Guild Wars - Could Last Forever

[Couchpotato]

Eurogamer has wrote up an article about Guild Wars lasting forever, and even provided a video looking back on the game.

There are still people playing famed eight-year-old MMO Guild Wars 1, and developer ArenaNet has no intention of abandoning them.

"Oh absolutely not," lead content designer Mike Zadorojny told me recently.

"The game itself was so efficient on the server side in terms of the resources, like, it runs on a fraction of the hardware that we need for running Guild Wars 2, so having that on the back-burner is nothing compared to GW2.

"There's still a community there that's really passionate and really thriving in there, so we want to support them as best we can."

The team supporting the old MMO, however, is minuscule, and the chances of new content are slim.

"We've been doing a lot of automation support so that the game itself could last forever, even without anybody really touching it," added Zadorojny.

"They're not necessarily making new content right now but there is a team that is monitoring if there are massive issues they're taken care of, and they're supporting them."

More information.

 

[joxer]

Forever? Right.
The only game I can think of lasting forever is Solitaire. You don't need a PC/console/smartphone/tablet/whatever gadget to play it.
It's cheap (or free) to get a deck of cards in any shape, contains no taxes monthly fees to play it, there are no microtransactions, and what's best - it's not MMO.

 

[Drithius]

You, sir, can get very tiresome with your unrelenting negativity.

I personally think GW1 is superior to GW2, but, whether or not the plug is officially pulled, it's been pretty much abandoned by ArenaNet unfortunately. My last go-around, I went all-out with a Paragon character; I got the majority of my "Hall of Monuments" points with him and everything. But the Paragon class is/was in desperate need of an overhaul, and I grew pretty discouraged with the game when it became increasingly apparent that no such overhaul would ever occur.

Still, the strategy involved in not only selecting your GW1 character's skills but that of your party's is supremely gratifying when everything synergizes together. Certainly more gratifying than the wack-a-mole zergfest of GW2.

 

[Roq]

You, sir, can get very tiresome with your unrelenting negativity.

I personally think GW1 is superior to GW2, but, whether or not the plug is officially pulled, it's been pretty much abandoned by ArenaNet unfortunately. My last go-around, I went all-out with a Paragon character; I got the majority of my "Hall of Monuments" points with him and everything. But the Paragon class is/was in desperate need of an overhaul, and I grew pretty discouraged with the game when it became increasingly apparent that no such overhaul would ever occur.

Still, the strategy involved in not only selecting your GW1 character's skills but that of your party's is supremely gratifying when everything synergizes together. Certainly more gratifying than the wack-a-mole zergfest of GW2.

Absolutely, I put countless hours into Guild Wars 1, but reached an impasse with 2 after a few months, with little motivation to go back to the game. And I have no interest in the mini games and events they are adding as new content. Everything is either too quick and easy ... or the complete opposite, an extended repetitive grind; there's no middle ground.

Maybe it's because 1 is basically a single player party game (with *optional* multiplayer) as well as what you say about the variety of party load outs. I tended to play it in a sandboxy way, just taking a party out somewhere and making my own story. Would often get hooked again doing that and have fun trying to optimize my party for the task at hand.

Unfortunately, it seems unlikely that ANet will ever progress GW further or do anything like it again. It's odd that although there are many innovative ideas in GW2, they didn't themselves really seem to understand the reasons why 1 was so addictive and have totally failed to bring that sandbox/experimentation feel over into their new game.

Maybe the spiritual successor to GW1 will be something like Garriot's "Shroud of The Avatar", which appears to have some the same sort of design ideas. Although, I do wonder about some aspects of this game (housing for instance).

 

[DArtagnan]

I didn't like GW much - but I definitely think it was a mistake not to include the "skill hunt" in GW2, as it was one of the few things I really liked about the first game.

But it's clear to me that ANet are targeting a certain kind of gamer that's very far removed from myself.

It seems they're using a genre that's all about longevity and commitment, trying to turn it into something that doesn't require an investment.

A really strange choice - but then again, I'm fine with investing myself in a game I enjoy.

I mean, if the design is trying to provide hundreds of hours of fun - then I can only assume those hundreds of hours are going to be spent from my pool of time available.

If I'm going to spend hundreds of hours playing a game - I most definitely prefer being invested and committed to the experience.

Frankly, I have no idea why anyone would want to spend hundreds of hours NOT being invested in some kind of long-term goal or accomplishment. Sure, it's just a game - but so are all games we spend our time playing, right?

Anyway, their approach to content and longevity is just weird, man.

Kinda frustrating, because they're clearly accomplished developers. The engine is fantastic - and combat is really smooth and responsive. Such a shame about the limited arsenal and the zergy approach to almost all challenges.