Guildwars 2 PvE Endgame Reality Check!!!

[Frozen Death Knight]

It's still a bit much to use the "f-word" here, imo, since we so actively shout down anybody who uses that word against people in this forum. But it is a correct observation that the people who mention the term at all are the people who will come into this sub-forum to say "GW2 isn't one, shut up!"

I always disliked labels like that. It's just a way to distract people from the actual points that are brought to a discussion and derail entire topics. That is also why I never use terms like that towards anyone, even when it can be quite apparent that someone would fit under the category.

[Prepared]

Please correct if I am wrong, but is the reason for a raid lockout to help balance guild's progression? So that a hard core guild doesn't get too far ahead of other guilds that are not so hard core?

I am not too familiar with the loot distribution in GW2 dungeons, but would think there is a better chance to getting better loot in dungeons than not. If this is right and there are no lockouts as mentioned, how is the progression balanced in GW2 so that a hard core guild doesn't get too far ahead of other guilds? Maybe it doesn't matter as much on a single server because there is no PvP between guilds on the same server as it is in other MMOG's but seems as though there should be something in place to allow slow down top players from getting all of the top gear so rapidly.

[Frozen Death Knight]

Pretty sure Fencers quit WoW after TBC

If the shoe fits... His point is that it's the wow fanbois who throw that term around as a way to dismiss GW2 (or any other MMO). The GW2 fans know what we're getting, and frankly couldn't care less whether it's a WoW killer overall, as long as it's a great game. If you can't get that...why are you here again?

Aha. Well, I still do not see the point, though. Multiple difficulties make a game more accessible for a larger audience and is a way to get more people the bang for their buck, so to speak. Still, not going to argue about it, since it would just be pointless.

I have no quarrels with GW 2, but what I reacted on was the word "fanboy", since it happens very often that people use it against the entire WoW community. Though, since that apparently is not the case, I will withdraw my statement.

[Drakhar]

I think time consumption is a fairly valid way to make comparisons, because that's how people decide what they're gonna do when, especially if they're busy people with day-jobs and friends to go bar-hopping with.
If people know they'll spend the same amount of time in these dungeons as they would raiding, that's important knowledge for how this PvE content in GW2 could satisfy their needs.

If that's what we're discussing then yes, absolutely. But I'm pretty sure that's not the OP's point, he's comparing quantity of content not how time consuming it is.

I always disliked labels like that. It's just a way to distract people from the actual points that are brought to a discussion and derail entire topics. That is also why I never use terms like that towards anyone, even when it can be quite apparent that someone would fit under the category.

Agreed, though I primarily stopped using the term because it got me banned instead

Please correct if I am wrong, but is the reason for a raid lockout to help balance guild's progression? So that a hard core guild doesn't get too far ahead of other guilds that are not so hard core?

I am not too familiar with the loot distribution in GW2 dungeons, but would think there is a better chance to getting better loot in dungeons than not. If this is right and there are no lockouts as mentioned, how is the progression balanced in GW2 so that a hard core guild doesn't get too far ahead of other guilds? Maybe it doesn't matter as much on a single server because there is no PvP between guilds on the same server as it is in other MMOG's but seems as though there should be something in place to allow slow down top players from getting all of the top gear so rapidly.

I think shared lockout went hand in hand with offering gear from the same loot table. Top guilds were forced to do 25 mans even if they were primarily a 10 man. If you felt obligated to run the same raid twice a week to stay "up to par" so to speak it seemed more like a burden than anything. So yes, I guess it's partially to help balance progression. Also don't want people gearing up and quitting twice as fast. In GW2 it just isn't a big deal since the creme de la creme rewards are strictly cosmetic. You will be able to earn max stat gear, guaranteed, even if you're a casual player. But that mega awesome death plate of ubercoolness may be out of your reach.

[rhandric]

Please correct if I am wrong, but is the reason for a raid lockout to help balance guild's progression? So that a hard core guild doesn't get too far ahead of other guilds that are not so hard core?

Partially; it's to ensure that players don't complete all the content (fully gearing up all slots for the tier) in <1 month, and continue their sub

I am not too familiar with the loot distribution in GW2 dungeons, but would think there is a better chance to getting better loot in dungeons than not. If this is right and there are no lockouts as mentioned, how is the progression balanced in GW2 so that a hard core guild doesn't get too far ahead of other guilds? Maybe it doesn't matter as much on a single server because there is no PvP between guilds on the same server as it is in other MMOG's but seems as though there should be something in place to allow slow down top players from getting all of the top gear so rapidly.

