I am sure GW2 will be a fun game, I ll find that out and reach my own decision when I play the game. But I like the EQ style game play and not GWs style, I think what GW2 Fans need to understand is that people LOVE tanking and healing and nothing is going to change that, I know that you don't like the Tank/DPS/Healer gameplay and I am fine with that, more power to ya, but what I hate is that your saying its a bad thing when its not, it never was, and never will be, its more like a genre stable and it will be around long after both SWTOR and GW2.
You keep wondering why people have no interest in GW2, yet think SWTOR will rock, its freakin star wars, bioware and an MMO your average joe does not care about innovation, your Xbox 360 player won't care. The majority of people whinning about innovation seem to be the hardcore MMO players and guess what they are a minority.
/end rant
I'd disagree with these parts of your post.
I think the tank comes from simply extending an hp stat from P&P game's stats into an energy bar in MMO's. This has little changed from being made into a Tank class (differentiate classes) that led onto the healer and of course DPS exists quite naturally.
The real pain is the healer in this 3. Simply topping up an energy bar out of nothing, changes the rules of the game. Eg no potions in this specific sub-gamemode etc illustrates this sort of de-emphasis on gameplay and more on stats/gear. "The sword is mightier than the shield" is a way of saying this, also in RL and something I think games especialy mmo's will need to model more on.
As to it not changing, I think it will change and one of the criticisms with mmos is the poor balance of pvp compared to FPS. I think combat can be reworked in MMO's that will move on from this tank/healer set-up and EVERYONE will care about that innovation. Hoping GW2 can be the architect to this sea change.
What annoys me about some of these comments is that I am 100% sure that had SWTOR been the completely different and uniqe game that tried to change everything, some of you would have defended it's innovation to death.
You're biased because "its freaking star wars". Well, SWG was freaking Star Wars, and Ralph Koaster and his dream team were considered the best at the time, in the early 2000s, even with the SOE dislike at that time(which grew over the years)!
GW2 is the one that has the highest chance of failing. The person who said the thing about the standard player not giving a crap about innovation, I think he is completely right. We live in a Call of Duty world of boring scripted events, and predetermined outcomes...
If SWTOR was not Star Wars, and the roles between them reversed, many people would still side with Star Wars. And that's this games problem. Some of these Star Wars fanboys won't yield. There simply is little common sense. "wuwuwuw I hate george lucas, but I will still buy star wars in an even more screwed up edition on Blu-Ray wuwuwuwuw"!
You know it's true.
Secondly, in both of these games cases, give me a break. Why do you all act like they will magically ffx everything? Do you not understand that everything has consequences, and for everything they will gain, something else will be missed.
I am sure GW2 will have some things missing, from other more established MMOs. Just like the first game, the lack of fee does not mean giant monthly updates, and fixes and such.
For SWTOR, more and more about it sounds like shallow mission design under the surface. the solo structure, will impact the perception of it being a MMO. I predict people will say the same thing that they said about Conan. That it does not always feel like a MMO.
They have been so vague about trying to walk a fine line between sandbox and WoW-questing, without pissing off either of the bases, but at the end of the day, one of these groups are going to get pissed, and with these on-rails missions, I am think that SWTOR will give the finger to SWG in a major way.
What annoys me about some of these comments is that I am 100% sure that had SWTOR been the completely different and uniqe game that tried to change everything, some of you would have defended it's innovation to death.
You're biased because "its freaking star wars". Well, SWG was freaking Star Wars, and Ralph Koaster and his dream team were considered the best at the time, in the early 2000s, even with the SOE dislike at that time(which grew over the years)!
GW2 is the one that has the highest chance of failing. The person who said the thing about the standard player not giving a crap about innovation, I think he is completely right. We live in a Call of Duty world of boring scripted events, and predetermined outcomes...
If SWTOR was not Star Wars, and the roles between them reversed, many people would still side with Star Wars. And that's this games problem. Some of these Star Wars fanboys won't yield. There simply is little common sense. "wuwuwuw I hate george lucas, but I will still buy star wars in an even more screwed up edition on Blu-Ray wuwuwuwuw"!
You know it's true.
Secondly, in both of these games cases, give me a break. Why do you all act like they will magically ffx everything? Do you not understand that everything has consequences, and for everything they will gain, something else will be missed.
I am sure GW2 will have some things missing, from other more established MMOs. Just like the first game, the lack of fee does not mean giant monthly updates, and fixes and such.
For SWTOR, more and more about it sounds like shallow mission design under the surface. the solo structure, will impact the perception of it being a MMO. I predict people will say the same thing that they said about Conan. That it does not always feel like a MMO.
They have been so vague about trying to walk a fine line between sandbox and WoW-questing, without pissing off either of the bases, but at the end of the day, one of these groups are going to get pissed, and with these on-rails missions, I am think that SWTOR will give the finger to SWG in a major way.
I plan on playing both so half of these comments don't effect me at all. I like WoW, its my favorite MMO on the market right now And its the favorite MMO of over half the people paying for an MMO, People like WoW, and if SWTOR ends up being WoW but better then hell, I sure as shit won't be complaining.
GW2 although neither really excite me all that much. I doubt I will pick either up unless a friend talks me into GW2 down the road, but if it was a sub I would not. Really the only MMO that I am considering picking up and subbing to is FFXIV, and other than that maybe World of Darkness if CCP ever releases it.
