Poll: Are you enjoying the "Endgame"?

Page 38 of 43 FirstFirst ...
28
36
37
38
39
40
... LastLast
  1. #741
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Awe View Post
    It all boils down to raiding. Sure both game have some different features, one could start nitpicking at will. But take away raiding from WoW and you instantly get the same "problem" as with GW2.
    In all fairness, it would have much more of a problem than GW2 has. Assuming there's no redesign of the game, the only thing WoW would have for max level characters to do at that point is heroic dungeons, which are cleared in ~30 minutes or less each. You could argue that exploring, questing et cetera would still be available, but WoW has never been a game that encourages that, aside from arbitrary points in your achievements tab. It's always been more a case of "this is here, and you could do it, but over here in this 10/25/40-man instance is where it's really at".

    GW2 and WoW was designed differently, and it makes no sense to even try to compare the endgame of the two.

  2. #742
    Fluffy Kitten Remilia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Avatar: Momoco
    Posts
    15,160
    Quote Originally Posted by Jigain View Post
    In all fairness, it would have much more of a problem than GW2 has. Assuming there's no redesign of the game, the only thing WoW would have for max level characters to do at that point is heroic dungeons, which are cleared in ~30 minutes or less each. You could argue that exploring, questing et cetera would still be available, but WoW has never been a game that encourages that, aside from arbitrary points in your achievements tab. It's always been more a case of "this is here, and you could do it, but over here in this 10/25/40-man instance is where it's really at".

    GW2 and WoW was designed differently, and it makes no sense to even try to compare the endgame of the two.
    The 'arbitrary points' are the same as GW2's.

    Wow has a 'vast' (depends on what you want to compare it to) world that you can explore.
    How is this somehow different than gw2?

    Achievements, let's see...

    http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Achievement
    vs
    http://www.wowwiki.com/Achievement

    For the completionist or those who just want to do them for that number giggles. I see no difference.
    You gain titles, items, whatever.
    How is this any different? You do stuff, receive 'arbitrary points'.

    And since there was the 80 things to do at level 80, which I found quite... amusing? Some posts back that was quoted.
    http://guildwars2hub.com/features/ed...gs-do-level-80

    Add new friends to your friend’s list
    Participate in meta events
    Collect stacks of butter and butter prank your friends
    Get rich selling Globs of Ectoplasm
    Write about your level 80 experience, have it published on GW2Hub
    Purchase a set of armor from the guild armorsmith
    Purchase a set of weapons from the guild weaponsmith
    Have fun!
    Just to get some really really abstract things started and very inflated list.

    I keep hearing:
    Do dungeons
    Get the grindy legendary.
    Do events.
    Do achievements.
    Explore.
    Do what you've been doing, whatever that is.
    Level alts.

    How is this different from any other game?

    Just because it has two different design for the 'endgame' doesn't make similar contents that both games have somehow different.

  3. #743
    Deleted
    Why should I play a sub based MMO when im not remotly interested in sub based MMO unique features?

  4. #744
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Remilia View Post
    The 'arbitrary points' are the same as GW2's.

    Wow has a 'vast' (depends on what you want to compare it to) world that you can explore.
    How is this somehow different than gw2?

    Achievements, let's see...

    http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Achievement
    vs
    http://www.wowwiki.com/Achievement

    For the completionist or those who just want to do them for that number giggles. I see no difference.
    You gain titles, items, whatever.
    How is this any different? You do stuff, receive 'arbitrary points'.
    The difference is that (for anyone else reading this post, btw, go back and read my previous post for the exact specifics of the discussion) for doing quests and exploring and such in WoW, you receive achievement points and nothing else (well, the occasional title or pet/mount). Doing "quests" and exploring in GW2 on the other hand does give you arbitrary achievement points, but it also gives you experience even at max level which eventually translates into skill points which translates into more skills for your character alternatively phat lewts. On top of that, you gain two types of currency, both of which are valid at max level. Additionally, you gain gear and items appropriate for your level, even if you do a "quest" intended for a level 35 character.

    Thus, the difference you asked for is that in GW2 you get arbitrary points... and then some.