Horizontal, rather than vertical, progression. You'll easily be able to get the "best" gear as soon as you hit 80, via crafted, stocked valor, etc. And after ~5 runs of an explorable dungeon you'll have a full set of that dungeon's set (appearance). If gear progression is important to you, you'll still be able to get that through weapons, sigils, runes...am I missing customization options? But GW2 isn't about the gear, it's about the adventure, which sets it apart from WoW and WoW-like MMOs

[tnyswonger]

I have enjoyed WoW since vanilla in 2005. I enjoyed exploring GW2 BWE1 and I'm looking forward to BWE2 this weekend. I think most everyone here has a valid point or two in these discussions, but what I don't seem to understand is why all the hate? Why 'swear allegiance' to any one single game? I think it's safe to say we're all gamers who probably enjoy more than one single game on any single platform. Me? I plan to continue to sub to WoW to explore the new expansion (the MoP beta has been pretty cool) but also purchase GW2. Aside from the initial cost, it doesn't cost anything to play GW2. So in effect, you pay the same price for one game (WoW's sub) as you would for two (WoW + GW2). I think this will aid in slowing burn-out from WoW by mixing it up with GW2 and vice versa. Why not have variety? I apologize if this seems off-topic but with the hostile postings breaking out over the 'f' word as someone mentioned above or whether one game is 'better' due to endgame seems trivial when you can just play both. Just my .02. Thanks for your time.

[DrakeWurrum]

If that's what we're discussing then yes, absolutely. But I'm pretty sure that's not the OP's point, he's comparing quantity of content not how time consuming it is.

Well quality is going to be subjective, and will depend on the player. Raiding is only a small percentage of the population as is, so it's clear that a minority enjoys it, or at least has the time for it. :P

[terrahero]

A huge chunk of max level players in WoW use the LFD and LFR tools, so your argument makes no sense to begin with.

Ofcourse it does. Because in WoW 5mans are not ENDGAME, they are either for leveling, or a stepping stone towards what is endgame, but not the actual endgame. The highest challenge in pve is heroic raids, the dungeons (even heroic) are a general cakewalk to grind gear. In GW2 5man dungeon hardmodes are the pinacle of PvE progress and the hardest content to beat.

You cannot compare the two just because they are both 5man dungeons, because they both fullfill an entirely different aspect to each game respectively.

[rhandric]

Aha. Well, I still do not see the point, though. Multiple difficulties make a game more accessible for a larger audience and is a way to get more people the bang for their buck, so to speak. Still, not going to argue about it, since it would just be pointless.

I have no quarrels with GW 2, but what I reacted on was the word "fanboy", since it happens very often that people use it against the entire WoW community. Though, since that apparently is not the case, I will withdraw my statement.

Drake has subsequently defined what we (most/all MMOC-GW2 fans) classify as "fanboys"; I do understand where you're coming from, but again...if the shoe fits (not directed at you specifically of course).

[Deleted]

I say let wow be wow and
Guild wars 2 be Guild wars 2

I just hope Guild wars 2 blows up and becomes 2nd most mmorpg 2 date for years and years

[DrakeWurrum]

In GW2 5man dungeon hardmodes are the pinacle of PvE progress and the hardest content to beat.

Well we can't say that just yet. We have no idea just how hard higher-level EDEs will actually be.

[Drakhar]

Well quality is going to be subjective, and will depend on the player. Raiding is only a small percentage of the population as is, so it's clear that a minority enjoys it, or at least has the time for it. :P

quantity of content.

Quality we'd be having a completely different and far worse conversation... because yeah obviously subjective and, well, we haven't even been able to try out the GW2 ones yet.

I say let wow be wow and
Guild wars 2 be Guild wars 2

Really the best way to look at it TBH. Guild Wars 2 is specifically trying to break the mold and give us a very different option than what we're used to. (Thank God) Wow does what it does amazingly well. Guild Wars 2 is shaping up to be great at what it's design goals intend.

The whole "fanboy" conversation just isn't even necessary in this thread, I'd just drop it, there really hasn't been much of it here in the first place.

[Frozen Death Knight]

Ofcourse it does. Because in WoW 5mans are not ENDGAME, they are either for leveling, or a stepping stone towards what is endgame, but not the actual endgame. The highest challenge in pve is heroic raids, the dungeons (even heroic) are a general cakewalk to grind gear. In GW2 5man dungeon hardmodes are the pinacle of PvE progress and the hardest content to beat.