Really a sad list of games being developed. None of them are going to advance this genre at all or do anything different. Hell Tera may be the only one even trying but i'm scared of Korean grinds.
GW2 is the one that has the highest chance of failing. True The person who said the thing about the standard player not giving a crap about innovation, I think he is completely right False: A large innovation in an area/genre that is mainstream is significant enough for ppl to vote with their wallets, but in a sub-genre or suchlike it does not necessarily follow. We live in a Call of Duty world of boring scripted events, and predetermined outcomes...
Secondly, in both of these games cases, give me a break. Why do you all act like they will magically ffeverything? Do you not understand that everything has consequences, and for everything they will gain, something else will be missed.True: But if both these games excel (innovations for theme-park mmos and lucrative profits), it might open the door a little for innovation towards sandbox or the two merge is my expectation and good things will follow. It's a bold statement but still a lot of potential in mmo's.
GW2 hands down. SWTOR looks like a pig steaming pile of shit imo. Prolly gonna be dumbed down so much for all the wow kiddies and star wars fans who suck at games.
I am sure GW2 will be a fun game, I ll find that out and reach my own decision when I play the game. But I like the EQ style game play and not GWs style, I think what GW2 Fans need to understand is that people LOVE tanking and healing and nothing is going to change that, I know that you don't like the Tank/DPS/Healer gameplay and I am fine with that, more power to ya, but what I hate is that your saying its a bad thing when its not, it never was, and never will be, its more like a genre stable and it will be around long after both SWTOR and GW2.
You keep wondering why people have no interest in GW2, yet think SWTOR will rock, its freakin star wars, bioware and an MMO your average joe does not care about innovation, your Xbox 360 player won't care. The majority of people whinning about innovation seem to be the hardcore MMO players and guess what they are a minority.
/end rant
I'd disagree with these parts of your post.
I think the tank comes from simply extending an hp stat from P&P game's stats into an energy bar in MMO's. This has little changed from being made into a Tank class (differentiate classes) that led onto the healer and of course DPS exists quite naturally.
Not really what GW2 is doing could have alway been done since EQ, but the Trinity makes it to where you have to group up to kill that baddie. and one a side note, in SWTOR, there is actually no dedicated healer class as compainions fill in that role, you CAN chose to be a healer but you don't have to be, people seem to be ignoring this huge aspect of SWTOR.
The real pain is the healer in this 3. Simply topping up an energy bar out of nothing, changes the rules of the game. Eg no potions in this specific sub-gamemode etc illustrates this sort of de-emphasis on gameplay and more on stats/gear. "The sword is mightier than the shield" is a way of saying this, also in RL and something I think games especialy mmo's will need to model more on.
The day video games become life like, will be the day I stop playing video games.-Me
As to it not changing, I think it will change and one of the criticisms with mmos is the poor balance of pvp compared to FPS. I think combat can be reworked in MMO's that will move on from this tank/healer set-up and EVERYONE will care about that innovation. Hoping GW2 can be the architect to this sea change.
WoW got PvP balance right. When I played my Warrior I was able to kill just about everything. I am one of the people who does not think that every class should be able to kill every other class. Thing is this is where Skill should become a big aspect of the game, during PvP.
GW2 is the one that has the highest chance of failing. True The person who said the thing about the standard player not giving a crap about innovation, I think he is completely right False: A large innovation in an area/genre that is mainstream is significant enough for ppl to vote with their wallets, but in a sub-genre or suchlike it does not necessarily follow. We live in a Call of Duty world of boring scripted events, and predetermined outcomes...
Secondly, in both of these games cases, give me a break. Why do you all act like they will magically ffeverything? Do you not understand that everything has consequences, and for everything they will gain, something else will be missed.True: But if both these games excel (innovations for theme-park mmos and lucrative profits), it might open the door a little for innovation towards sandbox or the two merge is my expectation and good things will follow. It's a bold statement but still a lot of potential in mmo's.
I never logged onto EvE and said, "Wow this game is innovative", I logged on and said "Wow this is pretty fun". The key to making a good game is to make it to where no one will notice what you did to make something good. Everything GW2 and SWTOR are/is doing has been done before. Like in that episode of south park where they are making fun of The Simpsons. It does not matter what you do because its been done in some form before, and thats why the innovation of GW2 does not impress me as much as it does you because of the way I am looking at it. I just want to play a fun game whether it be GW2 or SWTOR, I just want to have fun.
Like sound it movies, how often do you go "Holy crap that music totally fit that fighting scene." You just don't.
I am sure GW2 will be a fun game, I ll find that out and reach my own decision when I play the game. But I like the EQ style game play and not GWs style, I think what GW2 Fans need to understand is that people LOVE tanking and healing and nothing is going to change that, I know that you don't like the Tank/DPS/Healer gameplay and I am fine with that, more power to ya, but what I hate is that your saying its a bad thing when its not, it never was, and never will be, its more like a genre stable and it will be around long after both SWTOR and GW2.
You keep wondering why people have no interest in GW2, yet think SWTOR will rock, its freakin star wars, bioware and an MMO your average joe does not care about innovation, your Xbox 360 player won't care. The majority of people whinning about innovation seem to be the hardcore MMO players and guess what they are a minority.
/end rant
I'd disagree with these parts of your post.
I think the tank comes from simply extending an hp stat from P&P game's stats into an energy bar in MMO's. This has little changed from being made into a Tank class (differentiate classes) that led onto the healer and of course DPS exists quite naturally.
