is the "hello kitty "version of the mmo's and they never care much about competition since they only want pve players, raeson it is a heavy gimmick gameplay to low skilled playerd that is what the true target of players is.

 

@Dawdler.8521

http://www.enewstoday.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=1093271 /lol

It looks lineage wont come to mobile, article tells shows in a way that gw engine is more suited for mobile than unreal ...whut?

[LetoII.3782]

> @"STIHL.2489" said:

> Anyone that would leave GW2 for for CU, has already made that choice,.Anet should instead focus on making the best game they can make, and not worry about what other games are out there.

 

Not true, may the best offering win.

Neither is a finished product

[Fuel.3285]

If Mark's learned from the mistakes and success of DAoC, my favorite MMO of all time, then yes CU will take some of the WvW population with it. That is unavoidable. Most people in GW2 would hate DAoC RvR anyway as DAoC used asymmetrical balance. CU looks to be using that system as well.

 

Love the cc song lol.

You get a mezz, and you get a mezz, everybody gets a mezz. (Damn bards lol).

 

Still, it has to be different enough from GW2 to take anybody. Nothing is certain until people actually get to play the game find out what makes it different.

[Dawdler.8521]

> @"Aeolus.3615" said:

> > @"Dawdler.8521" said:

> > > @"Aeolus.3615" said:

> > > > @"Killthehealersffs.8940" said:

> > > > > @"Aeolus.3615" said:

> > > > > > @"davidiven.9408" said:

> > > > > > lol ash of creation, that game will be kitten in large scale pvp cuz of unreal engine 4

> > > > >

> > > > > Project TL(lineage remade) was using gw2 engine and they had to drop it and go for unreal4 engine as well.

> > > >

> > > > Maybe Ncsoft ask Arenanet to send some1 that is knowlegable with the engine to help them , and they refused :P

> > > > The conversation i believe went something like this :

> > > > You own the rights of the engine....but whatever idea we wanted to implant GW2 we had to cut it down to be implanted in other games first .

> > > > Then some yelling and then some kisses and then Amazon shows up in with a whip ...:P

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > project TL exist cause nscsoft and testers felt that lineage eternal failed, the gw2 engine was (is) limited to a damage 111 output gameplay nothing more, in terms of mechanics wise is a complete gutted game engine w/o much space for progression.

> > > Wich imo is was made nsoft ending eternal and start TL cause they wanted to make stuff that was not simple possible on gw2 engine.

> > >

> > > http://massivelyop.com/2017/08/08/lineage-eternal-delayed-again-guild-wars-2-mobile-game-teased/

> > The article state it was first announced in 2011 (before GW2 was released) and had "focus tests" in 2015. The TL wiki state there was going to be a beta according to schedule in 2013, but it was delayed. All references I find state that it was using the **Guild Wars engine**, not the **Guild Wars 2 engine**. Using the original by then "mature" Guild wars engine when Anet arent gonna use it anymore matches with the original development time.

> >

> > So, did it actually use the *vastly* superior GW2 modification of the GW engine? Or did it use the old GW engine?

> >

> > Source pls cause now I am curious.

>

> gw2 or gw1, it does not make much diference ^^ since gw2 is a fork of gw1 thas has been massivly tweaked over time, for theplayer the only big diference are the graphics

> the game engine limitations are still imposed in its sucessor.

>

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGaU0ZlWD0I

>

> Humm this might be the engine that Anet took base to develop gw2 into still not fully the gw2 tweaked fork version.

>

> ()lol u can knock off mobs, on gw2 mobs knock u off while they are invunerable to be knocked of the map.....

It makes a huge difference when you decide to put the blaim on GW2, since GW2 would have nothing to do with it if it was the GW engine. Anet was more than capable to tweak the GW engine for their GW2 needs. That developer obviously couldnt or didnt want recode the GW engine. Choosing another engine is understandable. If you already knew this, why not say GW1?

 

[Turk.5460]

> @"Fuel.3285" said:

> If Mark's learned from the mistakes and success of DAoC, my favorite MMO of all time, then yes CU will take some of the WvW population with it. That is unavoidable. Most people in GW2 would hate DAoC RvR anyway as DAoC used asymmetrical balance. CU looks to be using that system as well.

>

> Love the cc song lol.

> You get a mezz, and you get a mezz, everybody gets a mezz. (kitten bards lol).

>

> Still, it has to be different enough from GW2 to take anybody. Nothing is certain until people actually get to play the game find out what makes it different.

 

Even most of the people who did enjoy DAoC RvR would not enjoy DAoC RvR right now after playing GW2 WvW. Otherwise they'd be playing right now. But It's more convenient for them to romanticize the past when in reality, as much fun as we all had when DAoC was relevant - it's balance was utter garbage. 1HKO from archer-class Crit-Shots or assassin-class PA's. Mez/PBAoE meta. Heal-classes simply spamming group-heal until someone notices (wow, much skill, so fun).

 

But it's fun to reminisce and bask in the nostalgia with those rose-tinted glasses.

[Aeolus.3615]

@Dawdler.8521, both games have same engine, gw2 is still made on guildwars engine, and using guildwars engine does not means it is gw1 engine as well, but the base for wich gw2 was developed.

