Endgame? [Video]

[Fencers]

We've answered all of these already... <snip>

Stop right there and get over yourself. Many of these Qs can't be answered until release. You have not answered a thing- what you have done is parrot stuff you read & heard elsewhere. To which I say, sounds good on paper but I'll believe it when it's installed on my SSD.

And optimism =/= ignorance, your ignorance is thinking that despite what EVERYONE ELSE IS SAYING, that the dungeons will be one instance 4 difficulty levels, and that without progression the games not going to be good.

Assuming many of these systems are going to work as advertised is ignorance.

Is anyone here in the alpha or beta? A designer for the game? No/yes? Then I will take fan responses with a grain of salt on all aspects of gameplay and remain skeptical.

You don't know anymore than the rest of us unless you are hands-on with the game right now.

Also I never said the dungeons were 4 difficulty levels or assumed such. So you claiming something I never said. What I see presented to us are 8 dungeons with 4 variations apiece. Not 32 separate dungeons.

8.

[Blznsmri]

Many of these Qs can't be answered until release.

If you recognize that, then stop asking questions that you claim can't be answered till release. We've given you every reason and explanation of things available and you've argued "But it might not be." We don't know that it will be like they're advertising, and you don't know that it won't. So the argument is really moot...

[Fencers]

If you recognize that, then stop asking questions that you claim can't be answered till release. We've given you every reason and explanation of things available and you've argued "But it might not be." We don't know that it will be like they're advertising, and you don't know that it won't. So the argument is really moot...

Your efforts were moot as I read the same blogs as you have.

Speculating on aspects I am unsure will work or posing a rhetorical question is not seeking the forum's answers to GW2's mysteries.

Give me a break. GW2's maiden head is well protected.

So that means you spend a lot of time in GW1, bought game + different campaigns + EOTN so Arenanet earned your money, so to me it seem that the endgame model without gear progressing Anet used in GW1 was very successful.

Um, I never asked for gear progression or expect it out of GW2. What I do expect is a sense of progression out of any MMO period. Whether it be story continuation, access to areas, cool toys, AAs, levels, pets or gear. I don't particularly care what it is we get as long as it's meaningful to your character.

The gear thing was just nonsense others kinda are hung up on.

[Deleted]

Um, I never asked for gear progression or expect it out of GW2. What I do expect is a sense of progression out of any MMO period. Whether it be story continuation, access to areas, cool toys, AAs, levels, pets or gear. I don't particularly care what it is we get as long as it's meaningful to your character.

The gear thing was just nonsense others kinda are hung up on.

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Achievements there isn't much info about these yet, but I see no reason to believe there won't be some achievements which will take lot of time just like some GW1 titles took. Colin said it in one interview that there will be achievements take lot of time to achieve, so these players who enjoy working toward some big goal have something to do.

[Deleted]

^ this, the more i read these the more ignorant fencers seems to be...

I don't understand this: why is someone ignorant if that person is validly concerned and expresses that concern? Or is it that someone is ignorant if they disagree with you?

[Blznsmri]

I don't understand this: why is someone ignorant if that person is validly concerned and expresses that concern? Or is it that someone is ignorant if they disagree with you?

Not reading the full argument is what causes it. Also there's this whole thing about how humans are wired to want to win arguments, regardless of right, wrong, reason, or logic.

[Deleted]

Not reading the full argument is what causes it.

Well, looking at some of the answers to her are no better :S

Also there's this whole thing about how humans are wired to want to win arguments, regardless of right, wrong, reason, or logic.

Humans beings are mostly selfish creatures with personal gain as the primary motivator, and for some people the feeling of "winning" -- even over completely ridiculous things -- is enough to make it feel like it is indeed personal gain.

Personally I agree with Fencers's concerns and from what I've seen and read I doubt I'll bother doing the dungeons more than once. Getting only visual differences just doesn't feel much of a reward and thus there doesn't exist the incentive for doing those. Similarly as there is no feeling of progression whatsoever there is little reason to do them other than the "I'll run through this just to see how this dungeon looks like." Running DEs is the same thing; if there is no incentive to continue doing them I'll likely just ignore them.