Not really what GW2 is doing could have alway been done since EQ, but the Trinity makes it to where you have to group up to kill that baddie. and one a side note, in SWTOR, there is actually no dedicated healer class as compainions fill in that role, you CAN chose to be a healer but you don't have to be, people seem to be ignoring this huge aspect of SWTOR.
The real pain is the healer in this 3. Simply topping up an energy bar out of nothing, changes the rules of the game. Eg no potions in this specific sub-gamemode etc illustrates this sort of de-emphasis on gameplay and more on stats/gear. "The sword is mightier than the shield" is a way of saying this, also in RL and something I think games especialy mmo's will need to model more on.
The day video games become life like, will be the day I stop playing video games.-Me
As to it not changing, I think it will change and one of the criticisms with mmos is the poor balance of pvp compared to FPS. I think combat can be reworked in MMO's that will move on from this tank/healer set-up and EVERYONE will care about that innovation. Hoping GW2 can be the architect to this sea change.
WoW got PvP balance right. When I played my Warrior I was able to kill just about everything. I am one of the people who does not think that every class should be able to kill every other class. Thing is this is where Skill should become a big aspect of the game, during PvP.
Concerning the 3 archetypes leading to grouping, that's the case, but it relies on a healer mechanic. Now if you have a different set-up where positioning of attacks (as per FPS) warrants greater tactics/anticipation/skill etc but also combo-attacks then the combination of these offensive/defensive measures responding to visual cues, I think this is what GW2 is saying they are going to do and it sounds like it might work. Not only that, but it might keep grouping viable at the same time as reduce the dependence on healers therefore allowing skill not stats/gear/healer to emerge. That tank can no longer take on all the enemies at arm's reach which is what we usually see. Speculation until more evidence I guess.
Again I see the above system being more conducive to pvp and also reducing group imbalance depending on a healer representation or lack of.
I did not realise SWTOR is also not using a dedicated healer class, though I thought that was the job of the Republic ambassador class (name?!)?
Oc, RL is more a reference how you would expect things to be not a like-for-like, at all. Ie reducing the emphasis on a godly healer, I hope this makes characters choose to buff/debuff more wisely on the foe, knowing they need to take down quickly or hold on longer and use tactics as such that change on the situation, instead of heal-botting stationary configuration.
GW2 is the one that has the highest chance of failing. True The person who said the thing about the standard player not giving a crap about innovation, I think he is completely right False: A large innovation in an area/genre that is mainstream is significant enough for ppl to vote with their wallets, but in a sub-genre or suchlike it does not necessarily follow. We live in a Call of Duty world of boring scripted events, and predetermined outcomes...
Secondly, in both of these games cases, give me a break. Why do you all act like they will magically ffeverything? Do you not understand that everything has consequences, and for everything they will gain, something else will be missed.True: But if both these games excel (innovations for theme-park mmos and lucrative profits), it might open the door a little for innovation towards sandbox or the two merge is my expectation and good things will follow. It's a bold statement but still a lot of potential in mmo's.
I never logged onto EvE and said, "Wow this game is innovative", I logged on and said "Wow this is pretty fun". The key to making a good game is to make it to where no one will notice what you did to make something good. Everything GW2 and SWTOR are/is doing has been done before. Like in that episode of south park where they are making fun of The Simpsons. It does not matter what you do because its been done in some form before, and thats why the innovation of GW2 does not impress me as much as it does you because of the way I am looking at it. I just want to play a fun game whether it be GW2 or SWTOR, I just want to have fun.
Like sound it movies, how often do you go "Holy crap that music totally fit that fighting scene." You just don't.
It does depend on how you see it. A scriptwriter might just look at movies and check boxes "How clever to sneak that into the scene in that way"... etc and derive a different pleasure whereas a production where all the bits fit into the whole will be a fine film for many people, usually.
Short answer: I see GW2 as redefining some basic, building blocks which might if successful have larger repercussions and I see SWTOR as being so truly massive and structured so cleverly and oodles of quality (bioware oc) that it too will have a strong impact as well.
I am sure GW2 will be a fun game, I ll find that out and reach my own decision when I play the game. But I like the EQ style game play and not GWs style, I think what GW2 Fans need to understand is that people LOVE tanking and healing and nothing is going to change that, I know that you don't like the Tank/DPS/Healer gameplay and I am fine with that, more power to ya, but what I hate is that your saying its a bad thing when its not, it never was, and never will be, its more like a genre stable and it will be around long after both SWTOR and GW2.
You keep wondering why people have no interest in GW2, yet think SWTOR will rock, its freakin star wars, bioware and an MMO your average joe does not care about innovation, your Xbox 360 player won't care. The majority of people whinning about innovation seem to be the hardcore MMO players and guess what they are a minority.
/end rant
I'd disagree with these parts of your post.
I think the tank comes from simply extending an hp stat from P&P game's stats into an energy bar in MMO's. This has little changed from being made into a Tank class (differentiate classes) that led onto the healer and of course DPS exists quite naturally.
Not really what GW2 is doing could have alway been done since EQ, but the Trinity makes it to where you have to group up to kill that baddie. and one a side note, in SWTOR, there is actually no dedicated healer class as compainions fill in that role, you CAN chose to be a healer but you don't have to be, people seem to be ignoring this huge aspect of SWTOR.
