What if WoW never existed?

[Vayne]

Uughh geez. Time to point out the obvious. Again.



You're right, a lot of people are tired of it. But it has nothing to do with what I like or not. It has to do with what works. WoW's business model, works. No matter what you say or what points you try to prove, there are 10 million people playing that game and paying monthly fees and that is A LOT. You can lessen the number whatever conspiracy theories you want. Free accounts, trial accounts, whatever. Because at the end of the day, more people enjoy the gear grind than the people who complain and are tired of it.

And the point is:It's not only WoW that incorporates the gear grindy mechanics, and it didn't START with MMO's. It became a THING because game designers REALIZED that more people would buy into a franchise with said mechanics. Which is the point. "HEY People will play this! LETS MAKE IT!" if people would have bought a different business model, then that would have been made instead.

If you want more meaningful gameplay, play another game genre. Seriously. I could even recommend titles to you that you'd probably never even heard of or considered. So now while you guys sit here and bicker, I'm gonna go compete in real games because it's Friday.

Tata.

I don't actually believe there are ten million people playing WoW. Part of that count are people with a one year sub to Wow because they wanted to get Diablo 3 for free, and that annual pass thing has artificially inflated the number of players. And I know people who don't play but keep their subs up, just to hang out with people from their guild, who they wish would leave. Ten million people probably aren't playing WoW. In fact, it was down to just over 9 million before the new game came out and in three months it will probably drop under that.

But you see a successful business model that hit at the right time and place might not have been successful if it hadn't, and there's no possible way you can prove that it would have. And it doesn't matter if WoW invented gear grind or depended on it. The fact is, no other game type is subscription based, so no one COULD HAVE earned the money WoW had. So developers see $$$ in their eyes, and they copy. But the time and place are gone and no one has the success WoW did.

Does that mean that WoW is automatically better than every game that came after it, or does it mean that people have time invested in that game and don't want to start over, or does it mean that people are tired of that crap and want something new, but no one can provide it because it's too big of a risk.

You're condescending answers to what I'm saying don't make you right. You can explain it to me as simply as you want, and I'll still disagree, because I don't agree with you. And contrary to popular belief, I can think for myself and had many of these ideas long before Guild Wars 2 was even announced.

I don't CARE who invented gear grind, it's not relavant to the fact that its' pretty much fucked over the genre. And I'm not the only person who feels this way.

[Fey]

I don't actually believe there are ten million people playing WoW.

Of course you don't, just like how you choose to ignore the history of gaming and what statistics have shown. It's not about my opinion, it's not about your opinion. I'm not talking about what I think is best for games or the direction I think they should be going. It's about what works and what's successful. Just like every other form of entertainment. Facts. Not opinions. That's something you have to live with. You get what you pay for and every person that buys and MMO should know that there is going to be some degree of grinding in it. GW2 is no different, even without the gear increase there are still plenty of grinds. You said it yourself, token grinds, working as intended.

It's the same reason why the Wii was so successful despite it's extremely weak lineup of quality games. There's a saying that's thrown around the industry which I'm sure you're familiar with. "Why strive for amazing when decent sells 10x more?" if the consumer base gave designers more of a reason to push themselves, they'd do it. If they'd stop settling for mediocre MMO's and generic gameplay choices, designers would innovate more. But the cost to make MMO's isn't worth the risk. You talk about business a lot I'm sure you already know this.

I don't particularly like gear grinds, but I don't mind them either. I'd rather not do them but I understand their purpose. And as long as people keep buying games that have them and continue to do them, they're not going to go away. Designers would easily switch to something else if it were as lucrative and successful. I'm sure plenty of them are as frustrated as you are when it comes to making a game that seemingly has to have to one to work. No developer likes seeing a game they've worked on and dedicated part of their life towards to fail.

I don't CARE who invented gear grind, it's not relavant to the fact that its' pretty much fucked over the genre. And I'm not the only person who feels this way.

You can think that all you want. Sales say otherwise. You can justify them however you want as well, but at least get your facts straight when doing so. Because you still sound like you have no idea what you're talking about. Especially when you've only played a very small fraction of MMO's and probably RPGs in general.

