Justine.6351 Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 > @"Obtena.7952" said: > Regardless, I don't know how GW2 was sold to GW1 customers that much is apparent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obtena.7952 Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 > @"Justine.6351" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > Regardless, I don't know how GW2 was sold to GW1 customers > > that much is apparent. And as I said, completely irrelevant as well. The fact was that GW1 was lacking, even if parts of it were amazing. It was at the end of its life as a business line, so development stopped. That's pretty normal for games like this actually. I've yet to play a game that didn't suffer from being old in the tooth. It's expensive to maintain a game to keep up with using new available technology, features, hardware ... etc... It's better business just to make a new game and makes more sense as well, otherwise companies wouldn't do it. Personally, I think GW1 was a mistake; when all these game companies were releasing games where you could interact on a massive scale with other players ... GW1 was severely limited in that area. Seems to me that Anet under-estimated how much value players put interacting with each other in open world, instanced group, etc... and realized what a missed opportunity that was. I'm sure if the information they had said otherwise, GW2 would have been GW1 part 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justine.6351 Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > Regardless, I don't know how GW2 was sold to GW1 customers > > > > that much is apparent. > > And as I said, completely irrelevant as well. The fact was that GW1 was lacking, even if parts of it were amazing. It was at the end of its life as a business line, so development stopped. That's pretty normal for games like this actually. I've yet to play a game that didn't suffer from being old in the tooth. It's expensive to maintain a game to keep up with using new available technology, features, hardware ... etc... It's better business just to make a new game and makes more sense as well, otherwise companies wouldn't do it. Pretty sure I did not say GW2 shouldn't have been made. So presumably you are anticipating the next campaign in approximately a year. Well imagine tomorrow you woke up to a news article saying that development on GW2 had been canceled and GW3 would be in a couple years. Its just that GW2 was getting to complex and bloated for new players to come into and they did not have the means to add everything in that they brainstormed. So they decided that it was time for a whole new game to do lots of wonderful things based on what they had learned the previous years (2 for GW1, we are at 6 for GW2). FIVE years later, with lifesupport levels of development in GW2, you get into GW3 and find it is a Battle Royale style game like Fortnight. Yeah, feels good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obtena.7952 Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 > @"Justine.6351" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > Regardless, I don't know how GW2 was sold to GW1 customers > > > > > > that much is apparent. > > > > And as I said, completely irrelevant as well. The fact was that GW1 was lacking, even if parts of it were amazing. It was at the end of its life as a business line, so development stopped. That's pretty normal for games like this actually. I've yet to play a game that didn't suffer from being old in the tooth. It's expensive to maintain a game to keep up with using new available technology, features, hardware ... etc... It's better business just to make a new game and makes more sense as well, otherwise companies wouldn't do it. > > Pretty sure I did not say GW2 shouldn't have been made. > > So presumably you are anticipating the next campaign in approximately a year. ... Stop you right there ... I don't anticipate ANY online game will be around in a year and if I didn't like a game if was playing, I wouldn't play it for 5 more years waiting for it to become something I think it should be. If I did, I wouldn't complain about it because it's my own fault or I was lying to myself enjoying the game for what it was, not for what I thought it should be. That's why I think this whole thread isn't really honest ... if GW1 people didn't like GW2 they wouldn't be play it now, PERIOD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justine.6351 Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 > @"Obtena.7952" said: > Personally, I think GW1 was a mistake; when all these game companies were releasing games where you could interact on a massive scale with other players ... GW1 was severely limited in that area. Seems to me that Anet under-estimated how much value players put interacting with each other in open world, instanced group, etc... and realized what a missed opportunity that was. I'm sure if the information they had said otherwise, GW2 would have been GW1 part 2. Ok you clearly didn't play GW1... Instancing made GW1 the game that it was because you could actually balance stuff around a fixed number of allies/enemies. This is why in GW2 its Zerg pve, Zerg wvw and seemingly their best way to balance mobs is to make them bigger health pillows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justine.6351 Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > Regardless, I don't know how GW2 was sold to GW1 customers > > > > > > > > that much is apparent. > > > > > > And as I said, completely irrelevant as well. The fact was that GW1 was lacking, even if parts of it were amazing. It was at the end of its life as a business line, so development stopped. That's pretty normal for games like this actually. I've yet to play a game that didn't suffer from being old in the tooth. It's expensive to maintain a game to keep up with using new available technology, features, hardware ... etc... It's better business just to make a new game and makes more sense as well, otherwise companies wouldn't do it. > > > > Pretty sure I did not say GW2 shouldn't have been made. > > > > So presumably you are anticipating the next campaign in approximately a year. ... > > Stop you right there ... I don't anticipate ANY online game will be around in a year and if I didn't like a game if was playing, I wouldn't play it for 5 more years waiting for it to become something I think it should be. If I did, I wouldn't complain about it because it's my own fault or I was lying to myself enjoying the game for what it was, not for what I thought it should be. > > That's why I think this whole thread isn't really honest ... if you didn't like GW2 you wouldn't play it, PERIOD. ? They told us GW2 would be everything that they had learned from their development time on GW1 and more. And I am not waiting for GW2 to become something different. I play both GW1 and GW2 actively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obtena.7952 Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 > @"Justine.6351" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > Regardless, I don't know how GW2 was sold to GW1 customers > > > > > > > > > > that much is apparent. > > > > > > > > And as I said, completely irrelevant as well. The fact was that GW1 was lacking, even if parts of it were amazing. It was at the end of its life as a business line, so development stopped. That's pretty normal for games like this actually. I've yet to play a game that didn't suffer from being old in the tooth. It's expensive to maintain a game to keep up with using new available technology, features, hardware ... etc... It's better business just to make a new game and makes more sense as well, otherwise companies wouldn't do it. > > > > > > Pretty sure I did not say GW2 shouldn't have been made. > > > > > > So presumably you are anticipating the next campaign in approximately a year. ... > > > > Stop you right there ... I don't anticipate ANY online game will be around in a year and if I didn't like a game if was playing, I wouldn't play it for 5 more years waiting for it to become something I think it should be. If I did, I wouldn't complain about it because it's my own fault or I was lying to myself enjoying the game for what it was, not for what I thought it should be. > > > > That's why I think this whole thread isn't really honest ... if you didn't like GW2 you wouldn't play it, PERIOD. > > ? > They told us GW2 would be everything that they had learned from their development time on GW1 and more. And I am not waiting for GW2 to become something different. I play both GW1 and GW2 actively. Sure ... that doesn't mean GW2 was going to be anything like GW1 though ... In fact, that sort of goes into my theory that GW1 was a mistake. What Anet learned was that people value interacting with each other significantly, so they added it to GW2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justine.6351 Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > Regardless, I don't know how GW2 was sold to GW1 customers > > > > > > > > > > > > that much is apparent. > > > > > > > > > > And as I said, completely irrelevant as well. The fact was that GW1 was lacking, even if parts of it were amazing. It was at the end of its life as a business line, so development stopped. That's pretty normal for games like this actually. I've yet to play a game that didn't suffer from being old in the tooth. It's expensive to maintain a game to keep up with using new available technology, features, hardware ... etc... It's better business just to make a new game and makes more sense as well, otherwise companies wouldn't do it. > > > > > > > > Pretty sure I did not say GW2 shouldn't have been made. > > > > > > > > So presumably you are anticipating the next campaign in approximately a year. ... > > > > > > Stop you right there ... I don't anticipate ANY online game will be around in a year and if I didn't like a game if was playing, I wouldn't play it for 5 more years waiting for it to become something I think it should be. If I did, I wouldn't complain about it because it's my own fault or I was lying to myself enjoying the game for what it was, not for what I thought it should be. > > > > > > That's why I think this whole thread isn't really honest ... if you didn't like GW2 you wouldn't play it, PERIOD. > > > > ? > > They told us GW2 would be everything that they had learned from their development time on GW1 and more. And I am not waiting for GW2 to become something different. I play both GW1 and GW2 actively. > > Sure ... that doesn't mean GW2 was going to be anything like GW1 though ... ? lolwhat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obtena.7952 Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 > @"Justine.6351" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > > Regardless, I don't know how GW2 was sold to GW1 customers > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that much is apparent. > > > > > > > > > > > > And as I said, completely irrelevant as well. The fact was that GW1 was lacking, even if parts of it were amazing. It was at the end of its life as a business line, so development stopped. That's pretty normal for games like this actually. I've yet to play a game that didn't suffer from being old in the tooth. It's expensive to maintain a game to keep up with using new available technology, features, hardware ... etc... It's better business just to make a new game and makes more sense as well, otherwise companies wouldn't do it. > > > > > > > > > > Pretty sure I did not say GW2 shouldn't have been made. > > > > > > > > > > So presumably you are anticipating the next campaign in approximately a year. ... > > > > > > > > Stop you right there ... I don't anticipate ANY online game will be around in a year and if I didn't like a game if was playing, I wouldn't play it for 5 more years waiting for it to become something I think it should be. If I did, I wouldn't complain about it because it's my own fault or I was lying to myself enjoying the game for what it was, not for what I thought it should be. > > > > > > > > That's why I think this whole thread isn't really honest ... if you didn't like GW2 you wouldn't play it, PERIOD. > > > > > > ? > > > They told us GW2 would be everything that they had learned from their development time on GW1 and more. And I am not waiting for GW2 to become something different. I play both GW1 and GW2 actively. > > > > Sure ... that doesn't mean GW2 was going to be anything like GW1 though ... ? > > lolwhat? IKNOWRIGHT!!! It's blows your mind that Anet learned what NOT to do or what they DIDN'T do in GW1 that they needed to do in GW2. #mindblown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justine.6351 Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > Regardless, I don't know how GW2 was sold to GW1 customers > > > > > > > > > > > > that much is apparent. > > > > > > > > > > And as I said, completely irrelevant as well. The fact was that GW1 was lacking, even if parts of it were amazing. It was at the end of its life as a business line, so development stopped. That's pretty normal for games like this actually. I've yet to play a game that didn't suffer from being old in the tooth. It's expensive to maintain a game to keep up with using new available technology, features, hardware ... etc... It's better business just to make a new game and makes more sense as well, otherwise companies wouldn't do it. > > > > > > > > Pretty sure I did not say GW2 shouldn't have been made. > > > > > > > > So presumably you are anticipating the next campaign in approximately a year. ... > > > > > > Stop you right there ... I don't anticipate ANY online game will be around in a year and if I didn't like a game if was playing, I wouldn't play it for 5 more years waiting for it to become something I think it should be. If I did, I wouldn't complain about it because it's my own fault or I was lying to myself enjoying the game for what it was, not for what I thought it should be. > > > > > > That's why I think this whole thread isn't really honest ... if you didn't like GW2 you wouldn't play it, PERIOD. > > > > ? > > They told us GW2 would be everything that they had learned from their development time on GW1 and more. And I am not waiting for GW2 to become something different. I play both GW1 and GW2 actively. > > Sure ... that doesn't mean GW2 was going to be anything like GW1 though ... In fact, that sort of goes into my theory that GW1 was a mistake. What Anet learned was that people value interacting with each other significantly, so they added it to GW2. You do realize there was hubs in GW1 right? Where you form a party with people you choose and then go have fun together without interference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obtena.7952 Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 > @"Justine.6351" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > > Regardless, I don't know how GW2 was sold to GW1 customers > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that much is apparent. > > > > > > > > > > > > And as I said, completely irrelevant as well. The fact was that GW1 was lacking, even if parts of it were amazing. It was at the end of its life as a business line, so development stopped. That's pretty normal for games like this actually. I've yet to play a game that didn't suffer from being old in the tooth. It's expensive to maintain a game to keep up with using new available technology, features, hardware ... etc... It's better business just to make a new game and makes more sense as well, otherwise companies wouldn't do it. > > > > > > > > > > Pretty sure I did not say GW2 shouldn't have been made. > > > > > > > > > > So presumably you are anticipating the next campaign in approximately a year. ... > > > > > > > > Stop you right there ... I don't anticipate ANY online game will be around in a year and if I didn't like a game if was playing, I wouldn't play it for 5 more years waiting for it to become something I think it