The real pain is the healer in this 3. Simply topping up an energy bar out of nothing, changes the rules of the game. Eg no potions in this specific sub-gamemode etc illustrates this sort of de-emphasis on gameplay and more on stats/gear. "The sword is mightier than the shield" is a way of saying this, also in RL and something I think games especialy mmo's will need to model more on.
The day video games become life like, will be the day I stop playing video games.-Me
As to it not changing, I think it will change and one of the criticisms with mmos is the poor balance of pvp compared to FPS. I think combat can be reworked in MMO's that will move on from this tank/healer set-up and EVERYONE will care about that innovation. Hoping GW2 can be the architect to this sea change.
WoW got PvP balance right. When I played my Warrior I was able to kill just about everything. I am one of the people who does not think that every class should be able to kill every other class. Thing is this is where Skill should become a big aspect of the game, during PvP.
Concerning the 3 archetypes leading to grouping, that's the case, but it relies on a healer mechanic. Now if you have a different set-up where positioning of attacks (as per FPS) warrants greater tactics/anticipation/skill etc but also combo-attacks then the combination of these offensive/defensive measures responding to visual cues, I think this is what GW2 is saying they are going to do and it sounds like it might work. Not only that, but it might keep grouping viable at the same time as reduce the dependence on healers therefore allowing skill not stats/gear/healer to emerge. That tank can no longer take on all the enemies at arm's reach which is what we usually see. Speculation until more evidence I guess.
Keeping grouping viable while at the same time getting all of the classes to bounce off each other in terms of play style is what keeps me wary about guild wars. I want to tank of some sort in games, with Guild Wars 2 snare, trap stun set up I am afraid that I won't be able to play me way. My brother love playing healer classes, and was let down when he heard that GW2 won't do much to the healer class other than make I guess what you would call damage absorbers.
Again I see the above system being more conducive to pvp and also reducing group imbalance depending on a healer representation or lack of.
GW2 will be a PvP set game, I personally like PvP but I could never play nothing but PvP. I know people will say "Well theres instance and dungons just like WoW (Or something like) but in the end its PvP, Lack of a healing class is great for a PvP game though.
I did not realise SWTOR is also not using a dedicated healer class, though I thought that was the job of the Republic ambassador class (name?!)?
Consular, You CAN be a dedicated healer but you don't have to be at all. If you are a consular you can go Melee spec and let your companion be the healer. Same goes for Tank and DPS.
Oc, RL is more a reference how you would expect things to be not a like-for-like, at all. Ie reducing the emphasis on a godly healer, I hope this makes characters choose to buff/debuff more wisely on the foe, knowing they need to take down quickly or hold on longer and use tactics as such that change on the situation, instead of heal-botting stationary configuration.
I use to use tactics in WoW with my guild all the time, we would spend about an hour discussing the best way to take down Illidan, what to do and how to do it. There are tactics in games like WoW, you just have to know where to look.
I am sure GW2 will be a fun game, I ll find that out and reach my own decision when I play the game. But I like the EQ style game play and not GWs style, I think what GW2 Fans need to understand is that people LOVE tanking and healing and nothing is going to change that, I know that you don't like the Tank/DPS/Healer gameplay and I am fine with that, more power to ya, but what I hate is that your saying its a bad thing when its not, it never was, and never will be, its more like a genre stable and it will be around long after both SWTOR and GW2.
You keep wondering why people have no interest in GW2, yet think SWTOR will rock, its freakin star wars, bioware and an MMO your average joe does not care about innovation, your Xbox 360 player won't care. The majority of people whinning about innovation seem to be the hardcore MMO players and guess what they are a minority.
/end rant
I'd disagree with these parts of your post.
I think the tank comes from simply extending an hp stat from P&P game's stats into an energy bar in MMO's. This has little changed from being made into a Tank class (differentiate classes) that led onto the healer and of course DPS exists quite naturally.
Not really what GW2 is doing could have alway been done since EQ, but the Trinity makes it to where you have to group up to kill that baddie. and one a side note, in SWTOR, there is actually no dedicated healer class as compainions fill in that role, you CAN chose to be a healer but you don't have to be, people seem to be ignoring this huge aspect of SWTOR.
I'd just like to point out that this is a piece of crap. In gw1 hero's and hench could take the place of healer it didin't change the fact that an actual person was ALWAYS preferred and people would still not do certain dungeons without an actual player healer. It doesn't remove dedicated healers at all it simply removes their need in easier dungeons.
I am sure GW2 will be a fun game, I ll find that out and reach my own decision when I play the game. But I like the EQ style game play and not GWs style, I think what GW2 Fans need to understand is that people LOVE tanking and healing and nothing is going to change that, I know that you don't like the Tank/DPS/Healer gameplay and I am fine with that, more power to ya, but what I hate is that your saying its a bad thing when its not, it never was, and never will be, its more like a genre stable and it will be around long after both SWTOR and GW2.
You keep wondering why people have no interest in GW2, yet think SWTOR will rock, its freakin star wars, bioware and an MMO your average joe does not care about innovation, your Xbox 360 player won't care. The majority of people whinning about innovation seem to be the hardcore MMO players and guess what they are a minority.
/end rant
I'd disagree with these parts of your post.
I think the tank comes from simply extending an hp stat from P&P game's stats into an energy bar in MMO's. This has little changed from being made into a Tank class (differentiate classes) that led onto the healer and of course DPS exists quite naturally.