GW2 is a step in the right direction but ArenaNet isn't going to change the industry on their own.

- - - Updated - - -

And it doesn't matter if WoW invented gear grind or depended on it. The fact is, no other game type is subscription based, so no one COULD HAVE earned the money WoW had. So developers see $$$ in their eyes, and they copy. But the time and place are gone and no one has the success WoW did.

Just to put a little bit of emphasis on why you appear to not know what you're talking about. It's this^. The gear grind isn't why WoW was successful, and continues to be. It's part of what keeps people playing, sure. But that's not why it blew up as big as it did.

And This. V

Does that mean that WoW is automatically better than every game that came after it, or does it mean that people have time invested in that game and don't want to start over, or does it mean that people are tired of that crap and want something new, but no one can provide it because it's too big of a risk.

It has nothing to do with the quality of a game. It's the same reason why fast food restaurants are so successful despite their terrible quality of food. A product doesn't have to be superior for people to buy it. You know this. At least I'm pretty sure you do. Games are no different.

Crappy games make plenty of money, all the time. Most people that play games do not appreciate quality. Especially since the gaming industry is now ruled by casual gamers. I'm a hardcore gamer, I always have been I probably always will be. I'm also in the incredible minority when it comes to game design. I've seen games get easier and easier over the years, I've seen them become less innovative and unique, dumbed down into a cheap form of entertainment to make a quick profit instead of the art form that they truly are. It's not the industries fault that people enjoy terrible products. They just want to make money, and that's the most effective way. If people stopped buying terrible games, the industry would shift towards quality.

I'm not blaming casuals for being casual, it's simply the reality of the situation. Eventually an amazing title comes out and it blows everyones mind. Like Skyrim, as you bring up so often. But then other titles like CoD come out and sell over 20million coppies literally almost instantly.

Yet even Skyrim is a dumbed down version of Morrowind. Just like how CoD is a dumbed down version of DOOM. Well no, I suppose CS would be closer. But DOOM is you know. DOOM.

[Vayne]

Well, in some ways, Fey, you're right. The situation is that companies care about money and not art. Most companies anyway. And as long as they can make money, they can throw crap at us. And some people see that was fine. I don't, however. I've watched what it's done to the publishing industry, for example, which I had a particular stake in. I've watched what it's done to movies generally.

The problem is, allowing companies to get away with anything they can because they can, and not trying to educate what public you can reach means you can expect more and more of the same.

BTW, why WoW did as well as it did isn't a fact. I'm sure if you ask different people, you'd get different answers. But a lot of people do feel it did was well as it did because it's addictive. This isn't just something I've pulled out of my ass.

You can BELIEVE what you want, but that has nothing to do with fact. It's a fact, for example that a lot of people bought annual passes for WoW to get Diablo 3. Are you telling me you know that number, or know for a fact how many are still playing?

How many people are paying a monthly fee is a matter of fact only to a point. How many people are actively playing is another. Case in point, when I left Rift, I still had three months of a six month subscription left. Though I never logged in again, I was an active subscriber for 3 months after I'd stopped playing.

If you don't think this happens in other games, I don't know what to say.

And a lot of what you call fact can be argued.

[Stonesolid]

Or, maybe people need an alternative game that doesn't have those things.

And we're back to why I bought GW2 in the first place..

[Fey]

BTW, why WoW did as well as it did isn't a fact. I'm sure if you ask different people, you'd get different answers. But a lot of people do feel it did was well as it did because it's addictive. This isn't just something I've pulled out of my ass.

You can BELIEVE what you want, but that has nothing to do with fact. It's a fact, for example that a lot of people bought annual passes for WoW to get Diablo 3. Are you telling me you know that number, or know for a fact how many are still playing?

As of yesterday, the game has been out for 8 years. The game is old. Of course people are going to be tired of it. Of course people that are into the same kinds of things you are, are going to complain about it. And because it's so old and so big, of course A LOT of people are going to share this view. But that doesn't matter because the numbers show that it's mechanics are still incredibly successful. 8 years and it's still going strong.