should be. If I did, I wouldn't complain about it because it's my own fault or I was lying to myself enjoying the game for what it was, not for what I thought it should be. > > > > > > > > That's why I think this whole thread isn't really honest ... if you didn't like GW2 you wouldn't play it, PERIOD. > > > > > > ? > > > They told us GW2 would be everything that they had learned from their development time on GW1 and more. And I am not waiting for GW2 to become something different. I play both GW1 and GW2 actively. > > > > Sure ... that doesn't mean GW2 was going to be anything like GW1 though ... In fact, that sort of goes into my theory that GW1 was a mistake. What Anet learned was that people value interacting with each other significantly, so they added it to GW2. > > You do realize there was hubs in GW1 right? Where you form a party with people you choose and then go have fun together without interference? Yes, that doesn't change what I said though ... that's still nothing like the real MMO experience that clearly Anet knew was missing that they added to GW2. Seems to me it's the interference that was missing that people want ... or at least that's what the success of GW2 would suggest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Dragons Tail.3760 Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 I want to chime in here. I played gw1 and waited in anticipation for gw2, but no where in any of their statements did they say that gw2 was going to be like gw1. They made it clear multiple times, from what I remember, that it was going to be a different experience, but with some of the professions and lore. I heard it said and told that it was 250 years in the future and things have changed. But by all means if you can find proof on the net where anet, not people on forums or similar places, said that it was going to be like gw1 then please post them. Because simply saying that it is so does not make is so. Just like many things in gw2 where someone will state that anet promised something, but was never able to provide proof and then another provides proof they said it differently. When gw2 came out I at first thought this is not gw. But I kept with it and eventually learned the game. Now I have tried multiple times to play gw1 and just can't do it. I feel stifled in combat because I can't move, or I can't jump. But each persons memory will vary. And one thing I have learned over time is that most people will only remember the good things and ignore or forget the things they don't like. But how one remembers a game is their own. But to say that anet promised something requires proof. Now this not to say either side of any argument in here is right or wrong. I see points on each, but as I have been watching this thread I have noticed that it is slowly devolving into a mute argument since the thread is already here, but at the same time it really doesn't help either gw1 or gw2 in any fashion. Up til now I was just finding the discussion interesting, but when someone claims something about anet saying something when I can't remember them every saying, I personally want proof they did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justine.6351 Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > > > Regardless, I don't know how GW2 was sold to GW1 customers > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that much is apparent. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And as I said, completely irrelevant as well. The fact was that GW1 was lacking, even if parts of it were amazing. It was at the end of its life as a business line, so development stopped. That's pretty normal for games like this actually. I've yet to play a game that didn't suffer from being old in the tooth. It's expensive to maintain a game to keep up with using new available technology, features, hardware ... etc... It's better business just to make a new game and makes more sense as well, otherwise companies wouldn't do it. > > > > > > > > > > > > Pretty sure I did not say GW2 shouldn't have been made. > > > > > > > > > > > > So presumably you are anticipating the next campaign in approximately a year. ... > > > > > > > > > > Stop you right there ... I don't anticipate ANY online game will be around in a year and if I didn't like a game if was playing, I wouldn't play it for 5 more years waiting for it to become something I think it should be. If I did, I wouldn't complain about it because it's my own fault or I was lying to myself enjoying the game for what it was, not for what I thought it should be. > > > > > > > > > > That's why I think this whole thread isn't really honest ... if you didn't like GW2 you wouldn't play it, PERIOD. > > > > > > > > ? > > > > They told us GW2 would be everything that they had learned from their development time on GW1 and more. And I am not waiting for GW2 to become something different. I play both GW1 and GW2 actively. > > > > > > Sure ... that doesn't mean GW2 was going to be anything like GW1 though ... ? > > > > lolwhat? > > IKNOWRIGHT!!! It's blows your mind that Anet learned what NOT to do or what they DIDN'T do in GW1 that they needed to do in GW2. #mindblown Yeah they "learned" to take their success in GW1 and throw it out the window alienating their supporters. You do realize there are companies getting financially rekt right now because of that mentality? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justine.6351 Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > > > Regardless, I don't know how GW2 was sold to GW1 customers > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that much is apparent. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And as I said, completely irrelevant as well. The fact was that GW1 was lacking, even if parts of it were amazing. It was at the end of its life as a business line, so development stopped. That's pretty normal for games like this actually. I've yet to play a game that didn't suffer from being old in the tooth. It's expensive to maintain a game to keep up with using new available technology, features, hardware ... etc... It's better business just to make a new game and makes more sense as well, otherwise companies wouldn't do it. > > > > > > > > > > > > Pretty sure I did not say GW2 shouldn't have been made. > > > > > > > > > > > > So presumably you are anticipating the next campaign in approximately a year. ... > > > > > > > > > > Stop you right there ... I don't anticipate ANY online game will be around in a year and if I didn't like a game if was playing, I wouldn't play it for 5 more years waiting for it to become something I think it should be. If I did, I wouldn't complain about it because it's my own fault or I was lying to myself enjoying the game for what it was, not for what I thought it should be. > > > > > > > > > > That's why I think this whole thread isn't really honest ... if you didn't like GW2 you wouldn't play it, PERIOD. > > > > > > > > ? > > > > They told us GW2 would be everything that they had learned from their development time on GW1 and more. And I am not waiting for GW2 to become something different. I play both GW1 and GW2 actively. > > > > > > Sure ... that doesn't mean GW2 was going to be anything like GW1 though ... In fact, that sort of goes into my theory that GW1 was a mistake. What Anet learned was that people value interacting with each other significantly, so they added it to GW2. > > > > You do realize there was hubs in GW1 right? Where you form a party with people you choose and then go have fun together without interference? > > Yes, that doesn't change what I said though ... that's still nothing like the real MMO experience that clearly Anet knew was missing that they added to GW2. Seems to me it's the interference that was missing that people want ... or at least that's what the success of GW2 would suggest. Just suggested GW1 wasn't successful, yet plays GW2 today because of GW1's success. Brilliance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obtena.7952 Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 > @"Justine.6351" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > > > > Regardless, I don't know how GW2 was sold to GW1 customers > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that much is apparent. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And as I said, completely irrelevant as well. The fact was that GW1 was lacking, even if parts of it were amazing. It was at the end of its life as a business line, so development stopped. That's pretty normal for games like this actually. I've yet to play a game that didn't suffer from being old in the tooth. It's expensive to maintain a game to keep up with using new available technology, features, hardware ... etc... It's better business just to make a new game and makes more sense as well, otherwise companies wouldn't do it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pretty sure I did not say GW2 shouldn't have been made. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So presumably you are anticipating the next campaign in approximately a year. ... > > > > > > > > > > > > Stop you right there ... I don't anticipate ANY online game will be around in a year and if I didn't like a game if was playing, I wouldn't play it for 5 more years waiting for it to become something I think it should be. If I did, I wouldn't complain about it because it's my own fault or I was lying to myself enjoying the game for what it was, not for what I thought it should be. > > > > > > > > > > > > That's why I think this whole thread isn't really honest ... if you didn't like GW2 you wouldn't play it, PERIOD. > > > > > > > > > > ? > > > > > They told us GW2 would be everything that they had learned from their development time on GW1 and more. And I am not waiting for GW2 to become something different. I play both GW1 and GW2 actively. > > > > > > > > Sure ... that doesn't mean GW2 was going to be anything like GW1 though ... ? > > > > > > lolwhat? > > > > IKNOWRIGHT!!! It's blows your mind that Anet learned what NOT to do or what they DIDN'T do in GW1 that they needed to do in GW2. #mindblown > > Yeah they "learned" to take their success in GW1 and throw it out the window alienating their supporters. You do realize there are companies getting financially rekt right now because of that mentality? Yeah, Anet is getting financially rekt for the last 6+ years because of their decision to make GW2 and abandon their GW1 customers ... Seems to me who ever is running that business should be getting a bonus ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obtena.7952 Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 > @"Justine.6351" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > > > > Regardless, I don't know how GW2 was sold to GW1 customers > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that much is apparent. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And as I said, completely irrelevant as well. The fact was that GW1 was lacking, even if parts of it were amazing. It was at the end of its life as a business line, so development stopped. That's pretty normal for games like this actually. I've yet to play a game that didn't suffer from being old in the tooth. It's expensive to maintain a game to keep up with using new available technology, features, hardware ... etc... It's better business just to make a new game and makes more sense as well, otherwise companies wouldn't do it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pretty sure I did not say GW2 shouldn't have been made. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So presumably you are anticipating the next campaign in approximately a year. ... > > > > > > > > > > > > Stop you right there ... I don't anticipate ANY online game will be around in a year and if I didn't like a game if was playing, I wouldn't play it for 5 more years waiting for it to become something I think it should be. If I did, I wouldn't complain about it because it's my own fault or I was lying to myself enjoying the game for what it was, not for what I thought it should be. > > > > > > > > > > > > That's why I think this whole thread isn't really honest ... if you didn't like GW2 you wouldn't play it, PERIOD. > > > > > > > > > > ? > > > > > They told us GW2 would be everything that they had learned from their development time on GW1 and more. And I am not waiting for GW2 to become something different. I play both GW1 and GW2 actively. > > > > > > > > Sure ... that doesn't mean GW2 was going to be anything like GW1 though ... In fact, that sort of goes into my theory that GW1 was a mistake. What Anet learned was that people value interacting with each other significantly, so they added it to GW2. > > > > > > You do realize there was hubs in GW1 right? Where you form a party with people you choose and then go have fun together without interference? > > > > Yes, that doesn't change what I said though ... that's still nothing like the real MMO experience that clearly Anet knew was missing that they added to GW2. Seems to me it's the interference that was missing that people want ... or at least that's what the success of GW2 would suggest. > > Just suggested GW1 wasn't successful, yet plays GW2 today because of GW1's success. Brilliance. What I said in no way suggests GW1 wasn't successful, I'm simply saying Anet did learn from GW1 by seeing the mistakes they made in it to develop GW2 and that's why we have a significantly more expanded MMO experience in GW2 ... but whatever, you have an axe to grind, so just keep'em coming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justine.6351 Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 > @"Lost Dragons Tail.3760" said: > I want to chime in here. I played gw1 and waited in anticipation for gw2, but no where in any of their statements did they say that gw2 was going to be like gw1. They made it clear multiple times, from what I remember, that it was going to be a different experience, but with some of the professions and lore. I heard it said and told that it was 250 years in the future and things have changed. > But by all means if you can find proof on the net where anet, not people on forums or similar places, said that it was going to be like gw1 then please post them. Because simply saying that it is so does not make is so. Just like many things in gw2 where someone will state that anet promised something, but was never able to provide proof and then another provides proof they said it differently. > When gw2 came out I at first thought this is not gw. But I kept with it and eventually learned the game. Now I have tried multiple times to play gw1 and just can't do it. I feel stifled in combat because I can't move, or I can't jump. But each persons memory will vary. And one thing I have learned over time is that most people will only remember the good things and ignore or forget the things they don't like. But how one remembers a game is their own. But to say that anet promised something requires proof. > Now this not to say either side of any argument in here is right or wrong. I see points on each, but as I have been watching this thread I have noticed that it is slowly devolving into a mute argument since the thread is already here, but at the same time it really doesn't help either gw1 or gw2 in any fashion. Up til now I was just finding the discussion interesting, but when someone claims something about anet saying something when I can't remember them every saying, I personally want proof they did. I reread the article in a mag with dev quotes and stuff. They basically said, *can't keep pushing expansions every 6 months *can't fit everything in that they crazy brainstormed *can't keep making new mechanics for new tutorial areas without it being super congested *can't just keep adding more skills in because of crazy balance already with over 1000 skills and 10 professions *Gw2 would take what they learned and found successful in gw1 *don't expect gw2 for at least 2 years (was back in like 2007 article, game was released 5 years later) Thats pretty much it, rest talks about EoTN expansion. So no it doesn't say GW2 will be carbon copy of GW1. But its kind of implied that it would at least be similar considering GW1's success and they were building off of that. Sorry I should have mentioned that I did appreciate your post. Its good to have someone come in with their point of view that actually can relate to the scenario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justine.6351 Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > > > > > Regardless, I don't know how GW2 was sold to GW1 customers > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that much is apparent. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And as I said, completely irrelevant as well. The fact was that GW1 was lacking, even if parts of it were amazing. It was at the end of its life as a business line, so development stopped. That's pretty normal for games like this actually. I've yet to play a game that didn't suffer from being old in the tooth. It's expensive to maintain a game to keep up with using new available technology, features, hardware ... etc... It's better business just to make a new game and makes more sense as well, otherwise companies wouldn't do it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pretty sure I did not say GW2 shouldn't have been made. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So presumably you are anticipating the next campaign in approximately a year. ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Stop you right there ... I don't anticipate ANY online game will be around in a year and if I didn't like a game if was playing, I wouldn't play it for 5 more years waiting for it to become something I think it should be. If I did, I wouldn't complain about it because it's my own fault or I was lying to myself enjoying the game for what it was, not for what I thought it should be. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That's why I think this whole thread isn't really honest ... if you didn't like GW2 you wouldn't play it, PERIOD. > > > > > > > > > > > > ? > > > > > > They told us GW2 would be everything that they had learned from their development time on GW1 and more. And I am not waiting for GW2 to become something different. I play both GW1 and GW2 actively. > > > > > > > > > > Sure ... that doesn't mean GW2 was going to be anything like GW1 though ... ? > > > > > > > > lolwhat? > > > > > > IKNOWRIGHT!!! It's blows your mind that Anet learned what NOT to do or what they DIDN'T do in GW1 that they needed to do in GW2. #mindblown > > > > Yeah they "learned" to take their success in GW1 and throw it out the window alienating their supporters. You do realize there are companies getting financially rekt right now because of that mentality? > > Yeah, Anet is getting financially rekt for the last 6+ years because of their decision to make GW2 and abandon their GW1 customers ... Seems to me who ever is running that business should be getting a bonus ... Today's gaming climate has changed. Pretty obvious when you look at whats been happening in the gaming industry for the last 1-2 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obtena.7952 Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 > @"Justine.6351" said: > Thats pretty much it, rest talks about EoTN expansion. So no it doesn't say GW2 will be carbon copy of GW1. But its kind of implied that it would at least be similar considering GW1's success and they were building off of that. ... and there isn't any reason to think they didn't do that, considering that GW2 is successful. I mean, it IS similar to GW1 in lots of ways, just not the ways that everyone wants it to be. It's simply unfair to claim Anet changed their direction at the expense of it's GW1 players because some GW1 players don't think GW2 is similar enough to GW1. That's ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obtena.7952 Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 > @"Justine.6351" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > Regardless, I don't know how GW2 was sold to GW1 customers > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that much is apparent. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And as I said, completely irrelevant as well. The fact was that GW1 was lacking, even if parts of it were amazing. It was at the end of its life as a business line, so development stopped. That's pretty normal for games like this actually. I've yet to play a game that didn't suffer from being old in the tooth. It's expensive to maintain a game to keep up with using new available technology, features, hardware ... etc... It's better business just to make a new game and makes more sense as well, otherwise companies wouldn't do it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pretty sure I did not say GW2 shouldn't have been made. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So presumably you are anticipating the next campaign in approximately a year. ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Stop you right there ... I don't anticipate ANY online game will be around in a year and if I didn't like a game if was playing, I wouldn't play it for 5 more years waiting for it to become something I think it should be. If I did, I wouldn't complain about it because it's my own fault or I was lying to myself enjoying the game for what it was, not for what I thought it should be. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That's why I think this whole thread isn't really honest ... if you didn't like GW2 you wouldn't play it, PERIOD. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ? > > > > > > > They told us GW2 would be everything that they had learned from their development time on GW1 and more. And I am not waiting for GW2 to become something different. I play both GW1 and GW2 actively. > > > > > > > > > > > > Sure ... that doesn't mean GW2 was going to be anything like GW1 though ... ? > > > > > > > > > > lolwhat? > > > > > > > > IKNOWRIGHT!!! It's blows your mind that Anet learned what NOT to do or what they DIDN'T do in GW1 that they needed to do in GW2. #mindblown > > > > > > Yeah they "learned" to take their success in GW1 and throw it out the window alienating their supporters. You do realize there are companies getting financially rekt right now because of that mentality? > > > > Yeah, Anet is getting financially rekt for the last 6+ years because of their decision to make GW2 and abandon their GW1 customers ... Seems to me who ever is running that business should be getting a bonus ... > > Today's gaming climate has changed. Pretty obvious when you look at whats been happening in the gaming industry for the last 1-2 years. Right ... so how does that even relate to 6-8 years ago when Anet even thought about starting GW2? The fact that they have continued developing this game and making a business of it even IN the turbulent climate of the last 1-2 years suggests ... good business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lincolnbeard.1735 Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 @"Lost Dragons Tail.3760" ANet manifesto says something like we took everything you love out of gw1 and put it in gw2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justine.6351 Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > Thats pretty much it, rest talks about EoTN expansion. So no it doesn't say GW2 will be carbon copy of GW1. But its kind of implied that it would at least be similar considering GW1's success and they were building off of that. > > ... and there isn't any reason to think they didn't do that, considering that GW2 is successful. I mean, it IS similar to GW1 in lots of ways, just not the ways that everyone wants it to be. It's simply unfair to claim Anet changed their direction at the expense of it's GW1 players because some GW1 players don't think GW2 is similar enough to GW1. That's ridiculous. > Yeah in what way? Is it the locked weapon skill bars or the complete lack of enemy ai that makes them similar? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obtena.7952 Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 > @"Justine.6351" said: > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > Thats pretty much it, rest talks about EoTN expansion. So no it doesn't say GW2 will be carbon copy of GW1. But its kind of implied that it would at least be similar considering GW1's success and they were building off of that. > > > > ... and there isn't any reason to think they didn't do that, considering that GW2 is successful. I mean, it IS similar to GW1 in lots of ways, just not the ways that everyone wants it to be. It's simply unfair to claim Anet changed their direction at the expense of it's GW1 players because some GW1 players don't think GW2 is similar enough to GW1. That's ridiculous. > > > > Yeah in what way? Is it the locked weapon skill bars or the complete lack of enemy ai that makes them similar? In lots of ways that you don't want to admit. /shrug That statement is just being disingenuous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justine.6351 Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > @"Obtena.7952" said: > > > > @"Justine.6351" said: > > > > Thats pretty much it, rest talks about EoTN expansion. So no it doesn't say GW2 will be carbon copy of GW1. But its kind of implied that it would at least be similar considering GW1's success and they were building off of that. > > > > > > ... and there isn't any reason to think they didn't do that, considering that GW2 is successful. I mean, it IS similar to GW1 in lots of ways, just not the ways that everyone wants it to be. It's simply unfair to claim Anet changed their direction at the expense of it's GW1 players because some GW1 players don't think GW2 is similar enough to GW1. That's ridiculous. > > > > > > > Yeah in what way? Is it the locked weapon skill bars or the complete lack of enemy ai that makes them similar? > > In lots of ways that you don't want to admit. /shrug That statement is just being disingenuous. So yes name a few that are not lore related. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikali.9651 Posted January 31, 2019 Author Share Posted January 31, 2019 Yeah Obtena and Justine could you please stop with this, the point of this thread is not to argue, and also, the point of this thread is not to rub salt into the wound, Obtena. This is one thread about and for Guild Wars 1 players, and do you really need to make all this drama, Obtena? Come on now, let us be already, you are really being abusive now. 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