Page 12 of 32 FirstFirst ...
2
10
11
12
13
14
22
... LastLast
  1. #221
    I think most game companies will give refunds nowadays but I think there is a time limit to that (30 days after purchase or something like that). I've gotten refunds from Steam and Blizzard before. But those were within a week of purchase.

  2. #222
    What I don't understand is why can't they try to satisfy those kind of people. Does Anet hate money or popularity?

    If the PvP side of GW2 fails to gain any mass-attention, I wonder what is going to sustain the game, PvE obviously won't. They need to have a pretty important amount of players in the game for WvW and to make sure they have enough micro-transactions to pay the bills. And I don't know how they will attract people and make them buy that box without a PvE that can actually attract a lot of people.

    I don't know, I really wonder what they are planning for the game, it's kinda clear to me that they will have to announce some pretty big features to give the game some buzz.

  3. #223
    We had a thread a few weeks ago where a guy got a full refund. Well pass the 30 day mark. Thus why I say; Anet could just as well tell you to take a hike at this point.

  4. #224
    Have you not played GW1?

    Edit: CB, I know fencers has of course

  5. #225
    Quote Originally Posted by ControlBlue View Post
    What I don't understand is why can't they try to satisfy those kind of people. Does Anet hate money or popularity?
    Well, they can't. A lot of the things that would satisfy PVE players of traditional MMOs are gamebreaking in GW2.

    It's just never going to happen as that type of player wants. Those players bought the wrong game.

    In the same way say, those who bought the recent Xcom looking for a 3rd person shooter simply bought the game.

    I don't know, I really wonder what they are planning for the game, it's kinda clear to me that they will have to announce some pretty big features to give the game some buzz.
    Anet are probably gonna follow the same content roll out as Guild Wars 1. So far all signs and evidence bears this out.

  6. #226
    That's the thing though.

    I thought GW2 was their attempt to finally reach "mainstream" numbers. Doing the exact same thing as GW1 is merely just having a game and making enough to have it stay afloat.

    They did awesome number-wise when the game was released, but I don't know if it will be enough if there is no buzz or mass of players buying gems.

    By big features I'm mostly talking about things like PS3/XBOX versions or the supposed new PvE mode, or better a revamp of the PvE system :P.

  7. #227
    Quote Originally Posted by ControlBlue View Post
    That's the thing though.

    I thought GW2 was their attempt to finally reach "mainstream" numbers. Doing the exact same thing as GW1 is merely just having a game and making enough to have it stay afloat.

    They did awesome number-wise when the game was released, but I don't know if it will be enough if there is no buzz or mass of players buying gems.

    By big features I'm mostly talking about things like PS3/XBOX versions or the supposed new PvE mode, or better a revamp of the PvE system :P.
    Anet did do a lot to garner a more mainstream audience; organic questing, no gear grind, no necessary scheduled play, casual focus, accessible action combat, simplified stats.

    What Anet obviously didn't do was try to appeal to a broader audience by making a slicker WoW/EQ ala Rift or nearly copy/pasta of WoW mechanics in Jedi Effect. Both SWTOR and Rift are fine games in my opinion. Guild Wars 2 didn't go that route. Clearly.

    Guild Wars was still gonna be endemic of the design philosophy and style of Arena.net. The same way Treasure game feels like a Treasure game. Or the particular action on QCF in a Capcom game works.

    Don't know what else to say in this; some players weren't informed about the type of series Guild Wars & Anet are aiming for. Other folks jumped on that wagon.


    The new PVE game mode seems to be an endless dungeon gauntlet from the live stream a few days ago.
    Last edited by Fencers; 2012-11-03 at 02:05 AM. Reason: typo

  8. #228
    seems kind of like challenge missions from gw1

    I'd be down with that, I enjoyed those.

  9. #229
    The Lightbringer Karizee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The Eternal Alchemy
    Posts
    3,833
    Quote Originally Posted by ControlBlue View Post
    What I don't understand is why can't they try to satisfy those kind of people. Does Anet hate money or popularity?

    If the PvP side of GW2 fails to gain any mass-attention, I wonder what is going to sustain the game, PvE obviously won't. They need to have a pretty important amount of players in the game for WvW and to make sure they have enough micro-transactions to pay the bills. And I don't know how they will attract people and make them buy that box without a PvE that can actually attract a lot of people.

    I don't know, I really wonder what they are planning for the game, it's kinda clear to me that they will have to announce some pretty big features to give the game some buzz.

    What on earth are you talking about? The game is massively popular and the servers are packed.
    Morpheus: Do you believe that my being stronger or faster has anything to do with my muscles in this place? Do you think that's air you're breathing now?

  10. #230
    Brewmaster Newbryn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Leaving
    Posts
    1,337
    Quote Originally Posted by ControlBlue View Post
    That's the thing though.

    I thought GW2 was their attempt to finally reach "mainstream" numbers. Doing the exact same thing as GW1 is merely just having a game and making enough to have it stay afloat.

    They did awesome number-wise when the game was released, but I don't know if it will be enough if there is no buzz or mass of players buying gems.

    By big features I'm mostly talking about things like PS3/XBOX versions or the supposed new PvE mode, or better a revamp of the PvE system :P.
    You do realize at this point your posts boils down to this, "stop liking what i don't like" this is also addressing your posts before this one as well.
    Claymore is Epic again, eat it priscilla fanboys.

  11. #231
    Legendary! draykorinee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Ciderland, arrgh.
    Posts
    6,112
    Quote Originally Posted by ControlBlue View Post
    That's the thing though.

    I thought GW2 was their attempt to finally reach "mainstream" numbers. Doing the exact same thing as GW1 is merely just having a game and making enough to have it stay afloat.

    They did awesome number-wise when the game was released, but I don't know if it will be enough if there is no buzz or mass of players buying gems.