Now someone is bound to jump in and start spouting the same old, tired diatribe of "well GW2 is not for you GTFO!" But well, maybe it isn't, maybe it is. I really don't care, I'll still buy it as I like how it looks like, and I wish to atleast experience the story. I'll just stop playing when I run out of meaningful things to do. Besides, there isn't anything better out there now or in the near future, so telling me to move on to something else is just pointless.

What could Anet -- or some other developer, if you just take the question in general -- do to make it feel like there is some meaningful incentive for me? I can't really say as I don't know. I find the feeling of progression to be the most rewarding and thus being the closest thing to an incentive as can be in an MMO, but it doesn't necessarily have to be gear-wise progression. What else could it be, that I do not know as I am only familiar with gear-wise approach to it, and I am still waiting to see if someone else comes up with a good alternative.

[Blznsmri]

Well, looking at some of the answers to her are no better :S



Humans beings are mostly selfish creatures with personal gain as the primary motivator, and for some people the feeling of "winning" -- even over completely ridiculous things -- is enough to make it feel like it is indeed personal gain.

I didn't say that I or other people were innocent of it, just that's how it works.

I'll give you a more on-topic and full reply in the early morrow, I've got to be up in 4 hours.

[Fencers]

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Achievements there isn't much info about these yet, but I see no reason to believe there won't be some achievements which will take lot of time just like some GW1 titles took. Colin said it in one interview that there will be achievements take lot of time to achieve, so these players who enjoy working toward some big goal have something to do.

Very well and good. Again, I am aware there will be other things to do besides grind dungeons, DEs and so on.

Not the issue, unrelated to my original comments and not in any way to what I was speaking toward.

Let's backtrack a bit. Original comment to the OP of the thread--

My question is, will you miss this kind of never-ending endgame? Do you think the dungeons will make up for no raids?

I believe this to be the REAL gamble Anet is planning and the true risk of the game. To some this will be appealing, to others-- not so much. Anet is splitting their potential audience right down this divide I feel.

As long term players/guilds are held together by progressive orientated content. People like to feel as though they upgrading or working toward a communal goal; doing so with mates is that much more fun.

Of course, it's all one big gerbil wheel in these MMOs. But the illusion raid Z is gonna be that much more awesome than raid Y was is what keeps the "one more piece..." hook of an MMO going.

I want to see what sort of gerbil wheels Anet comes up with as a replacement that can hold together 50+ player plus guilds with robust raiding/grouping intentions over 4, 6, 7 years as Everquest, Final Fantasy 11 and World of Warcraft are able. Open world zerg content wears thin.

There is nothing there which assumes any of the following;

-- dungeons are all there is to endgame.
-- DEs are all there is to endgame.
-- gear grind is necessary.
-- the game will fail.
-- ANet's design is faulty.
-- the game needs to be a second job, so to speak.


Certainly, there will be time sinks of all kinds in GW2. Will GW2 work for holding big hardcore PVE guilds together as in WOW, EQ or Rift? I am not so sure yet and have explained why in response to nearly every false assumption, misguided attempt to explain how GW2 gameplay and strawman argument without backing down from comical fanboy drooling.

[Odeezee]

So what? Anet's esoteric break from the norm is fine.

I am (validly) raising my concerns about their proposed scheme to maintain players such as myself at the end of game as the thread's premise/video mentions.

The video author talks of WvWvW as a big hook for his endgame. That's fine for him. What I am iffy about is Anet's ability to pull this stuff off as long term. To provide a comparably engaging endgame as other MMOs on the market now & soon-to-be for players such as myself who do enjoy PVE exclusively and look for a content rich PVE experience.

If Anet make it so DEs, world exploration and 5 mans are super awesome- great! But there are a few things about the game at the moment in a PVE sense which seem sorta thin in the long term.

