The Future: GW2 in 4K

[Heriticus Spiritus.2489]

I have to agree that the game needs better optimizing all around. They're pushing an old game engine as hard as they can, and have done pretty well so far. How much more they can use it is anyone's guess.

 

Specs:

i-7 core 4770k

16gb of ddr3-1866

old Crucial ssd

Asus Z-97 mobo

Nvidia GTX-1060

Corsair 750w psu

 

I use a 55" Sharp 4k TV as a monitor. I run the game @3840x2160 full screen with every setting maxed except shadows. In L.A. and most areas I run between 40 to 50fps. The lowest the framerate drops is around 30fps when doing champs etc with tons of people around. With the exception of the videocard and psu, the other harfware is 4 or more years old. So you don't need to have the lastest and greatest hardware tp run this game well. The TV is the newest of all.

[Baldovin.1392]

I don't know why everyone is defending Anet and the fact that they badly NEED to update their engine because I made several posts before about this issue and I always let it go only because I believed they had more pressing matter to address in the game.

 

But now that the game is firmly on its two feet and is moving forward I believe they need to do something about the low frame rate issues on the relatively good machines. I know I'll receive a shitload of negative comments for mentioning Blizzards example but I don't care, I believe it is a good business model.

 

GW2 had two expansions, HoT and PoF, while WoW after the first two expansions made something extremely good, Cataclysm, and with it they revamp the engine and reworked the core content of old WoW. I believe if the GW2 plans to move forward and evolve as a good MMORPG that it is now, they need to do the same with their next, third expansion.

[Game of Bones.8975]

After a certain point, more doesn't do any good. It's like driving a Maserati in a traffic jam.

[phokus.8934]

You’re not getting a 3-5ms ping to the anet servers.

 

Gameplay performance, as others have mentioned, is mostly CPU bound.

 

I believe most people wouldn’t mind a graphics engine upgrade but not at the expense of content updates.

 

GW2 still runs well and fine so don’t get your hopes up.

[Diva.4706]

According to steam stats today, only 8.36% game at a resolution above 1080p. This number will increase in the future, but it will take years. For most people 1080p is the sweet spot on fps per dollar. 1080p gear is very affordable, way less than anything that can run 4k at 60FPS. Yes 4K is amazing, but it's going to be a few more years before it's as mainstream as 1080p is today. For older games like GW2, 4K is just not a priority.

[Liewec.2896]

you should try Planetside 2 if you want disappointing performance!

even at 2k resolution it runs at about 20fps in the really big battles on "ultra" settings

(with a 1080ti, 16gb of ram and an i7-7700k)

[Baldovin.1392]

> @"Diva.4706" said:

> According to steam stats today, only 8.36% game at a resolution above 1080p. This number will increase in the future, but it will take years. For most people 1080p is the sweet spot on fps per dollar. 1080p gear is very affordable, way less than anything that can run 4k at 60FPS. Yes 4K is amazing, but it's going to be a few more years before it's as mainstream as 1080p is today. For older games like GW2, 4K is just not a priority.

 

I'm not referring to the resolution in my post. Resolution is not that relevant as the other things that they need to rework. WoW did it perfectly with Cataclysm, hope GW2 does the same with their third expansion.

[ScottBroChill.3254]

Didn't they use the older engine and stuff so casual people without gaming computers could play? In my opinion they made their decision to support their initial release of the game at the expense of the longevity of the engine., which is fine, but the business model they have doesn't possess the resources to make large overhauls as such, which sucks. I really wish I knew how unlikely or unable they really are to overhaul the engine.

[Solori.6025]

Question. Isnt thier a third party graphics patch that improves some of the visuals of gw2. Does it help boost frame rates? Also is it legal to run in this game without the fear of a banhammer?

[Gehenna.3625]

> @"Baldovin.1392" said:

> But now that the game is firmly on its two feet and is moving forward

 

Really? Firmly on its two feet? If you'd seen their financial reports you'd know that aside from the spikes of the two expansions, quarterly revenue has been going down. Hopefully next month's report will finally show an uptrend again but after the HoT-spike revenue was again lower than before that spike and continued going down till PoF came out. Next month's report will show whether or not the trend is still down or not but their quarterly revenue is only half of what it was in 2013.

 

I'm not saying that the game is dying but to say it's firmly on its two feet is perhaps a bit too optimistic considering the facts. It'd be really nice if this time around the trend is broken but we won't know for another week or 2 roughly.