Not really what GW2 is doing could have alway been done since EQ, but the Trinity makes it to where you have to group up to kill that baddie. and one a side note, in SWTOR, there is actually no dedicated healer class as compainions fill in that role, you CAN chose to be a healer but you don't have to be, people seem to be ignoring this huge aspect of SWTOR.
I'd just like to point out that this is a piece of crap. In gw1 hero's and hench could take the place of healer it didin't change the fact that an actual person was ALWAYS preferred and people would still not do certain dungeons without an actual player healer. It doesn't remove dedicated healers at all it simply removes their need in easier dungeons.
Its more of an aspect of TOR, then it was in GW, if you ever played any Bioware games you would know that Companions in there games helped you out a whole hell of a lot more then in most.
I am sure GW2 will be a fun game, I ll find that out and reach my own decision when I play the game. But I like the EQ style game play and not GWs style, I think what GW2 Fans need to understand is that people LOVE tanking and healing and nothing is going to change that, I know that you don't like the Tank/DPS/Healer gameplay and I am fine with that, more power to ya, but what I hate is that your saying its a bad thing when its not, it never was, and never will be, its more like a genre stable and it will be around long after both SWTOR and GW2.
You keep wondering why people have no interest in GW2, yet think SWTOR will rock, its freakin star wars, bioware and an MMO your average joe does not care about innovation, your Xbox 360 player won't care. The majority of people whinning about innovation seem to be the hardcore MMO players and guess what they are a minority.
/end rant
I'd disagree with these parts of your post.
I think the tank comes from simply extending an hp stat from P&P game's stats into an energy bar in MMO's. This has little changed from being made into a Tank class (differentiate classes) that led onto the healer and of course DPS exists quite naturally.
Not really what GW2 is doing could have alway been done since EQ, but the Trinity makes it to where you have to group up to kill that baddie. and one a side note, in SWTOR, there is actually no dedicated healer class as compainions fill in that role, you CAN chose to be a healer but you don't have to be, people seem to be ignoring this huge aspect of SWTOR.
I'd just like to point out that this is a piece of crap. In gw1 hero's and hench could take the place of healer it didin't change the fact that an actual person was ALWAYS preferred and people would still not do certain dungeons without an actual player healer. It doesn't remove dedicated healers at all it simply removes their need in easier dungeons.
Its more of an aspect of TOR, then it was in GW, if you ever played any Bioware games you would know that Companions in there games helped you out a whole hell of a lot more then in most.
That doesn't change or mean anything. I could micromanage the movement and skills of my heroes if I chose to and gw had great AI in fact it had the best pvp A.I of any game i've played including that from Bioware games. The fact remains humans will always be more asked for than companions.
I've never found bioware combat A.I to be all that amazing combat wise.
i cant wait for GW2 i saw that trailer that is out and it looks freaking awesome and not only the graphics but the gameplay to and how when u help a city or town it doesnt just reset for the next player to come alone and do it thats what i like most about it
i cant wait for GW2 i saw that trailer that is out and it looks freaking awesome and not only the graphics but the gameplay to and how when u help a city or town it doesnt just reset for the next player to come alone and do it thats what i like most about it
It does reset for next player maybe not immediately but it does. it might be cool for first few tries but after that it will be a repetition just like any other MMO.
90% of haters are begging for love. 10% just want a little attention -- Paulo Coelho
I refuse to pay Monthly Subscription Fees, specially when games exist where companies take your money and later on go F2P and throw an RMT system. Its not the "FEE" that bothers me as much as the Psychological ideology that paying a subscription fee makes people think in order to get the worth of their money they must play for very long periods of time and when they start playing other games, they feel in paying they should be playing the same game otherwise its like losing money.
If a person wants to throw their money away, it is their right. One day they will wake up and find out that they have spend tons on one game and thats when buyer's remorse and withdrawal come and one realizes how much it sucks to have to count up everything lost...Time, Money, Hardware, Energy...All so you can keep grinding away forever.
GW I allowed me through the last five years to share my life online and offline without having to sacrifice one for the other, or being tied by a fee that says "If you dont play, you lose your money."
i cant wait for GW2 i saw that trailer that is out and it looks freaking awesome and not only the graphics but the gameplay to and how when u help a city or town it doesnt just reset for the next player to come alone and do it thats what i like most about it
It does reset for next player maybe not immediately but it does. it might be cool for first few tries but after that it will be a repetition just like any other MMO.
Not quite. That would be true if all the events were static (as in begins bunch of objectives finishes then restarts) and if they were all available all of the time but they're not. They're 1500 events each with different length "cycles" that will be triggered by players and be at different stages, with some not even triggered for long amount of time and many are layered on top of each other.
That is why it's called a "dynamic" event system. Even if you went through the game 100 times it's is unlikely that'll see the exact same events in the exact same stage in any two runs through it. The fact that some of them require very specific and rare conditions in order to occur mean that some events you will not see again for a very long time. The event "cycles" are mathematical variables and there are millions of combinations.
I voted for SWTOR but to be honest I'm hyped about both games and will more than likely purchase them both and try them out. Definately a plus for GW2 for no sub. It's like being pregnant with twins I will cuddle them both lovingly when they arrive =P
i cant wait for GW2 i saw that trailer that is out and it looks freaking awesome and not only the graphics but the gameplay to and how when u help a city or town it doesnt just reset for the next player to come alone and do it thats what i like most about it
It does reset for next player maybe not immediately but it does. it might be cool for first few tries but after that it will be a repetition just like any other MMO.