  5. #745
    Quote Originally Posted by Remilia View Post
    Wow has a 'vast' (depends on what you want to compare it to) world that you can explore.
    How is this somehow different than gw2?
    I've played WoW and now GW2. The worlds are completely different. I couldn't level up another alt through the WoW world instead I used PvP. Why? because its boring, the world feels dead. Nobody is helping, infact helping people around a quest hub is more griefing, even people in your party don't even want to share the drops. The quest are BORING in WoW, DE events in GW2 can have multiple parts to them leading to a large raid like boss.

    WoW's world (and I'm not even how ugly and sparse it is in comparison) and WoW's questing is bland.

    they are vastly different.

    I mean really what would be the best zone WoW has to offer?
    "you can't be serious!!" - yes actually I am.

  6. #746
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity Divinity View Post
    Yay, this topic again.

    You're wasting your time, though. These guys can't tell the difference between something being "super amazingly awesome, different and revolutionary" and just "it's a new game so it all seems fresh and new right now."

    They'll go on for pages about how sitting in Lion's Arch and talking in map chat is so different and so much more exciting than sitting in Orgrimmar and talking in trade chat.
    I also find it stupid how people keep saying that in Guild Wars 2 the entire game is endgame. Well, by that logic, WoW could also claim that everything you haven't done while leveling is endgame and proclaim themselves a next-gen MMO. And by that logic yet, WoW will always have more endgame than Guild Wars 2, because it has 4 expansions with lots of soloable content in them. I don't get it; does ArenaNet want to compete with Blizzard by creating an MMO that is more WoW than Guild Wars 1, but saying that in their game: "the grinds are optional" or "endgame starts at level 1"?

    I don't see the difference between the two: there are hundreds of activities you could do at maximum level without having BiS gear in WoW; as a newcomer, you'd have more to do in WoW than in Guild Wars 2. Just because you have three dragon zerg fights from levels 1 to 80 doesn't mean you can sell us that as endgame content.

    Also, what is there to do at maximum level after getting map completion? That's right, grinding. Dungeon armors are grind, karma armor is a grind, getting gold is a grind, all of them far worse than anything I've ever done in WoW. Sure, those who defend ArenaNet will tell us to play for fun. Well, guess what: there's no fun in doing the same thing over and over again; there's no fun in zergs. The personal story is not even close to being interesting enough to make you roll an alt. You could play games like Witcher 2 or Mass Effect for story, because there were a lot of choices to make each time and most of them turned out to alter the story a lot. You can't do that here.

  7. #747
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity Divinity View Post
    These guys can't tell the difference between something being "super amazingly awesome, different and revolutionary" and just "it's a new game so it all seems fresh and new right now."
    Except I dont get what is wrong with "fresh and new" benefit. Yes, compared to WoW GW2 is fresh and new and that is why right now I prefer to play GW2. And that "fresh and new" does not have to be only something that lasts for a week or month. We are comparing an 8 years old game (which I played since 2004 beta) to a game released one month ago. "Fresh and new" is also a benefit that MoP gets for WoW in general. But for me compared to GW2 it is not new enough. Still same WoW just a bit newer. To be fair if GW2 wasnt released yet, right now I would probably be playing MoP. But when I need to pick one of those, GW2 wins. Not becouse WoW is bad in general. But becouse WoW is OLD.

  8. #748
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity Divinity View Post
    There's nothing WRONG with it, it's fine for something to be fresh, new and exciting. That's just human nature.

    What's frustrating about the topic is that some people can't seem to tell when something is really worthy of praise or if it just seems great because they're in the "fresh, new and exciting" phase.

    So instead of any sort of reasonable discussion of game issues, you get post after post of people denying technical issues, denying balance issues, denying content-related issues, and insisting that <activity X> or <activity Y> that are common to all MMO's are suddenly awesome, revolutionary things unique to GW2 that you should be praising.
    I'm guessing you're the most reasonable person here. One mans "design issue" is another man's unique game play. You don't want to discuss, you want to nitpick. That's fine but don't pretend that you are being "reasonable".

  9. #749
    The Lightbringer Durzlla's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    3,650
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity Divinity View Post
    Gee, thanks, doctor. I see things so much more clearly, now.

    Also, I never said "design issues" in that post.
    Well you said issues about 5 times and all those things fall under the category of design, so design issues was heavily implied...
    Quote Originally Posted by draykorinee View Post
    Youre in the mmo forums and you find mmos boring, Im heading on over to the twilight forums to add my unecessary and shallow 2 cents.