[Baldovin.1392]

> @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> > @"Baldovin.1392" said:

> > But now that the game is firmly on its two feet and is moving forward

>

> Really? Firmly on its two feet? If you'd seen their financial reports you'd know that aside from the spikes of the two expansions, quarterly revenue has been going down. Hopefully next month's report will finally show an uptrend again but after the HoT-spike revenue was again lower than before that spike and continued going down till PoF came out. Next month's report will show whether or not the trend is still down or not but their quarterly revenue is only half of what it was in 2013.

>

> I'm not saying that the game is dying but to say it's firmly on its two feet is perhaps a bit too optimistic considering the facts. It'd be really nice if this time around the trend is broken but we won't know for another week or 2 roughly.

 

I believe you misunderstood what I was trying to say there. I didn't mean in the financial sense, rather I belive that the game is quite mature and it has a lot of good features implemented. Now, they only need to continue the development of an already good game and one of those development courses lies in the third expansion and using a good example from Blizard they could learn from it if they see what they did with their third expansion. With a good third expansion they could increase and return some of the old player base and that will probably increase the financial revenue you were mentioning.

 

For me, the third GW2 expansion should include the rework of an old game engine and rework of an old CORE GW2 content, just like Cataclysm did with WoW.

[Malediktus.9250]

2400 MHz Ram is also way too slow for a CPU limited game. Try 4000+ with manually optimized timings

 

Also you should have gotten a 8700k instead of a 8700. Overclocking the cache to 4.5GHz+ also helps a lot (but not sure how far you can even do that on a locked CPU).

[Korval.3751]

> @"phokus.8934" said:

> You’re not getting a 3-5ms ping to the anet servers.

 

Never wrote that. I wrote on average that's my ping rate online. That coupled with the average up and down speed is meant to set aside my Internet connection as a potential cause for frame rate issues.

 

> I believe most people wouldn’t mind a graphics engine upgrade but not at the expense of content updates.

 

And therein lies the difficulty. If ArenaNet ignores the performance issues of modern hardware eventually, content updates will become meaningless.

 

Oh, and by the way, BioShock Infinite came out in 2013 (a year after GW2). It runs on DirectX 11. Installed on the "slower" 7200 HDD (for comparison, GW2 is on the SSD), BSI runs at a steady 120 FPS in 4K (3840 x 2160) with EVERYTHING maxed out (screenshot https://i.imgur.com/OqPghL7.jpg ). The point? Upgrading from DirectX 9 to 11 for a fact would significantly improve performance across the board. It would be in Arenanet's best interest to look into upgrading to DX11.

 

> @"Distrikt.8075" said:

> Ok, first off consoles are still basically capped at 30fps @4k resolutions. The hardware in the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X is already a few years old by development standards. It will be the next gen consoles that would be truly capable of 4k over 30fps as it stands right now.

 

That's the point of my first post. The technology is coming, if it is not here already.

 

> @"Game of Bones.8975" said:

> After a certain point, more doesn't do any good. It's like driving a Maserati in a traffic jam.

 

In PC gaming MORE is always better. Always!

 

> @"Baldovin.1392" said:

> > @"Diva.4706" said:

> > According to steam stats today, only 8.36% game at a resolution above 1080p. This number will increase in the future, but it will take years. For most people 1080p is the sweet spot on fps per dollar. 1080p gear is very affordable, way less than anything that can run 4k at 60FPS. Yes 4K is amazing, but it's going to be a few more years before it's as mainstream as 1080p is today. For older games like GW2, 4K is just not a priority.

>

> I'm not referring to the resolution in my post. Resolution is not that relevant as the other things that they need to rework. WoW did it perfectly with Cataclysm, hope GW2 does the same with their third expansion.

 

Blizzard invested money back into their engine to modernize it. Perhaps it was part of the need to rework much of it to make flying mounts in vanilla areas doable. But the point is they made the investment into their engine to modernize it, and now the results are seen. 90 FPS with everything maxed out in 4K, and the game looks beautiful in WOW's signature timeless style.

 

> @"Malediktus.9250" said:

> 2400 MHz Ram is also way too slow for a CPU limited game. Try 4000+ with manually optimized timings

>

> Also you should have gotten a 8700k instead of a 8700. Overclocking the cache to 4.5GHz+ also helps a lot (but not sure how far you can even do that on a locked CPU).