Not quite. That would be true if all the events were static (as in begins bunch of objectives finishes then restarts) and if they were all available all of the time but they're not. They're 1500 events each with different length "cycles" that will be triggered by players and be at different stages, with some not even triggered for long amount of time and many are layered on top of each other.
That is why it's called a "dynamic" event system. Even if you went through the game 100 times it's is unlikely that'll see the exact same events in the exact same stage in any two runs through it. The fact that some of them require very specific and rare conditions in order to occur mean that some events you will not see again for a very long time. The event "cycles" are mathematical variables and there are millions of combinations.
Are you sure? you telling me there will be no repeptition at all, it seems highly unlikely. How many times you are going to save towns or escort npc from point A to B or defend some poor caravan in need? i am also excited about this game but i am also trying to be practical here.
90% of haters are begging for love. 10% just want a little attention -- Paulo Coelho
i cant wait for GW2 i saw that trailer that is out and it looks freaking awesome and not only the graphics but the gameplay to and how when u help a city or town it doesnt just reset for the next player to come alone and do it thats what i like most about it
It does reset for next player maybe not immediately but it does. it might be cool for first few tries but after that it will be a repetition just like any other MMO.
Not quite. That would be true if all the events were static (as in begins bunch of objectives finishes then restarts) and if they were all available all of the time but they're not. They're 1500 events each with different length "cycles" that will be triggered by players and be at different stages, with some not even triggered for long amount of time and many are layered on top of each other.
That is why it's called a "dynamic" event system. Even if you went through the game 100 times it's is unlikely that'll see the exact same events in the exact same stage in any two runs through it. The fact that some of them require very specific and rare conditions in order to occur mean that some events you will not see again for a very long time. The event "cycles" are mathematical variables and there are millions of combinations.
Are you sure? you telling me there will be no repeptition at all, it seems highly unlikely. How many times you are going to save towns or escort npc from point A to B or defend some poor caravan in need? i am also excited about this game but i am also trying to be practical here.
I'm not talking about repetition I'm talking about variables. It's basically like the lottery, the likelihood of getting one number is fairly high not great but fairly high, likelihood of 2 a bit less, 3 a lot less, 4 very unlikely, 5 very very unlikely, 6 extremely unlikely, 7 you start getting into the ridiculous range, 8 more likely to get hit by lightning however many times.
It's the same with events. You may do some of the exact same stages of events again but it's extremely extremely unlikley that if you do what 15 stages of different events that you see all the same events in the exact same stage, unless you basically cheated and somebody told you which stage all the events were at.
Of course I would have no idea about how similar each event is themselves since I haven't played the game but if I take each event as different then what I'm saying is roughly correct.
i cant wait for GW2 i saw that trailer that is out and it looks freaking awesome and not only the graphics but the gameplay to and how when u help a city or town it doesnt just reset for the next player to come alone and do it thats what i like most about it
It does reset for next player maybe not immediately but it does. it might be cool for first few tries but after that it will be a repetition just like any other MMO.
Not quite. That would be true if all the events were static (as in begins bunch of objectives finishes then restarts) and if they were all available all of the time but they're not. They're 1500 events each with different length "cycles" that will be triggered by players and be at different stages, with some not even triggered for long amount of time and many are layered on top of each other.
That is why it's called a "dynamic" event system. Even if you went through the game 100 times it's is unlikely that'll see the exact same events in the exact same stage in any two runs through it. The fact that some of them require very specific and rare conditions in order to occur mean that some events you will not see again for a very long time. The event "cycles" are mathematical variables and there are millions of combinations.
Are you sure? you telling me there will be no repeptition at all, it seems highly unlikely. How many times you are going to save towns or escort npc from point A to B or defend some poor caravan in need? i am also excited about this game but i am also trying to be practical here.
I'm not talking about repetition I'm talking about variables. It's basically like the lottery, the likelihood of getting one number is fairly high not great but fairly high, likelihood of 2 a bit less, 3 a lot less, 4 very unlikely, 5 very very unlikely, 6 extremely unlikely, 7 you start getting into the ridiculous range, 8 more likely to get hit by lightning however many times.
It's the same with events. You may do some of the exact same stages of events again but it's extremely extremely unlikley that if you do what 15 stages of different events that you see all the same events in the exact same stage, unless you basically cheated and somebody told you which stage all the events were at.
Of course I would have no idea about how similar each event is themselves since I haven't played the game but if I take each event as different then what I'm saying is roughly correct.
Yap, that's what i think too. And there's more info about DES that few ppl know about:
If, on the other hand, players fail to destroy the army, it will establish a fort in friendly player territory. From there, the dredge will send shipments of troops and supplies to the fort from the main base while building up walls, turrets, and siege engines to help defend it. Enemy dredge forces will then begin to move out from their newly established fort to attack friendly player locations in the area, sending snipers out into the hills, sending assault team forces to capture friendly player villages, and trying to smash down friendly fortifications with massive dredge walkers. All of these events continue to cascade out into further chains of events where cause and effect is directly related to the player's actions.