You cannot compare the two just because they are both 5man dungeons, because they both fullfill an entirely different aspect to each game respectively.

The point of end game is that people play it at max level in WoW. If players are using LFR and LFD at max level, then it can and will be defined as end game.

You are referring to something completely different than my definition of end game and have only "hardcores" in mind as a target audience, so it would be better if you understood what I meant by that instead of making a case that I have not even challenged.

[rhandric]

The point of end game is that people play it at max level in WoW. If players are using LFR and LFD at max level, then it can and will be defined as end game.

You are referring to something completely different than my definition of end game and have only "hardcores" in mind as a target audience, so it would be better if you understood what I meant by that instead of making a case that I have not even challenged.

Typically there are 2 definitions of "endgame" in MMOs. First, the set of content that is applicable upon hitting max level, and second the pinnacle (hardest/most rewarding) of content at max level. Most people (reinforced by game design) consider the latter definition the "true" or most applicable definition.

[Frozen Death Knight]

Drake has subsequently defined what we (most/all MMOC-GW2 fans) classify as "fanboys"; I do understand where you're coming from, but again...if the shoe fits (not directed at you specifically of course).

All right. Well, I have never denied that there are WoW players that do this as well as some GW 2 players, so I do not really disagree with what he said if that is what he meant.

---------- Post added 2012-06-08 at 04:08 PM ----------

Typically there are 2 definitions of "endgame" in MMOs. First, the set of content that is applicable upon hitting max level, and second the pinnacle (hardest/most rewarding) of content at max level. Most people (reinforced by game design) consider the latter definition the "true" or most applicable definition.

That is also why it is going to be pointless discussing the topic as long as people use different meanings of words. Unless everyone can agree on one or several terms to use to avoid confusion, it is going to be really tricky getting something out of this.

[DrakeWurrum]

The point of end game is that people play it at max level in WoW. If players are using LFR and LFD at max level, then it can and will be defined as end game.

That's a rather subjective definition. A lot of people don't count LFD or LFR as being end-game, because it's still not the end. It's merely the stepping stone to the end.

I think we're at a point in the industry where "endgame" is being slowly redefined by game designers, whether intentionally or not, because there's just SO MUCH crap at endgame these days.
ANet developers are saying that the entire game is "endgame" in GW2, because what you do at max level is essentially the same as what you do at level 10. Other people might say that there isn't an endgame at all because of that - because they expect that endgame only starts at max level, and includes everything after that.

[Drakhar]

Typically there are 2 definitions of "endgame" in MMOs. First, the set of content that is applicable upon hitting max level, and second the pinnacle (hardest/most rewarding) of content at max level. Most people (reinforced by game design) consider the latter definition the "true" or most applicable definition.

Alright you're very clearly just applying your definition as the "correct" one. Honestly I've always been under the impression that it's the former.

It's called "endgame" as in... what you do at the end of the game. It's not called "hardcore content only accesable to 1% of the playerbase."
Daily quests, max level regular dungeons, heroic dungeons, LFR, normal and heroic raids I would all consider "endgame" in WoW. In GW2 pretty much the whole damn game applies as "endgame" due to content scaling. There's your comparison, OP, even though you disappeared from this thread I'm trying to salvage for ya.

[Frozen Death Knight]

That's a rather subjective definition. A lot of people don't count LFD or LFR as being end-game, because it's still not the end. It's merely the stepping stone to the end.

That can be said about anyone else's definition used here. It is also why I said what my definition was, so people can understand what I actually said.

[Tekkommo]

You know, wow also has dungeons and LFG can be run an unlimited amount of times.

If you are gonna compare PVE, try and include everything next time.

Before you start saying endgame only, LFG is endgame, last time I checked it gave you badges for some of the best gear. Therefore you do it at endgame.

Tbh endgame is anything at max level. That is the correct definition anyway, whether people want to see it that way is a different matter.

Here is my comparison of WoW vs GW2 (this is basically what this thread is)

Wow has exciting 5 mans and 10/25 man raids to look forward to (well let's hope they are in MoP!).
GW2 has exciting 5 mans to do (it is 5 man right?), the 5 mans will be pretty unique as well.

[rhandric]

Alright you're very clearly just applying your definition as the "correct" one. Honestly I've always been under the impression that it's the former.

No, I clearly gave both definitions, and I typically use the former, but see people using the latter more frequently. Not sure how you decided that "my" definition is the latter.