 

No. I'm not overclocking. I talked with several professional system builders, and they said overclocking has a benefit when there are deficiencies but with my computer, the sum of each part IS the whole. In other words, everything I have combined makes each game run super fast. But not GW2.

 

The mobo supports up to DDR4 4000MHz (OC), but that wasn't a consideration while buying all the parts. I never buy maxed frequency RAM on the initial build, and I figured I wouldn't need to with a pair of SDDs, super fast Internet, high-speed video card, and a case built for cooling (again, "the sum of all parts"). I'll upgrade the RAM eventually, but not for GW2. RAM is way too expensive.

[Gehenna.3625]

> @"Baldovin.1392" said:

> > @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> > > @"Baldovin.1392" said:

> > > But now that the game is firmly on its two feet and is moving forward

> >

> > Really? Firmly on its two feet? If you'd seen their financial reports you'd know that aside from the spikes of the two expansions, quarterly revenue has been going down. Hopefully next month's report will finally show an uptrend again but after the HoT-spike revenue was again lower than before that spike and continued going down till PoF came out. Next month's report will show whether or not the trend is still down or not but their quarterly revenue is only half of what it was in 2013.

> >

> > I'm not saying that the game is dying but to say it's firmly on its two feet is perhaps a bit too optimistic considering the facts. It'd be really nice if this time around the trend is broken but we won't know for another week or 2 roughly.

>

> I believe you misunderstood what I was trying to say there. I didn't mean in the financial sense, rather I belive that the game is quite mature and it has a lot of good features implemented. Now, they only need to continue the development of an already good game and one of those development courses lies in the third expansion and using a good example from Blizard they could learn from it if they see what they did with their third expansion. With a good third expansion they could increase and return some of the old player base and that will probably increase the financial revenue you were mentioning.

>

> For me, the third GW2 expansion should include the rework of an old game engine and rework of an old CORE GW2 content, just like Cataclysm did with WoW.

 

My apologies, I did indeed misunderstand you.

 

I do wonder though if ArenaNet can afford to do more than just make essentially repeat content in a different setting. If the trend downward continues then it could make sense to invest into a turnaround, however, we generally see that companies don't do this. Blizzard is special in this because they are in control of their own products entirely and are willing to stand by their IP. ArenaNet is a subsidiary of NcSoft and therefore they do not have full control themselves and in these corporate structures it's more about whether a risk is likely to pay off or not, rather than believing in your product and going for it.

 

The reason for this, I think, is that such turnarounds in a game of a certain age are no longer realistic. Older players will have moved on and the game will never be as fresh as it was at the start. So even if you get older players back, I think they won't stay for very long. I do appreciate that it's tough on game makers, because a lot of players will say if X and Y happen then I'll come back but only then. However, if they do X and Y, players may still choose to not come back or they do and say, well it's nice but you haven't fixed Z and that's annoying me now. So as players we are a fickle bunch to be fair and we aren't necessarily as good as our word.

 

All this to say that it's very risky for them to invest on faith or hope. They have to go by revenue and expectation of initial sales mostly to determine what they can afford to do. The issue is that because it's a game without a subscription model, the game has to rely on a limited amount of people to spend money in the Gem store and they have to spread the revenue from box sales over a certain period of time. In WoW, where a sub is required it's spread more evenly among players. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not asking for GW2 to start subs because it will chase away a large portion of the player base, but the game does need regular spending in the gem store.

 

It may be hard to hear for some people but B2P means roughly that the box sales have to win back the resource cost for creating the game or expansion but the Gem store is instrumental in keeping the game going and profitable. And that means that people who play but do not spend in the Gem store are essentially mooching off the people who do. The game lives by the grace of those who spend money. ArenaNet also has wages and bills to pay and need a certain profit margin to keep the game going for the NcSoft investors to stay happy. But as long as players are happy with this arrangement, that's all good.

 

The issue I see with all other MMOs outside of WoW here in the West is that everybody saw the success of WoW and wanted in. But they underestimated how the game should start, meaning content wise and QoL standards. Of course you can't possibly offer the same amount of content an elder game has but you also don't want to start with bare bones when it comes to things like QoL and endgame in particular. And pretty much all MMOs made the mistake that they could get away with less and so people walk away in large amounts within the first 3-6 months. It's normal that it's around 30-40% of the player base. SWTOR really blew it and lost about 80% and it's a miracle the game survived.