For example, if the players do not mobilize to stop the dredge snipers, they'll begin to shoot down all the villagers and merchants in nearby friendly villages. If they fail to stop the dredge assault teams from capturing a village, players will need to lead a force to help liberate the town and free the villagers. All of this content is derived from a single initial event - the dredge army marching through the map.
Comments
I'd disagree with these parts of your post.
I think the tank comes from simply extending an hp stat from P&P game's stats into an energy bar in MMO's. This has little changed from being made into a Tank class (differentiate classes) that led onto the healer and of course DPS exists quite naturally.
The real pain is the healer in this 3. Simply topping up an energy bar out of nothing, changes the rules of the game. Eg no potions in this specific sub-gamemode etc illustrates this sort of de-emphasis on gameplay and more on stats/gear. "The sword is mightier than the shield" is a way of saying this, also in RL and something I think games especialy mmo's will need to model more on.
As to it not changing, I think it will change and one of the criticisms with mmos is the poor balance of pvp compared to FPS. I think combat can be reworked in MMO's that will move on from this tank/healer set-up and EVERYONE will care about that innovation. Hoping GW2 can be the architect to this sea change.
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
What annoys me about some of these comments is that I am 100% sure that had SWTOR been the completely different and uniqe game that tried to change everything, some of you would have defended it's innovation to death.
You're biased because "its freaking star wars". Well, SWG was freaking Star Wars, and Ralph Koaster and his dream team were considered the best at the time, in the early 2000s, even with the SOE dislike at that time(which grew over the years)!
GW2 is the one that has the highest chance of failing. The person who said the thing about the standard player not giving a crap about innovation, I think he is completely right. We live in a Call of Duty world of boring scripted events, and predetermined outcomes...
If SWTOR was not Star Wars, and the roles between them reversed, many people would still side with Star Wars. And that's this games problem. Some of these Star Wars fanboys won't yield. There simply is little common sense. "wuwuwuw I hate george lucas, but I will still buy star wars in an even more screwed up edition on Blu-Ray wuwuwuwuw"!
You know it's true.
Secondly, in both of these games cases, give me a break. Why do you all act like they will magically ffx everything? Do you not understand that everything has consequences, and for everything they will gain, something else will be missed.
I am sure GW2 will have some things missing, from other more established MMOs. Just like the first game, the lack of fee does not mean giant monthly updates, and fixes and such.
For SWTOR, more and more about it sounds like shallow mission design under the surface. the solo structure, will impact the perception of it being a MMO. I predict people will say the same thing that they said about Conan. That it does not always feel like a MMO.
They have been so vague about trying to walk a fine line between sandbox and WoW-questing, without pissing off either of the bases, but at the end of the day, one of these groups are going to get pissed, and with these on-rails missions, I am think that SWTOR will give the finger to SWG in a major way.
I plan on playing both so half of these comments don't effect me at all. I like WoW, its my favorite MMO on the market right now And its the favorite MMO of over half the people paying for an MMO, People like WoW, and if SWTOR ends up being WoW but better then hell, I sure as shit won't be complaining.
I don't care about innovation I care about fun.
GW2 although neither really excite me all that much. I doubt I will pick either up unless a friend talks me into GW2 down the road, but if it was a sub I would not. Really the only MMO that I am considering picking up and subbing to is FFXIV, and other than that maybe World of Darkness if CCP ever releases it.
Really a sad list of games being developed. None of them are going to advance this genre at all or do anything different. Hell Tera may be the only one even trying but i'm scared of Korean grinds.
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
How can you suck at having fun?
I don't care about innovation I care about fun.
I never logged onto EvE and said, "Wow this game is innovative", I logged on and said "Wow this is pretty fun". The key to making a good game is to make it to where no one will notice what you did to make something good. Everything GW2 and SWTOR are/is doing has been done before. Like in that episode of south park where they are making fun of The Simpsons. It does not matter what you do because its been done in some form before, and thats why the innovation of GW2 does not impress me as much as it does you because of the way I am looking at it. I just want to play a fun game whether it be GW2 or SWTOR, I just want to have fun.
Like sound it movies, how often do you go "Holy crap that music totally fit that fighting scene." You just don't.
I don't care about innovation I care about fun.
Concerning the 3 archetypes leading to grouping, that's the case, but it relies on a healer mechanic. Now if you have a different set-up where positioning of attacks (as per FPS) warrants greater tactics/anticipation/skill etc but also combo-attacks then the combination of these offensive/defensive measures responding to visual cues, I think this is what GW2 is saying they are going to do and it sounds like it might work. Not only that, but it might keep grouping viable at the same time as reduce the dependence on healers therefore allowing skill not stats/gear/healer to emerge. That tank can no longer take on all the enemies at arm's reach which is what we usually see. Speculation until more evidence I guess.
Again I see the above system being more conducive to pvp and also reducing group imbalance depending on a healer representation or lack of.
I did not realise SWTOR is also not using a dedicated healer class, though I thought that was the job of the Republic ambassador class (name?!)?
Oc, RL is more a reference how you would expect things to be not a like-for-like, at all. Ie reducing the emphasis on a godly healer, I hope this makes characters choose to buff/debuff more wisely on the foe, knowing they need to take down quickly or hold on longer and use tactics as such that change on the situation, instead of heal-botting stationary configuration.
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
It does depend on how you see it. A scriptwriter might just look at movies and check boxes "How clever to sneak that into the scene in that way"... etc and derive a different pleasure whereas a production where all the bits fit into the whole will be a fine film for many people, usually.