This is how ic it.

 

OH and tweaked engine or not even gw2 is extremelly limited in mechanics :\ it might be a burden for the dev's to do anything besides damage in, damage out in this game.

 

(EDIT)they cant even fix spirit weapons :}

[Ighten Hill.5038]

1... Its not even out in the real world to achieve what it says

 

2... (speculative guess) - like every other MMO it will be ping hell when it tries to do what it claimed in its promo and every one will rage

[Ansau.7326]

Oh my... people still have hopes for this game lol

 

Let's be real, CU so far has been nothing more than a disappointment of delays and empty promises. And now people are excited because they announced a date of the beta they promised in 2016, and it's not a definitive date because they open it to further delays...

 

But that's not the worst, the have to explain what they understand for a beta. Looking at the content they have showed in the past year, they are at a pre-alpha stage at best. You cannot be seriously talking about a beta in a forecast of less than half a year when you are still developing pre-rendered character animations and world objects...

 

CU 5 months before estimated first beta:

 

Gw2 7 months before first beta:

[DemonSeed.3528]

I think GW2 will be around for a while - to me it's like a staple in wvw modes, like how tf2 and cs have been around for so long even with other fps games out. Even if other games could potentially improve on the formula I can never get the feeling of combat/movement mechanics like I do here. Similarly Warframe has movement and combat mechanics that I love and I haven't gotten the same fluidity from many other games of the same genre either. Right now my main issue with GW2 is lag - I'm going to be dead no matter what, so any kind of balance is down the drain in any case. I can even live with the current balancing between classes if I can just enjoy the game lag free, I would be able to adapt. GW2 to me is a very special case, because you can return to 3 game modes anytime you want. If one takes a break and there are many changes, I would feel actually refreshed because I like figuring new builds and how to defeat new stuff that pops up. I do get angry sometimes with the choices the devs make but all in all I hope they keep working on GW2 and make it one of the longest mmo's around. To have a healthy game we need to keep both players and devs happy. My wish is for wvw to keep improving and not driving devs insane in the process because that will all come snowballing back to us :P

[ugrakarma.9416]

the only threat to WvW Gw2, would be a clone of him, without the graphic problems of big blobs fights it has.

 

[Dawdler.8521]

> @"Aeolus.3615" said:

> @Dawdler.8521, both games have same engine, gw2 is still made on guildwars engine, and using guildwars engine does not means it is gw1 engine as well, but the base for wich gw2 was developed.

> This is how ic it.

>

> OH and tweaked engine or not even gw2 is extremelly limited in mechanics :\ it might be a burden for the dev's to do anything besides damage in, damage out in this game.

>

> (EDIT)they cant even fix spirit weapons :}

Not sure what part of "modified engine" is hard to understand. The GW2 engine is not the same as the GW engine. By your logic the Quake engine in original Half-Life (or Quake 1) match the Source engine in Half-Life 2 and shares all it's limitations because it's the same basic engine.

 

Is it the same though? Really?

 

GW2 is an incredibly flexible engine which Anet has proved again and again over the years - there is a reason why it still feels like a modern game rather than something released a decade ago. It's as far from "damage in damage out" as it gets. WvW is still unmatched on the scale and detail of PvP. There's been newer games that are very simple in comparison (and in my experience every time they've tried 100+ man open world warfare, it's been practicly unplayable with warping and rubberbanding all over the place. Archeage, ESO, etc).

[morrolan.9608]

> @"Dawdler.8521" said:

> > @"Aeolus.3615" said:

> > @Dawdler.8521, both games have same engine, gw2 is still made on guildwars engine, and using guildwars engine does not means it is gw1 engine as well, but the base for wich gw2 was developed.

> > This is how ic it.

> >

> > OH and tweaked engine or not even gw2 is extremelly limited in mechanics :\ it might be a burden for the dev's to do anything besides damage in, damage out in this game.

> >

> > (EDIT)they cant even fix spirit weapons :}

> Not sure what part of "modified engine" is hard to understand. The GW2 engine is not the same as the GW engine. By your logic the Quake engine in original Half-Life (or Quake 1) match the Source engine in Half-Life 2 and shares all it's limitations because it's the same basic engine.

>

> Is it the same though? Really?

>

> GW2 is an incredibly flexible engine which Anet has proved again and again over the years - there is a reason why it still feels like a modern game rather than something released a decade ago. It's as far from "damage in damage out" as it gets. WvW is still unmatched on the scale and detail of PvP. There's been newer games that are very simple in comparison (and in my experience every time they've tried 100+ man open world warfare, it's been practicly unplayable with warping and rubberbanding all over the place. Archeage, ESO, etc).

 

1. It is a modified GW1 engine, not exactly the same engine but not new and this holds it back, if you do a comparison with any modern engine its obvious.

2. How is it flexible? The engine is more responsive than others yes but thats all.

3. The reason WvW performs slightly better than ESO (but still not well) is that they broke WvW up into 4 battlegrounds whereas ESO is all on 1 map. If WvW was all on 1 map I guarantee it would perform worse than ESO. However in terms of design only having 1 map is vastly preferable.