 

So that's a bit of background of how I see certain movements. I do not think that what you propose will really bring back that many players and even if it does, they won't stay long. And that simply may not be worth the investment. I do suspect that Cantha may be the next expansion. Clearly, people love GW1 and with Elona and the GW1 reskins in the Gem store this is clearly visible. I find PoF to be the best looking area so far but I also realize it's the area that reminds me most of GW1. So it seems wise to continue in that vein. I do hope that they are going to maybe do something else than masteries. I really would love to see the Ritualist return for example.

 

It's very difficult to imagine sometimes but when I think something is a good idea for the game, what I really mean is that I think it's good for me. Cause I can't possibly know what most players will do when certain changes happen. But what I have seen is that even when game companies do what players ask, it still receives a mixed response. And that means that it's better to focus on the cheaper elements than the more expensive ones. Cause in the end, you will lose players over time. No game, can keep their player base forever and you hope to find sort of your hardcore fanbase that will stay for the long term and make sure you can monetize that enough to keep the servers running and the investors happy.

 

[Gehenna.3625]

> @"Korval.3751" said:

 

> Oh, and by the way, BioShock Infinite came out in 2013 (a year after GW2). It runs on DirectX 11. Installed on the "slower" 7200 HDD (for comparison, GW2 is on the SSD), BSI runs at a steady 120 FPS in 4K (3840 x 2160) with EVERYTHING maxed out (screenshot https://i.imgur.com/OqPghL7.jpg ). The point? Upgrading from DirectX 9 to 11 for a fact would significantly improve performance across the board. It would be in Arenanet's best interest to look into upgrading to DX11.

 

Are you seriously trying to compare single player games to an MMO here? You do realize that's a completely ridiculous comparison to make, don't you? A lot more is asked of a computer to run a game with a shared, persistent world.

[intox.6347]

> @"Zaklex.6308" said:

> > @"Korval.3751" said:

> > Recently, I upgraded to a machine capable of steady 60+ FPS at 4K.

> >

> > CPU: i7-8700

> > Motherboard: ASUS ROG Strix Z370-E Gaming

> > Video: MSI GeForce GTX 1080 Ti 11G

> > RAM: Team T-Force Vulcan 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4-2400

> > 1st Drive: SAMSUNG 970 EVO M.2 2280 500GB

> > 2nd Drive: SAMSUNG 970 EVO M.2 2280 500GB

> > 3rd Drive: WD Black 2 TB 7200

> > Power Supply: EVGA SuperNOVA G3 850W

> > Displays: (2) LG 27"" 4K UHD IPS screens

> > OS: Windows 10 Pro 64-bit

> >

> > I've gone through a collection of around 30 titles, testing them to see how they perform. You can see the detailed results on my Google Sheet. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Pfb_Guw5DfJ0KuhgawzmAPPCpxcPZtpqnmtagTiGDiw/edit

> >

> > GW2's results for the sake of brevity.

> > + Installed Drive: Primary SDD

> > + Resolution: 3840 x 2160

> > + Avg FPS: 33

> > + Graphics Quality: High

> > + Anti-Aliasing: FXAA

> > + Post Processing: High

> > + Shadows: High

> > + Shaders: High

> > + Character Model Quality: High

> > + Texture Quality: High

> > + Animations: High

> > + Environments: High

> > + LOD Distance: High

> > + Reflections: All

> > + Render Sampling: Native

> >

> > The most disappointing was Guild Wars 2. Out of the group, this one had the worse performances from a prominent developer like ArenaNet. I saw extreme framerate shifts occurring in Lion's Arch whenever I opened and closed the inventory. The framerate would jump up to 42 from 33 and then down to 33 when closed.

> >

> > I'm on a high-speed Fiber Optic connection. On average, ping times are 3-5 ms; 95-97 Mbps upload and download speeds. Noting this to eliminate the Internet as the potential cause for framerate issues. Also, I installed GW2 on the primary SSD, so that eliminates drive read/write lag. The problem appears to stem from lousy net-code or poorly optimized graphics in the game itself. Maybe both.

> >

> > Eventually 4K gaming is going to be the norm for many. You want your game to be 4K ready.