HAHA, so basically you are upset because there are more than just PvE options for end-game content? i mean wtf? there was no need to even mention PvP being in GW2 if it doesn't concern you as it does not impact your PvE content. people are so myopic in their views of end-game and forget that "end-game' norms change with the games that popularize them. i gave you an example instanced raids were not a part of the EQ formula, WoW innovated in that aspect and popularized it. it is NOT the only form of progression for the so called "end-game". GW2 is just going a different route and if it becomes popular it will become the new norm for "end-game" content. as long as they make it fun, engaging and replayable.

I have no negative association with a gerbil wheel content cycle. It is quite fun for me to always work toward an ever moving goal. In the modern MMO, this is often gear or stats. But I would enjoy continued story progression or some other means such as AAs, C levels, access to new areas, item resale or what-have-you.

Progression doesn't have to be gear or stat based alone or at all. Often is, sure. I am looking for continued progression along PVE by some means. Not stagnation.

I'm sure killing stuff in GW2 will be loads of fun. But like, what happens when... we run our 50th Catacomb? Great job team! We won! What did we gain? Oh just the raw satisfaction of killing mobs in the same zone in slightly different compositions. Um, yea. We don't need an incentive, progression or meta-context. Nope. Who's up for run 51?

ok, first they are trying to give people a choice; play the dungeon because you find it fun, engaging and replayable and not to stay competitive. second, there is gear progression it is just cosmetic as opposed to stat based. i don't get how you can belittle this given you gain access to something you didn't have before, hence progression. thirdly, what is with this fixation that an instance with wings has the exact same mobs in each wing? this is why people think that you are being unreasonable as we not only have dev testimony but other game fans and game writers who attest to the different paths in GW2 being uniquely different.

What you were speaking about w/r/t PVP was not what I was speaking about. You misread the tenure of this conversation point. Go back and read the progression of these comments.

The video mentions PVP as endgame hook, others in thread as well. I said I am not interested or supportive of PVP as endgame hook. My concern is PVE as endgame hook. To that end, I expect the PVE content to provide enough interest and activity in of itself to me personally.

i am sorry but you seem to have confused yourself. PvE and PvP are mutually exclusive in GW and you should know that. one does not adversely affect the other, so i questioned why you would even bring it up. so what if it is a form of end-game you do not like? it doesn't matter because you do NOT have to participate in it. that does not invalidate it as an OPTION for those who want it as an end-game content.

Hardly. Swarms of players, rez'd or not, is zerging the content.

If calling it a zerg irks you, I'll just call it a lame-a-thon.

this is where i question if you actually understand what it means to zerg and how DEs scale. if there are 5 players there the difficulty scales to accommodate those 5 players and the same will happen up until the scale cap. if the DE has scaled to 5 players for 5 players and the players start to die off, it's not as easy as we can whittle down the boss by resing on him over and over as while you are being resed the remaining guys have more to deal with thus increasing the likelyhood that you will FAIL the event. remember there are 2 possible outcomes to each event; pass and fail, and there are time limits as well so you need to come prepared and play cohesively to succeed.

Most gameplay comments are assumption and speculation until the game is live. Do you have some inside scoop or rigorous hands-on testing yourself to say definitively how each system in the game works in actual practice?

If you are allowed to speculate DEs in GW2 will be "totally different" from the zerg/attrition matches seen in other open world encounters of numerous other games- then I am allowed to speculate DE encounters are gonna be simple "beer & pretzel" attack/respawn/attack attrition matches.

Players adapting? Wishful thinking. I reckon players are gonna perch themselves somewhere, toss out more fireballs, maybe die. Respawn and continue doing the same. Oh! Some players might run to the rifts..., err, I mean storehouse for more sourcestones.... err, I mean cannonballs...

PUG tailored content.

Again, if suddenly we get C'thun or Yogg Saron tactics in open world or messing with a DE event is akin to waking the Sleeper... then awesome. Hats off to Anet then, they managed to pull off open world encounters.

so basically this point is moot as neither of us can prove otherwise, but this however does not give you the right to talk about it in absolutes as you did in the post i replied to.