Short answer: I see GW2 as redefining some basic, building blocks which might if successful have larger repercussions and I see SWTOR as being so truly massive and structured so cleverly and oodles of quality (bioware oc) that it too will have a strong impact as well.
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
I don't care about innovation I care about fun.
I'd just like to point out that this is a piece of crap. In gw1 hero's and hench could take the place of healer it didin't change the fact that an actual person was ALWAYS preferred and people would still not do certain dungeons without an actual player healer. It doesn't remove dedicated healers at all it simply removes their need in easier dungeons.
Its more of an aspect of TOR, then it was in GW, if you ever played any Bioware games you would know that Companions in there games helped you out a whole hell of a lot more then in most.
I don't care about innovation I care about fun.
Im a huge fan of bioware and i think its the perfect company to make a SW mmo.
But we have to be honest, TOR will be more of the same(im sure it will be a great game), and GW2 is trying to make something diferent.
So my vote goes to GW2
What he said.
but yeah, to call this game Fantastic is like calling Twilight the Godfather of vampire movies....
SWTOR because i need a new sci-fi game. There are already enough fantasy MMOS out there.
90% of haters are begging for love. 10% just want a little attention -- Paulo Coelho
That doesn't change or mean anything. I could micromanage the movement and skills of my heroes if I chose to and gw had great AI in fact it had the best pvp A.I of any game i've played including that from Bioware games. The fact remains humans will always be more asked for than companions.
I've never found bioware combat A.I to be all that amazing combat wise.
i cant wait for GW2 i saw that trailer that is out and it looks freaking awesome and not only the graphics but the gameplay to and how when u help a city or town it doesnt just reset for the next player to come alone and do it thats what i like most about it
madnessman
It does reset for next player maybe not immediately but it does. it might be cool for first few tries but after that it will be a repetition just like any other MMO.
90% of haters are begging for love. 10% just want a little attention -- Paulo Coelho
Definately Guild Wars 2:
I refuse to pay Monthly Subscription Fees, specially when games exist where companies take your money and later on go F2P and throw an RMT system. Its not the "FEE" that bothers me as much as the Psychological ideology that paying a subscription fee makes people think in order to get the worth of their money they must play for very long periods of time and when they start playing other games, they feel in paying they should be playing the same game otherwise its like losing money.
If a person wants to throw their money away, it is their right. One day they will wake up and find out that they have spend tons on one game and thats when buyer's remorse and withdrawal come and one realizes how much it sucks to have to count up everything lost...Time, Money, Hardware, Energy...All so you can keep grinding away forever.
GW I allowed me through the last five years to share my life online and offline without having to sacrifice one for the other, or being tied by a fee that says "If you dont play, you lose your money."
Not quite. That would be true if all the events were static (as in begins bunch of objectives finishes then restarts) and if they were all available all of the time but they're not. They're 1500 events each with different length "cycles" that will be triggered by players and be at different stages, with some not even triggered for long amount of time and many are layered on top of each other.
That is why it's called a "dynamic" event system. Even if you went through the game 100 times it's is unlikely that'll see the exact same events in the exact same stage in any two runs through it. The fact that some of them require very specific and rare conditions in order to occur mean that some events you will not see again for a very long time. The event "cycles" are mathematical variables and there are millions of combinations.
I voted for SWTOR but to be honest I'm hyped about both games and will more than likely purchase them both and try them out. Definately a plus for GW2 for no sub. It's like being pregnant with twins I will cuddle them both lovingly when they arrive =P
Are you sure? you telling me there will be no repeptition at all, it seems highly unlikely. How many times you are going to save towns or escort npc from point A to B or defend some poor caravan in need? i am also excited about this game but i am also trying to be practical here.
90% of haters are begging for love. 10% just want a little attention -- Paulo Coelho
I'm not talking about repetition I'm talking about variables. It's basically like the lottery, the likelihood of getting one number is fairly high not great but fairly high, likelihood of 2 a bit less, 3 a lot less, 4 very unlikely, 5 very very unlikely, 6 extremely unlikely, 7 you start getting into the ridiculous range, 8 more likely to get hit by lightning however many times.
It's the same with events. You may do some of the exact same stages of events again but it's extremely extremely unlikley that if you do what 15 stages of different events that you see all the same events in the exact same stage, unless you basically cheated and somebody told you which stage all the events were at.
Of course I would have no idea about how similar each event is themselves since I haven't played the game but if I take each event as different then what I'm saying is roughly correct.
Yap, that's what i think too. And there's more info about DES that few ppl know about:
If, on the other hand, players fail to destroy the army, it will establish a fort in friendly player territory. From there, the dredge will send shipments of troops and supplies to the fort from the main base while building up walls, turrets, and siege engines to help defend it. Enemy dredge forces will then begin to move out from their newly established fort to attack friendly player locations in the area, sending snipers out into the hills, sending assault team forces to capture friendly player villages, and trying to smash down friendly fortifications with massive dredge walkers. All of these events continue to cascade out into further chains of events where cause and effect is directly related to the player's actions.
For example, if the players do not mobilize to stop the dredge snipers, they'll begin to shoot down all the villagers and merchants in nearby friendly villages. If they fail to stop the dredge assault teams from capturing a village, players will need to lead a force to help liberate the town and free the villagers. All of this content is derived from a single initial event - the dredge army marching through the map.
Eheheh xD