>

> GW2 is CPU based, not GPU, so your CPU is doing most of the work and the GPU is barely helping at all...that's the way the engine is designed and that's what allows it to run on older machines...don't get your hopes up for a complete overhaul of the engine...not going to happen. Also, it will stay DX9 based for the exact same reason, so it can run on a multitude of computers, not just souped up gaming rigs...that is why it can run on potatoes.

>

> P.S. - I run on an Alienware Aurora R6, and average 65 - 80 FPS will all graphic settings on High...and that's on and HDD, been to lazy to install my SSD(s) yet.

 

Yop, im playing with i7 8700k delid, oc 5 GHz and i see big difference from ryzen 1700x i was testing before.

Also have evga gtx1080ti .. but i tried just for lols gtx1060 and it didnt make that much difference...

 

So for GW2 will be good choice some strong cpu... i7 7700k oc ... and you are good :)

[Malediktus.9250]

> @"Korval.3751" said:

> > @"Malediktus.9250" said:

> > 2400 MHz Ram is also way too slow for a CPU limited game. Try 4000+ with manually optimized timings

> >

> > Also you should have gotten a 8700k instead of a 8700. Overclocking the cache to 4.5GHz+ also helps a lot (but not sure how far you can even do that on a locked CPU).

>

> No. I'm not overclocking. I talked with several professional system builders, and they said overclocking has a benefit when there are deficiencies but with my computer, the sum of each part IS the whole. In other words, everything I have combined makes each game run super fast. But not GW2.

>

> The mobo supports up to DDR4 4000MHz (OC), but that wasn't a consideration while buying all the parts. I never buy maxed frequency RAM on the initial build, and I figured I wouldn't need to with a pair of SDDs, super fast Internet, high-speed video card, and a case built for cooling (again, "the sum of all parts"). I'll upgrade the RAM eventually, but not for GW2. RAM is way too expensive.

Sounds like your professional system builders are clueless.

Going to 4000Mhz RAM with handtuned timings (not garbage XMP profile) will very noticeably increase your fps in GW2. 2400 MHz RAM (with XMP profile at that) is garbage tier

[kharmin.7683]

> @"Korval.3751" said:

 

>

> Blizzard invested money back into their engine to modernize it.

 

I really wish people would stop comparing GW2 to WoW. It's not remotely close to the same model. WoW has more resources due to its subscription model whereas it's like pulling teeth to get anyone to spend any cash in the GW2 Gem Shop. People complain constantly about the cost of items and/or whine because things aren't free. It GW2 players spent more, then perhaps ANet would have the financial resources to make the changes that the OP desires.

 

Reality being a kitten, it simply isn't going to happen.

[phokus.8934]

> @"Korval.3751" said:

> > @"phokus.8934" said:

> > You’re not getting a 3-5ms ping to the anet servers.

>

> Never wrote that. I wrote on average that's my ping rate online. That coupled with the average up and down speed is meant to set aside my Internet connection as a potential cause for frame rate issues.

>

> > I believe most people wouldn’t mind a graphics engine upgrade but not at the expense of content updates.

>

> And therein lies the difficulty. If ArenaNet ignores the performance issues of modern hardware eventually, content updates will become meaningless.

>

> Oh, and by the way, BioShock Infinite came out in 2013 (a year after GW2). It runs on DirectX 11. Installed on the "slower" 7200 HDD (for comparison, GW2 is on the SSD), BSI runs at a steady 120 FPS in 4K (3840 x 2160) with EVERYTHING maxed out (screenshot https://i.imgur.com/OqPghL7.jpg ). The point? Upgrading from DirectX 9 to 11 for a fact would significantly improve performance across the board. It would be in Arenanet's best interest to look into upgrading to DX11.

 

It was inferred by you that you're getting a 3-5ms ping to the servers, otherwise why would you give out superfluous information? You're be comparing oranges to mashed potatoes otherwise.

 

There really isn't a significant performance issue with GW2. The game runs very smoothly except in some instances and under certain circumstances. Sure you may not be able to run the game at a constant 60+FPS with max everything but an MMO has to worry about gameplay fluidity rather than pushing computers to their max.

 

Also consider the following: you're once against making a bad comparison - an MMO versus an FPS that doesn't carry the infrastructure of an MMO. This is purely speculation but I can only imagine that ArenaNet went with the Guild Wars game engine is due to their familiarity with it. If they went with say, the Unreal engine, there might've been a significant learning curve and also who knows how the licensing of the Unreal engine looks like for a game like GW2.