  10. #750
    Fluffy Kitten Remilia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Avatar: Momoco
    Posts
    15,160
    Quote Originally Posted by MrSerious View Post
    I've played WoW and now GW2. The worlds are completely different. I couldn't level up another alt through the WoW world instead I used PvP. Why? because its boring, the world feels dead. Nobody is helping, infact helping people around a quest hub is more griefing, even people in your party don't even want to share the drops. The quest are BORING in WoW, DE events in GW2 can have multiple parts to them leading to a large raid like boss.

    WoW's world (and I'm not even how ugly and sparse it is in comparison) and WoW's questing is bland.

    they are vastly different.

    I mean really what would be the best zone WoW has to offer?
    Explore, not quest.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jigain View Post
    The difference is that (for anyone else reading this post, btw, go back and read my previous post for the exact specifics of the discussion) for doing quests and exploring and such in WoW, you receive achievement points and nothing else (well, the occasional title or pet/mount). Doing "quests" and exploring in GW2 on the other hand does give you arbitrary achievement points, but it also gives you experience even at max level which eventually translates into skill points which translates into more skills for your character alternatively phat lewts. On top of that, you gain two types of currency, both of which are valid at max level. Additionally, you gain gear and items appropriate for your level, even if you do a "quest" intended for a level 35 character.

    Thus, the difference you asked for is that in GW2 you get arbitrary points... and then some.
    As far as I know, and a lot of people seem to point out. All the level appropriate gear is obsolete in comparison to everything else that you would otherwise obtain at level 80.

    The level system has it's limitation. Also known as all your skills are still capped to whatever and if you really care about legendary, which I suppose goes for every game though.
    It's more like the AA (alternate advancement) system in EQ1/2 if you'd like to view it as such.

    It's not 'and then some' when you can obtain the same thing via another method. It's just two methods to obtain the same thing.
    If you want to explore, explore, but to explore for the sake of obtaining something else is no different than doing another method to get the 'something else'.

  11. #751
    Really players are only getting the xp/cash of selling items by re-doing lower level content in GW2. It's more something to do because you hopefully enjoy doing that content for it's own sake. "And then some" is maybe a little bit of an overstatement.

    As already mentioned, other games not called World of Warcraft have had down leveling and AA systems for years too.
    Last edited by Fencers; 2012-10-10 at 06:49 PM.

  12. #752
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity Divinity View Post
    Yeah, except I was pretty specific. I guess I have to literally draw a picture around here.
    The problem is you and others want to push the game (or at least discussion of the game) to how you want the game to be, not how the game is. There are other games that have X endgame model, the GW franchise uses a different design (of course, it exists to an extent in elite dungeons in GW1, which I hope [and expect] will make a return in some fashion and at some point in GW2, but not at launch -- and even then it was of the same, cosmetic-only but challenging content style).

    Trying to mold the game into what you think you want rather than what is good for the game (different design goals compared to raid-centric games) would--were they incorporated--ruin the game it intends to be. Mind you, since I know you'll misconstrue what I wrote, the game isn't perfect, but it does it's job well, and I expect a steady influx of new content to occupy--and hopefully more challenging content.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ryngo Blackratchet View Post
    Yeah, Rhandric is right, as usual.

  13. #753
    Problem is that all the interesting mechanics are in zerg-fest events where they go unnoticed and all the single-group instanced content is packed with Mickey-Mouse nonsense. It's a weird turnaround.
    I'll agree with you there. There's a couple of issues at work there, between scaling not seemingly working 100% properly (which allows zergs when it really shouldn't) and fewer mechanics on dungeon bosses. Despite those issues, I don't see it as a long-term problem. I expect that in (relatively) little time we'll get both more and more-interesting (and ideally, more challenging) content. The problem is, people want it now, when ANet is busy both fixing bugs with current content and developing new content. Both take time and resources, and even with separate teams, can't be done immediately, or yesterday, or last week or month.

    I didn't say I wanted a raid-centric game, if anything I've said time and again that the content doesn't have to be raiding.
    Actually...you keep saying that they've removed content (raids), which is true...and you keep suggesting they add content (non-gear-based raids)...directly contradicting what you said here! Sure, you might change the name (what'd you call it, structured PvE I think), but it amounts to the same thing. Which, as long as 2 things don't occur, would be fine. But don't sit here and say you're not asking for raids when you're explicitly asking for raids.