What people think is irrelevant, everyone has different reasons for everything. Statistics show that WoW was successful because it incorporated a questing system that was more immersive than it's predecessors and the game itself was more user friendly and accessible. Apple and Nintendo have both adopted this same policy. There's a reason why the Wii sold more worldwide than both the PS3 and the Xbox360 combined. It's the same reason why WoW has been so much more successful than any MMO. Ease of usability and catering to the casual players.

That is not my opinion, that is fact. My opinion is that the Wii was only worth purchasing because it was so easy to hack. None of it's games were worth buying and it's done almost nothing to push gaming further as an art form. My opinion on WoW is similar to yours, minus all the conspiracy theories. I played WoW for 6 and a half years, I know how it works, I know why it works. I stopped playing because I was tired of it, like lots of people are.

But the fact of the matter is that there are far more people that aren't tired of it.

So me saying "I'm tired of that game I wish it would go away so something new would come out" is stupid, because something will replace it that deserves to replace it. And I do not mind waiting for whatever game that is. By no means am I in a hurry to get the next big MMO out on the market. An whenever that MMO comes out, by no means do I want people to stop playing WoW to come play it. Because the people that like WoW are obviously still playing and will continue to keep playing WoW. When something "beats" WoW, I don't think it'll be because it pulled so many people away from WoW that WoW died. I think it'll pull in new people that didn't like MMO's before whatever hypothetical game I'm talking about released. Because that's what WoW did.

That's my opinion.

If you don't think this happens in other games, I don't know what to say.

Of course it happens, I never said it didn't. Hence why you keep missing the point entirely. I'm not trying to prove you wrong, I'm not trying to prove me right. I'm just giving my insight on the situation. Take it or leave it, doesn't matter.

And a lot of what you call fact can be argued.

Anything can be argued on the internet. lol

[Vayne]

@Fey

For a guy not trying to prove me wrong you sure use words like "You're wrong" and "You look like you don't know what you're talking about because" an awful lot.

Your use of language isn't at all backing up what you're saying. I'm saying that no one can tell what percentage of people are addicted to WoW and have stayed because of it and nothing you've said so far has said otherwise. Different games have different ways to hold players and whatever that initial research has shown, other research has been done about video games in general and even into WoW specifically about the addictive quality of the skinner box model.

It's the same sort of thing that keeps people gambling. Of course, with something like WoW, you probably won't lose your home, and job, but some people have managed to at least lose relationships due to it. I can't tell you how many times my son has returned to WoW even though he doesn't like and it and he KNOWS he doesn't like it. But he keeps going back.

How does anything you've said, counter the addictive argument?

[Fey]

For a guy not trying to prove me wrong you sure use words like "You're wrong" and "You look like you don't know what you're talking about because" an awful lot.

I don't know why you take things out of context. I said you were "wrong" once, because your comment was directed towards a description of me.

Or, maybe people need an alternative game that doesn't have those things. Saying this is the way the genre is, so those people shouldn't play it, is simply saying I'm okay with the genre, so it's fine. That's not progressive.

See very few things I've said in this forum were my opinions and views of the industry. You seem to think that I'm okay with the way the gaming world is evolving. The truth of the matter is I'm not. But voicing my opinion about it wont change anything, especially not on the internet. It would only make things personal. Which is not constructive.

That statement is simple: A product(in this case MMO's) provides x. If you dislike x, don't buy it. People that buy a game and then complain about what they bought, should stop playing it. They're obviously not enjoying it. Expecting it to be something it's not is foolish. Constructive feed back will help show game designers what to put in their next game. Blaming them for the way business models work on the other hand, does nothing.

As for the second comment, that's just an observation. My perception of you, is that you don't know what you're talking about when it comes to this topic. I do however, know you're a very intelligent individual. My perception could easily be wrong, but that's what it is. So until you show otherwise, that's how I'm viewing you.

How does anything you've said, counter the addictive argument?

My parents tried to tell me I was addicted to video games when I was a child, they told me I spend hours playing them and didn't care about anything else. My response to them was "if I spent hours reading books instead of playing video games, would you view it any differently?"

I don't believe that video games are any different than TV, movies, music, books, or any other hobby that takes time and dedication. If someone chooses to play an MMO over other responsibilities in life, then that is their choice.