 

In a perfect world, I'd love to see GW2 push our high end machines to run at max FPS with full settings but being the realist I am, I'm fine with what GW2 has and its performance.

 

 

[Tyncale.1629]

I agree with the OP, very disappointed with GW2's performance on my new Nvidia GTX 1080 Ti ftw. I was hoping for better framerates with Boss fights and in crowded places, but alas. Still have to lower the settings big time when doing some Boss farm. This is on a simple hd monitor btw. Unfortunately, GW2 is the game I play most on my PC, so that purchase has not really payed off yet. :)

[Baldovin.1392]

> @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> > @"Baldovin.1392" said:

> > > @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> > > > @"Baldovin.1392" said:

> > > > But now that the game is firmly on its two feet and is moving forward

> > >

> > > Really? Firmly on its two feet? If you'd seen their financial reports you'd know that aside from the spikes of the two expansions, quarterly revenue has been going down. Hopefully next month's report will finally show an uptrend again but after the HoT-spike revenue was again lower than before that spike and continued going down till PoF came out. Next month's report will show whether or not the trend is still down or not but their quarterly revenue is only half of what it was in 2013.

> > >

> > > I'm not saying that the game is dying but to say it's firmly on its two feet is perhaps a bit too optimistic considering the facts. It'd be really nice if this time around the trend is broken but we won't know for another week or 2 roughly.

> >

> > I believe you misunderstood what I was trying to say there. I didn't mean in the financial sense, rather I belive that the game is quite mature and it has a lot of good features implemented. Now, they only need to continue the development of an already good game and one of those development courses lies in the third expansion and using a good example from Blizard they could learn from it if they see what they did with their third expansion. With a good third expansion they could increase and return some of the old player base and that will probably increase the financial revenue you were mentioning.

> >

> > For me, the third GW2 expansion should include the rework of an old game engine and rework of an old CORE GW2 content, just like Cataclysm did with WoW.

>

> My apologies, I did indeed misunderstand you.

>

> I do wonder though if ArenaNet can afford to do more than just make essentially repeat content in a different setting. If the trend downward continues then it could make sense to invest into a turnaround, however, we generally see that companies don't do this. Blizzard is special in this because they are in control of their own products entirely and are willing to stand by their IP. ArenaNet is a subsidiary of NcSoft and therefore they do not have full control themselves and in these corporate structures it's more about whether a risk is likely to pay off or not, rather than believing in your product and going for it.

>

> The reason for this, I think, is that such turnarounds in a game of a certain age are no longer realistic. Older players will have moved on and the game will never be as fresh as it was at the start. So even if you get older players back, I think they won't stay for very long. I do appreciate that it's tough on game makers, because a lot of players will say if X and Y happen then I'll come back but only then. However, if they do X and Y, players may still choose to not come back or they do and say, well it's nice but you haven't fixed Z and that's annoying me now. So as players we are a fickle bunch to be fair and we aren't necessarily as good as our word.

>

> All this to say that it's very risky for them to invest on faith or hope. They have to go by revenue and expectation of initial sales mostly to determine what they can afford to do. The issue is that because it's a game without a subscription model, the game has to rely on a limited amount of people to spend money in the Gem store and they have to spread the revenue from box sales over a certain period of time. In WoW, where a sub is required it's spread more evenly among players. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not asking for GW2 to start subs because it will chase away a large portion of the player base, but the game does need regular spending in the gem store.

>

> It may be hard to hear for some people but B2P means roughly that the box sales have to win back the resource cost for creating the game or expansion but the Gem store is instrumental in keeping the game going and profitable. And that means that people who play but do not spend in the Gem store are essentially mooching off the people who do. The game lives by the grace of those who spend money. ArenaNet also has wages and bills to pay and need a certain profit margin to keep the game going for the NcSoft investors to stay happy. But as long as players are happy with this arrangement, that's all good.

>

> The issue I see with all other MMOs outside of WoW here in the West is that everybody saw the success of WoW and wanted in. But they underestimated how the game should start, meaning content wise and QoL standards. Of course you can't possibly offer the same amount of content an elder game has but you also don't want to start with bare bones when it comes to things like QoL and endgame in particular. And pretty much all MMOs made the mistake that they could get away with less and so people walk away in large amounts within the first 3-6 months. It's normal that it's around 30-40% of the player base. SWTOR really blew it and lost about 80% and it's a miracle the game survived.