So the layout and look of Catacombs will change wholly every time I walk in there; you know this to be true? You are sure this won't be like Rift's normal/expert/master modes with added rooms and bosses per mode?

You are sure that Catacombs story/expert 1/expert 2/expert 3/expert 1a/expert 1b/etc are going to be totally new environments each and every single time?

Catacombs expert path 3, sub-event C with a side room or extra skeletons is just Catacombs shuffle mode. I seen the concept before and it was fairly tiresome after run #3, yet alone run #20, 30, 40...

Give me a reason to keep visiting the same zone as a means of forwarding my character above that tier, and then I'll run all 22 variations of Catacombs. But if it's the same zone with some added rooms/mobs? Eh.

With just 8 dungeons zones, I hope those zones are balls to the wall. Otherwise, burn it & forget it, seems highly likely as it was in other games that offered similar glorified shuffle mode dungeons.

it's like you cannot understand the basic premise here and your lack of comprehension disturbs me. i can understand if you do not like the fact that they are using wings for dungeons, i can understand you wanting to only progress through illusory stat increases, but what i cannot understand is how you blatantly overlook the basic structure of the dungeons. you keep mentioning more than 2 difficulty modes which is wrong. there are only 2 modes of difficulty story mode (pug friendly) and explorable mode (organized groups only). the wings play differently from one another but their relative difficulty is the same. and from what we have been told from those that played it, look different too, depending on the path you have taken. this is why people in this thread discredit you because how do you get, "You are sure that Catacombs story/expert 1/expert 2/expert 3/expert 1a/expert 1b/etc are going to be totally new environments each and every single time?" from explorable mode has 3 distinctly different paths with their own unique mobs, mini-bosses and boss mechanics????!!!111 it's like me offering a choice betwen red, blue and yellow then you come back and say so basically every time i come to you i get a new and unique color. no you get to choose between red, blue or yellow. /sigh

But it is competing for my time and money. What do you not not understand about that?

You are defending something I am not attacking.

It is totally valid to look to GW2's endgame as presented and question aspects which might or might not retain your own interests. Of which, I am concerned the DEs are going to be "beer & pretzels" simplicity and the instances too sparse.

There are many other things I am excited or eager to see in GW2. Combat, cosmetics, story, graphics, et cetera. However, I do raise an eyebrow at other aspects.

games competing for your time and money goes without saying. the criteria that separate choice is what i was emphasizing /sigh. you don't have to like GW2 just don't spread misinformation.

[Xcreed]

The way I imagine buying GW2 would be like is more like buying CoD for example, there is a great storyline wich you can do. And after that you can PvP the hell out of the game. Wich is exactly what I'm going to be doing with GW2.

I havn't enjoyed raiding since early WotLK in WoW, so I am really happy there is no raiding in GW2. I think 5 man dungeons can be so much more challenging because you are in a smaller group. And quite frankly there is a bigger responsibility on your shoulder. PLUS! its way easier to play with close friends and improve your teamwork for say PvP.

[sacrypheyes]

-snip-

what i just don't get in all this is :
-if non DE (let's call them static) quests & dungeons have been enough to entertain you in previous MMOs, i don't get how improving the said system could be any worse. or else you'll have to explain to me in which way a "never changing" quest/dungeon is better than a "possibly different" one.
-you pretend (dun care wether if it's true or not) having a GW main with GWAMM title, thus should be already having an idea of what Anet can do without the usual gear treadmill, yet question how they'll be doing in GW2. kinda weird i gotta say.
-while i can't answer on the large scale DEs difficulty/complexity, if as previously stated, you know GW1 all that much, you should be able to figure by yourself Anet is pretty much able to create encounters where players can get their asses handed over to them if they're not well prepared enough. just because nowadays we can copy/paste some builds out of some wikis doesn't mean GW1 never had any challenging content. if you never thought the game was difficult at any point, i may say you must not have seen much of GW1.

and while marketing and all the communication tricks certainly help to sell a game, no matter how stupid people are, a bad game remains bad and won't retain players for long. whether GW2 will succeed on keeping players in front of their screens on the long term is something no one can tell until it's released.
the reason people are being quite optimistic about GW2 up to now is that most of what they "brag" about, they're also letting people see by themselves or they already used a similar mechanic in GW1.

also, bringing back the "endgame issue" topic again and again just gets boring as Anet obviously never showed/said anything about it. my thoughts : wait & see.