    And the two things I'm referring to, by the way, are elitism and segregation, and schedule-oriented gameplay. Sure, you'll say those are both on the community...and you'd be right. But the game design can influence the community, as can be seen in the GW2 community. Now, I don't have answers on how to prevent that, but that's why ANet is paid the big bucks

    Quote Originally Posted by Ryngo Blackratchet View Post
    Yeah, Rhandric is right, as usual.

  14. #754
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Fencers View Post
    Really players are only getting the xp/cash of selling items by re-doing lower level content in GW2. It's more something to do because you hopefully enjoy doing that content for it's own sake. "And then some" is maybe a little bit of an overstatement.
    That's fair enough. I still stand by my point though - that since WoW is designed as a bimodal game with the components "leveling until max level" followed by "raiding", and GW2 is designed as a unimodal game (or multimodal, depending on how you look at it) with multiple components, you really can't compare the two.

  15. #755
    Quote Originally Posted by Jigain View Post
    That's fair enough. I still stand by my point though - that since WoW is designed as a bimodal game with the components "leveling until max level" followed by "raiding", and GW2 is designed as a unimodal game (or multimodal, depending on how you look at it) with multiple components, you really can't compare the two.
    I would not disagree with that too strongly. The intention and design goals are so fantastically different between the two games.

    In total honesty, I don't believe WoW is a good point of comparison to many MMOs. Warcraft is kinda unique in it's structure. Really there are not many "wow clones". WoW is a somewhat limited and as I said earlier tonight- singular game. In terms of gameplay and design, I mean.

    Just aiming for different things.

  16. #756
    Pandaren Monk Bugg's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Darujhistan, the city of blue fire
    Posts
    1,759
    I voted Yes some 2 weeks ago, but I would change it to No today.

  17. #757
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity Divinity View Post
    That's interesting. Personally, I don't see GW2 as being different from any other MMO.
    Well, it is though. Guild Wars as a series eschews a lot of well known conventions in the genre. Their [Anet] goal for you to play the game and game structure is simply not aimed to appeal to the audience interested in many of the genre's tropes.

    A bimodal endgame intends for players to play that second phase at some point.

    Guild Wars does not. Players are suppose to enjoy the single phase, at relatively the same power level... forever.

    Players just never got more powerful in Guild Wars. There was nothing else once you ran through PVE in full. It was always the same type of activities from level 1-20. For 5 or so years. Over 4 complete standalone games and 1 expansion pack now.

    That's pretty different in design goal from other MMOs. Even breaks from the structure of MMOs which are not bimodal but may be linear in some other way. But if you want to say "Well you can do quests in games X, Y and Z too"-- yes, that will be true. However, is simply playing the quests in of themselves intended to be the gist those games?

    Very unlikely.

  18. #758
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity Divinity View Post
    That's interesting. Personally, I don't see GW2 as being different from any other MMO. The things you do and how you do them are pretty much the same from start to finish. The "bimodal" and "unimodal" thing is strictly true, I guess. The problem is that GW2's "unimode" is exactly the same as other MMO's "first state of bimodal" rather than "combination of both states" as would have been truly revolutionary.

    You could seriously make two flowcharts of "Things you do in GW2" and "Things you do from start to max level in most other MMO's" and you wouldn't be able to tell the two apart.
    The difference is in games that focus on "endgame" being "the entire game", the leveling portion is trivialized (in the sense of not having meaningful or difficult content) for the sake of getting to endgame and playing the "real" game.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ryngo Blackratchet View Post
    Yeah, Rhandric is right, as usual.

  19. #759
    Deleted
    Its really hard to answer to a question like thise as the ''endgame'' started the moment you made your character = /

  20. #760
    Merely a Setback PACOX's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    ██████
    Posts
    26,248
    I like how there is more than one way to "gear up". Karma, WvW, Crafting, or Tokens. Not the first game to do it, but more should go this route. Raids shouldn't be the only form of endgame progression.

    Dungeons are dungeons, you like them or you don't. Some of the paths are interesting, some are on the level of puggable raids.

    If you can rap your head around the Orr meta events work, it can be fun progressing through the zones.

    My favorite part of the "endgame" is WvW though. Get a guild and its like raid night except you're fighting other raid groups.
    Last edited by PACOX; 2012-10-11 at 07:29 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •