It's pretty easy choice for me, since the revealing of Planetside 2, I'm not really interested in the PVP of the same old themepark way of thiings we've been doing like ground hog day for many years now. The future of MMO is the MMOFPS 7 MMORPG/FPS hybrid that abount to jump out upon us. Thanks to Cod craze in the last few years. TOR is a 3 month fun feast before you all start feeling bored.
If they get good reviews im gonna buy both, I dont understand why some people say "is one or the other".
Because some people just need a definitive 'which game is better' even when there are so much differing factor between the two games.
The only reason I see GW2 conflict with SWTOR is if GW2 got so good that it just won't justified keeping a sub in SWTOR anymore, but then again, you can just discontinue the sub until you have a GW2 burn out, both game is gonna be great, but nothing will prevent people from getting burn out.
The only problem I have with a sub, is that I can't discontinue and get the remaining days refunded, I HAVE to get the whole month, if they make it like 50c a day and charge you per day of entry, I will like that. (not that I have much problem with coping a sub, just that I feel like I have to play the month out of I'll get ripped :P)
How much WoW could a WoWhater hate, if a WoWhater could hate WoW? As much WoW as a WoWhater would, if a WoWhater could hate WoW.
The thing is, GW1 wasn't an MMO. If you wanted the MMO experience, you had to pay a sub. (Or play an F2P game, which is usually an experience akin to jamming red hot pokers into your eyes until you learn to enjoy it)
So there was plenty of reason to have GW1 =and= an MMO. GW1 was some other type of game, and you'd pay the sub to get your MMO fix.
Since GW2 is an MMO, it is directly competing with MMOs, especially since most people don't have limitless amounts of time.
If somebody is going to pick an MMO, and the experience is roughly equal, why pick the one where you pay 15 dollars a month more? Why get both, when you can just get one, and play it twice as much?
Subs only make sense in that case if 1. It's a higher quality product, or 2. It's offering a significantly different enough experience.
I could see somebody paying for SW:ToR and having GW2, because even though they're both MMOs, SW:ToR will have more story and voice acting than any MMO ever... and it's Star Wars, which is a different experience as well.
You would buy FIFA (Or the B2P game of your choice) and an MMO because they're offering different experiences.
If you could buy FIFA, or a version of FIFA that costs you 15 dollars a month extra, why would you buy both?
Why would I pay 15 bucks more? Because the two games offer different things to me.
SWTOR is 'made by bioware' so I'm buying it. Done. End of story. (grew up playing BG1/2)
GW2 is by a developer that I found their previous 4 games (GW1 and its 3 exp) to be good so buying that too.
This is just me and everyone will have their own rationale on spending their money. How one spends their own money is something I couldn't careless.
Going by your logic though, how does one sell copies of military FPS?
I mean who doesn't have COD:MAKEACTIVISIONMONEY version nowadays but still COD:MW3 is going to sell millions.
Gdemami - Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
Why would I pay 15 bucks more? Because the two games offer different things to me.
SWTOR is 'made by bioware' so I'm buying it. Done. End of story. (grew up playing BG1/2)
GW2 is by a developer that I found their previous 4 games (GW1 and its 3 exp) to be good so buying that too.
This is just me and everyone will have their own rationale on spending their money. How one spends their own money is something I couldn't careless.
Going by your logic though, how does one sell copies of military FPS?
I mean who doesn't have COD:MAKEACTIVISIONMONEY version nowadays but still COD:MW3 is going to sell millions.
You won't find a whole lot of people who will be actively playing both CoD:Previous version and CoD: The new version.
That's why when the new version comes out, the old versions tend to lose most of their numbers. Just saying. The new versions have an improvement over the old version (Theoretically), and also have the big 'fresh numbers, new experience' thing going for it. You want to play with more people, you start the new game.
... and I just said why you'd buy SW:ToR and GW2, so not totally sure why you're repeating my point. I'm aware of why people would buy both of those. ... but 'GW2 isn't the same as SW:ToR' is not the same statement as the statement you kept making, which is 'GW2 does not compete with MMOs'.
The thing is, GW1 wasn't an MMO. If you wanted the MMO experience, you had to pay a sub. (Or play an F2P game, which is usually an experience akin to jamming red hot pokers into your eyes until you learn to enjoy it)
So there was plenty of reason to have GW1 =and= an MMO. GW1 was some other type of game, and you'd pay the sub to get your MMO fix.
Since GW2 is an MMO, it is directly competing with MMOs, especially since most people don't have limitless amounts of time.
If somebody is going to pick an MMO, and the experience is roughly equal, why pick the one where you pay 15 dollars a month more? Why get both, when you can just get one, and play it twice as much?
Subs only make sense in that case if 1. It's a higher quality product, or 2. It's offering a significantly different enough experience.
I could see somebody paying for SW:ToR and having GW2, because even though they're both MMOs, SW:ToR will have more story and voice acting than any MMO ever... and it's Star Wars, which is a different experience as well.
You would buy FIFA (Or the B2P game of your choice) and an MMO because they're offering different experiences.
If you could buy FIFA, or a version of FIFA that costs you 15 dollars a month extra, why would you buy both?
Why would I pay 15 bucks more? Because the two games offer different things to me.
SWTOR is 'made by bioware' so I'm buying it. Done. End of story. (grew up playing BG1/2)
GW2 is by a developer that I found their previous 4 games (GW1 and its 3 exp) to be good so buying that too.
This is just me and everyone will have their own rationale on spending their money. How one spends their own money is something I couldn't careless.
Going by your logic though, how does one sell copies of military FPS?
I mean who doesn't have COD:MAKEACTIVISIONMONEY version nowadays but still COD:MW3 is going to sell millions.
You are most likely in minority tho. People often wish to spend the most time on things they like. If i like GW2 more than SWTOR why would i pay 15$/month? If i have a work, wife, some responsibilities, why would i pay for a game i wont have time playing?
Many people will look at it this way indeed.
As for COD reference, i stopped at COD:MW2 although i have played Black Ops but i wouldn't buy it. I also dont see myself touching COD3. More likely i would try Battlefield 3.
Nowadays it is time that many people lack and because of that they get very picky to what they buy/spend time on.
Why would I pay 15 bucks more? Because the two games offer different things to me.
SWTOR is 'made by bioware' so I'm buying it. Done. End of story. (grew up playing BG1/2)
GW2 is by a developer that I found their previous 4 games (GW1 and its 3 exp) to be good so buying that too.
This is just me and everyone will have their own rationale on spending their money. How one spends their own money is something I couldn't careless.
Going by your logic though, how does one sell copies of military FPS?
I mean who doesn't have COD:MAKEACTIVISIONMONEY version nowadays but still COD:MW3 is going to sell millions.
You won't find a whole lot of people who will be actively playing both CoD:Previous version and CoD: The new version.
That's why when the new version comes out, the old versions tend to lose most of their numbers. Just saying. The new versions have an improvement over the old version (Theoretically), and also have the big 'fresh numbers, new experience' thing going for it. You want to play with more people, you start the new game.
... and I just said why you'd buy SW:ToR and GW2, so not totally sure why you're repeating my point. I'm aware of why people would buy both of those. ... but 'GW2 isn't the same as SW:ToR' is not the same statement as the statement you kept making, which is 'GW2 does not compete with MMOs'.
COD is actually unique in that MW2 has more players than BLOPS.
Regardless, other than 'F2P' MMOs, I can't think of a single B2P MMO other than GW to be honest.
Anyway, I really don't see GW2 competing with MMOs. Maybe that's due to my previous exp with GW series of 4 years so far or whatever but I see the B2P nature making it feel like another B2P game to a lot of players.
Gdemami - Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
Do I feel I wasted my money if I don't download the limit of my plan every month?
Not really. So why do you feel differently for a MMO?
You don't go months to years without using your phone while still paying for it. I'm currently playing GW again (checking out all the content updates/balances/etc), but the gap between now and the last time I played was over a year. I like being able to hop in and out whenever I feel like it.
MMO subs are on a month to month basis. There is nothing stopping anyone from cancelling and re-subbing later.
Except how do I know I want to re-sub without playing it a bit first? I'd have to go ahead and pay for the month, despite the fact that I might play an hour and decide I don't want to play it. I might be doing that 2-3 times a year and it'd be basically another new game's price down the drain just to see what's up in the game.
Finally a peacefull tread about swtor and gw2. I agree with OP, well said. SWTOR and GW2 both will be the games that will raise the poor mmorpg standards we have today. Good luck to both games!
Regardless, other than 'F2P' MMOs, I can't think of a single B2P MMO other than GW to be honest.
Anyway, I really don't see GW2 competing with MMOs. Maybe that's due to my previous exp with GW series of 4 years so far or whatever but I see the B2P nature making it feel like another B2P game to a lot of players.
AFAIK, Guild Wars 2 is the first B2P MMO in gaming history.
Guild Wars 1 is not a true MMO. While many people considered it a MMO, it was defined as a CO-RPG by the developers. It had hubs where everybody could enter and interact with one another, but there was a limited number of people that could enter a mission.
Hellgate: London was another game which followed a similar style and payment model to Guild Wars 1. It was one of the biggest failures ever. The company went bankrupt and another company acquired the rights and took over.
Apart from these 2 games, there are a few other games which have a similar game-mode and payment structure. If you haven't guessed it already, it's the Diablo series, and to a smaller extent, the Warcraft & Starcraft series as well. All of them have a platform where thousands of gamers can enter at the same time, form groups, then enter their own private game. The online platform is free to play on forever, and they continue to make money by selling expansions.
Is it a coincidence that all these games have a similar mechanic and payment model? I don't think so.
Both ArenaNet (Guild Wars series) and Flagshp Studios (Hellgate London) were formed by Blizzard Employees, many of them which were originally part of Blizzard North responsible for creating the Diablo series, and many of these employees worked on Warcraft & Starcraft as well. Mike O Brien, one of the founders of ArenaNet was responsible for the creation of Battle.net itself.
[QUOTE]Battle.net was the first online gaming service incorporated directly into the games that make use of it, in contrast to the external interfaces used by the other online services at the time. This feature, along with ease of account creations and the absence of member fees, caused Battle.net to become popular among gamers and became a major selling point for Diablo and subsequent Blizzard games.[/QUOTE]
It seems like many of the original employees of Blizzard North still hold the believe that they can create a fun game and top-notch multiplayer experience without having to charge players a monthly fee.
The thing is, GW1 wasn't an MMO. If you wanted the MMO experience, you had to pay a sub. (Or play an F2P game, which is usually an experience akin to jamming red hot pokers into your eyes until you learn to enjoy it)
So there was plenty of reason to have GW1 =and= an MMO. GW1 was some other type of game, and you'd pay the sub to get your MMO fix.
Since GW2 is an MMO, it is directly competing with MMOs, especially since most people don't have limitless amounts of time.
If somebody is going to pick an MMO, and the experience is roughly equal, why pick the one where you pay 15 dollars a month more? Why get both, when you can just get one, and play it twice as much?
Subs only make sense in that case if 1. It's a higher quality product, or 2. It's offering a significantly different enough experience.
I could see somebody paying for SW:ToR and having GW2, because even though they're both MMOs, SW:ToR will have more story and voice acting than any MMO ever... and it's Star Wars, which is a different experience as well.
You would buy FIFA (Or the B2P game of your choice) and an MMO because they're offering different experiences.
If you could buy FIFA, or a version of FIFA that costs you 15 dollars a month extra, why would you buy both?
1. Sorry to say but GW1 is turning to be more MMO than most MMOs ive played.
Nowadays in WoW for example you just sit in the town and queue for instances and play with people you dont know. In GW1 it was the same gameplay, sit here, form a group and get out.
The difference is in GW1, you actually quested with other people (okay that is kinda stupid for me to say but we chated alot while questing, theres no freaking chat at all in WoWs instances now) and went out to the world, while there actually existed instances (which later on became miniraids due to 8 people) and became friends with the players.
GW1 gives more experience and world content than WoW now, sad to say. WoW is the same place over and over while you can visit 500 mini instances in GW. And to add, every class in GW had their spot. Multiclassing ftw.
2. I WILL stay away from SWTOR just becaue every WoW quiter QQs all the way to SWTOR, and i do NOT want to play with such people.
Atleast GW2 hopefully requires teamwork and skills, so they wont ruin my gameplay. And GW2 wont be that free, they might release alot of expansions and the game will propably start with 2 character slots and you have to buy 8 more for 2.99 each.
Comments
It's pretty easy choice for me, since the revealing of Planetside 2, I'm not really interested in the PVP of the same old themepark way of thiings we've been doing like ground hog day for many years now. The future of MMO is the MMOFPS 7 MMORPG/FPS hybrid that abount to jump out upon us. Thanks to Cod craze in the last few years. TOR is a 3 month fun feast before you all start feeling bored.
Because some people just need a definitive 'which game is better' even when there are so much differing factor between the two games.
The only reason I see GW2 conflict with SWTOR is if GW2 got so good that it just won't justified keeping a sub in SWTOR anymore, but then again, you can just discontinue the sub until you have a GW2 burn out, both game is gonna be great, but nothing will prevent people from getting burn out.
The only problem I have with a sub, is that I can't discontinue and get the remaining days refunded, I HAVE to get the whole month, if they make it like 50c a day and charge you per day of entry, I will like that. (not that I have much problem with coping a sub, just that I feel like I have to play the month out of I'll get ripped :P)
How much WoW could a WoWhater hate, if a WoWhater could hate WoW?
As much WoW as a WoWhater would, if a WoWhater could hate WoW.
Why would I pay 15 bucks more? Because the two games offer different things to me.
SWTOR is 'made by bioware' so I'm buying it. Done. End of story. (grew up playing BG1/2)
GW2 is by a developer that I found their previous 4 games (GW1 and its 3 exp) to be good so buying that too.
This is just me and everyone will have their own rationale on spending their money. How one spends their own money is something I couldn't careless.
Going by your logic though, how does one sell copies of military FPS?