[Fencers]

Okay, more false assumptions from this guy--

HAHA, so basically you are upset because there are more than just PvE options for end-game content? i mean wtf? there was no need to even mention PvP being in GW2 if it doesn't concern you as it does not impact your PvE content. people are so myopic in their views of end-game and forget that "end-game' norms change with the games that popularize them. i gave you an example instanced raids were not a part of the EQ formula, WoW innovated in that aspect and popularized it. it is NOT the only form of progression for the so called "end-game". GW2 is just going a different route and if it becomes popular it will become the new norm for "end-game" content. as long as they make it fun, engaging and replayable.

OP mentions it, other person (page 2?) I was replying to mentioned it and now it's replied to by other commentators out of original context.

The rest of what you are saying here is irrelevant.

Why am I upset about PVP? I don't care about PVP to any degree. The video author does. He is looking forward to it as a his endgame. Seems cool. I am looking forward to PVE as my endgame and hope there will be tons of it.

Will there be? None of us know yet- we are assuming so based on what is said by people selling a product.

ok, first they are trying to give people a choice; play the dungeon because you find it fun, engaging and replayable.

second, there is gear progression it is just cosmetic as opposed to stat based i don't get how you can belittle this give you gain access to something you didn't have before, hence progression.

I am not totally convinced these are enough on their own with so few dungeons and such small incentive for return. As a long term endgame staple, dungeons right now look to be sparse. 8 zones, 4 modes each.

thirdly, what is with this fixation that an instance with wings has the exact same mobs in each wing? this is why people thing that you are being unreasonable as we not only have dev testimony but other game fans and game writers who attest to the different paths in GW2 being uniquely different.

Saw the same thing claimed in Rift. With dev and fan testimony to boot. They weren't lying, there were new layouts and things in the additional modes. They were so minor though as to be eyerolling- a few mobs, some new bosses, extra mechanics or two, an extra room or two.

Difficulty aside, like all CYOAs, eventually we run through all the permutations alternate paths can offer.

i am sorry but you seem to have confused yourself. PvE and PvP are mutually exclusive in GW and you should know that. one does not adversely affect the other, so i questioned why you would even bring it up.

Huh? I never claimed these weren't separate. Did you watch the video? Did you read the previous replies? Did you miss the conversation which mentioned PVP to which I was replying to?

PVP has no consequence to me. At all. Someone else mentioned it as part of the overall Endgame and even suggested I try some PVP as endgame. I said, "not interested."

Don't be so quick to defend stuff I am not tearing down.

this is where i question if you actually understand what it means to zerg and how DEs scale. if there are 5 players there the difficulty scales to accommodate those 5 players and the same will happen up until the scale cap. if the DE has scaled to 5 players for 5 players and the players start to die off, it's not as easy as we can whittle down the boss by resing on him over and over as while you are being resed the remaining guys have more to deal with this increasing the likelyhood that you will FAIL the event. remember there are 2 possible outcomes to each event; pass and fail, and there are time limits as well so you need to come prepared and play cohesively to succeed.

Zerg is just a term. If attrition better suits my POV, I'll call it as such. To me, zerging is simply throwing bodies at wall till it collapses.

500 unique individuals running up to a thing to smack it, respawning and doing it again till it has zero HP left is not functionally different than 5 individuals doing the same thing. In my point of view, if semantics on zerging are important to you- too bad.