>

> So that's a bit of background of how I see certain movements. I do not think that what you propose will really bring back that many players and even if it does, they won't stay long. And that simply may not be worth the investment. I do suspect that Cantha may be the next expansion. Clearly, people love GW1 and with Elona and the GW1 reskins in the Gem store this is clearly visible. I find PoF to be the best looking area so far but I also realize it's the area that reminds me most of GW1. So it seems wise to continue in that vein. I do hope that they are going to maybe do something else than masteries. I really would love to see the Ritualist return for example.

>

> It's very difficult to imagine sometimes but when I think something is a good idea for the game, what I really mean is that I think it's good for me. Cause I can't possibly know what most players will do when certain changes happen. But what I have seen is that even when game companies do what players ask, it still receives a mixed response. And that means that it's better to focus on the cheaper elements than the more expensive ones. Cause in the end, you will lose players over time. No game, can keep their player base forever and you hope to find sort of your hardcore fanbase that will stay for the long term and make sure you can monetize that enough to keep the servers running and the investors happy.

>

 

Well, you really did put an effort into this post and I do agree with some of your ideas and viewpoints. But I still believe that putting new things like classes, new maps, masteries and etc. will not do the trick for the third expansion. I believe they need to go big or go home, this third expansion will be the breaking point for this game.

[Nuka Cola.8520]

If there is no gw3 planned in the near future, why aren't they upgrading engines? Do something with your game, Anet. A balance patch once per 4-6 months is not bringing any excitement into your game.

 

Port the game to a new engine. Gem store money needs to go somewhere.

[blambidy.3216]

Eventually but when? The problem with this statement is, gw2 doesn’t need 4K to be enjoyable. It’s already a fantastic game. People are tripping over graphics but the best games were honestly one of the ugliest games to be created.

 

Minecraft,terraria,super Mario bros. Pokemon crystal, red, blue. Mega man.

 

So does gw2 (need) 4K to be substained? No. Gw2 does not need 4K to keep on going at all whatsoever. The problem is new games need the graphics to be enjoyable with this day and age.

 

Gameplay>graphics.

 

Also 4K is years before every single system is 4K ready. I’m thinking another 5 years for more TVs to be 4K. More monitors developed for 4K. But with this day and age 4K is still too far ahead of time. 4K is released too early for people to want gw2 to be 4K ready.

 

For 4K to be ready in every single household, there needs to be 30 in 4K TVs. 20 in 4K monitors. Much more development, and need for 4K.

 

4K is not needed like how vhs changed to dvd. 4K is just like hd which honestly is barely more pleasing then hd. But tbh 4K and hd does not catch my eye to buy a game. The gameplay does.

 

So in all in all. Does Anet have to have 4K as a thing to make people play? Or you want them to work on creating more content? Pick one.

[melodyca.8921]

> @"Diva.4706" said:

> According to steam stats today, only 8.36% game at a resolution above 1080p. This number will increase in the future, but it will take years. For most people 1080p is the sweet spot on fps per dollar. 1080p gear is very affordable, way less than anything that can run 4k at 60FPS. Yes 4K is amazing, but it's going to be a few more years before it's as mainstream as 1080p is today. For older games like GW2, 4K is just not a priority.

 

It took years before 1080p became affordable too. Its funny how people forget that.

[Korval.3751]

> @"Gehenna.3625" said:

> > @"Korval.3751" said:

>

> > Oh, and by the way, BioShock Infinite came out in 2013 (a year after GW2). It runs on DirectX 11. Installed on the "slower" 7200 HDD (for comparison, GW2 is on the SSD), BSI runs at a steady 120 FPS in 4K (3840 x 2160) with EVERYTHING maxed out (screenshot https://i.imgur.com/OqPghL7.jpg ). The point? Upgrading from DirectX 9 to 11 for a fact would significantly improve performance across the board. It would be in Arenanet's best interest to look into upgrading to DX11.

>

> Are you seriously trying to compare single player games to an MMO here? You do realize that's a completely ridiculous comparison to make, don't you? A lot more is asked of a computer to run a game with a shared, persistent world.

 

Yeah, because I already made the comparison to WOW to prove the point. BioShock Infinite is only for the DX11 versus DX9 comparison.