    By big features I'm mostly talking about things like PS3/XBOX versions or the supposed new PvE mode, or better a revamp of the PvE system :P.
    I think the game has enough quality to continue to be very popular, even if I dont like it, I realise that for every one of me there will be a lot more who do like what anet have done. I think this game has a big enough buzz about it and that will continue if they keep releasing content, even if that content is more filler quests and jumping puzzles than new dungeons/systems/bgs. Im sure we will see a development of the pve system at some point, for most people pve is still new and enjoyable, much like all mmo developers, anet will continue to add new systems in to the game to keep it fresh. No longer can developers sit on 6 months of no content updates....well unless you're playing my favourite game of choice ofc
    This doesn’t mean that we’re walking away from our fans who only play on PlayStation or on PC. We have Lara Croft and the Temple of Osiris coming to those platforms this December, and Tomb Raider: The Definitive Edition is available on PS4.
    More corporate lies and bullshit PR in the gaming industry.

  12. #232
    Quote Originally Posted by ControlBlue View Post
    What I don't understand is why can't they try to satisfy those kind of people. Does Anet hate money or popularity?

    If the PvP side of GW2 fails to gain any mass-attention, I wonder what is going to sustain the game, PvE obviously won't. They need to have a pretty important amount of players in the game for WvW and to make sure they have enough micro-transactions to pay the bills. And I don't know how they will attract people and make them buy that box without a PvE that can actually attract a lot of people.

    I don't know, I really wonder what they are planning for the game, it's kinda clear to me that they will have to announce some pretty big features to give the game some buzz.
    Well, the 'kind of people' you are talking about are but a small minority, albeit a vocal one. They don't matter much as far as the player number go, and to satisfy them requires a considerable time from developers. Spend over 50% of your resources to satisfy content needs of 5% of players? Doesn't sound as a good investment. For a casual player - who constitutes the vast majority of the population, GW2 is the most accessible experience ever provided by an MMO.

    Hence I am a bit baffled about your the second statement. You are talking as if the game is dead and yet it is full of people.

    As to the 'what they are planning': if they indeed have a new content/host events every month, it will generate lots of buzz and people will flock to it. The Halloween event was simply amazing with its new areas, events, pvp mini-games and a huge success. If they can pull something like that every month, the future of the game is pretty much secured, because its the only MMO which will deliver constantly changing fresh entertainment. Which, for a casual, is a much more attractive and fun thing than progression PVE.

  13. #233
    TBH some fights I just don't find interesting, and some mobs hit too hard for you to do anything. I prefer the open world dynamic event PvE. It's similar to guild wars 1 style.

  14. #234
    Brewmaster Newbryn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Leaving
    Posts
    1,337
    Quote Originally Posted by zito View Post
    TBH some fights I just don't find interesting, and some mobs hit too hard for you to do anything. I prefer the open world dynamic event PvE. It's similar to guild wars 1 style.
    I prefer them too the instances I don't really care much for, the events and the open world is what I love about the game, story mode arah was probably one of my worst experience in gaming no exaggeration. I cant say I get people who are looking for "challenges" in mmos they're social games for the most part, and challenge is personal If that's what I'm looking for I'll find it elsewhere simple as that.
    Claymore is Epic again, eat it priscilla fanboys.

  15. #235
    I cant say I get people who are looking for "challenges" in mmos they're social games for the most part, and challenge is personal If that's what I'm looking for I'll find it elsewhere simple as that.
    I don't see how the two are mutually exclusive. If you're looking for 0% challenge 100% social, there's already games like Farmville.

  16. #236
    GW2 is plenty popular, numbers speak for themselves:


  17. #237
    Brewmaster Newbryn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Leaving
    Posts
    1,337
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity Divinity View Post
    I don't see how the two are mutually exclusive. If you're looking for 0% challenge 100% social, there's already games like Farmville.
    For something to be enjoyable it doesn't have to be challenging, challenge will always be subjective same as fun, I can have fun without been challenged vice versa. A good example of something fun but not challenging would be kingdom hearts, 2 to be exact its not hard but its really fun, then we have demon souls/dark souls challenging but fun, at the end of the day it doesn't mean much since its all subjective anyway.
    Claymore is Epic again, eat it priscilla fanboys.

  18. #238
    For something to be enjoyable it doesn't have to be challenging, challenge will always be subjective same as fun, I can have fun without been challenged vice versa. A good example of something fun but not challenging would be kingdom hearts, 2 to be exact its not hard but its really fun, then we have demon souls/dark souls challenging but fun, at the end of the day it doesn't mean much since its all subjective anyway.
    I agree, but I don't see what that had to do specifically with what you quoted. =D

  19. #239
    Brewmaster Newbryn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Leaving
    Posts
    1,337
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity Divinity View Post
    I agree, but I don't see what that had to do specifically with what you quoted. =D
    Well to address your quote on social aspect the type of game you choose to be social in is irrelevant challenge or not, this is the only question that will ever be worthy of an answer, "are you enjoying what you're playing"? to put it simply no one would play a game that's only challenging if they're not having fun other than for the purpose of stroking their ego.
    Claymore is Epic again, eat it priscilla fanboys.

  20. #240
    Quote Originally Posted by Xarim View Post
    GW2 is plenty popular, numbers speak for themselves:

    I remember those kind of screens being used for SWTOR not to long ago...

    Anyway, all I'm saying is that they need things to INCREASE the player base, and that implementing a PvE that detract a lot of people, including people who actually matters (a lot more than anyone in this thread anyway including me), it runs opposite to that.

    Again, I see some indications that the PvE is hated, that it fails to generate any buzz for the game, and I see very few indications that people are liking that PvE system.

    That's all, really.

Posting Permissions

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