Again, I am aware of how DEs are *suppose* to work. I am highly suspicious any of that will actually work on release as such. Perhaps the aspect of GW2 I am most doubtful of, more so than any other to be honest.

so basically this point is moot as neither of us can prove otherwise, but this however does not give you the right to talk about it in absolutes as you did in the post i replied to.

We were talking about DEs previously. Pretty clear I was giving my opinion on the nature of DEs in a general sense. As a gameplay concept. The only absolutes I gave about DEs is that I think they suck as a concept.

i can understand you wanting to only progress through illusory stat increases

Incorrect assumption. Never claimed this. Never said I expect this in GW2. Never claimed any dislike for the concept either.

How else can I say you are bringing your own baggage here?

but what i cannot understand is how you blatantly overlook the basic structure of the dungeons.

Even though I laid out the structure expressly? O.o

you keep mentioning more that 2 difficulty modes which is wrong. there are only 2 modes of difficulty story mode (pug friendly) and explorable mode (organized groups only). the wings play differently from one another by their relative difficulty is the same.

You're right. I call them modes/paths interchangeably. Sorry about the confusion.

By "mode" I do mean "wing" in the sense you use the term.

And I apologize for the sloppy wording on that stuff.

and from what we have been told from those that played it, look different too<snip>

Here is what was said:

just because the instance you are in is called Catacombs even though the part that you are in looks distinctly different from the other 3 and also has unique mobs and boss mechanics it is not a different experience because it's still in the same instance as the others?

To which I said, how unique are these additions? How distinct and different?

Looks like a minor gimmick ala Rift or Everquest- shuffle mode for your dungeons. I saw those vids and post-gamescon, gamer's invitational write ups as well. And it looked like basically the same zone with some different layouts &/or mob comps.

Nothing I saw or read made it seem like explore mode path 1a was all that remarkably unique from path 2b of Catacombs. So yes, as was originally asked- I say we are still in Catacombs, even if it's Catacomb path C with jetpack equipped skeletons.

As an example, I wouldn't say we suddenly are in a discrete dungeon because I passed through the wall into lower Deepstrike Mines. Which was the talking point of what I was replying to- the fact I count 8 dungeons and not the 32 as claimed by marketers.

If you are going to make strawmans, at least backtrack and read the flow of conversation.

you don't have to like GW2

Assumption based on... well, nonsense fantasy on your part.

just don't spread misinformation.

Same as above.

The topic premise is what do we think about GW2's proposed endgame. As a PVE exclusive player, I am very skeptical of two aspects as endgame; Dungeons and DEs.

All other bits about stats, gear progression, not liking GW, PVP hate, etc is overly defensive fanboy fantasy.

[Niamea]

I wanted to write something to this topic but then I saw Naidia's response and I'll just quote that:

I won't miss it at all, GW:2 is going to be something in itself, and I will enjoy it for what it is, not comparing it to something it's not trying to be. I'll actually enjoy the game.

Agree!

[Deleted]

second, there is gear progression it is just cosmetic as opposed to stat based. i don't get how you can belittle this given you gain access to something you didn't have before, hence progression.

Just to nitpick a little: progression means improvement over something. As such cosmetic changes cannot be generally classified as "progression" because it is entirely subjective whether the change is for the good or the bad.

[Deleted]

Omg.. is this still going on?..

[Deleted]

Omg.. is this still going on?..

Of course it is. It is a matter that many people feel strongly about, one way or the other.

[Deleted]

Nice mindfu** Fencers =]. Good portion of scepticism, point of view changing and little bit of trolling (not too much so it doesn't sticks out, but enough make people run in circles).

It's easy to counter everything written in favour of GW2 cause GW2 fans are like flock without a shepherd - there is no official forum. All people have are some random interviews from conventions or a blog post once in a blue moon. I think this is the biggest flaw in GW2. Before WoW launched, people had some pretty crazy ideas about it on the forums, but because there were active CMs all "unrealistic" demands or "strange" visions were pretty quickly straighten up. With GW2 we have people running wild on both sides and without "official backup" it's hard to explain what GW2 really is.