I mean who doesn't have COD:MAKEACTIVISIONMONEY version nowadays but still COD:MW3 is going to sell millions.
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
You won't find a whole lot of people who will be actively playing both CoD:Previous version and CoD: The new version.
That's why when the new version comes out, the old versions tend to lose most of their numbers. Just saying. The new versions have an improvement over the old version (Theoretically), and also have the big 'fresh numbers, new experience' thing going for it. You want to play with more people, you start the new game.
... and I just said why you'd buy SW:ToR and GW2, so not totally sure why you're repeating my point.
I'm aware of why people would buy both of those. ... but 'GW2 isn't the same as SW:ToR' is not the same statement as the statement you kept making, which is 'GW2 does not compete with MMOs'.
You are most likely in minority tho. People often wish to spend the most time on things they like. If i like GW2 more than SWTOR why would i pay 15$/month? If i have a work, wife, some responsibilities, why would i pay for a game i wont have time playing?
Many people will look at it this way indeed.
As for COD reference, i stopped at COD:MW2 although i have played Black Ops but i wouldn't buy it. I also dont see myself touching COD3. More likely i would try Battlefield 3.
Nowadays it is time that many people lack and because of that they get very picky to what they buy/spend time on.
COD is actually unique in that MW2 has more players than BLOPS.
Regardless, other than 'F2P' MMOs, I can't think of a single B2P MMO other than GW to be honest.
Anyway, I really don't see GW2 competing with MMOs. Maybe that's due to my previous exp with GW series of 4 years so far or whatever but I see the B2P nature making it feel like another B2P game to a lot of players.
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
Except how do I know I want to re-sub without playing it a bit first? I'd have to go ahead and pay for the month, despite the fact that I might play an hour and decide I don't want to play it. I might be doing that 2-3 times a year and it'd be basically another new game's price down the drain just to see what's up in the game.
Finally a peacefull tread about swtor and gw2. I agree with OP, well said. SWTOR and GW2 both will be the games that will raise the poor mmorpg standards we have today. Good luck to both games!
Guild Wars 2 Youtube Croatian Maniacs
My Guild Wars titles
AFAIK, Guild Wars 2 is the first B2P MMO in gaming history.
Guild Wars 1 is not a true MMO. While many people considered it a MMO, it was defined as a CO-RPG by the developers. It had hubs where everybody could enter and interact with one another, but there was a limited number of people that could enter a mission.
Hellgate: London was another game which followed a similar style and payment model to Guild Wars 1. It was one of the biggest failures ever. The company went bankrupt and another company acquired the rights and took over.
Apart from these 2 games, there are a few other games which have a similar game-mode and payment structure. If you haven't guessed it already, it's the Diablo series, and to a smaller extent, the Warcraft & Starcraft series as well. All of them have a platform where thousands of gamers can enter at the same time, form groups, then enter their own private game. The online platform is free to play on forever, and they continue to make money by selling expansions.
Is it a coincidence that all these games have a similar mechanic and payment model? I don't think so.
Both ArenaNet (Guild Wars series) and Flagshp Studios (Hellgate London) were formed by Blizzard Employees, many of them which were originally part of Blizzard North responsible for creating the Diablo series, and many of these employees worked on Warcraft & Starcraft as well. Mike O Brien, one of the founders of ArenaNet was responsible for the creation of Battle.net itself.
[QUOTE]Battle.net was the first online gaming service incorporated directly into the games that make use of it, in contrast to the external interfaces used by the other online services at the time. This feature, along with ease of account creations and the absence of member fees, caused Battle.net to become popular among gamers and became a major selling point for Diablo and subsequent Blizzard games.[/QUOTE]
It seems like many of the original employees of Blizzard North still hold the believe that they can create a fun game and top-notch multiplayer experience without having to charge players a monthly fee.
1. Sorry to say but GW1 is turning to be more MMO than most MMOs ive played.
Nowadays in WoW for example you just sit in the town and queue for instances and play with people you dont know. In GW1 it was the same gameplay, sit here, form a group and get out.
The difference is in GW1, you actually quested with other people (okay that is kinda stupid for me to say but we chated alot while questing, theres no freaking chat at all in WoWs instances now) and went out to the world, while there actually existed instances (which later on became miniraids due to 8 people) and became friends with the players.
GW1 gives more experience and world content than WoW now, sad to say. WoW is the same place over and over while you can visit 500 mini instances in GW. And to add, every class in GW had their spot. Multiclassing ftw.
2. I WILL stay away from SWTOR just becaue every WoW quiter QQs all the way to SWTOR, and i do NOT want to play with such people.
Atleast GW2 hopefully requires teamwork and skills, so they wont ruin my gameplay. And GW2 wont be that free, they might release alot of expansions and the game will propably start with 2 character slots and you have to buy 8 more for 2.99 each.
Yawn