Power plateau (no gear progression) means different kind of "end game" and in my opinion it's a good approach. Especially when you consider sidekicking system (which works both up and downwards). This is quite possible rout for every PVE-only character:
- level to 80 (while unlocking weapon sets)
- get you standard average top level armor
- get all the racial/elite skills (that will require some traveling across the world, doing different challenges and with sidekicking system in place all the zones will not become low-level-stomp-mode spam)
- complete dungeons in explorer mode, while collecting prestige armor(minimal difference in stats - if at all, more about the looks)
- collect achievements while performing different challenges
- hunt/trigger larger DEs with guild
- cooperate with other guilds to unlock even bigger events

By the time you will be done with most of those things, new expansion will be ready . For people who are not afraid of PVP there will be double amount of fun ;>.

[Fencers]

what i just don't get in all this is :
-if non DE (let's call them static) quests & dungeons have been enough to entertain you in previous MMOs, i don't get how improving the said system could be any worse. or else you'll have to explain to me in which way a "never changing" quest/dungeon is better than a "possibly different" one.

I don't think it's going to be an improvement outright. Looks like a bit of a gimmick that just reuses the same zone template.

-you pretend (dun care wether if it's true or not) having a GW main with GWAMM title, thus should be already having an idea of what Anet can do without the usual gear treadmill, yet question how they'll be doing in GW2. kinda weird i gotta say.

AGAIN, I am not concerned with a gear treadmill or lack of in GW2.

The topic asks if we think GW2's break from other MMO endgame schemes will work. Specifically asking if dungeons as presented in GW2 will make up for raiding in the popular sense.

-while i can't answer on the large scale DEs difficulty/complexity, if as previously stated, you know GW1 all that much, you should be able to figure by yourself Anet is pretty much able to create encounters where players can get their asses handed over to them if they're not well prepared enough. just because nowadays we can copy/paste some builds out of some wikis doesn't mean GW1 never had any challenging content. if you never thought the game was difficult at any point, i may say you must not have seen much of GW1.

Before consumables/scrolls, OP henches and some of the 2man elite skill combos the challenge of some missions was pretty okay. Um, the mission where you carry the tree seeds around used to be brutal as all hell... been a long time, I can't recall the name. It was after LA, iirc.

The thing about open world in encounters, and this is based on previous experience, is they are limited by the fact any Joe can walk up and smack a dragon. That lowers the bar considerably. The missions and encounters were in controlled environments during GW1.

also, bringing back the "endgame issue" topic again and again just gets boring as Anet obviously never showed/said anything about it. my thoughts : wait & see.

Gw2 uses a non-subscription model, so obviously it doesn't have to create the illusion of infinite content like WoW does with new raiding tiers - My question is, will you miss this kind of never-ending endgame? Do you think the dungeons will make up for no raids?

Aside dungeons, are the open world dynamic events enough in terms of PvE content to keep the players who don't adore PvP busy?

^ I spoke to these points. This is what the topic is meant to discuss and what I am speaking toward.

Summary: As a PVE player, I believe progression needs to be doled out by some measure. Dungeons need to either be numerous or rewarding due to sparsity. Also I think DEs as a concept will not work as endgame for serious PVE players at all.

You can disagree with that. I'm cool with it as long as you aren't making wild assumptions based on personal baggage.

[Muzjhath]

Fencers, a few hours ago I wrote down the different parts to the Tequatle fight.
I know you saw the post since you qouted and adressed it, but not that part. Why is that, I am just curious?
Since that fight, from what I've seen of it, is more complex than most Raid bosses in WoW. Thinking about it, it is a bit like Razorscale, just that the dragon is on the ground the whole time not blindly following the tank. And the adds won't stop comming and will spawn closer to the things they aim to destroy. Then add some more elements.

Sure, was a quite easy fight, but when it was current I was with so many groups that couldn't really get a grip of how it worked.